# Bunkai.



## arnisador (Jan 27, 2002)

I'm curious to hear opinions on some of the things I've heard from Mr. Dillman and some otehr pressure point karateka. What do you think about the following statements:

***There are no blocks in the kata.
***Blocking is so easy and natural it wasn't taught as a skill.
***Every time you step it means that there's an optional kick in the technique at that point.
***Sometimes your arm is not your arm (that is, sometimes yoyur left hand is demonstrating a technique and your right hand should be taken to be the opponent's arm).
***There are "tells" in the kata, that is, movements that you do tell you what the attack is before showing you the defense.
***There are no wasted movements in the kata (not even the salutation and closing).
***Okinawan karate is principally a grappling art.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jan 27, 2002)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> What do you think about the following statements:
> 
> ***There are no blocks in the kata.



That really depends on the skill level and creativity of the practitioner.  The only true way to know if a particular kata has actual blocks or not is to ask the kata's founder.  Since they're dead...



> ***Blocking is so easy and natural it wasn't taught as a skill.



I just don't agree with this at all.  If that's the case, why does virtually every system of karate teach basic blocks?  I think parries are more natural than blocks.



> ***Every time you step it means that there's an optional kick in the technique at that point.



I happen to agree with this, for the most part.



> ***Sometimes your arm is not your arm (that is, sometimes yoyur left hand is demonstrating a technique and your right hand should be taken to be the opponent's arm).



Depends on the kata.  Sometimes, your right hand could be seen as the opponent's arm, sometimes it could be seen as having grabbed the opponent's arm.  Again, it comes down to skill level and creativity of the individual.



> ***There are "tells" in the kata, that is, movements that you do tell you what the attack is before showing you the defense.



Don't really see the point to this, but I guess it could be true.



> ***There are no wasted movements in the kata (not even the salutation and closing).



This seems to be taught in most martial arts.  A creative individual can make the most trivial movement have some martial value.  Again, skill level and creativity.



> ***Okinawan karate is principally a grappling art.



Only if you limit it in that way.  If a person skilled in some form of Okinawan karate wants to make it a grappling art, that is entirely possible, given they have the appropriate skill level and creativity.  

I think when it comes to bunkai, it all comes down to...you've got it...skill level and creativity.  

Cthulhu


----------



## arnisador (Jan 27, 2002)

Concerning the statement that there are no blocks in the kata:


> _Originally posted by Cthulhu _
> *I just don't agree with this at all. If that's the case, why does virtually every system of karate teach basic blocks? I think parries are more natural than blocks.
> *



I agree. I think the movements called blocks are meant to have multiple purposes including in many cases blocking/jamming/parrying. I remember how much better those blocks looked to me when my Goju-ryu instructor showed me how the first hand was parrying, then the second was really moving it out of the way and setting up the counter. Isshin-ryu blocks were different--one-handed. Of course in Isshin they always emphasized that every kata begins with a block to underscore the defensive nature of karate.

I like the _philosophy_ embedded in the statement that there are no blocks in the kata but I think it's best not to take it too literally.

I agree with your comments about skill and creativity, but I was really getting at what mindset one needs to have to decipher the kata. What advice does one give to help people find bunkai? I think everyone has the potential to find something new in a good kata but I also think that it's necessary to help people milk the most out of them--ideally by directing their attention to certain things rather than saying baldly "These movements mean you're doing such-and-such" which forever limits that technique in their eyes. I'm getting at what things people say to help people find the bunkai are useful and accurate.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jan 27, 2002)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *
> What advice does one give to help people find bunkai? I think everyone has the potential to find something new in a good kata but I also think that it's necessary to help people milk the most out of them--ideally by directing their attention to certain things rather than saying baldly "These movements mean you're doing such-and-such" which forever limits that technique in their eyes. I'm getting at what things people say to help people find the bunkai are useful and accurate. *



Ah, alrighty, I'll give this a go again.

Excellent topic, by the way 

How to help people find bunkai?  Well, first, I'd start with the obvious motions.  Just teach the techniques as the motions were interpreted when first introduced to the form.  For example, the low blocks in Heian 1 are first taught as mere low blocks.  Once the instructor has seen that the student can see these movements, begin to change things up a little, by adding hints here and there.  Again, using Heian 1 as an example, the stance/direction shifts could all be techniques used to disable the opponent's structure.  Show how a low block movement turns this into a throw and the student has something to work on with the rest of the similar movements in Heian 1 as well as the other kata he/she has learned.

During training, make efforts to show how certain movements can have many interpretations, depending on circumstances.  Of course, these motions are those pulled from the kata.  The diligent student should be able to connect these lessons to kata bunkai and begin to experiment with them.  Also allow the student to work with other advanced students to compare what they've pulled from the kata.

So, after all this rambling, I've got:

1) first introduce the 'basic', obvious bunkai
2) next, show alternative techniques with one or two motions of a kata, preferably those that can also be applied to other kata
3) from then on, simply drop hints to how different body motions can be used to create a variety of techniques, primarily using motions from kata.  This will allow the instructor to gauge the creativity and knowledge of a student as well as allowing the student to express his/her own creativity.
4) in conjunction with (3), allow the student to 'compare notes' with others on kata bunkai.  I still learn something new from something as simple as Heian 1 when I break it down with different people.

How's that, arnisador?  More of what you were looking for?

Cthulhu


----------



## arnisador (Jan 28, 2002)

Yes, this is what I was thinking about. How much and how soon is optimal in order to help people a.) see the bunkai you want them to see, and b.) see bunkai you haven't seen yet but they might. I think Mark Kline was right in many regards when he wrote in another thread that "The Bunkai of the Kata is determined by what the goal of the practitioner is" because if I teach an art as a grappling art I want the students to principally think grappling bunkai. On the other hand, I know from experience that new applications will simply emerge when sparring and that must be encouraged too; it also allows a better fit of the art to the person (something many don't associate with karate).



> *
> 1) first introduce the 'basic', obvious bunkai
> 2) next, show alternative techniques with one or two motions of a kata, preferably those that can also be applied to other kata
> 3) from then on, simply drop hints to how different body motions can be used to create a variety of techniques, primarily using motions from kata. This will allow the instructor to gauge the creativity and knowledge of a student as well as allowing the student to express his/her own creativity.
> 4) in conjunction with (3), allow the student to 'compare notes' with others on kata bunkai. I still learn something new from something as simple as Heian 1 when I break it down with different people. *



I like your points 1) through 4), Cthulhu, and I think that's more or less what I do. I started the thread more explicitly focused on aphorisms like "There are no blocks in the kata" and their role in teaching people bunkai or rather leading them to bunkai, but I was in fact thinking more generally. Saying "There are no blocks in the kata: should get the student's mind turning as to what those techniques could be--the "hints" in your number 3), after a fashion.

I am continually amazed at how much _stuff_ is contained in those moves! It's amazing. Or maybe the point is that if we have the right mindset we can find those techniques in any reasonable fighting movement--could there be a throw or lock buried in a boxer's jab?


----------



## Cthulhu (Jan 28, 2002)

Boxer's jab?  Can't see nothing but a jab, there.  However, a boxer's overhand punch combined with footwork?  That could be fun to pick apart   Ooooh...hook punches with footwork, too.

Cthulhu


----------



## D.Cobb (Mar 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> ***There are no blocks in the kata.
> [/B]



Isn't this also what Ed Parker was talking about, when he said that every block is actually a strike?
--Dave


----------



## arnisador (Mar 3, 2002)

> _Originally posted by D.Cobb _
> 
> *
> Isn't this also what Ed Parker was talking about, when he said that every block is actually a strike?*



More generally, some "blocks" in karate kata are actually grappling techniques. In that sense they aren't "also" a strike, they are not a block in any sense of the word.


----------



## Chiduce (Mar 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> 
> *
> 
> More generally, some "blocks" in karate kata are actually grappling techniques. In that sense they aren't "also" a strike, they are not a block in any sense of the word. *


 I agree! Lets take it a little further generally and call it upper extremity motion of the arms and hands! Master Lee Bachman  has a good analogy from this general method. This analogy gives the block a primary and secondary purpose, and can be described as primary and secondary motion. The block as a strike reflects  secondary motion, while the footwork to align and position the block reflects primary! This blocking motion has the intent of devastating, and finishing the attacker's intent by either breaking the attacking natural weapon or finishing the attacker off with the strike to a soft tissue traget area or vital point to fail the attack. A variation of the Nabu Haki. The block as a set up or grapple/grab reflects primary motion. This blocking motion has the intent of setting up the attacker's intent for devastation and finishing to fail the attacker. This brings the push-pull concept of receiving the attacker's intent as either a push or pull. When the attacker strikes (particularly with the lead leg and striking weapon of the same side) and the defender blocks. The attacker's strike is treated as a push and the defender can block/grab and pull the attacker into the series of secondary motion finishing strikes. So, this primary blocking motion is being used to align, position, and set-up the breaking and finishing striking motion/(s).  Sincerely, In Humility; Chiduce!


----------



## Rob_Broad (Mar 19, 2002)

The way Mr. Dillman tells it makes some sense if you think of how and when all these North Americans learned the martial arts.  The first guys to get any real experience were the Gi's in Okinawa, would you want to show all your training secrets to someone bigger than you?  There would also be a language barrier, the martial arts back then was not the way we see it today with very structured classes and a sylabus for everything under the sun.  The instructor would ask something of the the instructor and since there would be such a barrier in the language the sensei would say block, so everything that was not generally understood in the communication was called block.  We also have to think of the mindset of the Okinawan masters at that time, their country had been invaded by the Japanese and "liberated" by the Americans, these people didn't know if the Americans were there to stay as rulers or if they would leave as they had said.

Every block I have ever executed has resulted in my striking my opponent so I believe that in a sense there are no real blocks.


----------



## GojuBujin (Mar 23, 2002)

I know in Goju, there is striking of vital points, blocking, grabbing, choking, sweeping, take downs, wrist locks, joint locks, throws, grappling.  It's more than just grappling in Goju anyway.  I'm also faimiarl with Shurite and Tomari te systems, and there is some grappling but alot of striking is involved.

Michael
http://www.inigmasoft.com/goyukai


----------



## Kempojujutsu (Mar 25, 2002)

You have to remeber Okinawan was not part of Japan at one time. They were invaded by the Japanese force to fight for them, and then force to teach martial arts to them. If you were in their shoes you would not teach them the true meanings of kata. Just what the Okinawans did, teaching the Japanese a form of kids martial arts. This is a block, kick, punch etc. Going back to "kata has no blocks" at advance level of training  this is true. There are different levels of training with kata, beginner, intermediate, and advance. Master never gave out secret techniques to someone they didn't trust or have enough training time in. They didn't want to be training theives and thugs. Most master learn only a couple of kata's when training. The concept of blocking was doing multipal things with minmumal movement. Example blocking a kick with a leg block. The object block the kick and destroy the kicking limb at the same time. In the FMA There is concept of Defanging the Snake. It is used in stick and Knife fighting. As the attacker tries to attack you with his weapon, you either cut or strike the attacking limb to take the weapon away from him. This is the same concept of kata's have no blocking. To teach beginners this is a block is good concept but as their skill level increases you should have them figure out there own bunkai.     :samurai:


----------



## Curlykarateka (Mar 7, 2013)

oh wow, I'd never noticed that. no blocks in most of the kata. (gekisai, which are recently developed kata to get young people into karate for those who don't do Goju, does feature some moves that could very much be blocks) thanks for pointing that out really helps.


----------



## seasoned (Mar 7, 2013)

This is a very old thread going back to the beginnings of MT. I do like the question posed by the OP and feel it is very relevant, although covered extensively over the years. 
One of the great features about MT is the search ability, of old threads.


----------



## K-man (Mar 7, 2013)

An interesting question. This was *Arni'*s post from eleven years ago! I would love to know what his thoughts are now, a decade later.  

And for *Curleykarateka*, it was this question that turned my karate upside down many years back. A colleague asked me what I thought of the proposition that there are no blocks in kata. I went away, thought about it, and ever since have taught there are no 'blocks' in karate. I cop flack every time I say it but the more I train and read and learn, the stronger my belief.      :asian:


----------



## arnisador (Mar 8, 2013)

Some of this was said by George Dillman. I'm highly skeptical of most of his stuff but some of his kata interpretation comments were provocative. Others were things I had heard or read over the years of studying Isshin, then Goju, then Uechi. Overall, I think that not thinking of techniques as blocks is the right way to go for the most part, and looking for the grappling in techniques is also good. FOr the most part I think of these Qs as ways to expand how one interprets the kata.


----------

