# Bunkai genuine?



## TSDTexan (Jul 22, 2015)

Given Korean Tang Soo Do is partly derived from Okinawan Karate... And that bunkai for the Katas are relatively recently released to the rest of the world...

How do I ask this question without offending anyone?

OK. With greatest respect, how can we ascertain authenticity to the bunkai for the Okinawan Kata's of GM Itosu and others?

Given the amount of counterfeiting that goes on, (I know there are sacred cows here, and I am treading as lightly as I know how)... My skeptical side wants to "trust with/and verify", but how do we know for sure that the bunkai is the real McCoy and not spinning of silkworms?

Its is true because "master told me so", is a logical fallacy called appeal to authority, (this of course doesn't really apply to first hand written testimony of the Kata's author, or testability of assertions made)

I am wanting real answers, because I am considering dropping old katas from my class curriculum, and phasing in new Katas/Hyungs, from the last 80 years to present.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 22, 2015)

The way many of us see it is that there is no one answer to the question of bunkai. Forms are a series of movements, most (if not all) of which can be used in multiple ways. A single movement, like the middle knifehand, can be a block, a strike, a release, etc. 
Personally, if someone tried to tell me that what they're teaching is THE bunkai, I'd walk the other way. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> The way many of us see it is that there is no one answer to the question of bunkai. Forms are a series of movements, most (if not all) of which can be used in multiple ways. A single movement, like the middle knifehand, can be a block, a strike, a release, etc.
> Personally, if someone tried to tell me that what they're teaching is THE bunkai, I'd walk the other way.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.




That's exactly my read. 

My first answer to white belts who ask about forms is its a library, that etches your techniques into muscle memory, so you can chain together and recall your "how to" when you start having senior moments. The beauty of it is when it transcends muscle memory and becomes a real mental library. You "see" without seeing the whole form.

May I ask you if you have heard anything about Tactical or Combat Hapkido Alliance?

I am looking to gain a Dan belt in Hopkido, and seeing as there are no Dans or Masters in my neck of the woods, I am seriously considering Hopkido-Online and taking a few of my senior students through it as a group.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 23, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Given Korean Tang Soo Do is partly derived from Okinawan Karate... And that bunkai for the Katas are relatively recently released to the rest of the world...
> 
> How do I ask this question without offending anyone?
> 
> ...



If you work through Bunkai, discovering for yourself what's there they won't be counterfeit. If you use the work of reputable karateka to help you do this you will know whether the Bunkai work, you don't just 'learn' Bunkai, you have to make it work for you. Explore it, use it, practice it then it becomes something workable and useful.
I don't understand what you mean though wen you say that the Bunkai were 'relatively released to the rest of the world', a lot of people have worked and are still working through kata to find useable and workable Bunkai, nobody has released that knowledge, many people study Bunkai.
As DD said there is no one _right _way of Bunkai and anyone saying there is very misguided to say the least.


----------



## Jacky Zuki (Jul 23, 2015)

There are levels of bunkai. The superficial level is the obvious one, a strike is a strike, a block is a block etc. Anything deeper than that gets personal; blocks and strikes can be seen as locks and throws of increasing technical difficulty depending on the knowledge and needs of the person seeking to unlock the moves.The superficial level is exactly what it looks like, the deeper levels depend on so many variables and personal preferences that what works for one person may seem contrived and ungainly to another. Don't think of bunkai as something to be kept pure and passed down in entirety, think of it as something everyone needs to reinvent in part for themselves.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

Jacky Zuki said:


> There are levels of bunkai. The superficial level is the obvious one, a strike is a strike, a block is a block etc. Anything deeper than that gets personal; blocks and strikes can be seen as locks and throws of increasing technical difficulty depending on the knowledge and needs of the person seeking to unlock the moves.The superficial level is exactly what it looks like, the deeper levels depend on so many variables and personal preferences that what works for one person may seem contrived and ungainly to another. Don't think of bunkai as something to be kept pure and passed down in entirety, think of it as something everyone needs to reinvent in part for themselves.



OK, so Hwang Kee, and Gitchen Funakoshi have enumerated different applications for each of the different punch/block/kicks. But neither are "Orthodox" according to some who say they were never taught "the" founder's Original Secret Recipe Bunkai.

In other words, bunkai was never intended to be an exercise of subjective interpretation, but a handing down of a concealed tradition.

If you read enough comments TSD or TKD or striking KMAs that have Okinawan Kata/Hyungs, you will eventually hear/read Japanese or Okinawan practioners spount "secret sauce you don't know" therefore your art is weaker, fake, flawed, or any other pejorative.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 23, 2015)

What is your understanding of what bunkai is?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> What is your understanding of what bunkai is?




The short answer, according to my first Sensai (Shihan Richard Brown 8th Dan, Karate) that I learned sometime back in the late 80s, was "take apart" or "disassembled", and the extracted technique or the oyoh is the breakdown or application of a technique within the kata, these are found through analysis.

He called the terms *toridai* and *himitsu* as the general names for techniques not easily obsreved to the viewer and these are hidden techniques within a given form.

He taught several styles of art forms (different days of the week), two of which I studied Shotokon Ryu, and Tang Soo Do. However, My TSD gained at his Dojo was only the first 2 geups.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 23, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> If you read enough comments TSD or TKD or striking KMAs that have Okinawan Kata/Hyungs, you will eventually hear/read Japanese or Okinawan practioners spount "secret sauce you don't know" therefore your art is weaker, fake, flawed, or any other pejorative.



Well you aren't hearing it from me ,no one I know 'spouts' such stuff. And as trashing other styles is strictly discouraged here ie against the rules you won't  hear it from anyone. I don't know anyone who thinks Bunkai is a secret. I know people who don't do it or think it's not worth doing but even they don't think it's some sort of secret.

What is 'Shotokon Ryu'?


----------



## DaveB (Jul 23, 2015)

There are a couple of inaccuracies in your question and I think clearing them up will help you with the answer to your question.



TSDTexan said:


> Given Korean Tang Soo Do is partly derived from Okinawan Karate... And that bunkai for the Katas are relatively recently released to the rest of the world...



From what I understand all Taekwondo is modified Shotokan and Tang Soo Do is the closest to the Shotokan root. This is good because Shotokan has a lot of research material publicly available and Tang Soo Do forms don't need a lot of modification to get back to the originals. Which makes TSD the only TKD branch with real kata application potential IMO. (It's not a dig, I love TKD, but their poomsae are muddled up kata, created to be different to kata for nationalistic reasons, not for holding a fighting art).

Bunkai were not released to the world. The world re-invented it to fill in the obvious gaps like dealing with grasping attacks and close fighting.

There are a small number of Shorin ryu schools and the like who claim to teach karate with full applications as they were handed down, but as of yet I have not encountered anyone making these publicly available. I've personally encountered one such group and their methods are fascinatingly distinct. So much so that I think they are genuine, but of limited relevance to other schools.

Pretty much everyone else has reverse engineered applications or learned from someone else who reverse engineered applications.

Though the concept has always been present, the Karate of Itosu and his peers was not routinely transmitted with a complete set of applications for the kata.

One of the most telling pieces of evidence towards this is the Naihanchi (Tekki) applications of Choki Motobu. They were his own. An article about him told how he enjoyed discussing possible applications for kata. But he was a master of the generation who should have known difinitively, with no need for further exploration.

I believe the truth is that each master taught a few applications in order to drill the skills of fighting, but that after that the kata served as a creative tool for further developing the potential of movement. After all, what more efficient way to train can there be, than drilling one small group of movements (i.e. kata) but being able to use that small set for a vast variety of fighting techniques and tactics.



> How do I ask this question without offending anyone?
> 
> OK. With greatest respect, how can we ascertain authenticity to the bunkai for the Okinawan Kata's of GM Itosu and others?
> 
> ...



Noboody knows who created most of the kata we have so there is no hope of finding the original applications. Taking into account what I wrote above, for the vast majority of us there is no "Authentic Bunkai". Never was, never will be. The only test is does it work?
That means checking the principles of the technique against the pressures of the real world and it's functionality against a resisting opposition.

But this is not just a point about how knowledge has been forgotten, it is about the fact that the question is wrong.

Bunkai at it's most fundamental is about finding combinations of kihon (basic/fundamental) techniques. Karateka had a hard time understanding kata because we fixed movements with names that limited their potential, and more damagingly our kihon had become limited to block, punch and kick. If your kihon includes these but also has wrist lock, shoulder lock, trap, pull, hip throw, reap etc, kata applications are not that mysterious. You may not spot everything straight away, but you will start to get what is going on more easily.

But this begs the question, if we need to know techniques to find the applications, what do we need the kata for?

The answer has to be that the techniques are not the important part, the sequences of techniques are why we have kata. How and why we should put the techniques together.

Can we apply every sequence in kata as it occurs in the kata and will these cover every combative situation I might encounter?

No we can't and no they won't.

From sequences we get tactics and strategies. These are embodied within a sequence, but transcend the specific techniques.
By having a set of rules (tactics and strategies) that guide us in which techniques to use and when to use them, we can avoid having to train for everything scenario and avoid learning hundreds of set piece drills that we won't be able to get off against an opponent who's not scripted.

So when you consider changing your kata I would suggest you consider whether or not the sequences impart underlying lessons of real value.
That being said I have always felt that TKD should do away with their patterns and create some new ones based on the modern fighting art that they have evolved through both sport and military channels. I think the result would look something like a cross between Ashihara Karate kata and Krav Maga.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

DaveB said:


> There are a couple of inaccuracies in your question and I think clearing them up will help you with the answer to your question.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


DaveB thank you. You understood what I was getting at.  That answers it.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Well you aren't hearing it from me ,no one I know 'spouts' such stuff. And as trashing other styles is strictly discouraged here ie against the rules you won't  hear it from anyone. I don't know anyone who thinks Bunkai is a secret. I know people who don't do it or think it's not worth doing but even they don't think it's some sort of secret.
> 
> What is 'Shotokon Ryu'?




Typo Shotokon was supposed to be Shotokan


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 23, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Typo Shotokon was supposed to be Shotokan



Ah, thought I'd ask because you never know,


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

You stated:

Bunkai at it's most fundamental is about finding combinations of kihon (basic/fundamental) techniques.

My comment: well put. When my students ask me the why do we do this form?... I feel like Teyve in fiddler on the roof. And I tell em, "This here is what I was taught, what my master was taught, and his was taught by Hwang Kee." Then I point at the little bookshelf, and say "go ask him, take notes and prepare a presentation of your findings, this is your introduction into Bun Hae."

You also said:
what do we need the kata for?

The answer has to be that the techniques are not the important part, the sequences of techniques are why we have kata. How and why we should put the techniques together.

Can we apply every sequence in kata as it occurs in the kata and will these cover every combative situation I might encounter?

No we can't and no they won't.

From sequences we get tactics and strategies. These are embodied within a sequence, but transcend the specific techniques.
By having a set of rules (tactics and strategies) that guide us in which techniques to use and when to use them, we can avoid having to train for everything scenario and avoid learning hundreds of set piece drills that we won't be able to get off against an opponent who's not scripted.

So when you consider changing your kata I would suggest you consider whether or not the sequences impart underlying lessons of real value.

My response: this is something I need to meditate upon. If I alter the curriculum, I will be departing from The Tradition and becoming a non traditional art, unless I want to approve the Seven Stars and related Soo Bahk Do forms... At which point, I am headed towards re-unification with the MDK, and ending TSD classes altogether. I am not certain I desire to do that.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 23, 2015)

Who is the 'you' in your post please? It's hard to follow because it looks like a conversation you are having with yourself?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 23, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Who is the 'you' in your post please? It's hard to follow because it looks like a conversation you are having with yourself?



 My phone goofed up, while was trying to respond to DaveB


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 24, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> My phone goofed up, while was trying to respond to DaveB



I try never to use my phone for things, I can't decide whether it's me or the phone.


----------



## dancingalone (Jul 24, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> My response: this is something I need to meditate upon. If I alter the curriculum, I will be departing from The Tradition and becoming a non traditional art, unless I want to approve the Seven Stars and related Soo Bahk Do forms... At which point, I am headed towards re-unification with the MDK, and ending TSD classes altogether. I am not certain I desire to do that.



Do you mean reconnecting with HC Hwang and the Soo Bahk Do group?  If so, as I understand it, Hwang Kee really didn't pass along a systematic way of studying the Chil Sung forms either, at least in the sense that bunkai sets are used in some Okinawan ryu-ha.  

Korean styles in general aren't the way to go if you want to study form applications in a cohesive fashion, but you know that already.  Frankly, there's more talk about it on the web than it actually exists (in my personal experience).  Yeah, the Okinawan styles are more likely to do it.  You'll still have to find the right teacher and the right situation as many nominally Okinawan karate schools in the west don't have the goods either.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 24, 2015)

dancingalone said:


> You'll still have to find the right teacher and the right situation as many nominally Okinawan karate schools in the west don't have the goods either.



You'll find a growing number of karateka in the UK who are using and investigating Bunkai. Iain Abernethy's seminar's, book and videos are tremendously popular. There's a number of instructors now who also take seminars on Bunkai.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 24, 2015)

This came in the newsletter from Iain Abernethy today. Pinan Heian Yodan Pyung Ahn Sa Dan Flow Drill Iain Abernethy


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 24, 2015)

dancingalvAFZrTYTfEo

1717531 said:
			
		

> Do you mean reconnecting with HC Hwang and the Soo Bahk Do group?  If so, as I understand it, Hwang Kee really didn't pass along a systematic way of studying the Chil Sung forms either, at least in the sense that bunkai sets are used in some Okinawan ryu-ha.
> 
> Korean styles in general aren't the way to go if you want to study form applications in a cohesive fashion, but you know that already.  Frankly, there's more talk about it on the web than it actually exists (in my personal experience).  Yeah, the Okinawan styles are more likely to do it.  You'll still have to find the right teacher and the right situation as many nominally Okinawan karate schools in the west don't have the goods either.




Yes, Hwang, HC's Moo Duk Kwan, and their current Soo Bank Do art form. As I was trained in the artform TSD as the Moo Duk Kwan interpreted it. As the 50s came to a close, Kee left the Taekwando/Taesoodo/TKD unification efforts, and incorporated the Korean Soobahkdo Association, and started to highly modify his TSD curriculum until it was no longer TSD.

There were a number of factors for this, but one of which, He couldn't get a trademark on the name "tang so do" as it is too generic. Hence the move away from Korean Karate, towards a depper connection to CMAs.

Sometime after Kee's son HC took over the Moo Duk Kwan, and when the Organization was in the US, sometime around 1990, the Moo Duk Kwan formally registered a trademark on the fist logo, the name "Moo Duk Kwan" (R).  This lead a lot of independent schools and masters to either stop teaching TSD and start teaching SBD, and re inter the MDK organization.

Other folks, remained independent, teaching old school tsd and had to drop the name. As for an example, For my lineage has had black belts awarded at first Dan, but after the end of the late fifties, Dan's were being issued midnight blue belts. This is why if a student of mine makes it to the 1st Dan, she or he receives a black belt.

If I were to rejoin the MDK some of my instructors would probably take deep exception. It violates our "tradition" (as an aside, how much tradition has held back real valid innovation?)

But back to your point, perhaps there is no Bun Hae or Bunkai, to SBD's new forms, as like the Okinawan masters had/have.

Would overhauling the kata to make

ki cho hyung il bu






turn back into kihon kata






Gain more than it loses? Is one objectively better then the other? I doubt I will ever go to Okinawa to spend 10 years relearning Karate just to gain an authentic bunkai. And I dont have time or inclination to reverse engineer, test and document bunkai, while searching for meaning in it. It is almost like a roarshach inkblot test.


----------



## dancingalone (Jul 24, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> But back to your point, perhaps there is no Bun Hae or Bunkai, to SBD's new forms, as like the Okinawan masters had/have.



I'm sure plenty of people have come up with interesting, perhaps even compelling, interpretations of the Chil Sung and Yuk Rho patterns.  But, they are not official, handed down from the mountain, ones from GM Hwang if that is important to one.

Then again, perhaps this could be something GM HC Hwang adds... or whomever his successor will be.  If the US Soo Bahk Do Federation seeks to  standardize and codify (trademark and copyright too) their art, this seems like a fairly obvious place to work some wonders.


----------



## dancingalone (Jul 24, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Would overhauling the kata to make
> 
> ki cho hyung il bu
> 
> ...



I don't know what you would gain.  The Shotokan folks, at least at the org level, generally don't practice bunkai in any comprehensive fashion either.  Trading one basic form for its Japanese cognate seems pointless to me.   



TSDTexan said:


> I doubt I will ever go to Okinawa to spend 10 years relearning Karate just to gain an authentic bunkai.



That's the catch.  If you are hung up on 'authentic' bunkai you have to practice a style that has such a thing to begin with, then you need to find a teacher from that lineage that actually had some if not all of it transmitted to him.  And even then, I sometimes think we would discover that the bunkai would stem back at best to the 1900's for most of these styles (I think you can have better luck with the Naha styles since they are more recent imports from China).  

Best not to worry about so-called 'authentic' teachings in my opinion, unless you're interested in studying a koryu art that is designed for historical preservation.



TSDTexan said:


> And I dont have time or inclination to reverse engineer, test and document bunkai, while searching for meaning in it. It is almost like a roarshach inkblot test.



A handful of people have already done it for you.  McCarthy, Abernethy, etc.  They are readily found and easy to communicate with if this is something you're interested in.  Then again, just finding some local capable instruction in Hapkido (aikido, judo, wrestling for that matter) will do wonders for deepening your understanding of kata.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 24, 2015)

My other Dan grade is in TSD, we don't do Kee Cho Hyung Il Boo as shown in the first video but as it's done in the second. This is the way the UK Tang Soo Do ( Soo Bahk) Do Federation tell people to do it, for guidance Grand master Kang UK Lee's book is used. I've said before I like TSD well enough but massively prefer Wado Ryu.

When you say you can't go to Japan to learn 'authentic' Bunkai are you suggesting that Bunkai that has been developed aren't genuine or that there is only one interpretation that is 'authentic'? There has been a lot of work done by martial artists in Bunkai which you could easily follow.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 24, 2015)

Been readibg


dancingalone said:


> I don't know what you would gain.  The Shotokan folks, at least at the org level, generally don't practice bunkai in any comprehensive fashion either.  Trading one basic form for its Japanese cognate seems pointless to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have recently obtained some hapkido course books and Dvds, and am recording and preparing to submit my videos at an online hapkido dojang, that help sponsor this place.

Feels nice being a white belt for a change, in a new nontraditional combat art form. 

I am looking forward to having "ah so" moments.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 24, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> My other Dan grade is in TSD, we don't do Kee Cho Hyung Il Boo as shown in the first video but as it's done in the second. This is the way the UK Tang Soo Do ( Soo Bahk) Do Federation tell people to do it, for guidance Grand master Kang UK Lee's book is used. I've said before I like TSD well enough but massively prefer Wado Ryu.
> 
> When you say you can't go to Japan to learn 'authentic' Bunkai are you suggesting that Bunkai that has been developed aren't genuine or that there is only one interpretation that is 'authentic'? There has been a lot of work done by martial artists in Bunkai which you could easily follow.




Well if it isn't the hidden/lost bunkai then it is an alternative to it. There is a thread in anthoer spot here that dives into "What is bunkai?" There are some in that thread that disbelieve in bunkai altogether, and others who put forward the notion that bunkai actually is the combat system itself, of karate and not free sparing-esqe kumite.

I was meditating on the idea that the kata's had encoded a series of movements that are like kings rook to c1 Check, player2: responds player1 next move Checkmate


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 24, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I try never to use my phone for things, I can't decide whether it's me or the phone.


I hear you 5x5. I have a 6.3in. screen smart phone, and usually it works right.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Well if it isn't the hidden/lost bunkai then it is an alternative to it. There is a thread in anthoer spot here that dives into "What is bunkai?" There are some in that thread that disbelieve in bunkai altogether, and others who put forward the notion that bunkai actually is the combat system itself, of karate and not free sparing-esqe kumite.
> 
> I was meditating on the idea that the kata's had encoded a series of movements that are like kings rook to c1 Check, player2: responds player1 next move Checkmate




The problem with that though was that the ones who didn't believe in Bunkai etc weren't people who had actually practiced Bunkai  or even kata/patterns and had only taken karate for a matter of months. There are of course experienced karate people who don't believe in Bunkai but you can respect their opinions if they at least train kata and karate. To practice something else and rubbish another style is just plain silly.
The Bunkai being the combat system itself rather than the kumite could be taken as a view because karate was designed for civilian unarmed defence rather than as a 'fighting offensive' system so that view could have merit. That one wouldn't practice fighting if you were only ever going to use it for defending yourself is a reasonable idea I think, I don't agree but it's reasonable.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 25, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> There are of course experienced karate people who don't believe in Bunkai but you can respect their opinions if they at least train kata and karate. To practice something else and rubbish another style is just plain silly.



Well, personally I dont trash anyone's style but I groan when some tells me they are a MA, and I ask what art.... And they say something like Taebo/ cardio kickboxking. That or they say Tai Chi... And I ask "how much Chuan have you ever used in real life?" And they look at me with a blank look. "Oh I just do it for the health benefits" (inside I die a little).


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Well, personally I dont trash anyone's style but I groan when some tells me they are a MA, and I ask what art.... And they say something like Taebo/ cardio kickboxking. That or they say Tai Chi... And I ask "how much Chuan have you ever used in real life?" And they look at me with a blank look. "Oh I just do it for the health benefits" (inside I die a little).



Usually goes along with people making a karate 'chop' with their hands and making weird noises they think sounds like a kiai ( if they actually knew what one was)!


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 25, 2015)

Ever figure out why Bruce Lee did screaming monkey sounds?


----------



## DaveB (Jul 26, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Yes, Hwang, HC's Moo Duk Kwan, and their current Soo Bank Do art form. As I was trained in the artform TSD as the Moo Duk Kwan interpreted it. As the 50s came to a close, Kee left the Taekwando/Taesoodo/TKD unification efforts, and incorporated the Korean Soobahkdo Association, and started to highly modify his TSD curriculum until it was no longer TSD.
> 
> There were a number of factors for this, but one of which, He couldn't get a trademark on the name "tang so do" as it is too generic. Hence the move away from Korean Karate, towards a depper connection to CMAs.
> 
> ...



It sounds like your decision will be mostly political in nature.

Those who don't believe in applications of kata always have an agenda. Either it's a kid trashing traditional ma because he can't see the link between what we do and the dogma of MMA, or its a guy who spent 40 years marching up and down the dojo doing basic punches kicks and blocks who now feels that decades of training are being invalidated by the range of skills being introduced through application study.

The fact is that if you step out of the Karate bubble, the arts themail cultures that birthed Karate all use kata and they all encode fighting methods in them. We know this. It's documented, it's in every CMA school. Debate over.

Now whether or not a person wishes to study kata is up to them, but for me it is the most valuable aspect of MA after fitness.

Btw, all thats needed to fix the Korean kihon form is the rhythm of the central three punches. It's not 1,1,1. It's 1,1-2.

This introduces the student to the application of rhythm in fighting (e.g. drawing a response with the first blow that you intercept and roll over with the 1-2). This opens the door to exploring the possible variations of striking rhythm, from 1,1,1 to 1-2-3. 

Combining this with the three timings of the punches, (before on or after the step), with th with the three stepping options (half step, full step and spin) and with the reverse punch alternative gives rise to a whole syllabus of fighting education).


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 26, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> The short answer, according to my first Sensai (Shihan Richard Brown 8th Dan, Karate) that I learned sometime back in the late 80s, was "take apart" or "disassembled", and the extracted technique or the oyoh is the breakdown or application of a technique within the kata, these are found through analysis.



Cool.

The reason I ask is that I find that the exact meaning is one of the most misunderstood concepts in martial arts. It's commonly thought of as a specific interpretation, or set of interpretations, for kata (meaning the solo sequences as found in karate here), although that's not quite correct… Bunkai isn't anything specific… it's a process. In particular, it's a process of examination. In other words, there is no set bunkai for a particular kata… bunkai is what you apply to the kata yourself. The kanji for bunkai are 分解… the first character ("bun" - 分) means to divide, or take apart, with the second ("kai" - 解) meaning to disassemble, with an additional concept of to clarify. So bunkai is a process of taking apart to examine and clarify. That cannot be done if you are simply given the "answers"… it's a process where you find your own ones. Ideally, you should be guided to some more basic (kihon) understanding of what the actions can be interpreted as… and, from there, it's up to the practitioner to find (discover) their own understanding of the movements. This, among other reasons, is why you can get senior karateka with differing performances of the same kata, of course.

But here's the thing… bunkai is not, by definition, application. It's not even combatively useful. It can be, certainly… and many have that as a kind of "litmus test" to whether or not it's "real" bunkai (kinda missing the point… provided the kata is taken apart and analysed, it's "real" bunkai). Other versions of bunkai can take on a more "spiritual" identity (philosophical expressions in physical form)… or be used to emphasise other lessons. Actual applications (combative) of the movements are referred to as oyo (応用 - pretty literally "to act in response").

There are some lists of "rules" for bunkai… guidelines for how to best explore and examine the lessons of the kata… such as the Kaisai no Genri. But these are best understood as ideas, concepts to be applied… not the actual process of bunkai in and of itself.



TSDTexan said:


> He called the terms *toridai* and *himitsu* as the general names for techniques not easily obsreved to the viewer and these are hidden techniques within a given form.



Yeah, those are common enough terms… himitsu basically means "hidden from sight"… 



TSDTexan said:


> He taught several styles of art forms (different days of the week), two of which I studied Shotokon Ryu, and Tang Soo Do. However, My TSD gained at his Dojo was only the first 2 geups.



Okay… no such thing as "Shotokan Ryu", for the record… but cool.



dancingalone said:


> Best not to worry about so-called 'authentic' teachings in my opinion, unless you're interested in studying a koryu art that is designed for historical preservation.



Kinda off topic, but… no. That's not what Koryu are designed for…


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 26, 2015)

The odds of me finding some one who teaches Fujian White Crane in my town would be miraculous in magnatude.

Why do I'm mention this CMA? Because Karate is and always been a traditional MMA. To blast modern MMA starting with Bruce Lee's art, and everything after is in hypocrisy.

The Okinawan Masters would send their top students to China after about six years of training in the Okinawan system 手 (Te), after about 5-6 studying the CMAs  唐, the new master of the two systems Okiwan Te & CMA would spend the remaining part of his life creating a harmony within the two. 唐手

While passing on the living art to new students in Okinawa.

Gitchen Funakoshi changed the name Tang Soo, or China Hand to Empty Hand, in order to bypass the anti china sentiments of the mainland Japanese people. 

Giving us the Kanji or Hanji 空手

In Japan the "Te" -> Tang = new "Te" development cycle froze, and after the Sho Dynasty ended in Okinawa they also froze the Te-Tang development cycle. 

At this point, innovation only happened by discovery, or blending Japanese various breeds of jutsu into Karate-Do, by a master who was usually dual systemed.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 26, 2015)

You said:



Chris Parker said:


> Okay… no such thing as "Shotokan Ryu", for the record… but cool.




The Shotokon was a typo, as was stated later in the thread, unless you are asserting that there is no SHOTOKAN ryu (correct spelling) if the second is the case I will refer you to the following:

Shihankai ISKS home page

The Kokusai Shotokan-ryu Karate-do Shihankai (ISKS) was inaugurated in June 2004. 

But you might say, yes, but this name is antecedent to the 1980s when you studied Shotokan Karate. My answer, 2004 was when the organization formally inaugurated.

The following notion may be disturbing to some people... The can be both a Formal Ryu or an informal Ryu.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 26, 2015)

Yeah… don't know what they're on about… Shotokan isn't a ryu-ha… and there's no "ryu" in the kanji on the Japanese form of the name on that page, for the record…

When it comes down to it, Funakoshi didn't even intend what he taught to be a particular, distinct style… he just called it "karate". It was his students who (lovingly) gave a sign saying "Shotokan" (Shoto's Hall/Club) to the dojo. Shotokan is, when all's said and done, an organisation… which is very different to a ryu-ha.

Hmm… you added a bit after I posted… let's see.

Honestly, it doesn't matter if they decided to name their organisation "Shotokan Ryu" in 2004… it still doesn't make Shotokan a ryu… I also don't know what you mean by people being disturbed, or by "formal and informal ryu"…


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 26, 2015)

Well if it helps, the breed of Japanese Karate that I studied for that year, is commonly called Shotokan Karate. Whatever it means, or can't mean. Perhaps I should say Karate by the lineage and teaching of G. Funakoshi, through his students-do.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 26, 2015)

Ha, yeah, I got that… it was a minor point, really. The more important part of my post was the longer bit earlier…


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 26, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Honestly, it doesn't matter if they decided to name their organisation "Shotokan Ryu" in 2004… it still doesn't make Shotokan a ryu… I also don't know what you mean by people being disturbed, or by "formal and informal ryu"…


Usually Chris your spot on but you missed on this one.  while yeah i get what your saying in general terms but ALL Okinawan systems and styles are called ryu.  whether or not it is technically correct would be another topic but at some point the Okinawan styles have taken on the ryu designation.  Uechi-ryu, Goju -ryu, Shito-ryu, Kobo-ryu, shorin-ryu, Matubayashi-ryu......yeah shotokan ryu sounds a little weird and i have never heard it used before myself but i dont see why you would use it for every other karate style and not shotokan.



TSDTexan said:


> Gitchen Funakoshi changed the name Tang Soo, or China Hand to Empty Hand, in order to bypass the anti china sentiments of the mainland Japanese people.


to be accurate it wasnt Funakoshi that changed the name.  It was a meeting in Okinawa in 1936 with a few top karate-ka (Funakoshi was not there, he was in Japan) that decided to formally name what they do "empty handed self defense" thus kara-te.  it would seem that yes the anti- Chinese movement could have been the deciding factor to re- identify the arts. there was a lot going on at that time and would make sense to choose a name that was neutral to both the Chinese and the Japanese. The Chinese were in a Civil battle between the Communist party and the Nationalist party. Okinawans would also be weary of getting into that scuffle as well. the term "Tang-hand" To-Te which was the common term might have brought implications from the Chinese as well. 



TSDTexan said:


> The Okinawan Masters would send their top students to China after about six years of training in the Okinawan system 手 (Te), after about 5-6 studying the CMAs 唐, the new master of the two systems Okiwan Te & CMA would spend the remaining part of his life creating a harmony within the two. 唐手
> 
> While passing on the living art to new students in Okinawa.


Nice thought but ...no



TSDTexan said:


> In Japan the "Te" -> Tang = new "Te" development cycle froze, and after the Sho Dynasty ended in Okinawa they also froze the Te-Tang development cycle.



not sure what your trying to say here.



TSDTexan said:


> At this point, innovation only happened by discovery, or blending Japanese various breeds of jutsu into Karate-Do, by a master who was usually dual systemed.


i dont think i agree with this statement but i would need more of an explanation for what you are trying to say.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 26, 2015)

Sakukawa Kanga (1733 - 1815) was a student of one of the great worriors of Okinawa then, the monk Takahara Pēchin (高原 親雲上?). 

After 6 years of study, Takahara suggested hisstudent to go to China and study there under the guidance of the great master  Kosokun, (originator of _kusanku kata_), after 6 years of study in China Sakukawa returned to Okinawa and  started teaching in the city of Shuri, a fighting art that he called "Tudi Sakukawa," which meant "Sakukawa of China Hand." 

This was the first known recorded reference to the art of "Tudi," written as 唐手. 

Sakukawa's most significant student Matsumura Sōkon (1809–1899)   went on to develop his master’s style which was a synthesis of _te_ (Shuri-te and Tomari-te) and Shaolin (Chinese 少林) styles. 

Matsumura's style would later become the Shōrin-ryū style.








Matsumura Sōkon Sensei


Matsumura taught his art to Itosu Ankō (1831–1915) among others. 

Itosu adapted two forms he had learned from Matsumara: _kusanku_ and _chiang nan _from which he created the _ping'an_ forms ("_heian_" or "_pinan_" in Japanese) which are simplified kata for beginning students. 

In 1901 these forms were introduced into Okinawa's elementary public schools as part of their physical training program. 

Itosu's influence in karate is broad. The forms he created are common across nearly all styles of karate. 

Among his students are some of the most well-known karate masters, including Gichin Funakoshi, Kenwa Mabuni, and Motobu Chōki. 

Itosu is sometimes referred to as "the Grandfather of Modern Karate."

In 1881 Higaonna Kanryō from the city Naha returned from China after years of Kung Fu Instructions  with master Ryu Ryu Ko and founded what would






Chōjun Miyagi Sensei Teaching.


become Naha-te. 

One of his students, Chōjun Miyagi,  was the founder of Gojū-ryū (剛柔流?), ("hard-soft style").

 Chōjun Miyagi taught well-known karateka such as Seko Higa, Meitoku Yagi, Miyazato Ei'ichi, and Seikichi Toguchi.

In addition to the three early _te_ styles of karate a fourth Okinawan influence is that of Kanbun Uechi (1877–1948), who at the age of 20 went to Fuzhou in Fujian Province, China, to escape Japanese military conscription. 

While there he studied under Shushiwa. He was a leading figure of Chinese Nanpa Shorin-ken style at that time. 

He later developed his own style of Uechi-ryū karate based on the Sanchin, Seisan, and Sanseiryu kata that he had studied in China.


Hoshin1600, I now ask you a question.
Is any of this history in error?

This is the historical context of my statement "Te" -> Tang development cycle. 

Takahara Pēchin taught "Te" to Sakukawa Kanga  and then
Kosokun taught "Tang" (China Hand) to Sakukawa Kanga.  

This would develop into the formal art/school/tradition of Shōrin-ryū.

The art of Naha-te is another "Te" -> "Tong" development or hybrid.

As was, what we call the art taught under the name Uechi-ryū

These are pretty much the same as when they were founded right?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 26, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> I now ask you a question.
> Is any of this history in error?


i am not sure how to respond to your post.   i believe your last post is meant as a history lesson to make a point.  to answer your question directly yes there are some things that are not quite right but i dont think they are important enough to the topic at hand.  while i made a few comments on your prior posts, my main concern was not understanding your post to begin with and this one didnt help me understand any more.  im sorry. 

you typed this in both posts "Te" -> Tang development cycle. "  and this " "Te" -> "Tong" development or hybrid."   im sorry i am not understanding the intent and meaning of what you are trying to say.  you also posted "In Japan the "Te" -> Tang = new "Te" development cycle froze"
what  is a development cycle, what froze and what is the meaning of the  -> sign???  

my only other reply to you was about this 


TSDTexan said:


> The Okinawan Masters would send their top students to China after about six years of training in the Okinawan system


notice you use the word "students"  with and S ....this sentence to me (and maybe it just me and im wrong here) has the meaning that it was a common practice for all "the Okinawan masters" to teach their students for a period on 6 years then send them to China to study more. 
if this was your intent in what you wrote then i disagree.. on the other hand many Okinawans did go to China, and did learn there. its common knowledge that they did. including Matsumura Sokon.  
Did you mean that the Okinawan's studied with the Chinese?  or did you intend your statement to only be about Matsumura? i read is as it reads and interperted it as it reads.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> i am not sure how to respond to your post.   i believe your last post is meant as a history lesson to make a point.  to answer your question directly yes there are some things that are not quite right but i dont think they are important enough to the topic at hand.  while i made a few comments on your prior posts, my main concern was not understanding your post to begin with and this one didnt help me understand any more.  im sorry.
> 
> you typed this in both posts "Te" -> Tang development cycle. "  and this " "Te" -> "Tong" development or hybrid."   im sorry i am not understanding the intent and meaning of what you are trying to say.  you also posted "In Japan the "Te" -> Tang = new "Te" development cycle froze"
> what  is a development cycle, what froze and what is the meaning of the  -> sign???
> ...



Ok.
The -> shows where it started, and what it collided (for lack of a better term) the -> means Vector. The art of "te" headed towards a union with a type of "Chinese Hand". [Hence the Tang as in T'ang Dynasty or generally "China".] leading to a new "te".

I didn't mean to imply all students were sent to China, please forgive me. I meant a few Masters sent an occasional top student to China. This happened more then once, therefore I referred to them as in the plural. 


Ok so lets return to some more history.

In the 7th century, Chinese martial arts were introduced to Okinawa through Taoist and Buddhist monks. These styles were practiced in Okinawa and developed into "Te" (Hand) over several centuries.

The Ryūkyūan monk Takahara Pēchin had a type of "Te" that he taught to Sakukawa Kanga. 

Lets for the moment, call it Takahara-Te. [which was a synthesis of _te _(Shuri-te and Tomari-te) ]

Sakukawa went to China and then learned a Shaolin Ch'uan Fa under the Chinese military attache Kushanku. (Who lived briefly in Okinawa)     

Takarara-Te (Shuri-te) + White Crane Fist Southern Shaolin Ch'uan Fa  =  The foundation from which Tang-Te, or China-Hand, or Tang Soo springs. Called Tode or Tudi.

Matsumura Sōkon (1809–1899) went on to develop his master’s style and Shaolin (Chinese 少林) styles Matsumura's style would later become the Shōrin-ryū style.


Kushanku,is also known by his Chinese name Kong Su Kung. (his name was written as Guan Kui, Kushanku, Kouh-Shang-Kouh and Ko Sokun ) 
He is credited with the introduction of the Kanku kata came to Okinawa in 1756.
It is said that Kushanku learned the art of ch’uan Fa in China from a Shaolin Monk.

What he learned was White Crane Fist Style (Chinese: 白鶴拳) is a Southern Chinese martial art which originated in Fujian (福建) Province in the city of Qanzhou. 

Fāng Qīniáng is by tradition the founder of this White Crane Fist style, that was passed back to the Shaolin Monks.

This was a city where the part of the Southern Sect of Shaolin had a temple (until it was burned down, later to be rebuilt), This Southern sect had formed during the Jin and Tang Eras. 

Hence, this is why we say "Tang".


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 27, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> Usually Chris your spot on but you missed on this one.  while yeah i get what your saying in general terms but ALL Okinawan systems and styles are called ryu.  whether or not it is technically correct would be another topic but at some point the Okinawan styles have taken on the ryu designation.  Uechi-ryu, Goju -ryu, Shito-ryu, Kobo-ryu, shorin-ryu, Matubayashi-ryu......yeah shotokan ryu sounds a little weird and i have never heard it used before myself but i dont see why you would use it for every other karate style and not shotokan.



Ha, yeah… no. Shotokan is not a Ryu. At all. It wasn't designed as one, it wasn't formulated as one, it wasn't presented and passed on as one, it wasn't named as one, and simply isn't one. I mean… I can point out that Shotokan isn't an Okinawan (specific) style of karate… realistically, it's a homogenised, generic form of karate based on a number of systems that Funakoshi introduced to Japan… and the name was simply for the dojo itself. I can point out that it's not alone in that either (Kyokushinkai and Goju Kai being another couple of examples)… but, in the end, it's possibly sufficient to point out that it's not a ryu… it's a kan. Hence the name. If it was a ryu, it'd be Shoto-Ryu.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2015)

Chris, ( sorry, this is a slight detour from thread) what about Wado Ryu? I know the history of it of course but I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about the Japanese way of doing things to know about 'Ryu' 'Kan' etc and what makes what! Cheers.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Ha, yeah… no. Shotokan is not a Ryu. At all. It wasn't designed as one, it wasn't formulated as one, it wasn't presented and passed on as one, it wasn't named as one, and simply isn't one. I mean… I can point out that Shotokan isn't an Okinawan (specific) style of karate… realistically, it's a homogenised, generic form of karate based on a number of systems that Funakoshi introduced to Japan… and the name was simply for the dojo itself. I can point out that it's not alone in that either (Kyokushinkai and Goju Kai being another couple of examples)… but, in the end, it's possibly sufficient to point out that it's not a ryu… it's a kan. Hence the name. If it was a ryu, it'd be Shoto-Ryu.



While perhaps each and every statement that you wrote is quite possibly true (I will be frank and say I dont know for certain), it still doesn't stop many, many people from calling it that nonetheless.

Even while being a misnomer.

Ryū (school), a school of thought or discipline (for example a fighting school).
Kan is a hall or building or academy, like Kwan in Korean.



The koala “bear,” which is actually a marsupial and not a bear.

The Panda bear isn't a bear either, but a member of the racoon family (the largest one)

Another is “German” chocolate cake, a cake that didn’t originate in Germany but was created in America by a man with the last name “German.”

Perhaps the biggest, history-changing misnomer was when Christopher Columbus dubbed American natives “Indians” because he mistakenly thought he was in India.

The sago palm (Cycas revolute), a common houseplant, is actually not a palm at all but a type of plant known as a cycad. This inaccuracy irks botanists and horticulturists everywhere,

Anyone who’s taken geometry knows Pythagoras’s famous theorem relating the sides of a right triangle: A2 + B2 = C2. Most of us presume Pythagoras was the first to recognize this truth, since the theorem bears his name. Actually, the Babylonians used the so-called Pythagorean Theorem some 1,000 years before Pythagoras was born. They even wrote it down, on a tablet now known as Plimpton 322.

So, I may understand that it is a misnomer. But I seriously doubt you are going to get others to stop calling it that, anymore than you would be able to get folks to stop calling the panda a bear. And correcting some folks runs a great risk of coming across as pedantic.

As I understand it, and is found in the wiki's.

Gichin Funakoshi had trained in both of the popular styles of Okinawan karate of the time: Shōrei-ryū and Shōrin-ryū.

After years of study in both styles, Funakoshi created a simpler system that combined the ideals of the two. He never named this system, however, always referring to it simply as "karate." Open Hand.

Having said that, it is my assertion that Shotokan Ryu literally would be Hall of Pine Waves School.

In 1924, Funakoshi adopted the Kyū / Dan rank system and the uniform (keikogi) developed by Kano Jigoro, the founder of judo.

This system uses colored belts (obi) to indicate rank. Originally, karate had only three belt colors: white, brown, and black (with ranks within each). The original belt system, still used by many Shotokan schools, is:

8th rising to 4th kyū: white
3rd rising to 1st kyū: brown
1st and higher dan: black

Funakoshi also wrote: "The ultimate aim of Karate lies not in victory or defeat, but in the perfection of the character of the participant.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 27, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Ok.
> The -> shows where it started, and what it collided (for lack of a better term) the -> means Vector. The art of "te" headed towards a union with a type of "Chinese Hand". [Hence the Tang as in T'ang Dynasty or generally "China".] leading to a new "te".
> 
> I didn't mean to imply all students were sent to China, please forgive me. I meant a few Masters sent an occasional top student to China. This happened more then once, therefore I referred to them as in the plural.
> ...



TSDTexan,

I for one have heard most of what you have written above in one form or another before, but I don't think that the difinitive way in which you present it is quite correct.

The impression I had was that there was waaaaaay more grey obscure patches across Karate's history. That there were many many other people involved who we simply don't remember today because they were unlucky in terms of karate's proliferation.

Some ideas, like the notion that te came from chinese monks, are new to me: I always understood te as being purely indigenous.
I don't think Higaonna was the founder of Naha te, largely because naha-te wasn't one art, but a generic term for the karate of people from Naha. Also I know that Itosu's first master was a naha-te man. He would have been of the same generation as Higaonna.

All of what you've written comes across in this same way to me: taking things we know are true and making them the whole story, or adding details that I don't recognise at all.

Please don't take this as a disagreement; I am no historian, just a keen student. Your view of things may be spot on, but there's nothing I've read before (with the exception of some of McCarthy's work) that comes across with certainty and clarity about the broader chain of events, as if we have an authenticated written history. And I'm pretty sure we don't have one of those.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

DaveB said:


> TSDTexan,
> 
> I for one have heard most of what you have written above in one form or another before, but I don't think that the difinitive way in which you present it is quite correct.
> 
> ...



I usually will ask when I share what I have learned so far, "Is this an accurate history?" because I actually like hearing the responses, those responses cause me to go back to researching the claimed inaccuracies. I have been corrected many, many, many times. and for that I am thankful. 

Corrections are like a roll on the mats.

I have said on occasion that the road for a black belt in BJJ probably has 30,000 or 40,000 tapouts given, and 90,000 tapouts received. You probably going to get tapped 3 times (or more) for every one time you tap someone else.
Based on the popular conception that a BB in BJJ is 3,000 to 10,000 hours of mat time.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2015)

In thirty odd years or more I've never heard Shotokan being called Shotokan Ryu, I have to say.



TSDTexan said:


> The koala “bear,” which is actually a marsupial and not a bear.
> 
> The Panda bear isn't a bear either, but a member of the racoon family (the largest one)
> 
> Another is “German” chocolate cake, a cake that didn’t originate in Germany but was created in America by a man with the last name “German.”



Usually pandas are called pandas and koalas... koalas, as for 'German' cake I've never heard of it. What things are called is dependent on where you come from usually.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

-Scott Shaw, Ph.D as stated 
*The Warrior Is Silent: Martial Arts and the Spiritual Path*





Tez3 said:


> In thirty odd years or more I've never heard Shotokan being called Shotokan Ryu, I have to say.
> 
> 
> 
> Usually pandas are called pandas and koalas... koalas, as for 'German' cake I've never heard of it. What things are called is dependent on where you come from usually.




It was fairly common in Texas, in the late 80s and early 90s, in the cities of San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, and Houston.
Perhaps its just a regional thing.


As for folks who are unfamiliar with Chinese Monks introducing what would become "Te" in the 700s, should read:
*The Warrior Is Silent: Martial Arts and the Spiritual Path*
isbn 1620550717 - Google Search
Scott Shaw, Ph.D. - 1998 - ‎Body, Mind & Spirit
Martial Arts and the Spiritual Path, Scott Shaw, Ph.D. Japanese contact with the Ryukyu Islands, of which Okinawa is a part, began in 616 C.E., when ... in the islands through Chinese Taoist and Buddhist monks during the late seventh century.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 27, 2015)

TSDTexan 
I would guess by your writing that you are an engineer or chemist or something like that or perhaps you just have the linear analytical  thinking like one,
Thank you for trying to clarify.
I would point out as was already stated that you style of writing gives the reader the impression of absolutes.  We are talking about history, an oral history for the most part. We really can't talk in absolutes when it comes to the very early origins of karate. We can only use probability.  The idea of monks bringing martial arts to Okinawa is only one theory.  First, that theory would then have to be framed with a fact that Buddhist  monks knew martial arts to begin with.  This again is only a theory based on more folklore then fact.
There are just to many unknowns in the history of karate. However that doesn't stop people from filling in the blanks with their own thoughts and agenda to create a flowing narrative.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> TSDTexan
> I would guess by your writing that you are an engineer or chemist or something like that or perhaps you just have the linear analytical  thinking like one,
> Thank you for trying to clarify.
> I would point out as was already stated that you style of writing gives the reader the impression of absolutes.  We are talking about history, an oral history for the most part. We really can't talk in absolutes when it comes to the very early origins of karate. We can only use probability.  The idea of monks bringing martial arts to Okinawa is only one theory.  First, that theory would then have to be framed with a fact that Buddhist  monks knew martial arts to begin with.  This again is only a theory based on more folklore then fact.
> There are just to many unknowns in the history of karate. However that doesn't stop people from filling in the blanks with their own thoughts and agenda to create a flowing narrative.


I write open mindedly of what I believe to be true. It doesn't mean I am necessarily correct or incorrect. The katas are the preponderance of evidence to say CMA impacted Okinaiwan Te. Therefore reason says I can safely believe it.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 27, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> I write open mindedly of what I believe to be true. It doesn't mean I am necessarily correct or incorrect. The katas are the preponderance of evidence to say CMA impacted Okinaiwan Te. Therefore reason says I can safely believe it.



OK ....so then what you are proposing is that the kata originally came from China.. hum....interesting. I wouldn't have belived it but your posts clearly show you know your history or are good at Wikipedia. The Kata came from China ...let me ponder that for a bit. Or maybe you are saying that karate in general came from China..I was always told the Okinawan invented it to fight against the samurai. So...karate is really Kung fu? Who would have thought. ......?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> OK ....so then what you are proposing is that the kata originally came from China.. hum....interesting. I wouldn't have belived it but your posts clearly show you know your history or are good at Wikipedia. The Kata came from China ...let me ponder that for a bit. Or maybe you are saying that karate in general came from China..I was always told the Okinawan invented it to fight against the samurai. So...karate is really Kung fu? Who would have thought. ......?




Well I read this a few years back, 
History of Karate Prabhuji Ashram

Then I started looking into who was Kushanku.

That led me to knowledge that he was trained by a Shaolin monk. 

This led me to what styles of "kung fu" the temple in Fujian Provence were taught.

Then I was reading something about how Wing Chun and Karate both had relations to White Crane Fist.

Which took me back full circle to 
History of Karate Prabhuji Ashram


Only recently in the last day or two I have read some stuff on katas like origins because of stuff posted about bunkai, and looking to related forms in Kung Fu.

The Okinawas developed a fighting style or styles that are distinctly not kung fu, but are influenced by it.

Hence my assertion that Karate is an old mma.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

Hoshin1600: said "OK ....so then what you are proposing is that the kata originally came from China"

My response: "no, not exactly" The Katas that came to Okinawa did not remain as they were. They were modified, or edited.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 27, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> OK ....so then what you are proposing is that the kata originally came from China.. hum....interesting. I wouldn't have belived it but your posts clearly show you know your history or are good at Wikipedia. The Kata came from China ...let me ponder that for a bit. Or maybe you are saying that karate in general came from China..I was always told the Okinawan invented it to fight against the samurai. So...karate is really Kung fu? Who would have thought. ......?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 27, 2015)

I've met and worked with two out four of those masters in the comparison sanchin video.  

Naw I just don't buy it...karate and Kung fu related. ...preposterous 
Next thing you guys will be telling me is that water is wet.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 27, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> I've met and worked with two out four of those masters in the comparison sanchin video.
> 
> Naw I just don't buy it...karate and Kung fu related. ...preposterous
> Next thing you guys will be telling me is that water is wet.


 And women have secrets......


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 27, 2015)

elder999 said:


> And women have secrets......




Or the Pope is Buddhist, but the Dali Lama is Catholic.


----------



## DaveB (Jul 28, 2015)

TSDTexan, 

An example of where the uncertainty lies in your viewpoint:



TSDTexan said:


> Well I read this a few years back,
> History of Karate Prabhuji Ashram
> 
> Then I started looking into who was Kushanku.
> ...



The name Kushanku could be a person, but it could be a title.

The southern Shaolin temple in Fujian is an unproven myth. Nobody knows if it ever existed. The story is popular because of the prestige it brings to the area, but there's no evidence to support it.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

Okinawan Martial Arts History Kyushiki-Ryu Kempo-Jutsu is a really good read.

DaveB, have you ever been to Fujian area?
You have made an assertion that there is no evidence. This is not accurate.

Dao Guang returned to Fujian and selected Putian Linshan Mountain (which resembled "Jiu Lian" mountain in topography) as the site of the Southern Shaolin Temple. Evidence amassed by the three above referenced historical and archeological organizations establishes that the Tang Emperor, Li Shimin (600-649 AD), approved the proposed site and the construction of a Southern Shaolin Temple. He was particularly appreciative, as the warrior monks had earlier saved his life in a conflict with a rogue General who challenged his ascendancy to the throne. Li Shimin (Imperial title - Tai-Tsung) reigned from 626-649 AD. He brought Taoism and Buddhism together with Confucian policy to rule the country. The Chan tradition of the Southern Shaolin was also created at this time, together with that temple's practice of martial arts.

More than 30 experts in martial arts, history, religion and archeology firmly asserted that the central temple Lin Quan Yuan of this Southern Shaolin Temple was built around 557 A.D, during the Nan (South) Dynasty.

This is only 61 years later than the Song Shan Shaolin Temple and even one year earlier than the most famous Guan Hua Temple at Putian. Therefore it is the earliest temple built in Fujian.

The National Culture Bureau discovered the ruins of the center temple, "Lin Quan Yuan," in 1986 - more than 300 years after its destruction.

The ruins are located at Linshan Mountain (above sea level 500 meters) and are surrounded by mountains North, South, and East. The Temple's western side was opposite the Supine Buddha Mountain (above sea level 570 meters) with a river in between. The ruins are 200 meters long from west to east with a total area of about 30,000 square meters.

The terrain and its features bear a strong resemblance to Song Shan Shaolin Temple. The topography of the Southern Shaolin Temple is strategically located and quite difficult to access.

From a military perspective, it was easy to defend and difficult to challenge. In essence, it was an ideal place for executing revolutionary command and control of military strategy and tactics. There are more than 10 fortified mountain villages around it.

Today the ruins of these villages still exist. The four stone inscriptions of the Zhang Jiang Village confirm that it was built at the end of Ming Dynasty (1645 A.D) when Cibo Huang fought against Qing soldiers. There are also place names related to the Shaolin Temple at Lin Shan Village, such as Yuan Qian, Yuan Hou, Yuan Ke, Ta Li, Ta Xi, Fangseng Chi, Liangong Tan, etc.

Likewise, there are found some camp names related to martial arts practice as well, and a stone trough for the monk soldiers to treat wounded and ill casualties. It is engraved with Chinese calligraphy proclaiming that two Monk soldiers, Yongqi and Jinqi, of* Linquanyuan Temple, the original name of the Southern Shaolin Temple, made this trough in September of the Year Jiayou of the Song Dynasty.*


The stone trough is 226 cm long and 100 cm wide with the inscription "Bathing and boiling herb medicine for monks."

According to the stone inscription, it had more than 20 buildings with more than 500 monks living there. *Lin Quan Yuan was not just a common temple.*

*It was a temple of Shaolin Martial Arts directly passed on by Shaolin Monk Soldiers. It became a branch of the Song Shan Shaolin temple.*

*Fujian Province's Fuqing County has had a Shaolin Yuan ever since Song times.*

After the Southern Song capitulated to the Yuan, a Quanzhou native Liang Ke Jia revised the "Three Mountain Record" in 1182.

In Volume 36, called "Fuqing County Temples." of the Ming dynasty, Liang Ke Jia records that the Putian native named Huang Zhong Zhao, edited the "Records of the Min Area" around 1499, and this volume also records that there are eight temples in the Xin Ning area of Fuqing County:
Fang Dong,
Dong Lin,
Hou Tang,
Long Xi,
Zhao Fu,
Long Ju,
Shaolin,
and Da Xu.

Among these temples, the first to be built was the Fang Dong with construction beginning in 569. The Dong Lin temple was built sometime between 1086 and 1094. Hou Tang was built in 1117. However the other five temple's construction dates weren't recorded.

Fujian Provincial government and Fuzhou City archeological teams *excavated the site in July and August of 1995 and March through October of 1996*.
*
This is OFFICIAL.*

The excavations uncovered a site of over 5000 square meters, *currently the largest temple found within China. *The archeologists' report found four strata: Northern Song, Southern Song, Ming/Qing, and nearly modern.

The Shaolin Yuan is in the northeastern corner of Fuqing county, at the intersection of three counties: Fuqing, Putian, and Yong Tai.

Sorry DaveB, but the Facts are against your assertion.

Story of Traditional Chinese Martial Arts - Southern Chinese Martial Arts in Qing Dynasty Part 1


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

The other thing that I happen to know, directly from the mouth of a Korean Shaolin who was raised the Dae Yeon Sa Temple from age five through age 18, (when Korean law forced him into military service.) The Dae Yeon Sa temple had sent and received monks to the Southern Sect temples. There are records of these departures and arrivals, by the scribes of Temple Headmasters.

I got the opportunity to train under him, in Tukong Moosul, for about 5 months before I had to move to Las Vegas.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

When the Manchus overthrew the Ming dynasty, lovalists (the Southern Shaolin amongst them) rallied to restore the Ming government - this is the reason for the popularity of the term si ming (思明), or remember the Ming. As part of the fight, even their monastic greeting changed. In the Northern Shaolin monastery, monks greeted each other by clasping their palms together, as if in prayer. In the south, monks brought their right fist toward their left palm in front of their chest (if you can't picture it, watch any kungfu movie - period or contemporary). The combination of the right fist / left palm symbolised the Chinese character for Ming.


The Qing emperor never forgave nor forget the Southern Shaolin's treasonous ways and ordered the complete destruction of the temple, with instructions that it was never to be rebuilt. The Southern Shaolin thus faded into the mists of history, and it's only been in recent years that there has been renewed interest in pinpointing its actual location.


Here are some words from people who have been there DaveB:

*Fuqing's Shaolin Temple*

Southern Shaolin that we visited last. The temple in Fuqing is where there are direct historical references to the Shaolin monks. Unlike the temples in Putian and Quanzhou, it is named in 12th, 15th, and 16th century publications and excavations produced Song era pottery with the Chinese characters for Shaofin (少林).

*The national Cultural Relics Bureau eventually determined that there had truly been a Shaolin temple in that location.*


It took me a week get around to make my way back to Songbai bus station in order to catch a bus to Hong Lu (宏路), a small town where we were going to be picked up and driven through the mountains to Fuqing Shaolin Temple. We were a lot more organised this time; I had arranged a driver, a Fuqing native, to show us around (through Mr Fu of Apple Foreign Connections, see our listings for their address and telephone number).


As we sat (and napped, for it was a 6:00 am start this time) through our three-hour bus journey, then waited a few minutes in the hot Fujian sun for our driver, Mr Wei, to appear, I began to worry that this temple would also be a letdown. Mr Fu had said more than once that this temple was rather remote, and expressed surprise that I even knew of its existence.


The physical location of Fuqing's Shaolin temple gave us a good feeling from the start. Secondly, as only the middle section of the temple has been rebuilt (according to the woman manning the gift counter, the local government does not have the money to rebuild the rest), some ancient foundations remain. They are marked and untouched (and unprotected against the ravages of time and inclement weather). I actually felt joy at seeing these ruins, whether it was a wall, support columns, or the monks' toilet block - here was history, real history, not something that had been demolished and rebuilt as a replica of the original.


This time, I was grateful that the temple grounds were practically deserted; I had the opportunity to clamber among the ruins, furiously taking snapshots using both my digital and film cameras with no one getting in the way of my viewfinder. There was even an ancient grave in the top corner - graves are of some personal interest to me, and to find one that could have been the final resting place of a real Shaolin monk? What a treasure!


It saddens me that there is a real possibility of these ruins being covered over and a brand new temple built in its place - once there is enough money. Being a big fan of history, it is my fond hope that the Fuqing local government understands the value of preserving, net replacing, these monuments, as they are an important part of China's long history. Building replicas just doesn't leave visitors with a real sense of what has been.


Fuqing Southern Shaolin Temple, Dongzhang Township, Fuqing County (福清县东张镇少林寺


----------



## DaveB (Jul 28, 2015)

Consider the source. Official information from China....?

The monks of the northern Shaolin temple are said to have been manufactured to take advantage of the global appeal of kungfu mythology. The info about the Southern temple has been suggested is just as manufactured.

I can't confirm or deny anything, my point was only that absolute certainty about the names and events in Karate history is not really possible.

Another one, Ryu Ryu Ko, there are suspects for who he may have been, but also may have been made up....


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 28, 2015)

Do you also believe in Bigfoot? 
Your evidence is circumstancial. You would still have to prove that monks trained in martial arts.
So here is a question,  have you ever heard the word Hakka?  Follow that, and a whole new reality may open up about the origins of martial arts.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

DaveB said:


> Consider the source. Official information from China....?
> 
> The monks of the northern Shaolin temple are said to have been manufactured to take advantage of the global appeal of kungfu mythology. The info about the Southern temple has been suggested is just as manufactured.
> 
> ...



I dont need "beyond a reasonable doubt", my evidentiary burden is " preponderance of evidence ". But there is enough phisical archeological evidence to hold no reasonable doubt.
Let's review what we have:

1. The oral tradition.  Which inclues all the steps involved from White Crane Fist, and its mixture with types of Te, 

Seeing how far back it goes and the acknowledgement of guys like G. Funakoshi and those with him that cause the name change from to  唐 T'ang 手 (Te) hand空 empty 手 (Te) hand.

2 Written documents. These are documents that place individuals in the oral tradition in real space and where/when.

3. Archeological digs that found the largest temple in China. Pottery with Shaolin written on them.

4. The testimony of other Shaolin monestaries and Temples that had contact with the Southern Sect.

5. The change of the 
with a slight bow and hands pressed together, palms touching and fingers pointing upwards, thumbs close to the chest. This gesture is called _Añjali Mudrā_ or _Pranamasana_. That looks like 




 

Which was replaced with Shaolin disciples used a special hand signal to recognize sympathizers of the resistance. In Chinese, the word Ming (明) means "bright" and comprises of the characters for the sun (日) and the moon (月), the two great sources of light and brightness. The signal consisted of the right hand as a fist, symbolizing the sun, and the left hand as an open palm, symbolizing the moon. Together the fist and open hand carried the meaning of “bright,” or Ming (明). 

When a person displayed the hand signal to another, he indicated two things; first, the Ming dynasty must return, and second, the person showing the hand signal was himself "bright" and an agent for justice regarding the destruction of the southern temples.



 

6.
The presence of modified Chinese forms in "Te". Sanchin is not in all Shaolin styles.. Sanchin was and likely still is The White Crane Fists Primary form. It was the first form taught to white crane students as a non moving then later as a moving form.... As they left intermediate level they relearned it all again.over.

Some of what I am writing came in an email last night.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> Do you also believe in Bigfoot?
> Your evidence is circumstancial. You would still have to prove that monks trained in martial arts.
> So here is a question,  have you ever heard the word Hakka?  Follow that, and a whole new reality may open up about the origins of martial arts.



Yes, I know about the many Hakka waves of immigration, and "guest families" that were paid by the government to relocate.

As for the monks knowing Shaolin martial arts... Before the first Shaolin temple was constructed, the mountain cave sages were about the only Shaolin predecessors who had any. After the first temple was built, the Hindi Bodidharma a Chan (zen) Buddhist from the warrior caste, cane to the first temple.

He found weak and out of shape monks who had no martial arts, but could read write and meditate.

The first Shaolin form was created to whip them into shape and teach them how to fight in self defense. Its called 18 hands, and almost every Shaolin monk knew it. It was pretty much required study.

The Hakka are actually part of the underground that were taught the arts of 5 ancestors by a handful of surviving monks who escaped a nighttime slaughter of 128 monks in a a northern Temple.

Their headmaster foresaw the 10,000 strong army that was about to come and destroy the temple, so he poisoned the monks with a sleeping potion. The army burned the temple down. The five who survived did so, because they were fasting.

They fled the north and were responsible for the uprising against the Qing. They sought the restoration of the Ming.

These were the founders of monasteries and temples in Hakka fortified towns.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 28, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> 1. The oral tradition.  Which inclues all the steps involved from White Crane Fist, and its mixture with types of Te,



The thing about any oral history out of China, it can change depending on who you talk to. And yet another thing about Chinese history is that any study of it needs to be done with an understanding of Chinese characters and at times traditional characters.

Not saying anything you are posting is right or wrong, but if it is out of China, it may or may bot be true. I can list all sorts of reputable sources who talk about the founder of Taijiquan being Zhang Sanfeng. However look into it a bit further and you see they list him all over the place in the Chinese timeline. And even with those "rebutabel sources" most Chinese scholars today do not believe Zhang Sanfeng had much or anything to do with the creation of taijiquan..if he ever really existed at all


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> The thing about any oral history out of China, it can change depending on who you talk to. And yet another thing about Chinese history is that any study of it needs to be done with an understanding of Chinese characters and at times traditional characters.
> 
> Not saying anything you are posting is right or wrong, but if it is out of China, it may or may bot be true. I can list all sorts of reputable sources who talk about the founder of Taijiquan being Zhang Sanfeng. However look into it a bit further and you see they list him all over the place in the Chinese timeline. And even with those "rebutabel sources" most Chinese scholars today do not believe Zhang Sanfeng had much or anything to do with the creation of taijiquan..if he ever really existed at all



Very true, which is why I say my beliefs are open minded. I am willing to change position if some offers a much stronger case for a position opposed to mine, I will after researching, weigh the two and then accept the new view. Or in some matters accept both as equally valid, and leave it to the reader or listener to do with as he or she sees best. If that subject is discussed in the future.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

hoCanzonieri spost: 1717873 said:
			
		

> Do you also believe in Bigfoot?
> Your evidence is circumstancial. You would still have to prove that monks trained in martial arts.
> So here is a question,  have you ever heard the word Hakka?  Follow that, and a whole new reality may open up about the origins of martial arts.



Story of Traditional Chinese Martial Arts - History of Hakka Martial Art and its relationship to Southern Chinese and Shaolin martial arts

I read this a while back like December of last year, and it is where I first learned about the Hakka.

Been reading the stuff from Salvatore Canzonieri for a long while now


----------



## donald1 (Jul 28, 2015)

In unfamiliar with your terminology; sacred cow? Real mccoy? Spinning of silkworms??

Im assuming your asking is bunkai useful?

Ive practiced bunkai for a couple years now (specifically within okinawan goju ryu). I have some understanding of the subject. I would say bunkai is good training and teaches useful techniques.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Yes, I know about the many Hakka waves of immigration, and "guest families" that were paid by the government to relocate.
> 
> As for the monks knowing Shaolin martial arts... Before the first Shaolin temple was constructed, the mountain cave sages were about the only Shaolin predecessors who had any. After the first temple was built, the Hindi Bodidharma a Chan (zen) Buddhist from the warrior caste, came to the first temple.
> 
> ...



the mountain cave sages were about the only Shaolin predecessors who had any.

This statement is not to mean that there were no martial arts practioners, who became Shaolin. Or anything of the like, but that at the founding of the first temple, there and then there were none numbered among the Shaolin. 

It is recorded that Bohdidarma gave them their martial arts.

There were plenty of martial arts in China at that point.

While this is what I believe: I will offer a rebuttal against my belief:

The Shaolin monk's martial art was an art of body guards, temple guards, military generals, and ex-soldiers.

By 500 AD, Shaolin monks created a set of loose techniques and staff fighting methods (these are based upon sword fighting techniques from Tong Bei system, which was the main one practiced by the military).

This was also developed from an internal and external style that was based on the 
I Chin Ching Qigong (muscle/tendon changing), 
the Hsi Sui Ching (Bone Marrow/Brain Washing) 
Qigong, and the Shi BaLuo Han exercises (18 Luohan
 Forms) Qigong, coupled with self defense techniques that were prevalent among the professional martial artists of the time, such as Shuai Chiao, and the various other military quan fa.

This is the case because of who the earliest inhabitants of the Shaolin Temple were, besides monks doing strictly religious study there.

The official position of the Shaolin Temple and Chinese Government historians today is that the original monks were retired military men and robber barons looking to live out the remainder of their lives in a tolerant setting with others of their kind.

In other words, the original Shaolin Temple possessed martial arts experience from its inception. In any case, it is concluded that Buddhidharma / Damo is not the founder of Shaolin martial arts.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

donald1 said:


> In unfamiliar with your terminology; sacred cow? Real mccoy? Spinning of silkworms??
> 
> Im assuming your asking is bunkai useful?
> 
> Ive practiced bunkai for a couple years now (specifically within okinawan goju ryu). I have some understanding of the subject. I would say bunkai is good training and teaches useful techniques.




What is Karate? Kihon, Kata, and Kumite. Take away any one of these, and it is not Karate. The are many of the old Masters who maintained Kata, and the Bunkai process are the heart and soul of Karate.

My initial questions, were asked with the intent of finding out ... How do you know the hidden application Oyo is the correct
Interpretation?

My asking was crude and imprecise. As the dialog progressed I was better able to reframe the question.

Perhaps I should have asked this question instead "Is there a single correct Oyo?" for each step in a kata... In an objective sense. If so, why not write it down?

If not, then why?
It it because the Oyo is it purely subjective in the choice of the person doing Bunkai?

Why is their so much confusion and disagreement among karateka about the subject of bunkai?


----------



## donald1 (Jul 28, 2015)

Personally I never heard the term "oyo"

Techniques in a kata can be taken and used in different ways.(not just one way)

Writing it down may help but one thing ive always heard the instructor say "pay close attention to detail" he would say that as performing techniques and giving tips, and occasionally showing some advanced moves from the techniques

I dont know what the disagreement is about. Personally I havnt heard any discussed

Maybe someone more knoledgable nay shine some light on this


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 28, 2015)

donald1 said:


> Personally I never heard the term "oyo"
> 
> Techniques in a kata can be taken and used in different ways.(not just one way)
> 
> ...







Donald1, I found this today. Since you are Gojo-Ryu, You will really appreciate the section on Kanryo Higaonna, and the visit to the Honbu central dojo where they train "old school" and train under Morio Higaonna.






This video is pretty amazing actually. You get to see a Picture of either Ryo Ko Ko or the Other Named Guy who trained Higaonna in China.

I wish I could train at the Go-Jo Honbu for just one year. Or 10.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 29, 2015)

Found this today, as well. apparently, Hiagonna has disclosed the applications of Go-Jo Kata-Bunkai, in a dvd series.
I suspect I have found "Authentic Bunkai" without having to go to Okinawa.

For 400.00 dollars plus shipping, I can have his:

*Encyclopedia of Goju Ryu by Morio Higaonna*
This ten part professionally produced DVD series is of extreme value to Goju Ryu practitioners, being the only source of this information on the KATA and their BUNKAI (applications) at this level.

Filmed in a beautiful Japanese dojo, the demonstrations performed by Morio Higaonna Sensei - widely regarded as the greatest living Goju Ryu Master - and the level of skill he exhibits is simply breath-taking, and results from intense daily training for more than fifty years under the direction of the late An'ichi Miyagi, a senior student of the founder of Goju Ryu, Chojun Miyagi Sensei.
Here is a link
IOGKF Videos


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 29, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> I suspect I have found "Authentic Bunkai" without having to go to Okinawa.



I suspect your ideas about Bunkai are somewhat different from the rest of the worlds in that you think there's only one Bunkai for each kata and that only someone from Okinawa can reveal this 'secret' to you when the truth is that it's there for you to discover if you want to do the work, if you are feeling lazy then there's plenty of books, videos and articles about Bunkai out there, if it's a 'secret' it's a very open one.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 29, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I suspect your ideas about Bunkai are somewhat different from the rest of the worlds in that you think there's only one Bunkai for each kata and that only someone from Okinawa can reveal this 'secret' to you when the truth is that it's there for you to discover if you want to do the work, if you are feeling lazy then there's plenty of books, videos and articles about Bunkai out there, if it's a 'secret' it's a very open one.




I was being tounge-in-cheek.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jul 29, 2015)

Er… this might not be one of my short posts… 



Tez3 said:


> Chris, ( sorry, this is a slight detour from thread) what about Wado Ryu? I know the history of it of course but I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about the Japanese way of doing things to know about 'Ryu' 'Kan' etc and what makes what! Cheers.



Firstly, Tez… yeah, it's not really a particularly simple thing to describe… but, in essence, a kan refers to a "hall", or, in a larger sense, an organisation. A ryu, on the other hand, is a coherent body of knowledge, self-referencing and self-reinforcing, structured from the ground up with a single ideal. Of course, the question there is "how does that not describe Shotokan?" And the answer, honestly, is because it doesn't. That's not the way Shotokan was designed, set up, structured, or anything else. It was, really, designed as a generic expression of what was known as karate (or to-te, or simply te… or, in Okinawa's dialect, to-ti or ti), rather than it's own version (specific).

Wado Ryu, on the other hand, is a Ryu (for the first clue in both cases, look to the name…). Wado Ryu was a synthesised and specific approach to karate developed by Otsuka Sensei, based on his training under a couple of karate teachers (including Funakoshi) and his training in Shindo Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu. By using the principles and structure of Shindo Yoshin Ryu, as well as the lessons of karate, as well as his own understanding, Otsuka formulated a single approach to combative arts, structured and self-reinforcing (in other words, none of it is simply "tacked on" from other areas/systems). Now, it really should be emphasised that neither approach is "better" than the other… neither is "right" or "wrong"… the Bujinkan, for instance, isn't a ryu either (nor does it claim to be), although it does contain various ryu-ha. Instead, the Bujinkan is an organisation which teaches the art of Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu… a homogenised, in a way generic approach to a broad skill set based in taijutsu (body skills). Training in Budo Taijutsu is more along the lines of Shotokan's (well, Funakoshi's) approach to karate… taking the various source materials to come up with a single, in ways simplified, in other ways generalised, but overall more consistent method of studying the essential skills.

So, what's the distinction, and why is it important? Well, the distinction is in the "flavour" of the training… and it's not necessarily that important… unless it is. What is important is being able to recognise what something is, and being able to classify/discuss it properly. 



TSDTexan said:


> While perhaps each and every statement that you wrote is quite possibly true (I will be frank and say I dont know for certain), it still doesn't stop many, many people from calling it that nonetheless.
> 
> Even while being a misnomer.
> 
> ...



"Many, many people"?? Really? Aside from yourself, and the single website you cited (a group founded in 2004…), I've never come across it from anyone claiming anything close to familiarity with the subject… oh, and your definitions are rather lacking, and really only applicable at a very base level… a lot of the real nuance and therefore meaning (contextually) is missing… which, when all's said and done, is where the real definition is found.



TSDTexan said:


> The koala “bear,” which is actually a marsupial and not a bear.
> 
> The Panda bear isn't a bear either, but a member of the racoon family (the largest one)
> 
> ...



Look, I get the point you're trying to make, but you're simply spouting a lot of completely irrelevant "facts" here… belabouring a point that, honestly, wasn't that correct to begin with.



TSDTexan said:


> As I understand it, and is found in the wiki's.
> 
> Gichin Funakoshi had trained in both of the popular styles of Okinawan karate of the time: Shōrei-ryū and Shōrin-ryū.
> 
> After years of study in both styles, Funakoshi created a simpler system that combined the ideals of the two. He never named this system, however, always referring to it simply as "karate." Open Hand.



Er… no. Until 1935, Funakoshi's books and texts used the kanji 唐手… meaning "China (T'ang Dynasty) Hand". This is seen on Karate Jutsu (1925), as well as the earlier To-de Ryukyu Kenpo. In 1935, Karate-Do Kyohan was his first book to use the kanji 空手, meaning "Empty Hand".



TSDTexan said:


> Having said that, it is my assertion that Shotokan Ryu literally would be Hall of Pine Waves School.



Er… no. Again, we'd need to get into the context, but it'd more realistically be like "the style of this training hall, headed by Shoto" (Funakoshi's pen name… the "waving pines" thing doesn't really have any relevance to the system, the way Wado Ryu's or Goju Ryu's name does). In that sense, it's not the way ryu is used or applied… as it's, once again, not a ryu.



TSDTexan said:


> In 1924, Funakoshi adopted the Kyū / Dan rank system and the uniform (keikogi) developed by Kano Jigoro, the founder of judo.
> 
> This system uses colored belts (obi) to indicate rank. Originally, karate had only three belt colors: white, brown, and black (with ranks within each). The original belt system, still used by many Shotokan schools, is:
> 
> ...



And… all of that had relevance to what, exactly?



TSDTexan said:


> I usually will ask when I share what I have learned so far, "Is this an accurate history?" because I actually like hearing the responses, those responses cause me to go back to researching the claimed inaccuracies. I have been corrected many, many, many times. and for that I am thankful.
> 
> Corrections are like a roll on the mats.



Okay, then. Shotokan is not, nor has ever been called, Shotokan Ryu.



TSDTexan said:


> I have said on occasion that the road for a black belt in BJJ probably has 30,000 or 40,000 tapouts given, and 90,000 tapouts received. You probably going to get tapped 3 times (or more) for every one time you tap someone else.
> Based on the popular conception that a BB in BJJ is 3,000 to 10,000 hours of mat time.



And, again, that has relevance to what, exactly?



TSDTexan said:


> Okinawan Martial Arts History Kyushiki-Ryu Kempo-Jutsu is a really good read.



Yeah… a number of fairly major issues with that article, you know… mistakes in language and translation, among some other errors… I wouldn't put too much stock in it myself. If you need any real confirmation of how to take it… there's no other record of a "Kyushiki Ryu Kempo Jutsu" that I can find (it's a modern, Western created system), the instructor page lists a "Society of Shihan", and various Western "Soke"… never a good sign… to read between the lines, we don't fraud bust here, so I'm not saying what it actually means… 



TSDTexan said:


> I dont need "beyond a reasonable doubt", my evidentiary burden is " preponderance of evidence ". But there is enough phisical archeological evidence to hold no reasonable doubt.



Er… 



TSDTexan said:


> Let's review what we have:



Sure...



TSDTexan said:


> 1. The oral tradition.  Which inclues all the steps involved from White Crane Fist, and its mixture with types of Te,
> 
> Seeing how far back it goes and the acknowledgement of guys like G. Funakoshi and those with him that cause the name change from to  唐 T'ang 手 (Te) hand空 empty 手 (Te) hand.



You know, in my systems, there are oral traditions that state that the art was handed down in a dream from the gods… or that the founder was never beaten… combined with another system that states that it's founder is the only one to beat the former one (the unbeaten one)… or that the founder lived to be over a century old in the 15th Century… and a large range of other things that are, simply, not verifiable outside of the oral traditions themselves.



TSDTexan said:


> 2 Written documents. These are documents that place individuals in the oral tradition in real space and where/when.



Again, there are written accounts naming various figures in classical Japanese arts that couldn't possibly be there, or couldn't be involved in the history of so many arts, or are said to have co-existed with peoples known to have lived decades, or centuries apart. 

The thing to remember with both oral and written sources is that they're often retroactively created… or doctored to include aspects to make the art seem more credible or give them greater prestige.



TSDTexan said:


> 3. Archeological digs that found the largest temple in China. Pottery with Shaolin written on them.



This, I'd need to see.



TSDTexan said:


> 4. The testimony of other Shaolin monestaries and Temples that had contact with the Southern Sect.



Testimony that said what? That there was a temple? This still isn't anything to do with a connection to Okinawan/Ryu-Kyu Kempo.



TSDTexan said:


> 5. The change of the
> with a slight bow and hands pressed together, palms touching and fingers pointing upwards, thumbs close to the chest. This gesture is called _Añjali Mudrā_ or _Pranamasana_. That looks like
> 
> View attachment 19413
> ...



Do you want to go through the various mudra forms that have existed throughout Asia? The way they all stem from India and Buddhist (as well as early Yogic) teachings? What I'm saying is that you're noting something that was found throughout Asia at the time, and are making connections where they don't necessarily exist. There's a legal term, post hoc ergo propter hoc (after it, therefore because of it)… in essence, it's the false recognition of a cause and effect relationship where it doesn't exist.



TSDTexan said:


> 6.
> The presence of modified Chinese forms in "Te". Sanchin is not in all Shaolin styles.. Sanchin was and likely still is The White Crane Fists Primary form. It was the first form taught to white crane students as a non moving then later as a moving form.... As they left intermediate level they relearned it all again.over.
> 
> Some of what I am writing came in an email last night.



From?



TSDTexan said:


> the mountain cave sages were about the only Shaolin predecessors who had any.
> 
> This statement is not to mean that there were no martial arts practioners, who became Shaolin. Or anything of the like, but that at the founding of the first temple, there and then there were none numbered among the Shaolin.
> 
> ...



Okay… without going through all of this, the story of Boddhidharma giving the monks martial arts is rather apocryphal… it's believed that he really only gave them a series of exercises (similar to early Yoga) to aid in their endurance for meditation primarily. Nothing to do with martial arts at all. I've never come across anything suggesting that the monks were "retired military men and robber barons", for the record… 

Mind you, I'm still wondering what any of this has to do with the actual topic… 



TSDTexan said:


> What is Karate? Kihon, Kata, and Kumite. Take away any one of these, and it is not Karate. The are many of the old Masters who maintained Kata, and the Bunkai process are the heart and soul of Karate.



I'd largely agree with that… I'd say that they are core, or central components, though, and what makes karate itself is expressed through such methods, but what it is is goes a fair way beyond that.



TSDTexan said:


> My initial questions, were asked with the intent of finding out ... How do you know the hidden application Oyo is the correct
> Interpretation?



That's easy. It works.



TSDTexan said:


> My asking was crude and imprecise. As the dialog progressed I was better able to reframe the question.
> 
> Perhaps I should have asked this question instead "Is there a single correct Oyo?" for each step in a kata... In an objective sense. If so, why not write it down?



Okay, a two parter… no, there is no single correct oyo. Oyo is a practical application… provided what you're doing is a practical application, it's a correct oyo… "hidden" or not. Secondly, why not write it down? Because you will invariably miss things, which will lead to gaps in understanding. By writing down precise details, you're forced to omit others… these things aren't learnt by writing or reading. Ideally, written transmissions are more like road maps… giving a way to find your way, not specific directions themselves.



TSDTexan said:


> If not, then why?
> It it because the Oyo is it purely subjective in the choice of the person doing Bunkai?



No, not really the choice of the person… but in a large way, it is based on the personal explorations of the individual. The difference between exploration and choice is an important one… 



TSDTexan said:


> Why is their so much confusion and disagreement among karateka about the subject of bunkai?



As I said earlier, it's because bunkai, and what it actually means (contextually) is potentially the most misunderstood concept in martial arts today. Translation is difficult enough, but the cultural implications can only confuse matters more.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 29, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Er… this might not be one of my short posts…
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Great answers, I like.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 29, 2015)

Thank you Chris, to be honest I tend only to be interested in training the techniques, kata and Bunkai rather than any history beyond who the founder is and how he came to 'invent/found' Wado Ryu. The history of martial arts in detail doesn't interest me as much as learning techniques. I know many are really bothered and worry about lineage but in the UK at least it tends not to be such a big part of martial arts. I think if the techniques work and do what they're supposed to we are happy, as to whether martial arts comes from India, China or Okinawa/Japan I'm not sure we are that bothered other than it makes a nice story. This is why I suppose the idea of secret techniques only told to the 'faithful' or lost in the mists of time are fairly amusing when many of us are pragmatic karateka who work on kata and bunkai ourselves and with others like Iain Abernethy.
This isn't to dismiss those who are interested in the history though, each to their own. but really the country martial arts 'originated  in' pales into insignificance compared to the excitement of making a technique work for you.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 29, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Er… this might not be one of my short posts…



*You* do "_shor_t" posts?








Chris Parker said:


> yeah, it's not really a particularly simple thing to describe… but, in essence, a kan refers to a "hall", or, in a larger sense, an organisation*. A ryu, on the other hand, is a coherent body of knowledge, self-referencing and self-reinforcing, structured from the ground up with a single ideal.* Of course, the question there is "how does that not describe Shotokan?" And the answer, honestly, is because it doesn't. That's not the way Shotokan was designed, set up, structured, or anything else. It was, really, designed as a generic expression of what was known as karate (or to-te, or simply te… or, in Okinawa's dialect, to-ti or ti), rather than it's own version (specific)., exactly?
> ore.



How does this distinction appply to shito-ryu or shorin-ryu?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 29, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Thank you Chris, to be honest I tend only to be interested in training the techniques, kata and Bunkai rather than any history beyond who the founder is and how he came to 'invent/found' Wado Ryu. The history of martial arts in detail doesn't interest me as much as learning techniques. I know many are really bothered and worry about lineage but in the UK at least it tends not to be such a big part of martial arts. I think if the techniques work and do what they're supposed to we are happy, as to whether martial arts comes from India, China or Okinawa/Japan I'm not sure we are that bothered other than it makes a nice story. This is why I suppose the idea of secret techniques only told to the 'faithful' or lost in the mists of time are fairly amusing when many of us are pragmatic karateka who work on kata and bunkai ourselves and with others like Iain Abernethy.
> This isn't to dismiss those who are interested in the history though, each to their own. but really the country martial arts 'originated  in' pales into insignificance compared to the excitement of making a technique work for you.



As my master taught me, all this is for after class.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 29, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> As my master taught me, all this is for after class.




After class is for going to the pub!


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 30, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Thank you Chris, to be honest I tend only to be interested in training the techniques, kata and Bunkai rather than any history beyond who the founder is and how he came to 'invent/found' Wado Ryu. The history of martial arts in detail doesn't interest me as much as learning techniques. I know many are really bothered and worry about lineage but in the UK at least it tends not to be such a big part of martial arts. I think if the techniques work and do what they're supposed to we are happy, as to whether martial arts comes from India, China or Okinawa/Japan I'm not sure we are that bothered other than it makes a nice story. This is why I suppose the idea of secret techniques only told to the 'faithful' or lost in the mists of time are fairly amusing when many of us are pragmatic karateka who work on kata and bunkai ourselves and with others like Iain Abernethy.
> This isn't to dismiss those who are interested in the history though, each to their own. but really the country martial arts 'originated  in' pales into insignificance compared to the excitement of making a technique work for you.



i agree with this sentiment...but.....
i am a traditionally trained MA but my focus is more reality based self defense.  i really find the history interesting and it should not over shadow the day to day training but from my own experience working with some of the "old school" masters i find that looking back can sometimes lead to forward thinking ideas about how to train and what we do as martial artists.  i found it really amusing when i was at a seminar with Tomoyose  sensei (who is basicly a national living treasure of Okinawa) that all these american "masters" who are at the 6th and 7th degree level would ask detailed questions about kata bunkai and he would look at them like they have 3 heads. and say "no, no we never did that" or its not like that.  we tend to put our own interpretations on things and the details become very important to us and we pass these on to the next generation. we create our own narrative on what the kata is all about then to have someone like Tomoyose come around and burst your bubble and say you got it all wrong is very eye opening.  moves that seemed very complex become very simple and simple becomes complex.  i feel the study of any history can greatly expand our current knowledge on what the original intent was of the kata.  most times its not what we think.  often the original intent is of no practical use in todays world. in that instance we can stop looking for "hidden meanings" and replace it with whatever we find applicable to todays needs.  this may have drastic implications on the way we actually preform the kata so it may not be the correct path for everyone but historical knowledge allows us and opens us up to make the choice of practicing an art for preservation or for practicality.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 30, 2015)

Perhaps it's because my style is Wado Ryu ( with TSD on the side) I don't have those issues, our founder was alive until the 1980s passing on knowledge so the 'history' is clearer less 'hidden' because he'd put everything out there already. He was filmed doing all his katas, which are now on video so we have a very clear way of doing them. Perhaps Wado is a very modern style compared to others.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 30, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> After class is for going to the pub!



A beer, and discusdion of philosophy or history of martial arts can walk harmoniously together.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 30, 2015)

hoshin1600 said:


> i agree with this sentiment...but.....
> i am a traditionally trained MA but my focus is more reality based self defense.  i really find the history interesting and it should not over shadow the day to day training but from my own experience working with some of the "old school" masters i find that looking back can sometimes lead to forward thinking ideas about how to train and what we do as martial artists.  i found it really amusing when i was at a seminar with Tomoyose  sensei (who is basicly a national living treasure of Okinawa) that all these american "masters" who are at the 6th and 7th degree level would ask detailed questions about kata bunkai and he would look at them like they have 3 heads. and say "no, no we never did that" or its not like that.  we tend to put our own interpretations on things and the details become very important to us and we pass these on to the next generation. we create our own narrative on what the kata is all about then to have someone like Tomoyose come around and burst your bubble and say you got it all wrong is very eye opening.  moves that seemed very complex become very simple and simple becomes complex.  i feel the study of any history can greatly expand our current knowledge on what the original intent was of the kata.  most times its not what we think.  often the original intent is of no practical use in todays world. in that instance we can stop looking for "hidden meanings" and replace it with whatever we find applicable to todays needs.  this may have drastic implications on the way we actually preform the kata so it may not be the correct path for everyone but historical knowledge allows us and opens us up to make the choice of practicing an art for preservation or for practicality.




I have found in my encounters with very old Japanese men, they usually do not answer direct questions directly. 
Their answers were enigmatic and almost poetic.


In my personal experience it was very rare. The younger "baby boomer aged" Japanese men I know have been very American in their frank and direct answers. 

This not just within the JMA group of Men I have encountered, but others, salarymen, noodle shop owners, horticultural engineers.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jul 30, 2015)

it wasnt about his answers. it was the illumination that many of the strongly held truths that we all were trying so hard to do correctly, preserve and pass on to the next generation never really existed.  it was a creation of our own incorrect perception.
Tomoyose sensei is too much of a gentleman to say anyones method or ideas were wrong.  maybe i over stated the point.  the question would be asked and he would shake his head smile and say that he didnt know the answer because "we" never did that or didnt do it like that.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 30, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Wado Ryu, on the other hand, is a Ryu (for the first clue in both cases, look to the name…). Wado Ryu was a synthesised and specific approach to karate developed by Otsuka Sensei, based on his training under a couple of karate teachers (including Funakoshi) and his training in Shindo Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu. By using the principles and structure of Shindo Yoshin Ryu, as well as the lessons of karate, as well as his own understanding, Otsuka formulated a single approach to combative arts, structured and self-reinforcing (in other words, none of it is simply "tacked on" from other areas/systems). ore.



@Chris Parker :Or Isshin-ryu?


----------



## TimoS (Jul 30, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Er… no. Until 1935, Funakoshi's books and texts used the kanji 唐手… meaning "China (T'ang Dynasty) Hand". This is seen on Karate Jutsu (1925), as well as the earlier To-de Ryukyu Kenpo. In 1935, Karate-Do Kyohan was his first book to use the kanji 空手, meaning "Empty Hand".


Haven't read the rest of your post yet, but on this you're actually wrong. The first written use of 空手 was in a book published in 1905 called "karate shoshu hen" by Hanashiro Chomo (sorry, don't have the kanji for the book title).


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 30, 2015)

TimoS said:


> Haven't read the rest of your post yet, but on this you're actually wrong. The first written use of 空手 was in a book published in 1905 called "karate shoshu hen" by Hanashiro Chomo (sorry, don't have the kanji for the book title).



Maybe you should have read the post before you replied. 
Because the post was about G Funakoshi. Nobody else. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## TimoS (Jul 30, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> Maybe you should have read the post before you replied.
> Because the post was about G Funakoshi. Nobody else.


So? Does that make the fact somehow less valid?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 30, 2015)

TimoS said:


> So? Does that make the fact somehow less valid?


Well yes, it does. It makes it completely irrelevant. 
Chris says "Funakoshi didn't say THIS until THEN."
You say "You're wrong! Because this other guy said it THEN!"
What and when some other guy said something has absolute nothing whatsoever to do with what Chris said. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Bupkis. 

Unless you're claiming that they're Secretly the Same Person?




Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## TimoS (Jul 30, 2015)

Bugrit! I skipped the "his" word from Chris's reply and my brain just automatically filled it with "the"


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jul 30, 2015)

TimoS said:


> Bugrit! I skipped the "his" word from Chris's reply and my brain just automatically filled it with "the"



Details... they matter, eh?


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 30, 2015)

TimoS said:


> Haven't read the rest of your post yet, but on this you're actually wrong. The first written use of 空手 was in a book published in 1905 called "karate shoshu hen" by Hanashiro Chomo (sorry, don't have the kanji for the book title).



Thank you, I think? I dont think I was refering to the catagory
"First written use ever".

I suspect Empty Hand or unarmed hand (with regard to fighting) may have been written even earlier then 1905.

Consider The Sword Abolishment Edict (廃刀令 Haitōrei) which was an edict issued by the Meiji government of Japan on March 28, 1876


Takeda Sōkaku 武田 惣角 and
空手
With the outlawing of the samurai class and the prohibition against carrying swords apparentally Sokaku decided to emphasize the empty handed, jujutsu oriented, techniques of his ancestor's art. These apparently were 'oshiki-uchi', or secret teachings of the Aizu clan, up to that point. These, along with other skills he had acquired, were combined to create an art which he christened first 'Daitō-ryū jūjutsu' and later 'Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu'.

It is of extremely high probability that Sokaku wrote the phrase 空手 at a point prior to 1905, the question is whether or not such a written thing was published for others, or kept to himself.


----------



## TimoS (Jul 31, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> It is of extremely high probability that Sokaku wrote the phrase 空手 at a point prior to 1905, the question is whether or not such a written thing was published for others, or kept to himself.


Is it possible? Sure, I guess, but since Daito ryu has nothing to do with Okinawan martial arts, I don't see how that could be relevant.


----------



## TSDTexan (Jul 31, 2015)

TimoS said:


> Is it possible? Sure, I guess, but since Daito ryu has nothing to do with Okinawan martial arts, I don't see how that could be relevant.



Well the comment was made towards the point that was raised about first use of a phrase, that another person made. His comment went outside of the intended scope of what i had said. What he was making a comment, was not relevant, since He was there, I joined him. 

The whole line of conversation is off the topic of the OP.
But it us germane to the general subject of asian Chinese and Okinawan martial arts. The Okinawan MA didn't remain in Okinawa, nor did Okinawa remain a sovereign nation. For the present time Okinawa is a prefecture of Japan.


----------



## MatsumuraKarate (Aug 1, 2015)

From my experience I have found the Japanese have tried to systemize the bunkai, the Okinawans don't. The true essence of bunkai is that one mans bunkai is not the same as another. This is where the art comes to play. This is where our karate becomes our own. Principles and technique are taught by your teacher, you must discover how they work together most efficiently for you. So to answer the OP. No there is no such as thing as predetermined bunkai. Bunkai is unique to the individual teaching and sharing it.


----------



## Chris Parker (Aug 2, 2015)

Hey, Tez… 



Tez3 said:


> Thank you Chris, to be honest I tend only to be interested in training the techniques, kata and Bunkai rather than any history beyond who the founder is and how he came to 'invent/found' Wado Ryu. The history of martial arts in detail doesn't interest me as much as learning techniques.



That's a pity, to my mind… after all, without that history, there are no techniques for you to train… 



Tez3 said:


> I know many are really bothered and worry about lineage but in the UK at least it tends not to be such a big part of martial arts. I think if the techniques work and do what they're supposed to we are happy, as to whether martial arts comes from India, China or Okinawa/Japan I'm not sure we are that bothered other than it makes a nice story.



Where the art comes from dictates the cultural influences on the techniques… it shapes the how of the art. It's never just a "nice story". To ignore it is, frankly, to miss much of the techniques themselves.



Tez3 said:


> This is why I suppose the idea of secret techniques only told to the 'faithful' or lost in the mists of time are fairly amusing when many of us are pragmatic karateka who work on kata and bunkai ourselves and with others like Iain Abernethy.



Hmm… I'd caution to be careful of making a reducto ad absurdum argument in your head there… there are genuinely "secret" techniques/methods/teachings held back… maybe not so much in modern arts, but they're certainly there in older arts… and for very good reasons, which are eminently pragmatic. Just from a different perspective.



Tez3 said:


> This isn't to dismiss those who are interested in the history though, each to their own. but really the country martial arts 'originated  in' pales into insignificance compared to the excitement of making a technique work for you.



The country of origin is a large part of the technique itself, though… among other things.

And yeah, I get the point you're making… I get the mentality. On the other hand, from my perspective, it's missing a fair bit. And really, that's fine. Because, as I said, I get it.



elder999 said:


> *You* do "_shor_t" posts?



Er… sometimes? Maybe?



elder999 said:


> How does this distinction appply to shito-ryu or shorin-ryu?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's an interesting question… and one that gets into a lot of highly subjective ideas. I mean, the histories of many systems of karate are so intertwined that they often share the same kata… something that is incredibly far from the norm in traditional Japanese arts (where the ryu-ha concept comes from). In a way, each of these can be seen as branches, or at the least, bunpa-ryu of each other (and ancestor schools, such as they were).

I suppose, of course, that the question is what makes them ryu-ha, but not Shotokan, yeah? The biggest distinction is in the drive and purpose of the development. In each of the cases you cite, it was a particular teacher creating their own form of the art, based on the material they had been taught, as their own personal highest level expression. Shotokan, on the other hand, was designed not as Funakoshi's ultimate form of karate, but as an almost "standardised", in ways simplified form of karate, a generic study of the myriad methods of Okinawan arts, primarily as a way of introducing Okinawan arts (as a whole) to the Japanese populace.

It's the same way that the Kodokan isn't a new ryu of jujutsu… it was designed as a method that multiple forms of jujutsu could come together and train under a common methodology. Kendo isn't a new ryu of kenjutsu… it was a way for differing kenjutsuka to compete. Shotokan wasn't a new form of karate… it was a way to express all karate so that it could be seen, felt, and understood by the Japanese people (and beyond).



TSDTexan said:


> As my master taught me, all this is for after class.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Those are the same things in koryu circles… 



TimoS said:


> Haven't read the rest of your post yet, but on this you're actually wrong. The first written use of 空手 was in a book published in 1905 called "karate shoshu hen" by Hanashiro Chomo (sorry, don't have the kanji for the book title).



Yeah… not arguing that, as DD said… for the record, there's apparently a document written by (or attributed to) Momochi Sandayu that mentions the term as well… from the 17th Century. So long as we're comparing dates… 



TSDTexan said:


> Thank you, I think? I dont think I was refering to the catagory
> "First written use ever".
> 
> I suspect Empty Hand or unarmed hand (with regard to fighting) may have been written even earlier then 1905.



Er… and?



TSDTexan said:


> Consider The Sword Abolishment Edict (廃刀令 Haitōrei) which was an edict issued by the Meiji government of Japan on March 28, 1876



Why? What does that have to do with anything?



TSDTexan said:


> Takeda Sōkaku 武田 惣角 and
> 空手
> With the outlawing of the samurai class and the prohibition against carrying swords apparentally Sokaku decided to emphasize the empty handed, jujutsu oriented, techniques of his ancestor's art. These apparently were 'oshiki-uchi', or secret teachings of the Aizu clan, up to that point. These, along with other skills he had acquired, were combined to create an art which he christened first 'Daitō-ryū jūjutsu' and later 'Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu'.
> 
> It is of extremely high probability that Sokaku wrote the phrase 空手 at a point prior to 1905, the question is whether or not such a written thing was published for others, or kept to himself.



Why is it probable? I mean… you have listed in your mined quote the terms he used… jujutsu and aikijujutsu… why do you think it'd be probable that he'd use a completely different term? And, even if he did, what would such a meaningless co-incidence of terminology mean? Are we meant to think that that means Takeda was really teaching karate (Okinawan arts) before Funakoshi came to Japan? 

Look, to be frank, reading through your posts, it seems you are big on getting what you think are facts and evidence, but are struggling a bit in grasping relevance and connections. I'd suggest trying to express things in your own words… hopefully we can get some more clarity then.



TimoS said:


> Is it possible? Sure, I guess, but since Daito ryu has nothing to do with Okinawan martial arts, I don't see how that could be relevant.



Agreed.



TSDTexan said:


> Well the comment was made towards the point that was raised about first use of a phrase, that another person made. His comment went outside of the intended scope of what i had said. What he was making a comment, was not relevant, since He was there, I joined him.
> 
> The whole line of conversation is off the topic of the OP.
> But it us germane to the general subject of asian Chinese and Okinawan martial arts. The Okinawan MA didn't remain in Okinawa, nor did Okinawa remain a sovereign nation. For the present time Okinawa is a prefecture of Japan.



What? Honestly, that makes little to no sense to me…


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 2, 2015)

Chris, I really don't have the time nor ever have really to delve into martial arts history, when I worked I worked shifts, brought up two kids, am a martial arts instructor, reffing, promoting and judging MMA, Jewish community security advisor  Guide leader, mental health volunteer as well as running a home, things are no better now I'm retired as my husband is recovering from a heart attack and I have more to do in the house and garden, it's simply not an option.

On the subject of 'lineage', in the UK we know who our instructors are obviously and who theirs are/were and probably before that but we aren't into worrying about much further back. I remember a while back on MT Exile saying it was very common in the US to go into detail about lineage for the same reason people want to know their own history...because it is still a young country and they want a history!

On the subject of secret techniques etc, I wasn't saying they _don't _exist I was saying many find the idea amusing in this day and age. Many people are like myself, busy enough to met ourselves coming back, so whether a martial arts comes from China or India is of far less relevance to us than whether the techniques we've trained hard to use work when we need them to. We don't have the luxury of wondering about the history however important it may be. Perhaps in years to come I may have the luxury of sitting in the old people's home looking up the history of martial arts


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 2, 2015)

Chris Parker said:


> Hmm… I'd caution to be careful of making a reducto ad absurdum argument in your head there… there are genuinely "secret" techniques/methods/teachings held back… maybe not so much in modern arts, but they're certainly there in older arts… and for very good reasons, which are eminently pragmatic. Just from a different perspective.



I was thinking more about this and I think you are reading into it far more than I wrote. For one thing there's no argument at all, it's just a comment. We often look back at things people used to do in the past and find it amusing they used to do what they did. I'm watching a cycling race, the riders are followed by their teams cars with spare wheels, bike and with food and drink for them, a long while ago the riders used to carry the spare tyres around their bodies with their pockets full of food and drink or they stopped at cafes. That, to modern eyes is amusing. That people used to have secret techniques and things 'never to be told' is amusing now to those of us who try to be as open and as 'sharing' as possible, there's no argument there at all, just a lot back at how things were with an amused smile just as we do with many things.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 1, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> The thing about any oral history out of China, it can change depending on who you talk to. And yet another thing about Chinese history is that any study of it needs to be done with an understanding of Chinese characters and at times traditional characters.
> 
> Not saying anything you are posting is right or wrong, but if it is out of China, it may or may bot be true. I can list all sorts of reputable sources who talk about the founder of Taijiquan being Zhang Sanfeng. However look into it a bit further and you see they list him all over the place in the Chinese timeline. And even with those "rebutabel sources" most Chinese scholars today do not believe Zhang Sanfeng had much or anything to do with the creation of taijiquan..if he ever really existed at all


I need your HELP Sir, I am testing for 3rd Dan TKD after way too long! I asked my GM why do some learn forms easily and others like me struggle. I believe it is a great MATH brain. Geometry. I am searching for information for my thesis. Help me if wish. please.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 1, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I was thinking more about this and I think you are reading into it far more than I wrote. For one thing there's no argument at all, it's just a comment. We often look back at things people used to do in the past and find it amusing they used to do what they did. I'm watching a cycling race, the riders are followed by their teams cars with spare wheels, bike and with food and drink for them, a long while ago the riders used to carry the spare tyres around their bodies with their pockets full of food and drink or they stopped at cafes. That, to modern eyes is amusing. That people used to have secret techniques and things 'never to be told' is amusing now to those of us who try to be as open and as 'sharing' as possible, there's no argument there at all, just a lot back at how things were with an amused smile just as we do with many things.


Asking with respect. I need help. I am writing a thesis for my 3rd Dan. Why do some learn forms. Kata Poomse with ease and other struggle. I believe it is a math brain. Trying to learn.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 1, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Asking with respect. I need help. I am writing a thesis for my 3rd Dan. Why do some learn forms. Kata Poomse with ease and other struggle. I believe it is a math brain. Trying to learn.




I would say not a maths brain as I'm really useless at maths, really bad I can't remember numbers let alone do maths. learning kata becomes easier the more you do, learning your first one you have techniques and movements to learn as well as the 'order' in which they are done. Afterwards, you know the techniques and just have to learn the order, often kata/forms follow a pattern.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 1, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> I need your HELP Sir, I am testing for 3rd Dan TKD after way too long! I asked my GM why do some learn forms easily and others like me struggle. I believe it is a great MATH brain. Geometry. I am searching for information for my thesis. Help me if wish. please.



I doubt I could be of much help but I do not think it is math, actually it could be detrimental IMHO


----------



## elder999 (Sep 1, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Asking with respect. I need help. I am writing a thesis for my 3rd Dan. Why do some learn forms. Kata Poomse with ease and other struggle. I believe it is a math brain. Trying to learn.


 They likely have better imaginations, and are "seeing" opponents-you should ask them.


----------



## elder999 (Sep 1, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> On the subject of secret techniques etc, I wasn't saying they _don't _exist I was saying many find the idea amusing in this day and age. Many people are like myself, busy enough to met ourselves coming back, so whether a martial arts comes from China or India is of far less relevance to us than whether the techniques we've trained hard to use work when we need them to. We don't have the luxury of wondering about the history however important it may be. Perhaps in years to come I may have the luxury of sitting in the old people's home looking up the history of martial arts


 
It's been my experience that such secrets are often hidden in plain sight, waiting to be absorption brings them to the surface for the practitioner...one of judo's secrets, for example, is exemplified in something the founder said about its merciful nature.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 1, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> I would say not a maths brain as I'm really useless at maths, really bad I can't remember numbers let alone do maths. learning kata becomes easier the more you do, learning your first one you have techniques and movements to learn as well as the 'order' in which they are done. Afterwards, you know the techniques and just have to learn the order, often kata/forms follow a pattern.


But, was it difficult for you as a lower belt? I am the one who found it difficult. I am 23 years into this. I instruct and see myself in my students and I see the ones that POOF get the form. So MY question to you is...was it difficult? IE were you the slower one at first to learn? As patterns are geometry and also you must be able to visualize it. Sure repetition is key but I have a kid who after 4 lessons knew 2 forms well enough that I was I shock. I simply asked ARE YOU GOOD AT MATH?


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 1, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> But, was it difficult for you as a lower belt? I am the one who found it difficult. I am 23 years into this. I instruct and see myself in my students and I see the ones that POOF get the form. So MY question to you is...was it difficult? IE were you the slower one at first to learn? As patterns are geometry and also you must be able to visualize it. Sure repetition is key but I have a kid who after 4 lessons knew 2 forms well enough that I was I shock. I simply asked ARE YOU GOOD AT MATH?




You will always have people who are really good at things and others who are slower, it's human nature. I wouldn't say patterns are geometry though but then I don't know what ones you do, my katas are from Wado Ryu and were actually fairly easy to learn, I had good instructors and we'd learn them bit by bit, learn the bunkai and repeat often. Are you learning the bunkai as well or do you just go through the motions of the patterns.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 1, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> You will always have people who are really good at things and others who are slower, it's human nature. I wouldn't say patterns are geometry though but then I don't know what ones you do, my katas are from Wado Ryu and were actually fairly easy to learn, I had good instructors and we'd learn them bit by bit, learn the bunkai and repeat often. Are you learning the bunkai as well or do you just go through the motions of the patterns.


Well, Sir, I am TKD. It is all more the same than not. I do not believe it is so simple as human nature. I am trying to help others teach. Nothing you say is helpful. It is yellow belt stuff. I am into my 24th year. This is a thesis. Please if you or anyone has research papers. I know it is easier for some. I am simply trying to research the why. With respect, what you say is not helpful. I am great at my forms but I work hard where others just float in and do it. This is a graduate paper on teaching forms, Sir.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 1, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well, Sir, I am TKD. It is all more the same than not. I do not believe it is so simple as human nature. I am trying to help others teach. Nothing you say is helpful. It is yellow belt stuff. I am into my 24th year. This is a thesis. Please if you or anyone has research papers. I know it is easier for some. I am simply trying to research the why. With respect, what you say is not helpful. I am great at my forms but I work hard where others just float in and do it. This is a graduate paper on teaching forms, Sir.




Well firstly I'm not a sir, you could try ma'am but I would prefer you not to, secondly I think you need to tone down your responses. I've been in martial arts longer than you have and if what I say isn't helpful then I'm sorry but it's my experience, I can't give you more than that. You have it in your mind it's to do with maths, I've pointed out that I'm useless at maths, I do have a degree but it's in something else. I don't have research papers and to be honest I'm not sure it would help because the work is supposed to be yours not someone else's.
I work hard at some things other things I find quite easy, everyone has subjects like that, why I don't know but it is so.
I think you need to take a deep breaths and start looking for a different way of looking at the subject. You need to look at academic studies of how people learn, the psychology of learning, I don't think you will find the answers on here to be honest.  what you seem to be looking for is beyond martial arts. It seems a very complicated subject...that of how people learn...for a Dan grade.
I would suggest starting a new thread asking for opinions as this thread is about something else and you probably won't get the answers you want on here but I'm hoping it's not, as we have had before, that you want someone else's work to use.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 1, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well, Sir, I am TKD. It is all more the same than not. I do not believe it is so simple as human nature. I am trying to help others teach. Nothing you say is helpful. It is yellow belt stuff. I am into my 24th year. This is a thesis. Please if you or anyone has research papers. I know it is easier for some. I am simply trying to research the why. With respect, what you say is not helpful. I am great at my forms but I work hard where others just float in and do it. This is a graduate paper on teaching forms, Sir.



A large part of it is s matter of interest. 
When I first studied Tae Kwon Do, in 1969, I didn't really care about forms. I liked sparring. And breaking. I learned forms only as required for promotion, and didn't work at them much outside of class. As a result, I learned slowly. Now, a few years later (ok, more than a few), I enjoy forms and put a lot more effort into them. As a result, I learn them quickly. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 2, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well, Sir, I am TKD. It is all more the same than not. I do not believe it is so simple as human nature. I am trying to help others teach. Nothing you say is helpful. It is yellow belt stuff. I am into my 24th year. This is a thesis. Please if you or anyone has research papers. I know it is easier for some. I am simply trying to research the why. With respect, what you say is not helpful. I am great at my forms but I work hard where others just float in and do it. This is a graduate paper on teaching forms, Sir.



24th year...wow.....impressive...that would be.....let me see...using a little math..... 18 years ago for me....there be old people here with a lot of experience...you should probably be made aware of that.

Based on your responses you seem to already feel you already know why and are not looking so much for assistance as you are looking for support for your hypothesis.

Oh and for the record...I am a sir


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 2, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well, Sir, I am TKD. It is all more the same than not. I do not believe it is so simple as human nature. I am trying to help others teach. Nothing you say is helpful. It is yellow belt stuff. I am into my 24th year. This is a thesis. Please if you or anyone has research papers. I know it is easier for some. I am simply trying to research the why. With respect, what you say is not helpful. I am great at my forms but I work hard where others just float in and do it. This is a graduate paper on teaching forms, Sir.



A question... how is it that you have determined that these people "just float in and do it?" Have you accurately determined their level of training and experience, including training in other systems? Have you accurately measured how much time they spend practicing outside formal classes? Have you accurately determined how much effort they put into their training in and out of formal classes (and if so, I'd like to know how...)?

You say you're "great" at forms (got video?), but credit this to hard work, while assuming others are not working equally hard. Or harder.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 2, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> I need your HELP Sir, I am testing for 3rd Dan TKD after way too long! I asked my GM why do some learn forms easily and others like me struggle. I believe it is a great MATH brain. Geometry. I am searching for information for my thesis. Help me if wish. please.





Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well, Sir, I am TKD. It is all more the same than not. I do not believe it is so simple as human nature. I am trying to help others teach. Nothing you say is helpful. It is yellow belt stuff. I am into my 24th year. This is a thesis. Please if you or anyone has research papers. I know it is easier for some. I am simply trying to research the why. With respect, what you say is not helpful. I am great at my forms but I work hard where others just float in and do it. This is a graduate paper on teaching forms, Sir.


Hi Teresa! Welcome to MartialTalk. I'd suggest you make a post in the Meet and Greet section to introduce yourself and then make another post asking your question about learning forms in the General Martial Arts section so that as many people see it as possible.

Personally, I doubt that anyone has published any academic research on a correlation between natural ability in math and the ability to quickly learn forms. It's possible that such a correlation exists, but I'm skeptical. Even if there is such a correlation, it's quite possibly due to both attributes being correlated with some other factor such as general memory which could aid in both domains.

If I had to guess, I'd suspect that the biggest difference between those who pick up forms quickly vs those who don't would be the quality and quantity of practice outside of class.

BTW - am I correct in interpreting your question to be asking about why some folks _memorize_ the steps in a form easier than others? It seems to me that whether such memorization is easy or hard for an individual, the time required to memorize the steps is still trivial compared to the time it takes to get really good at the form.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

PILSUNG


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 5, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well, first of all Madame, I am sorry for calling you Sir. No matter it is not kind to suggest I would steal anyone's work. I was asked to do this topic. I already have manwa books for children but it is a secondary. I wondered WHY? But, yes, I will look at HOW people learn as apparently no one has applied this to martial arts or if so I cannot find a source. I need to find the answer. I have a college degree. It is plagiarism to steal and certainly no true person takes another as their own. OH I am not trying to prove how a Dan grade learns but to assist those who teach and simply to understand the WHY of ease. I will look at learning patterns say for Dance and Music and see if I can apply it. I certainly did not mean to offend. I truly am amazed that GM's do not have an answer regarding this so if not? It is interesting to me. PILSUNG




What GM's? I don't think we have any here and the truth is we don't understand really what is it you want. I'm thinking that English is not your first language?
 I don't know what 'manwa' books are.
If you follow the suggestion of posting a new thread with what you want I think you would get more answers, as I said it's hard to tell what it is you want to know.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

PILSUNG


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

PILSUNG


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

Pilsung


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

Pilsung


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

Pilsung


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hi Teresa! Welcome to MartialTalk. I'd suggest you make a post in the Meet and Greet section to introduce yourself and then make another post asking your question about learning forms in the General Martial Arts section so that as many people see it as possible.
> 
> Personally, I doubt that anyone has published any academic research on a correlation between natural ability in math and the ability to quickly learn forms. It's possible that such a correlation exists, but I'm skeptical. Even if there is such a correlation, it's quite possibly due to both attributes being correlated with some other factor such as general memory which could aid in both domains.
> 
> ...





Dirty Dog said:


> A large part of it is s matter of interest.
> When I first studied Tae Kwon Do, in 1969, I didn't really care about forms. I liked sparring. And breaking. I learned forms only as required for promotion, and didn't work at them much outside of class. As a result, I learned slowly. Now, a few years later (ok, more than a few), I enjoy forms and put a lot more effort into them. As a result, I learn them quickly.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


Thank you


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hi Teresa! Welcome to MartialTalk. I'd suggest you make a post in the Meet and Greet section to introduce yourself and then make another post asking your question about learning forms in the General Martial Arts section so that as many people see it as possible.
> 
> Personally, I doubt that anyone has published any academic research on a correlation between natural ability in math and the ability to quickly learn forms. It's possible that such a correlation exists, but I'm skeptical. Even if there is such a correlation, it's quite possibly due to both attributes being correlated with some other factor such as general memory which could aid in both domains.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Sir.


----------



## Teresa Wyatt (Sep 5, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> 24th year...wow.....impressive...that would be.....let me see...using a little math..... 18 years ago for me....there be old people here with a lot of experience...you should probably be made aware of that.
> 
> Based on your responses you seem to already feel you already know why and are not looking so much for assistance as you are looking for support for your hypothesis.
> 
> Oh and for the record...I am a sir


Well? Sir!! That is what a scientist does. If it doesn't pan out? One moves on to the next! I am asking those with more teaching experience if they have noticed the ease of some and the challenges of others. Then, has anyone thought of why? I DO think I should look at how all learn anything mostly in dance and music. I had what I thought was a rather simple question from one only 23 or 4 years into this. Funny how a medical surgeon can chop into a patient with much less experience. I do not think I am anything but a student of the art...I simply want to understand the teaching of forms. My project in a Manwa or Manga cartoon book ( my second ) on the tenets of TKD for kids. It was suggested this would be a good paper as I asked my Grandmaster and he said GO and find out. I am simply doing as he asked. With respect.........always.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 5, 2015)

Teresa Wyatt said:


> Well? Sir!! That is what a scientist does. If it doesn't pan out? One moves on to the next! I am asking those with more teaching experience if they have noticed the ease of some and the challenges of others. Then, has anyone thought of why? I DO think I should look at how all learn anything mostly in dance and music. I had what I thought was a rather simple question from one only 23 or 4 years into this. Funny how a medical surgeon can chop into a patient with much less experience. I do not think I am anything but a student of the art...I simply want to understand the teaching of forms. My project in a Manwa or Manga cartoon book ( my second ) on the tenets of TKD for kids. It was suggested this would be a good paper as I asked my Grandmaster and he said GO and find out. I am simply doing as he asked. With respect.........always.



Um... I'm sorry, but are you under the impression that what you're doing here is in any way "science?" 
Because it's not. Not even remotely. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 5, 2015)

OK some strange posting here, can anyone explain for me because I'm obviously missing something here? What's these posts just saying 'pilsung' about?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 5, 2015)

It's Korean for "certain victory" but I have absolutely no idea what the relevance to this thread is. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 6, 2015)

Dirty Dog said:


> It's Korean for "certain victory" but I have absolutely no idea what the relevance to this thread is.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.



Interesting. I do think posting a new thread would get more answers because this is quite an old one and specifically about bunkai so I'm not sure the people who may have answers would be looking here.


----------



## Argus (Sep 21, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hi Teresa! Welcome to MartialTalk. I'd suggest you make a post in the Meet and Greet section to introduce yourself and then make another post asking your question about learning forms in the General Martial Arts section so that as many people see it as possible.
> 
> Personally, I doubt that anyone has published any academic research on a correlation between natural ability in math and the ability to quickly learn forms. It's possible that such a correlation exists, but I'm skeptical. Even if there is such a correlation, it's quite possibly due to both attributes being correlated with some other factor such as general memory which could aid in both domains.
> 
> ...



If we take a look at psychological functions, I would say that people with a strong preference for _Extroverted Sensing_, that is, a preference for information taken in from the outside world through concrete senses, tend to have the best memory, and easily memorize forms, patterns, and sequences that others don't.

The exact opposite of this would be _Extroverted Intuitive_ types, such as myself, who tend to always be taking in general impressions, focusing on the "big picture." Intuition is more about seeing connections, impressions, possibilities, and overall meaning or intent. So, I tend to be very good at getting a "feel" for how things work if I have a chance to play with it, but when learning formalized sequences of techniques, I struggle to remember anything. I literally can't remember something without tying it to a relevant context. Though, that's a part of _Introverted Sensing_ as well, which is an inferior/supporting function that Extroverted Intuitive types generally share.

As for the point about Geometry, I couldn't disagree more. I'm not generally good at math because it's difficult for me to remember and think through long sequences of numbers, but Geometry is one area that I am good at due to the visualizing aspect, and ability to "look at the big picture," if you will.

So, in short, it's more to do with psychology, I believe. People learn and remember things in different ways, and some arts have an approach to certain things that are perhaps better suited to some types than others.


----------



## TSDTexan (Sep 22, 2015)

Just finished reading "An introduction to applied karate" by Iain Abernathy.  This guy... has a gift.


----------

