# KIAI's - THEIR PLACE IN KATA



## isshinryuronin (Aug 7, 2020)

When I began my practice in 1966, kiai's were generally thrown in on the last rep of each drill.  They were also firmly entrenched in kata, usually two in each, at specific places within the routine.  These places seem to be accepted as part of the style's kata, as much as a punch or block, sometimes found across different styles.   We all know the purposes of the kiai, but as I delve deeper into kata, questions come to mind.

Aside that they generally occur during a strong attack move, why are they in the kata at all?  Were they always a part of kata, as taught by Matsumura or Higaonna, or something added in later, perhaps to conform to some notion of ferocity to impress the public?  If later on, when?  Why do they exist in all the kata I know?  Was it found necessary to put them in all?

These days when practicing alone, I often omit kiais.  If the "ki" in kiai means spirit, is that not an internal and personal thing?  If so, why should the time and place of it in kata be determined by some outside authority or convention? Shouldn't I be free to determine my own spirit at the time and place of my choosing as the feeling explodes spontaneously from within me?

Reviewing my post, I see there were more questions than I realized.  Perhaps too many for something as common and accepted as a simple kiai.  But, as I have learned from my long study of karate, there is significance to everything.


----------



## Buka (Aug 7, 2020)

isshinryuronin said:


> Shouldn't I be free to determine my own spirit at the time and place of my choosing as the feeling explodes spontaneously from within me?



Great question and a terrific post, but the above? That's gold right there.


----------



## Steve (Aug 7, 2020)

Give folks a little latitude to kiai anytime they want and in no time, you have this:






Guy is very athletic, and I'd kill to be able to move as quickly and precisely. But his kiai'ing seems a little excessive.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 7, 2020)

Steve said:


> Give folks a little latitude to kiai anytime they want and in no time, you have this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, he is a good entertainer.  I'm sure all the kids enjoyed it.  To all the adults in the audience - do not mistake this for kenjutsu.  Now, on the serious side.....


----------



## Steve (Aug 7, 2020)

isshinryuronin said:


> Well, he is a good entertainer.  I'm sure all the kids enjoyed it.  To all the adults in the audience - do not mistake this for kenjutsu.  Now, on the serious side.....


Sorry. I mistook the thread as tongue in cheek. You were being serious.  Noted.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 7, 2020)

Steve said:


> Sorry. I mistook the thread as tongue in cheek. You were being serious.  Noted.


Not to worry.  My reply was a bit of both.


----------



## _Simon_ (Aug 8, 2020)

Some interesting thoughts @isshinryuronin ... and yeah can't really speak to those questions with much knowledge. To me kiais were placed at particular moments within the kata that really called for intense focus and an 'all-in' technique, moreso relating to power, as obviously you want focus for all parts of it. An instant of total unification and multiple elements coming together all in a split second. Maybe like a particular 'marker' of that focus?

But then you have to wonder, in the middle sections of Taikyoku Ichi with the three punches, why is it only on the third punch? All of those steps and punches are the same... but perhaps more of a metric for beginners, and a way to build up to that moment. Having it on the first punch could throw off your timing or focus for the subsequent ones...

But I absolutely see what you're saying, and like the idea of it being natural and spontaneous. I'm just recollecting now in all the katas I know where the kiais are placed... they seem to be at big moments... Bassai Dai the kinsetsu geri after trapping the arm and pulling them in... Kururunfa on the big rising elbow strike after the deflection uraken mae geri... Seiunchin on the uppercut after grab and pull in... Pinan Ni on the nukite (!!!).

Could it even be related to the ol "Ikken Hissatsu?" Or more of a way to delineate and separate specific phases or themes of the kata, like a punctuation mark?

Seems to be at a certain pivotal moment where everything 'comes together', a significant part of the kata...

Just musings!


----------



## _Simon_ (Aug 8, 2020)

Steve said:


> Give folks a little latitude to kiai anytime they want and in no time, you have this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Needs more cowbell.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 8, 2020)

Steve said:


> Give folks a little latitude to kiai anytime they want and in no time, you have this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't have a problem with his kiai. If anything he may have been a little mellow in some places.  He performed an excellent, elite level routine; most people don't appreciate what it takes to get emotionally up, and stay up, to perform at that level. 
I played college football and still remember how loud some guys would get during a game. No, it was not formally known as a kiai but the intent was much the same. My point is there is a very natural element to kiai (kihap) in the everyday, real world. I am sure we have all made the very loud 'grunt' when picking up something heavy. That is akin to the formal kiai. In kata or poomsae it is used to help on mental focus. It is the crescendo. 
Something I tell new students (well, all students) is that kihap literally means 'expulsion of air'. It take a very forceful expulsion to perform an effective kiai. Using the mental target helps 'feeling' the movement and makes it tangible and understandable. 
Do I kihap every time I practice a form? No. It falls into the learning phase and conservation of energy for me. But when it is on and I want to practice/perform full stroke, then yes kiai/kihap is it's own element with it's own purpose and meaning. 

I cannot say whether they have always been an integral part of kata. For me it does not matter because I know they have a lot of function for me now.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 8, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> I don't have a problem with his kiai. If anything he may have been a little mellow in some places.  He performed an excellent, elite level routine; most people don't appreciate what it takes to get emotionally up, and stay up, to perform at that level.
> I played college football and still remember how loud some guys would get during a game. No, it was not formally known as a kiai but the intent was much the same. My point is there is a very natural element to kiai (kihap) in the everyday, real world. I am sure we have all made the very loud 'grunt' when picking up something heavy. That is akin to the formal kiai. In kata or poomsae it is used to help on mental focus. It is the crescendo.
> Something I tell new students (well, all students) is that kihap literally means 'expulsion of air'. It take a very forceful expulsion to perform an effective kiai. Using the mental target helps 'feeling' the movement and makes it tangible and understandable.
> Do I kihap every time I practice a form? No. It falls into the learning phase and conservation of energy for me. But when it is on and I want to practice/perform full stroke, then yes kiai/kihap is it's own element with it's own purpose and meaning.
> ...


I really like this post. That said, I think the OP was getting more into why they’re at specific points of the kata rather than why they’re in kata. And have they always been there.

This thread has got me thinking. I’d venture to guess they weren’t initially there in specific places. Teachers probably noticed students tensing up and not releasing that energy, thereby being counterproductive. We’ve all seen and probably most of us have been the student who stiffens up and holds his/her breath during a punch, kick, etc. They were probably formally introduced at specific points to add the element of proper breathing during the execution phase of movements. Put them in specific places rather than have everyone yell every time or having everyone yelling at different random times. Keep in mind the Japanese military-like mentality of uniformity.

I haven’t pondered why they are where they are before. I have pondered why some movements are slowed down the way they are. Look at a Kata like Seiunchin. Why the slow opening movements? They’d never be slow in an actual fight. Why the slow-fast-slow tempo in parts like after the opening series. For example, after the opening sequence, there’s the faster pullback, punch, elbow combo. Then you slow down and turn 45 degrees in a back leaning stance, then fast step through with the alternating low blocks. Then slow down again for the next sequence, then speed up again. Why?





About the pacing I learned it at, and similar enough to the way we do it.


----------



## Chris Parker (Aug 8, 2020)

Interesting set of questions and thoughts here... I hope you'll forgive an interloper from other Japanese traditions here...



isshinryuronin said:


> When I began my practice in 1966, kiai's were generally thrown in on the last rep of each drill.  They were also firmly entrenched in kata, usually two in each, at specific places within the routine.  These places seem to be accepted as part of the style's kata, as much as a punch or block, sometimes found across different styles.   We all know the purposes of the kiai, but as I delve deeper into kata, questions come to mind.



I wouldn't personally suggest that "we all know the purposes of the kiai", as, in my experience, there is a wide range of understandings of the concept, stemming from greater or lesser development or appreciation of the concepts involved...



isshinryuronin said:


> Aside that they generally occur during a strong attack move, why are they in the kata at all?  Were they always a part of kata, as taught by Matsumura or Higaonna, or something added in later, perhaps to conform to some notion of ferocity to impress the public?  If later on, when?  Why do they exist in all the kata I know?  Was it found necessary to put them in all?



In a number of lines of karate, the comment is sometimes made "without kiai, there is no karate"... so asking why it's in one of the most fundamental and important training methodologies (kata), I feel, is a bit redundant. They're there because they're important to the concept of karate. As a result, I would suggest that they were always there... were they always as they are now, well, that's another question... and I'd suggest they probably weren't... but that's just part of the natural development of a martial art over time. What I will say absolutely definitively is that they were not put there as any kind of "show", or to demonstrate "ferocity".... that's a complete misunderstanding of what kiai are in the first place, as well as some major cultural gaps.

So, in order:
- Because they're vital to karate.
- Always there, just maybe not in exactly the same placement/form... then again the kata you do aren't exactly as was laid out by previous generations either.
- Nothing to do with "ferocity" or "a show".
- Perhaps altered later, for reasons the teacher themselves found important.
- They're there as they're an integral part of karate.
- Yes. It is absolutely necessary. Without them, you've missed a major part of the kata.



isshinryuronin said:


> These days when practicing alone, I often omit kiais.  If the "ki" in kiai means spirit, is that not an internal and personal thing?  If so, why should the time and place of it in kata be determined by some outside authority or convention? Shouldn't I be free to determine my own spirit at the time and place of my choosing as the feeling explodes spontaneously from within me?



Hmm... while the "ki" can be rendered to mean "spirit", it's really not the same thing as you're potentially thinking... I've seen people translate "kiai" as "spirited shout" before (hell, I've used the term to get across some concepts), but that's both not literal, and not accurate. I would suggest that in incorporates some "internal" aspect, but it is not anything like this idea of a "personal" thing, and therefore not subject to external reasoning and dictates... if that's your thing, honestly, then go make up your own art... whether a "new" form of karate, or something else entirely... because you're now wilfully not doing the art you're purporting to.

So, really, no... you are not free to choose when such things occur. You are not free to "determine" anything of the kind. Once you start down that idea, you're moving further and further from the art you claim to practice. That in and of itself is not a problem, provided you're happy not doing your own system anymore.



isshinryuronin said:


> Reviewing my post, I see there were more questions than I realized.  Perhaps too many for something as common and accepted as a simple kiai.  But, as I have learned from my long study of karate, there is significance to everything.



Ha, believe me, we've hardly scratched the surface... and to be honest, while this is a bit further than most go in their thinking and questioning, it's still quite a long way from what kiai even begins to mean... 



Steve said:


> Give folks a little latitude to kiai anytime they want and in no time, you have this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah.... that not only wasn't anything to do with ki-ai, it wasn't anything to do with, well, martial arts. It's a gymnastic routine... a flamboyant, showy one, that you may describe as "martial themed"... but in no way even close to anything resembling anything I'd recognise as martial arts... honestly, the ki-ai is the least of it... 



dvcochran said:


> I don't have a problem with his kiai. If anything he may have been a little mellow in some places.  He performed an excellent, elite level routine; most people don't appreciate what it takes to get emotionally up, and stay up, to perform at that level.



From an athletic level, sure... but the very idea of "get emotionally up, and stay up" is the exact opposite of what a martial art teaches... this is the guy with the swords in Raiders... the emotionally-driven fool who charges into the enemy machine guns to get mown down senselessly... this is, simply, the equivalent of a dead man, martially speaking. 



dvcochran said:


> I played college football and still remember how loud some guys would get during a game. No, it was not formally known as a kiai but the intent was much the same. My point is there is a very natural element to kiai (kihap) in the everyday, real world. I am sure we have all made the very loud 'grunt' when picking up something heavy. That is akin to the formal kiai.



Honestly, all of that is almost precisely what kiai is not.



dvcochran said:


> In kata or poomsae it is used to help on mental focus.



That's much closer.



dvcochran said:


> It is the crescendo.



In a way, yeah... or, really, it can be. It can also be other things...



dvcochran said:


> Something I tell new students (well, all students) is that kihap literally means 'expulsion of air'.



The problem is that it, quite literally, doesn't. At all.



dvcochran said:


> It take a very forceful expulsion to perform an effective kiai.



Actually, I'd argue that it really doesn't. And the more forced it is, the less of an actual kiai it is.



dvcochran said:


> Using the mental target helps 'feeling' the movement and makes it tangible and understandable.
> Do I kihap every time I practice a form? No. It falls into the learning phase and conservation of energy for me. But when it is on and I want to practice/perform full stroke, then yes kiai/kihap is it's own element with it's own purpose and meaning.



Okay.



dvcochran said:


> I cannot say whether they have always been an integral part of kata. For me it does not matter because I know they have a lot of function for me now.



Cool. Good to hear!


----------



## Steve (Aug 8, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> Interesting set of questions and thoughts here... I hope you'll forgive an interloper from other Japanese traditions here...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


says the guy whose entire understanding of anything “martial” is strictly academic.  don't be such an elitist.  XMA isn’t karate, and truly I posted that video tongue in cheek as I said earlier.  But, it’s as much a martial art as ninjutsu, wushu, or anything else.   May not be your cup of tea, but it doesn’t have to be.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 8, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> In a number of lines of karate, the comment is sometimes made "without kiai, there is no karate"... so asking why it's in one of the most fundamental and important training methodologies (kata), I feel, is a bit redundant.


So many unsubstantiated comments, it's hard to know where to begin.  For starters, I think the quote you're thinking of is, "If there is no *kata, *there is no karate."  by Nagamine Shoshin, founder of Matsubayashi *S*horinryu karate.  Next point, since kiais ARE in such a fundamental as kata, that is EXACTLY why we should ask about it.
,


Chris Parker said:


> So, really, no... you are not free to choose when such things occur. You are not free to "determine" anything of the kind. Once you start down that idea, you're moving further and further from the art you claim to practice.


Oh, I think I am free to determine many things about the art I "claim" to practice.  How much depth do you have in karate study?  Be aware of whom you are addressing before making such comments.


----------



## Buka (Aug 8, 2020)

_Simon_ said:


> Needs more cowbell.



That was really funny. I'm hurting today,knees, back....I really needed a good laugh.


----------



## Buka (Aug 8, 2020)

Fortunately, there is no "one way only" to practice Karate. Nor is there one style of Karate.

At least to us upstart heathen Americans.


----------



## Steve (Aug 8, 2020)

Buka said:


> That was really funny. I'm hurting today,knees, back....I really needed a good laugh.


Sorry you’re hurting today, buka.   Hope you get some relief soon.


----------



## Buka (Aug 8, 2020)

Steve said:


> Sorry you’re hurting today, buka.   Hope you get some relief soon.



Thanks, Steve. My wife has apparently come up with a solution. She says if I get on my hands and knees and wash the hardwood floors, my back will feel better from that position, and if I have some decent padding under my knees they'll probably feel better, too.

She's often mistaken for Florence Nightingale, yes.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 8, 2020)

JR 137 said:


> I really like this post. That said, I think the OP was getting more into why they’re at specific points of the kata rather than why they’re in kata. And have they always been there.
> 
> This thread has got me thinking. I’d venture to guess they weren’t initially there in specific places. Teachers probably noticed students tensing up and not releasing that energy, thereby being counterproductive. We’ve all seen and probably most of us have been the student who stiffens up and holds his/her breath during a punch, kick, etc. They were probably formally introduced at specific points to add the element of proper breathing during the execution phase of movements. Put them in specific places rather than have everyone yell every time or having everyone yelling at different random times. Keep in mind the Japanese military-like mentality of uniformity.
> 
> ...



You brought up some good observations and questions on Seiunchin kata, JR.  Katas are meant to be examined and questioned and explored.  This is not modern day heresy - even the masters of 80 or 100 years ago said as much.  Other than the kiais being on a strong attack as a rule, I don't have a definitive answer to the why's and where's of them in kata.  You may be right that they are there simply for uniformity in the Japanese tradition.  But I think at the advanced levels this strict, rote uniformity is meant to be diverged from as the masters encouraged, _while still keeping the principles of the kata intact._

I thought the video showed a very good rendition of Seiunchin - slightly different than my style's version, but all the Naha styles of it are remarkably similar.  Regarding the slow movements in various kata (other than dramatic pauses in competition), my opinion is that they often represent moves against a resisting opponent, such as grabbing and pulling him, and are often accompanied by a tight dynamic breath to show implied strength.

The fast/slow rhythm of the moves you wonder about is another thing I've thought about as well.  It may be a tactical thing, the combo requiring a quck timing to make it work, in contrast to the slow resisting moves I suggested above.  My studies and readings lead me to believe that some things are not as strictly required in kata as I had been brought up to believe.  Perhaps the rhythm is one of those things we can adapt to our own likes.

Kata was originally designed as effective, no BS combat techniques - very direct.  When I look at it from this angle, some bunkai makes more sense.  When it makes less sense, I know I'm missing something.  But I still wonder at the lack of historical info on kiai.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 8, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> From an athletic level, sure... but the very idea of "get emotionally up, and stay up" is the exact opposite of what a martial art teaches... this is the guy with the swords in Raiders... the emotionally-driven fool who charges into the enemy machine guns to get mown down senselessly... this is, simply, the equivalent of a dead man, martially speaking.



Have you ever competed at a high level or professionally? It is a very different animal and the emotional drain is hard to describe. I agree there is a distinct difference in getting up (maybe more your idea of kiai) and staying up. I do not know your style and I am not very familiar with soft styles but that sounds more where you ideas lie to me. 
 It sounds pretentious to say it is the exact opposite of what a martial art teaches. Some martial arts? Sure. But it is incorrect to make such a general reference. Hence the term martial.  
I am not at all talking about blind emotion and especially not fear. But your reference is an accurate one. The focus and willingness to go into something when the odds are very low (you machine gun reference) is a mentality hard to imagine or understand. The reality is for some that is their calling. On a different level but elite athletes are in a similar vein. There is a difference in knowing and believing your destiny and in thinking you can make a difference. All these higher minded ideas are hard to elucidate but they are embodied in the focused energy of a kihap. So I have to disagree with the dead man walking analogy since the mentality is completely different. 



Chris Parker said:


> Honestly, all of that is almost precisely what kiai is not.


You are going to have to better explain your viewpoint here.



Chris Parker said:


> The problem is that it, quite literally, doesn't. At all.


I understand what I said is a figurative statement. I use it literally to help people understand the ideas within a kihap. 
I think we have learned a different method. It sounds like your understanding is what I have heard referred to as the 'peep' method. A short, swift sound using little expulsion or air. Uber tense and taught. I was taught it is a weapon. A directed energy, a release, a flow. The expression and possibly intent is different. This is a Korean ideology. I do not know if it carries over to JMA's or CMA's. My dabblings in Kung Fu suggests it does. 



Chris Parker said:


> Actually, I'd argue that it really doesn't. And the more forced it is, the less of an actual kiai it is.


Again, apparently different teaching. 
Another saying I like to use is 'if you do not breathe you die'. I am guessing this is different for you as well, but in the action of doing poomsae there is a lead in to the kihap. A beginning, middle, and end. This is not always a realism in competition or the real world but the application learned thorough kata applies and is hugely beneficial.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 8, 2020)

Buka said:


> Thanks, Steve. My wife has apparently come up with a solution. She says if I get on my hands and knees and wash the hardwood floors, my back will feel better from that position, and if I have some decent padding under my knees they'll probably feel better, too.
> 
> She's often mistaken for Florence Nightingale, yes.


I cringe at the thought of getting on my knees on a hard surface. Sadly I have gotten really good at just getting down on my butt when I need to do something on the ground for any length of time. 
My left knee is really hurting today after all the clutching I have done the last few days doing hay. It is definitely Miller time.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 8, 2020)

JR 137 said:


> I really like this post. That said, I think the OP was getting more into why they’re at specific points of the kata rather than why they’re in kata. And have they always been there.
> 
> This thread has got me thinking. I’d venture to guess they weren’t initially there in specific places. Teachers probably noticed students tensing up and not releasing that energy, thereby being counterproductive. We’ve all seen and probably most of us have been the student who stiffens up and holds his/her breath during a punch, kick, etc. They were probably formally introduced at specific points to add the element of proper breathing during the execution phase of movements. Put them in specific places rather than have everyone yell every time or having everyone yelling at different random times. Keep in mind the Japanese military-like mentality of uniformity.
> 
> ...


I love watching forms from different styles. So many things different and always things that are similar.


----------



## _Simon_ (Aug 9, 2020)

I think...... it would be quite remiss of me.... to not bring this up...

(AND also it's just been too long since it has surfaced on these forums)








@isshinryuronin, and well, EVERYONE actually, if you could give me a point by point analysis of the kiais here that'd be swell! Would deepen ALL our understandings of kata and kiais I think.....

P.S. Apologies if this hurts you @Buka more than it helps your pain!


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 9, 2020)

_Simon_ said:


> I think...... it would be quite remiss of me.... to not bring this up...
> 
> (AND also it's just been too long since it has surfaced on these forums)
> 
> ...


I have only one thing to say - "*YAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!"*


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 9, 2020)

_Simon_ said:


> I think...... it would be quite remiss of me.... to not bring this up...
> 
> (AND also it's just been too long since it has surfaced on these forums)
> 
> ...


I hope my last comments on a video were not mixed up with this one. Two completely different animals. I have no idea what the intent of this video is. Not a kiai IMHO.


----------



## Chris Parker (Aug 9, 2020)

Steve said:


> says the guy whose entire understanding of anything “martial” is strictly academic.  don't be such an elitist.  XMA isn’t karate, and truly I posted that video tongue in cheek as I said earlier.  But, it’s as much a martial art as ninjutsu, wushu, or anything else.   May not be your cup of tea, but it doesn’t have to be.



Ah, Steve... yeah, haven't really missed you, bud...

No. Says the guy with over 3 decades in dominantly Japanese systems, including those specialised in and focused on swordsmanship, but with a background including Classical Japanese arts (koryu, specifically Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, and Muso Shinden Ryu, all sword arts), modern organisations and iterations of such (Takamatsuden arts), karate, Tae-kwon Do, Aikido, boxing, judo, jodo, and BJJ... as well as doing a range of seminars and other training events for FMA arts, RBSD ones, Hapkido, modern (Western) jujutsu systems, Seitei Iaido, Wing Chun, Hung Gar, Taiji, Western Fencing, HEMA, and probably half a dozen I'm forgetting. I've trained in modern arts, classical arts, traditional arts, sports/competitive arts, I've competed, I've been involved in real fights and violence. And, frankly, you've been told all this before, and have decided that my experience doesn't count for you. Simply speaking... tough. You've stated that your only background is your BJJ, you haven't gotten into actual fights, and your exposure and understanding of anything outside of your BJJ is incredibly limited, to say the least... hell, you thought the OP, a very reasoned and serious question, was a joke thread, due to your complete inability to understand anything being discussed.

And, for the record, no, XMA is an exhibition spectacle, it is not anything close to martial arts. To use the video you posted as an example, there is nothing close to anything like an effective understanding of te-no-uchi, hasuji, cutting mechanics, tactical application of a bladed weapon, context of usage of the weapon and much, much, much more. It is just a showy gymnastic show... to consider it anything else is to have no clue about what you're looking at. This isn't elitism, it's simple observation. I mean... the knife fight in West Side Story is more akin to martial arts than that display is. That's not to say that there isn't anything of value in what XMA guys do... just that there's no value from a martial perspective other than physical fitness (which, it must be said, is not equal to martial training in the slightest... there is a cross-over in the Venn diagram, but not as wide as might be believed... especially for this coming from a sports-related background).



isshinryuronin said:


> So many unsubstantiated comments, it's hard to know where to begin.



Yep, that's absolutely fair... and, really, deliberate as well. I purposefully didn't go into detail other than to indicate where things were off-base, mainly to see how people would take it... if they'd re-examine their approach to the topic, ask for clarification, or what... so I apologise for coming off as somewhat dismissive of the ideas, as that's not the actual case... but I don't apologise for the lack of detail behind my answers... yet.



isshinryuronin said:


> For starters, I think the quote you're thinking of is, "If there is no *kata, *there is no karate."  by Nagamine Shoshin, founder of Matsubayashi *S*horinryu karate.



No, I meant what I said. I am, of course, familiar with the far more common quote from Nagamine-sensei, and I agree with it possibly more vehemently than many karate practitioners, but I meant my reference to kiai. Then again, I don't separate them out, as I consider them both integral to karate (and martial arts in general, especially Japanese ones).



isshinryuronin said:


> Next point, since kiais ARE in such a fundamental as kata, that is EXACTLY why we should ask about it.



Agreed completely. I think asking about such things as you've done here is exactly what everyone should be doing about their practice, regardless of what they study... ask questions, find out, understand all aspects of your practice if you can. This is why I am so baffled as to what in your OP Steve thought was indicative of this being a "joke thread" as he said.



isshinryuronin said:


> Oh, I think I am free to determine many things about the art I "claim" to practice.



You missed my point, I feel. I'm not doubting your study of Isshin Ryu... what I'm saying is that the more you decide to alter the art to suit your personal preferences, the less it remains Isshin Ryu... so to claim it to still be the same art is increasingly inaccurate. Of course, changes to a martial system can and do occur over time... with the strict caveat that such changes are typically from the head of the system on down, for a range of reasons... when someone changes something due to having a complete understanding, and coming to some kind of realisation, or adapting to some change, is one thing... when people change things because they don't understand them properly or fully, that's where it's problematic... and leads to the new version having less and less in common with the purported art it still claims to be. That can lead to new arts (look to Bruce Lee, Ed Parker, Wally Jay, the variant BJJ lineages etc for fairly modern examples), which again, no problem whatsoever... none of them claimed to be the same as their source, and all came from various levels of understanding of their foundational systems... or it can lead to a corruption of the original system itself... which is where there are issues.



isshinryuronin said:


> How much depth do you have in karate study?  Be aware of whom you are addressing before making such comments.



My study of karate began in the late 80's, and I'm aware of who I'm addressing. I did, however, stop my karate training to move onto other arts in the early 90's, but my interest in all martial arts, especially those from Japan (and, by extension, Okinawan ones) has continued since. And, I might note, I began my first response by stating I was coming from other Japanese martial arts as my primary perspective... as that's my major focus... but karate is a big part of my history, as that's my starting point, at least for physical training.



Buka said:


> Fortunately, there is no "one way only" to practice Karate. Nor is there one style of Karate.
> 
> At least to us upstart heathen Americans.



Very true, Buka... of course, if I may, your case does highlight much of what I talk about above... you do not practice, nor claim to practice, a specific Okinawan or Japanese form/tradition of karate... you are very open in that you practice an American variant, which is a new system based in a personal direction of someone, or a group of people, back in the day... the approach separated from the way it was presented for whatever reasons... so it became it's own thing. Which is exactly what I describe about moving away from the original system, and no longer actually practicing that original art.



dvcochran said:


> Have you ever competed at a high level or professionally? It is a very different animal and the emotional drain is hard to describe. I agree there is a distinct difference in getting up (maybe more your idea of kiai) and staying up. I do not know your style and I am not very familiar with soft styles but that sounds more where you ideas lie to me.



I get the whole "psych yourself up" idea... but that's anathema to martial arts the way it's presented here... a big part of it being that "emotional drain" you're talking about. Ideally, such things should be avoided, or at least minimalised as much as possible, as it only leads to exhaustion (mentally and physically), and, in the middle of combat, that's an equation for death.

As far as being unfamiliar with what I train, here's one of my main systems. This is the other main line, the Narita/Chiba group (I'm from the Kawasaki one), but the heart is the same:








dvcochran said:


> It sounds pretentious to say it is the exact opposite of what a martial art teaches. Some martial arts? Sure. But it is incorrect to make such a general reference. Hence the term martial.



One of the most common concepts in Japanese martial arts is that of mushin (無心 - pretty literally "an absence of mind/heart/spirit"), which is a concept of not having emotional extremes, keeping control over yourself internally in order to have external control, and so on. It's not a "soft style" thing, in fact, quite the opposite... it is simply what is required if you want to survive. Watch combat sports... those that keep their cool, stay calm and focused (in a Japanese expression, maintain mushin), are the ones who come across as the professionals... those just running in, emotions all over the place, get cleaned up.



dvcochran said:


> I am not at all talking about blind emotion and especially not fear. But your reference is an accurate one. The focus and willingness to go into something when the odds are very low (you machine gun reference) is a mentality hard to imagine or understand.



Yeah... you missed the point. I was using that as an example of a very bad idea, not one that's hard to imagine yourself doing... a meaningless sacrifice grown out of being overly emotionally excited, and not being able to make any kind of clear decision.



dvcochran said:


> The reality is for some that is their calling.



Oh, I'm not talking about the soldier who is ordered to move forward despite the lack of odds of survival... I'm talking about the soldier who gets so hyped up he ignores any orders and just charges forward... 



dvcochran said:


> On a different level but elite athletes are in a similar vein. There is a difference in knowing and believing your destiny and in thinking you can make a difference. All these higher minded ideas are hard to elucidate but they are embodied in the focused energy of a kihap.



None of which was in the video Steve linked. That was pure emotional energy, focused, sure, but such an extreme waste of energy with such meaningless action that it is, as I said, the exact opposite of actual martial arts. It's jumping up and down and screaming "LOOK AT ME!!!!!"... it's a show, nothing else... there is no technical aspect related to martial arts, especially not the use of a sword, there is no tactical expression related, there is no mechanical aspect related, and more.



dvcochran said:


> So I have to disagree with the dead man walking analogy since the mentality is completely different.



Then I say again. Put this guy up against anyone with 6 months of sword work, and he does this? Hell, he does anything close to this, or related to it? He dies.



dvcochran said:


> You are going to have to better explain your viewpoint here.



Sure. I was going to do this at the end, but might as well put it here.

Let's take this back a bit, and examine exactly what a ki-ai actually is, what it refers to, and what it isn't. But first, let's remind ourselves what I was responding to when I said "Honestly, all of that is almost precisely what kiai is not." 
You had said:
"I played college football and still remember how loud some guys would get during a game. No, it was not formally known as a kiai but the intent was much the same. My point is there is a very natural element to kiai (kihap) in the everyday, real world. I am sure we have all made the very loud 'grunt' when picking up something heavy. That is akin to the formal kiai."

So, my disagreement is that "getting loud (during a game of football)" is anything related to ki-ai... as well as that the idea of a "loud 'grunt' when picking up something heavy" is anything close either... and all that comes down to understanding what a ki-ai is in the first place, as most people attribute it to something that it, well, isn't... which is the noise itself.

Ki-ai (気合) is made up of two characters, as you can see (Korean arts obviously use the Korean Hangul for kihap, but they are actually the same words), with the first obviously being "ki", the second "ai". Both these characters/concepts have a fair amount of nuance to them, which is where it all gets a bit complicated, but to keep it pretty simple, "ki" (気) is often described as "energy" (the character itself represents the steam coming up off a cooked grain of rice... interesting!), with "ai" (会) meaning "to come together/unite"... so the term "ki-ai" means "to unite, or bring together, energy". Okay, but what does that mean? Well, it basically means that a ki-ai is the action, or concept of acting in total concert with yourself. It's the body and intention all working together; your arms, legs, core, breath, mind, intent, and so on. But you might notice that I haven't said anything about any sound or noise yet... and that's because it's not a part of the concept of ki-ai. It is used to express ki-ai, but it's not actually the ki-ai itself... 

So what is the noise/shout, then? In Japanese terms, it's called the kakegoe (懸聲), which is literally a "suspended voice". From this, we can understand that the shout is not the ki-ai, although it can be part of the expression of a ki-ai, and that the presence of a shout (or noise) is not necessarily indicative of ki-ai. The examples of a "loud football game" is more to do with adrenaline, psyching each other up (or yourself), but is removed from the rest... unless the only noises where in conjunction with a particular action, and then also combined with a particular approach to intent... which is why the "grunt" of physical effort is also not related to the concept of ki-ai.

Now, none of this is to say that simple vocalisation is not valid in and of itself... the military have used it as a psychological tool, both in spurring the recruits into action in training drills, and to increase aggression when facing truly terrible situations. What must be noted there, though (and this is where the whole "I'm a soldier, therefore more of a martial artist than a judo guy" comes into it) is that the aim of the soldiers training is not to keep the soldier (individual) alive... it's to get them to follow the orders as part of the unit so the overall aims can be achieved. Honestly, soldiers are considered expendable in the over-arching scheme of things... that's kind of the point of them... and going into that career knowing that is something that demands respect, clearly. Just in case anyone felt I was speaking ill of military members. The only point I'm making is that the shouting in military training is not a ki-ai, as the aims and reasoning is quite different. By the same token, a "grunt" of effort is simply a way of expelling air, and therefore giving less "space" inside your body, reinforcing it for the action you're asking of it. Yes, it's combined with an action, but it's not so much about focusing the mind/spirit, or anything similar... it's just a physiological reinforcing of muscle groups when under (physical) stress.



dvcochran said:


> I understand what I said is a figurative statement. I use it literally to help people understand the ideas within a kihap.



"Something I tell new students (well, all students) is that kihap literally means 'expulsion of air'."

It doesn't. The term has no reference to air, expulsion, or anything else. In fact, it's about bringing things together (uniting - ai/hap/会), not expelling anything. So when you say it "literally means (this)" when it very literally does not, yeah, I'm going to correct that... saying that your claim of literal wasn't literal, but figurative, well... nah... 



dvcochran said:


> I think we have learned a different method.



Ha, yeah, I'd suggest that as well... and, again, this isn't in and of itself an issue... but if we're discussing things in a forum dedicated to Japanese martial arts, then, well, I'd suggest we look to the Japanese approach to the concept... without getting into the suppositions of exactly what was brought across to Korea to create much of the modern KMA approaches...



dvcochran said:


> It sounds like your understanding is what I have heard referred to as the 'peep' method. A short, swift sound using little expulsion or air. Uber tense and taught. I was taught it is a weapon. A directed energy, a release, a flow. The expression and possibly intent is different. This is a Korean ideology. I do not know if it carries over to JMA's or CMA's. My dabblings in Kung Fu suggests it does.



Yeah... no. Not at all.



dvcochran said:


> Again, apparently different teaching.



Yeah, I'd say so... but to expand on my comments, if your'e requiring a "forceful expulsion of air", that's removed from being united with the rest of your action... which means it is, again, simply not a ki-ai.



dvcochran said:


> Another saying I like to use is 'if you do not breathe you die'.



Ha, cool... I usually tell my guys that breathing is good for you, and I wholeheartedly recommend it for most people... there are always some exceptions, though, ha!



dvcochran said:


> I am guessing this is different for you as well, but in the action of doing poomsae there is a lead in to the kihap. A beginning, middle, and end.



Firstly, bear in mind that Japanese arts, especially classical ones, utilise kata quite differently to Chinese-influenced arts (karate, TKD etc), in that kata are rarely the long string of solo actions... to see examples of kata in Japanese arts, well.... see the video I linked above. So there's going to be differences there already. That said, in many classical arts, there are a range of kakegoe applied throughout the waza, depending on the tradition... they may have them at the beginning, and end... only on the final action... all the way through... or even not have them at all.



dvcochran said:


> This is not always a realism in competition or the real world but the application learned thorough kata applies and is hugely beneficial.



Okay.

To finish (for now), @isshinryuronin, I'd like to invite you to ask for clarification of anything I have said here, or in my first post in this thread... as I said, yes, much is "unsubstantiated" in the post itself... deliberately so, aiming to provoke thought... so please, ask anything you want me to clarify or expand upon. Obviously you don't have to agree with me, but it may give some ways to think about this topic you haven't considered yet.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 9, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> get the whole "psych yourself up" idea... but that's anathema to martial arts the way it's presented here... a big part of it being that "emotional drain" you're talking about. Ideally, such things should be avoided, or at least minimalised as much as possible, as it only leads to exhaustion (mentally and physically), and, in the middle of combat, that's an equation for death.
> 
> As far as being unfamiliar with what I train, here's one of my main systems. This is the other main line, the Narita/Chiba group (I'm from the Kawasaki one), but the heart is the same:


But it is not binary, not full on/full off. Just like in your description, an 'athlete' has to train and learn to handle the drain, and to 'open and close' the aforementioned drain as required, to prevent exhaustion. So we are saying the same thing, only differently.

As far as the video; it was a performance in front of an applauding audience, just like the first video. There is no end all 'real world' difference in either. Just differences is what is seen and appreciated. I appreciate both videos, each in their own way.



Chris Parker said:


> One of the most common concepts in Japanese martial arts is that of mushin (無心 - pretty literally "an absence of mind/heart/spirit"), which is a concept of not having emotional extremes, keeping control over yourself internally in order to have external control, and so on. It's not a "soft style" thing, in fact, quite the opposite... it is simply what is required if you want to survive. Watch combat sports... those that keep their cool, stay calm and focused (in a Japanese expression, maintain mushin), are the ones who come across as the professionals... those just running in, emotions all over the place, get cleaned up.


Conservation of energy is exactly what I am referring to above. What you most often do Not see on TV is what an athlete does before/after they compete. Many, not all, to have an emotional release, 'getting up' for the adversity ahead.
Staying with the football analogy, when you are in the locker room before a game it is quite and a Lot of reflection is going on. There is a Very cool crescendo taking place. Many guys will have vocal expression as time gets closer. It is never a total release (whatever that is) because they understand what is ahead of them. So again, same/same. 



Chris Parker said:


> Yeah... you missed the point. I was using that as an example of a very bad idea, not one that's hard to imagine yourself doing... a meaningless sacrifice grown out of being overly emotionally excited, and not being able to make any kind of clear decision.


Now you are talking about being irrational. Totally different line of thinking. 



Chris Parker said:


> Oh, I'm not talking about the soldier who is ordered to move forward despite the lack of odds of survival... I'm talking about the soldier who gets so hyped up he ignores any orders and just charges forward...


Agree. That is being totally out of control of one's emotions, regardless of the stressors involved.



Chris Parker said:


> None of which was in the video Steve linked. That was pure emotional energy, focused, sure, but such an extreme waste of energy with such meaningless action that it is, as I said, the exact opposite of actual martial arts. It's jumping up and down and screaming "LOOK AT ME!!!!!"... it's a show, nothing else... there is no technical aspect related to martial arts, especially not the use of a sword, there is no tactical expression related, there is no mechanical aspect related, and more.


C'mon man. Both videos were a performance. Both were a "LOOD AT ME!!!!" Different in content but a performance all the same. 



Chris Parker said:


> Then I say again. Put this guy up against anyone with 6 months of sword work, and he does this? Hell, he does anything close to this, or related to it? He dies.


You are basing this statement purely on one video. You have zero context for the rest of his training. Buyer beware here. 



Chris Parker said:


> Sure. I was going to do this at the end, but might as well put it here.
> 
> Let's take this back a bit, and examine exactly what a ki-ai actually is, what it refers to, and what it isn't. But first, let's remind ourselves what I was responding to when I said "Honestly, all of that is almost precisely what kiai is not."
> You had said:
> ...





Chris Parker said:


> It doesn't. The term has no reference to air, expulsion, or anything else. In fact, it's about bringing things together (uniting - ai/hap/会), not expelling anything. So when you say it "literally means (this)" when it very literally does not, yeah, I'm going to correct that... saying that your claim of literal wasn't literal, but figurative, well... nah...


Thank you for the history less, sincerely. Much of this is common knowledge for many across countries and styles. 
Fair enough on the intent of you correction. I agree it can lead to confusion with people new to an art. I said literal and you took it as such. I will still hold to my point that when using it as a tool, we are saying the same thing(s). 



Chris Parker said:


> Ha, yeah, I'd suggest that as well... and, again, this isn't in and of itself an issue... but if we're discussing things in a forum dedicated to Japanese martial arts, then, well, I'd suggest we look to the Japanese approach to the concept... without getting into the suppositions of exactly what was brought across to Korea to create much of the modern KMA approaches...


I acknowledge I am on the JMA forum and that perspectives will be different but I have already stepped in it so will proceed. Much respect for everyone here. 



Chris Parker said:


> Yeah, I'd say so... but to expand on my comments, if your'e requiring a "forceful expulsion of air", that's removed from being united with the rest of your action... which means it is, again, simply not a ki-ai.


Never said that at all. I said "expulsion of air".  It is an integral part of the whole process.


----------



## Chris Parker (Aug 9, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> But it is not binary, not full on/full off. Just like in your description, an 'athlete' has to train and learn to handle the drain, and to 'open and close' the aforementioned drain as required, to prevent exhaustion. So we are saying the same thing, only differently.



Which is nothing like the video Steve posted.



dvcochran said:


> As far as the video; it was a performance in front of an applauding audience, just like the first video. There is no end all 'real world' difference in either. Just differences is what is seen and appreciated. I appreciate both videos, each in their own way.



Honestly, if you can't see a difference between those two videos, then I'm not sure what else I can say... other than to say that, to anyone passingly familiar, it's a far more extreme difference than between watching a well-done karate or TKD kata/poomse, and watching Power Rangers... although, honestly, the latter is probably closer to each other than the XMA and actual kenjutsu are.



dvcochran said:


> Conservation of energy is exactly what I am referring to above. What you most often do Not see on TV is what an athlete does before/after they compete. Many, not all, to have an emotional release, 'getting up' for the adversity ahead.
> Staying with the football analogy, when you are in the locker room before a game it is quite and a Lot of reflection is going on. There is a Very cool crescendo taking place. Many guys will have vocal expression as time gets closer. It is never a total release (whatever that is) because they understand what is ahead of them. So again, same/same.



Again, no. Look, I get all of that... I've played enough sports, I've done stage performances (as both a musician and an actor), I get it... none of that is related to the XMA performance itself and what I'm discussing with it. And absolutely none of it has any connection to the concept of ki-ai.



dvcochran said:


> Now you are talking about being irrational. Totally different line of thinking.



My apologies if I wasn't clear the first time, I can see how the example I chose could be misinterpreted. I had a particular image in my head of someone getting all worked up, standing up, and just blindly charging forwards, without his teammates beside him, and without the order to charge... hopefully we're on the same page with that example now.



dvcochran said:


> Agree. That is being totally out of control of one's emotions, regardless of the stressors involved.



Cool.



dvcochran said:


> C'mon man. Both videos were a performance. Both were a "LOOD AT ME!!!!" Different in content but a performance all the same.



An embu and whatever it was that XMA guy was doing are quite different... the audience isn't actually the audience in embu, for one thing... and the content is one of the biggest things to look at... how it's designed, how it's structured, how it's performed... again, though, if you can't see it, I really don't have any way of making it clearer.



dvcochran said:


> You are basing this statement purely on one video. You have zero context for the rest of his training. Buyer beware here.



Ha! No, believe me, I'm not... and, when it comes to swordsmanship, he's dead. That's just reality.



dvcochran said:


> Thank you for the history less, sincerely. Much of this is common knowledge for many across countries and styles.



Honestly, it's really not. I kinda hate to say it, but these kind of details are relatively rare to come across in any depth in most modern practitioners (by which I mean practitioners of modern arts). I'd love it if such things were common knowledge, but my experience has indicated otherwise.



dvcochran said:


> Fair enough on the intent of you correction. I agree it can lead to confusion with people new to an art. I said literal and you took it as such. I will still hold to my point that when using it as a tool, we are saying the same thing(s).



To that point, the whole idea of defining a ki-ai/kihap as 'an expulsion of air' is okay up to a point... in order for a student to understand a bit about how it's meant to be done... but to use it as a definition of the concept is a bit... lacking, I would say.



dvcochran said:


> I acknowledge I am on the JMA forum and that perspectives will be different but I have already stepped in it so will proceed. Much respect for everyone here.



And it's always good to get outsider perspectives and opinions... often having someone from "outside the family", so to speak, can lead to more introspection and thought, as they might ask questions those in the middle don't think to. So it's great having you involved, as it helps me clarify my thoughts, and hopefully can lead to a greater appreciation in both directions.



dvcochran said:


> Never said that at all. I said "expulsion of air".  It is an integral part of the whole process.



Yeah... here I'm going to argue with you, though... here's your quote:



dvcochran said:


> Something I tell new students (well, all students) is that kihap literally means 'expulsion of air'. *It take a very forceful expulsion to perform an effective kiai.* Using the mental target helps 'feeling' the movement and makes it tangible and understandable.



If the bolded doesn't have you saying a "forceful expulsion of air" is a requirement, then...


----------



## Steve (Aug 9, 2020)

You have a way of stating your credentials that is lengthy, while also being vague and unconvincing.  So, three decades of karate? Do you actually have rank in any karate system?  Have you been in a fight yet?  Been a soldier?  Done anything remotely martial, besides teaching the system you are so proud of?  As I recall, the answer is always no, in those are times you answer directly.  Don't get me wrong.  I appreciate your academic knowledge.  But I don't think you understand the difference.

But that aside, what I'm more interested in is why you think you're the arbiter of what is and isn't a martial art.  That seems really arrogant.  Even for you.


----------



## Steve (Aug 9, 2020)

_Simon_ said:


> I think...... it would be quite remiss of me.... to not bring this up...
> 
> (AND also it's just been too long since it has surfaced on these forums)
> 
> ...


You know, as I watched that, it really reminded me more of the Pacific Islander war dances, like the Haka or Siva  tau.  I mean, clear differences, but the way this kata was performed seems more like a firing up the spirit for battle ritual than a training exercise.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 9, 2020)

Steve said:


> But that aside, what I'm more interested in is why you think you're the arbiter of what is and isn't a martial art.  That seems really arrogant.  Even for you.


I love it when people have the authority to determine what IS something and what ISN’T. I’m glad I don’t have that authority. Way too much responsibility and answering way too many questions. And I’ve heard the pay isn’t that great either.

I’d rather just train. Ed Parker said it best when he said (paraphrasing) “... whenever fist is meeting flesh, it’s real karate.” Real, fake, who gives a damn. As long as you’re meeting the needs of why you train. And why care about why others train? It’s their business, not mine. I love beating people up and getting beat up, but not too much of a beating  Just enough to make me smile and still be functional the next day. Same for my partners. Some think it’s not enough, others think it’s too much. That’s their problem to deal with if they’ve got to perseverate on what I’m doing.

Edit: Not my partners’ problem. Always go at a level they’re comfortable with.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 9, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> You missed my point, I feel. I'mnot doubting your study of Isshin Ryu... what I'm saying is that the more you decide to alter the art to suit your personal preferences, the less it remains Isshin Ryu... so to claim it to still be the same art is increasingly inaccurate. Of course, changes to a martial system can and do occur over time... with the strict caveat that such changes are typically from the head of the system on down, for a range of reasons... when someone changes something due to having a complete understanding, and coming to some kind of realisation, or adapting to some change, is one thing... when people change things because they don't understand them properly or fully, that's where it's problematic


 
We are in* complete* agreement on this point.  I would be considered a strict traditionalist when it comes to kata and a constant defender of the ideas you express here.  I was, though, questioning the reason and placement of just the kiai (which does refer to "meeting spirit" or as DV states, "the coming together of energy."  The idea is the same.  My spirit will remain mine to command.


----------



## Buka (Aug 9, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> Very true, Buka... of course, if I may, your case does highlight much of what I talk about above... you do not practice, nor claim to practice, a specific Okinawan or Japanese form/tradition of karate... you are very open in that you practice an American variant, which is a new system based in a personal direction of someone, or a group of people, back in the day... the approach separated from the way it was presented for whatever reasons... so it became it's own thing. Which is exactly what I describe about moving away from the original system, and no longer actually practicing that original art.



Beautifully said and quite true, Sir.


----------



## Buka (Aug 9, 2020)

_Simon_ said:


> I think...... it would be quite remiss of me.... to not bring this up...
> 
> (AND also it's just been too long since it has surfaced on these forums)
> 
> ...



I quite enjoyed that, albeit for probably different reasons. I look at martial things and imagine in the back of my mind the transference of various parts of what I watch into other aspects of real life.

Having judged Kata for twenty years in tournaments a million years ago, I'm quite familiar with that one.
But I haven't really been exposed to Kata over the last few decades, so while watching that now, I wonder in what other aspects of life the practitioner verbalises and moves with such volume and vigor.

Yes, I'm a dog. Guilty, head hung in shame.


----------



## Buka (Aug 9, 2020)

As a side note about kiais..... Judging at tournaments back in the dark ages, I was often saddled with judging white belt kumite. Mostly because I had patience, the tourney promoters knew me and none of my students competed in kata.

Every time I did it there were always a few white belts that would do a kiai when they thought they were striking their opponent. And there were always some of them that actually yelled the word "kiai" as their kiai.

Now, that's entertainment.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 9, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> Which is nothing like the video Steve posted.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Chris Parker (Aug 10, 2020)

Steve said:


> You have a way of stating your credentials that is lengthy, while also being vague and unconvincing.  So, three decades of karate? Do you actually have rank in any karate system?  Have you been in a fight yet?  Been a soldier?  Done anything remotely martial, besides teaching the system you are so proud of?  As I recall, the answer is always no, in those are times you answer directly.  Don't get me wrong.  I appreciate your academic knowledge.  But I don't think you understand the difference.



You aren't serious, are you? Really? 

Look, Steve, I'm sick of this. You've been given these answers before, and they are almost all also answered in the post above, and you consistently ignore them, or discount them with no basis but extreme bias... and frankly, I don't care. As I said above, you're been told all of this before, and you have decided that, for whatever lunatic reason you have, you will act as if you've not been informed. Again, tough. Learn to read, and bluntly, grow up.

You decided that no-one could teach or learn self defence, as you had no ability to grasp what that actually entailed, and gave parameters that honestly don't match reality... and even when presented with those parameters being met, decided that they didn't actually match your ideals, despite being exactly what you asked for. You have continually discounted all experience, knowledge, understanding, and more... and never once been able to actually argue against anything presented.

And keep your "appreciation" of my academic knowledge... you don't appreciate it at all. You rail against it, discount it by deciding other factors trump it (even in academic matters, which is just proof that you don't care about anything other than railing against me... again, get over whatever cracked in your head years ago), then discount each example of my experience that does match what you ask for. Stop with the snide "funny" tags, and learn to read.



Steve said:


> But that aside, what I'm more interested in is why you think you're the arbiter of what is and isn't a martial art.  That seems really arrogant.  Even for you.



Not an arbiter, son, just educated. And you can take that as arrogant as you'd like... your complete lack of acceptance of anything I say means that, really, your opinion is of exactly no value.



JR 137 said:


> I love it when people have the authority to determine what IS something and what ISN’T. I’m glad I don’t have that authority. Way too much responsibility and answering way too many questions. And I’ve heard the pay isn’t that great either.



It's not authority, as said, it's education. But yeah, the pay is not something that I'd recommend... 



JR 137 said:


> I’d rather just train. Ed Parker said it best when he said (paraphrasing) “... whenever fist is meeting flesh, it’s real karate.” Real, fake, who gives a damn. As long as you’re meeting the needs of why you train. And why care about why others train? It’s their business, not mine. I love beating people up and getting beat up, but not too much of a beating  Just enough to make me smile and still be functional the next day. Same for my partners. Some think it’s not enough, others think it’s too much. That’s their problem to deal with if they’ve got to perseverate on what I’m doing.
> 
> Edit: Not my partners’ problem. Always go at a level they’re comfortable with.



Of course, you have to realise why he made such a patently inaccurate statement... he was defending the idea that what he was doing (his new American Kenpo art) was a form of karate, when it obviously didn't match what was seen in other (Okinawan and Japanese) forms... 



isshinryuronin said:


> We are in* complete* agreement on this point.  I would be considered a strict traditionalist when it comes to kata and a constant defender of the ideas you express here.  I was, though, questioning the reason and placement of just the kiai (which does refer to "meeting spirit" or as DV states, "the coming together of energy."  The idea is the same.  My spirit will remain mine to command.



Ha, I felt we might be... as for the placement of the ki-ai in kata, that is a very insightful question, and something I think should be asked by everyone who wants to understand their art in the fullest. I would personally side with much of @_Simon_ 's ideas, in that they are placed at the culmination of a series of actions, indicating a type of "rest" or "stop" point... but even that is not likely to be absolutely consistent. It is also pertinent to realise that the placement likely is different to how it was done "back in the day"... the concept of your spirit, though, I feel is separate from the concept of "ki" as found in the ki-ai principle and concept themselves... I don't dispute your statement, but feel that's not really that related. The "ki" of ki-ai should be a consistent throughout the kata, rather than being reliant on an internally, potentially less-regulated "feeling".

Say, here's an experiment... try performing a kata in three different ways... once, the way it's regularly taught... once, putting a ki-ai on every action (possibly differentiating between "offensive" and "defensive" ones)... and once, with a ki-ai where they naturally occur for you. It'd be interesting to see how each changes for you... you may find reasons for the placement that you didn't notice before...


----------



## _Simon_ (Aug 10, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> I hope my last comments on a video were not mixed up with this one. Two completely different animals. I have no idea what the intent of this video is. Not a kiai IMHO.


Oh no wasn't referring to your comments, would quote you if I was, just thought a comedic vid loosely related to the thread XD


----------



## Steve (Aug 10, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> You aren't serious, are you? Really?
> 
> Look, Steve, I'm sick of this. You've been given these answers before, and they are almost all also answered in the post above, and you consistently ignore them, or discount them with no basis but extreme bias... and frankly, I don't care. As I said above, you're been told all of this before, and you have decided that, for whatever lunatic reason you have, you will act as if you've not been informed. Again, tough. Learn to read, and bluntly, grow up.
> 
> ...


Listen, son, your blustering outrage is noted, though you managed to write three paragraphs with zero actual information.  I think you're hilarious, why wouldn't I put a funny tag on your posts?  

Regarding my positions on self defense, boy, I think some folks can teach it effectively.  Just not someone like you, with no actual experience, kiddo.  If you think my belief is that no one can teach it, you've failed to understand.  Which, honestly, doesn't surprise me at all, squirt.  To claim to be an expert on something you have no experience doing is funny, champ.  I should say, best case is it's funny.  I mean, if you charge folks for your lessons, that's more dangerous and potentially unethical than funny.  But your posts are funny, at least.  

Regarding your academic knowledge, you know a lot about certain things.  You're like a history professor.  I appreciate those posts where you're strictly sharing historical information.  That seems to be your wheelhouse.  





> Not an arbiter, son, just educated. And you can take that as arrogant as you'd like... your complete lack of acceptance of anything I say means that, really, your opinion is of exactly no value.


Wait.  so, you're saying that XMA and wushu are not real martial arts, but ninjutsu is.  And that any educated person would agree with you?  You're confusing your opinion for absolute fact, and that, my little friend, is very arrogant.  While I would take you at your word regarding why a samurai might fold his napkin in feudal Japan, I'm sure your opinion about whether something is or is not a martial art is no more valid than anyone else's.  You may disagree with that person for any number of reasons, but that doesn't make them wrong.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 10, 2020)

Buka said:


> As a side note about kiais..... Judging at tournaments back in the dark ages, I was often saddled with judging white belt kumite. Mostly because I had patience, the tourney promoters knew me and none of my students competed in kata.
> 
> Every time I did it there were always a few white belts that would do a kiai when they thought they were striking their opponent. And there were always some of them that actually yelled the word "kiai" as their kiai.
> 
> Now, that's entertainment.


I’ve told this story several times here, but it needs repeating. And it never gets old for me...

We had this group of students who were about 6 months in or so. They kept saying “kiai” every time they kiai’ed. My teacher explained the concept and made it clear they weren’t supposed to say kiai, but the were supposed to kiai. What do they do? They keep saying it. Over and over, even after being told repeatedly.

My teacher gets sick of it and has us line up like one of those big Mas Oyama workouts. Standing in place, drilling basic techniques like individual punches, blocks, et al. Kiai on every technique. They just couldn’t stop yelling kiai. We went a good 45 minutes straight. I loved every minute of it. They finally got it about a half hour into it.

Every now and then, me and another guy would try to get someone to yell kiai. No one had the balls to do it though. If he or I would’ve done it, he’d have seen right through it and I’m sure the sparring session with him wouldn’t have been good. He’s a great guy, but like all of us, he had his buttons. Yelling kiai was one of them.


----------



## Steve (Aug 10, 2020)

JR 137 said:


> I’ve told this story several times here, but it needs repeating. And it never gets old for me...
> 
> We had this group of students who were about 6 months in or so. They kept saying “kiai” every time they kiai’ed. My teacher explained the concept and made it clear they weren’t supposed to say kiai, but the were supposed to kiai. What do they do? They keep saying it. Over and over, even after being told repeatedly.
> 
> ...


As I'm picturing this unfold, I'm imagining the students lined up, all yelling, 'Keeee-yai!'  

Anyone ever yell, "Hi-ya!" like in the old karate movies?


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 10, 2020)

Want to address a few more of Chris P.'s comments.  "_Mushin_" is an emptiness of mind/spirit as you define, but you stress it as an emotional (or lack thereof) state.  This is just a part of a broader, deeper concept.  Mushin has more to do with perception, the emptying providing a still surface without ripples, where things can be clearly reflected and seen undistorted (_mizu no kokoro_).  Emotions are just one source of ripples.  The main advantage to this clarity of mushin is that it allows "action and reaction to be one and the same."  I am speaking here in regards to karate - Mushin may be nuanced differently in meditation or other "do" such as ikebana or kyudo (arts I'm not well versed in.)

The kiai serves to startle the opponent, fortify the body and release one's spirit and power during an attack.  It must be timed correctly, explosive and forceful to accomplish these goals.  Those five second, drawn out kiai as seen in kata competition are not true kiai and serve only theatrical purposes, or to impress uneducated judges.  The same goes for kumite when used to tell the judges "Hey, I just scored a point."

Regarding the sound itself being the kiai, or just a manifestation of the internal kiai - Can the kiai be silent?  A good question.  Here is my opinion on it:  I think not, sort of.  While a sudden expulsion of air is needed as spirit and breath are connected, and in some cases can be silent, in terms of karate the sound is important as a tactical component of the attack to unbalance the opponent.  And I also think it serves to help bring out the other elements of kiai as well.


----------



## Buka (Aug 10, 2020)

Steve said:


> As I'm picturing this unfold, I'm imagining the students lined up, all yelling, 'Keeee-yai!'
> 
> Anyone ever yell, "Hi-ya!" like in the old karate movies?



I haven't, but a friend of mine who has never taken a class in his life assumed what he thought was a Karate stance and yelled "Hi-ya" when he was about to fight two guys. He's an extremely tough individual who used to be a Bounty Hunter, and unbeknownst to the two guys, there were a dozen of us right there with him.

The two guys backed down. He always said he dazzled them with his Hi-ya.


----------



## Steve (Aug 10, 2020)

Buka said:


> I haven't, but a friend of mine who has never taken a class in his life assumed what he thought was a Karate stance and yelled "Hi-ya" when he was about to fight two guys. He's an extremely tough individual who used to be a Bounty Hunter, and unbeknownst to the two guys, there were a dozen of us right there with him.
> 
> The two guys backed down. He always said he dazzled them with his Hi-ya.


Good story.  Lucky those guys backed down, because I don't think things would've gone their way had they not.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 10, 2020)

Speaking of kiai...

A friend and I were in a bar. He was an American Kenpo guy, I was in a kyokushin offshoot. We were talking MA and a clown a few stools down said “aren’t you guys a little old to be doing karate?” We were in our mid 20s. My buddy says “I bet you $10 I can kick this ashtray off your head without touching you. The guy accepts. My buddy’s all of 5’5; the other guy is about 6’. My buddy gets into an angled kinda horse stance, lets out this hilarious Bruce Lee kiai, then side kicks the guy right in the stomach. You can hear this solid thud sound when he hits him. Knicks the guy back about 3 feet right onto his back. My buddy walks up, drops a $10 bill on him and simply says “I lose.”

My buddy sat right back down next to me and picked up the conversation exactly where he left off. The guy hobbled over to his barstool where he was harassed by his friends. 

One of those”did that just happen” moments that I’ll never forget. Nothing that guy did surprised me. Always amazed me and got me laughing my a$$ off, but never surprised me. The kind of guy you’re glad he’s your friend and not your enemy.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 10, 2020)

JR 137 said:


> Speaking of kiai...
> 
> A friend and I were in a bar. He was an American Kenpo guy, I was in a kyokushin offshoot. We were talking MA and a clown a few stools down said “aren’t you guys a little old to be doing karate?” We were in our mid 20s. My buddy says “I bet you $10 I can kick this ashtray off your head without touching you. The guy accepts. My buddy’s all of 5’5; the other guy is about 6’. My buddy gets into an angled kinda horse stance, lets out this hilarious Bruce Lee kiai, then side kicks the guy right in the stomach. You can hear this solid thud sound when he hits him. Knicks the guy back about 3 feet right onto his back. My buddy walks up, drops a $10 bill on him and simply says “I lose.”
> 
> ...


Can't say I'm a fan of this story.  There's one I've told before regarding Motobu Choki kicking a guy in the back as they were walking out of a bar, but that guy had threatened him with a knife and expressed the intent to kill him, so may be considered a pre-emptive attack.  In your story, it seems your buddy was not threatened and just took a cheap shot on this guy.  Not a very TMA action, nor in the spirit of Ed Parker's "Kenpo Creed."


----------



## Steve (Aug 10, 2020)

JR 137 said:


> Speaking of kiai...
> 
> A friend and I were in a bar. He was an American Kenpo guy, I was in a kyokushin offshoot. We were talking MA and a clown a few stools down said “aren’t you guys a little old to be doing karate?” We were in our mid 20s. My buddy says “I bet you $10 I can kick this ashtray off your head without touching you. The guy accepts. My buddy’s all of 5’5; the other guy is about 6’. My buddy gets into an angled kinda horse stance, lets out this hilarious Bruce Lee kiai, then side kicks the guy right in the stomach. You can hear this solid thud sound when he hits him. Knicks the guy back about 3 feet right onto his back. My buddy walks up, drops a $10 bill on him and simply says “I lose.”
> 
> ...


In elementary school we played a trick where we would offer to play a game of who can punch the other guy in the arm the softest.  The other guy goes first and barely taps you, then you hit him in the arm really hard and say, "You lose.".


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2020)

isshinryuronin said:


> When I began my practice in 1966, kiai's were generally thrown in on the last rep of each drill.  They were also firmly entrenched in kata, usually two in each, at specific places within the routine.  These places seem to be accepted as part of the style's kata, as much as a punch or block, sometimes found across different styles.   We all know the purposes of the kiai, but as I delve deeper into kata, questions come to mind.
> 
> Aside that they generally occur during a strong attack move, why are they in the kata at all?  Were they always a part of kata, as taught by Matsumura or Higaonna, or something added in later, perhaps to conform to some notion of ferocity to impress the public?  If later on, when?  Why do they exist in all the kata I know?  Was it found necessary to put them in all?
> 
> ...


A thought from outside the Karate world, and based entirely on my own experiece creating kata (so may or may not have any applicability to Karate kata). It's possible some things were put in just to be a challenge, or just to make sure that "thing" was somewhere in the kata. So perhaps someone was developing kata and thought, "I'd like my students to practice their kiai between sessions." Well, the kata was already going to be for that purpose, so why not throw a couple in. Choose some points in the movement when the kiai would best fit with the principles being taught (as I understand it, Karate usually focuses on using kiai for more intense movements and finishes). Then if that works well for the first person who does it, others borrow the good idea.

It could be as simple as that.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> You missed my point, I feel. I'm not doubting your study of Isshin Ryu... what I'm saying is that the more you decide to alter the art to suit your personal preferences, the less it remains Isshin Ryu...


To me, this includes an implicit assumption that Isshin Ryu was "finished" and the person who codified it would never want to change anything. There's a point at which enough changes that using the same name may be confusing to folks, but I don't at all buy into the concept that arts should be held static or they're less that same art. That inevitably leads to degredation of the art, both relative to other arts and absolutely (as 100% transmission from teacher to student is impossible).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> Ah, Steve... yeah, haven't really missed you, bud...
> 
> No. Says the guy with over 3 decades in dominantly Japanese systems, including those specialised in and focused on swordsmanship, but with a background including Classical Japanese arts (koryu, specifically Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, and Muso Shinden Ryu, all sword arts), modern organisations and iterations of such (Takamatsuden arts), karate, Tae-kwon Do, Aikido, boxing, judo, jodo, and BJJ... as well as doing a range of seminars and other training events for FMA arts, RBSD ones, Hapkido, modern (Western) jujutsu systems, Seitei Iaido, Wing Chun, Hung Gar, Taiji, Western Fencing, HEMA, and probably half a dozen I'm forgetting. I've trained in modern arts, classical arts, traditional arts, sports/competitive arts, I've competed, I've been involved in real fights and violence. And, frankly, you've been told all this before, and have decided that my experience doesn't count for you. Simply speaking... tough. You've stated that your only background is your BJJ, you haven't gotten into actual fights, and your exposure and understanding of anything outside of your BJJ is incredibly limited, to say the least... hell, you thought the OP, a very reasoned and serious question, was a joke thread, due to your complete inability to understand anything being discussed.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the explanation of the term "kiai". I've known for some time the definition I was given was probably inacurate (through 3 generations of non-Japanese-speakers), but hadn't found a good, concise explanation of the words (not sure that's even the right term) invovled.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2020)

Steve said:


> As I'm picturing this unfold, I'm imagining the students lined up, all yelling, 'Keeee-yai!'
> 
> Anyone ever yell, "Hi-ya!" like in the old karate movies?


Kids often do.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 10, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> A thought from outside the Karate world, and based entirely on my own experiece creating kata (so may or may not have any applicability to Karate kata). It's possible some things were put in just to be a challenge, or just to make sure that "thing" was somewhere in the kata. So perhaps someone was developing kata and thought, "I'd like my students to practice their kiai between sessions." Well, the kata was already going to be for that purpose, so why not throw a couple in. Choose some points in the movement when the kiai would best fit with the principles being taught (as I understand it, Karate usually focuses on using kiai for more intense movements and finishes). Then if that works well for the first person who does it, others borrow the good idea.
> 
> It could be as simple as that.



If so, that would put kiai in most Okinawan kata from as early as about 1800.  To be honest, I don't know if there were kiai even outside of kata at that time.  Could be they were placed there in the 1920's, or even later.  I have never come across any early reference to kiai in any of the books I have seen or heard about.  Is it that they weren't a big thing back then and nobody thought to write about or reference it, or were they just not there at all?  This is something I want to research.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 10, 2020)

isshinryuronin said:


> If so, that would put kiai in most Okinawan kata from as early as about 1800.  To be honest, I don't know if there were kiai even outside of kata at that time.  Could be they were placed there in the 1920's, or even later.  I have never come across any early reference to kiai in any of the books I have seen or heard about.  Is it that they weren't a big thing back then and nobody thought to write about or reference it, or were they just not there at all?  This is something I want to research.


That would be an interesting answer to have, to try to understand what changed that led to the addition of the audible kiai. Might be a small thing (as you said, maybe even as small as a performance bit), or might reflect some change in how Karate was taught.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 11, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> To me, this includes an implicit assumption that Isshin Ryu was "finished" and the person who codified it would never want to change anything. There's a point at which enough changes that using the same name may be confusing to folks, but I don't at all buy into the concept that arts should be held static or they're less that same art. That inevitably leads to degredation of the art, both relative to other arts and absolutely (as 100% transmission from teacher to student is impossible).


Very, very well said.


----------



## dvcochran (Aug 11, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> That would be an interesting answer to have, to try to understand what changed that led to the addition of the audible kiai. Might be a small thing (as you said, maybe even as small as a performance bit), or might reflect some change in how Karate was taught.


A couple of thoughts a to more modern reasons for the formalization of the kiai. 

As JMA's became more mainstream and introduced into their military and education systems, the kiai was/is used as an 'attention getter'. To help the person get and/or stay more focused. Something I find very helpful when teaching younger people. 

I think this would be more of a CMA thing but many elements in some styles were modeled after animals movements. A naturalists approach. The growl or roar of some animals is said to be the elements of a kiai. 

I realize this will not be historically accurate to some viewpoints (Parker) but it is true all the same. Makes me glad I am living in all of this great big world.


----------



## Steve (Aug 11, 2020)

Steve said:


> In elementary school we played a trick where we would offer to play a game of who can punch the other guy in the arm the softest.  The other guy goes first and barely taps you, then you hit him in the arm really hard and say, "You lose.".


Correction.  You would yell, 'I lose."  Makes more sense that way.   That's what I get for typing on a phone while also watching a movie.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 11, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> To me, this includes an implicit assumption that Isshin Ryu was "finished" and the person who codified it would never want to change anything. There's a point at which enough changes that using the same name may be confusing to folks, but I don't at all buy into the concept that arts should be held static or they're less that same art. That inevitably leads to degredation of the art, both relative to other arts and absolutely (as 100% transmission from teacher to student is impossible).



Kata had never been static.  Each of the old masters changed (maybe "adjusted" would be a better word) what they had learned in small ways to fit their own individual skills or views.  They borrowed techniques from other styles as well, since Okinawa was quite small and many of the old guys cross trained with each other.  But it is important to note that these guys were true masters to begin with and *fully* understood their art as few high ranking belts do today.

In regards to Isshinryu, in particular, it is one of the newest "modern" styles, dating from the mid 1950's, itself a synthesis of Miyagi's Goju and (mostly) Kyan's Shorinryu, along with a few unique tweeks from creator Shimabuku.  But much of what he, and other masters knew, has been lost, or not passed down (except perhaps to family).  

As a general rule, I think it is a bad idea to tinker with machinery one does not fully understand, and better to rely on the manual written by the guys who designed it and put it through lengthy trials.  I may change something (like kiai placement) for myself, but would not teach it as being the style - After many decades of practice and study and teaching, I'm not close to fully understanding kata enough to presume to change it and call myself a "master."


----------



## Steve (Aug 11, 2020)

isshinryuronin said:


> As a general rule, I think it is a bad idea to tinker with machinery one does not fully understand, and better to rely on the manual written by the guys who designed it and put it through lengthy trials.  I may change something (like kiai placement) for myself, but would not teach it as being the style - After many decades of practice and study and teaching, I'm not close to fully understanding kata enough to presume to change it and call myself a "master."


Very informative post.  Question, though.  You acknowledge that information is lost over time, which makes a lot of sense to me. It's inevitable for a number of reasons.  The question is, if you don't tinker, how will you ever deconstruct the activities to master the skills?  What I mean is, you know you're losing some insight... so, how does one rediscover that insight without some form of deconstruction?  Or said another way, it seems without some tinkering, you risk attrition within the style.  

This reminds me of an article I read about the rediscovery of damascus forging in the 1980s.  I don't know enough about metallurgy to get into the weeds, but the gist of the article is that the method was lost for (I think) a couple hundred years.  But guys had enough skill and experience in forging to basically figure out how it was done, through tinkering and deconstruction.  They knew the outcome they were looking for, and they had the skills as a building block.  They just had to tinker around to figure out to get from point a to point b.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Aug 11, 2020)

isshinryuronin said:


> Kata had never been static.  Each of the old masters changed (maybe "adjusted" would be a better word) what they had learned in small ways to fit their own individual skills or views.  They borrowed techniques from other styles as well, since Okinawa was quite small and many of the old guys cross trained with each other.  But it is important to note that these guys were true masters to begin with and *fully* understood their art as few high ranking belts do today.
> 
> In regards to Isshinryu, in particular, it is one of the newest "modern" styles, dating from the mid 1950's, itself a synthesis of Miyagi's Goju and (mostly) Kyan's Shorinryu, along with a few unique tweeks from creator Shimabuku.  But much of what he, and other masters knew, has been lost, or not passed down (except perhaps to family).
> 
> As a general rule, I think it is a bad idea to tinker with machinery one does not fully understand, and better to rely on the manual written by the guys who designed it and put it through lengthy trials.  I may change something (like kiai placement) for myself, but would not teach it as being the style - After many decades of practice and study and teaching, I'm not close to fully understanding kata enough to presume to change it and call myself a "master."


Here's where I have some disagreement. Those old masters, back when they started making those adjustments, were instructors in much the same way some instructors today are. They understood the art, and made meaningful adjustments to make it work well (sometimes better) for their students). If you have understanding of the art, you should be capable of a similar approach. In my opinion, changes like that should propagate from active instructors (working with average students) up to the top, not the other way around. If all of the changes come from the folks who are currently controlling an association, it's like all the management decisions coming from the executive suite - which is a demonstrably weak way to run a business.

I'm not suggesting everyone should be as liberal with changes as I am. That's a personality thing, and that approach fits for me (and my students), but won't be the right approach for everyone. But I suspect with "many decades of practice and study" you probably know many things the folks who codified those kata didn't know at the time (though they may have learned it later).


----------



## Steve (Aug 11, 2020)

What if, through your accumulated skill and experience, you actually knew more than the old masters?   It's a smaller world now than in the past.  Less insular and more diverse.  @isshinryuronin , you say you've been training/teaching this system for over 50 years.  There's a veneration of the "Masters" that seems like it could be counterproductive.   

I've mentioned Bloom's taxonomy in the past, as a way to to explain the bottom end of building expertise.  At the bottom end, it starts with Knowledge, then Comprehension, then Application.  After that, it moves into Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation.  The terms change slightly over the years, but the idea is, at a certain point, experts have to innovate and build on what came before them, or they will stagnate or stall.  At the bottom, you have to get to application in order to progress.  At the top end of expertise, meaning experts among experts... or the guys to whom experts go for help or instruction...  those guys are expanding what is known and adding value to the field.  

At 50+ years in a system...  I think if anyone is well prepared to write the manual, it's you.  At that point, it's not tinkering any more.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Aug 11, 2020)

*Steve & gps*.  All good comments above,   Re: tinkering to "deconstruct"  (this is a good spot to note "bunkai" basically means to deconstruct) - I sort of gave tinkering a negative connotation, which I meant to.  What is good to do is reverse engineer the kata to more fully understand all it contains.  To do this, we need to know the original intent of the moves we do.  By understanding what old Okinawan karate was, we can look at the kata and try to discover the true meaning of the techniques which to us, simply look like blocks, kicks and punches - which they mostly are not.

Thanks to hard work by some karate historians conversant in Japanese, the few older written records which still exist have been found and translated.  Also, the older living masters are not as secretive as in the old days and freer in sharing their knowledge.  From this we know the original Okinawan styles had few actual blocks, a very aggressive and offensive doctrine, few kicks (and those were below the waist) and a whole lot of grabbing with some twisting and breaking thrown in, as well as takedowns.  So rather than haphazard tinkering, we can more knowledgably reverse engineer from the basics we see now, to what it was meant to be - quite different from what the GI's brought back in the 1950's.  

By the way, re: your last line in the post above, thanks for promoting me to master.  In truth, I was not fully active that whole time and only fairly recently did I become "enlightened."  

I respectfully disagree with your basic premise, Gerry.  The old masters were not just "instructors" teaching classes to average students.  They were masters (proven warriors, many were bodyguards/retainers to the king) personally teaching a few hand picked disciples who underwent very rigorous combat training.  It was the top disciples of this group who went on to start their own style. It was not anything like what you see today.  Definitely a different animal.  There were no associations, no belts, not even clothes hardly.  A couple of generations after that, things did change and there was some organization.  But the head guy was acknowledged by his peers as being the top dog who earned his spot by his knowledge and skill, blood and sweat and dedication.  I think few today can match these qualifications and make changes to their style however they and their students decide.

But none of this prevents anyone from exploring and experimenting and discovering what is already hidden there.  Each may find something different.

Of course, these are just my views on the subject.  Sounds a little dramatic, but the history of karate is dramatic - great stories, great personalities, great benefits to its practitioners.  I love the sound of kiais in the morning!


----------



## Buka (Aug 11, 2020)

I believe that any of the founders of any of the styles, especially if they had been warriors, if presented with a more effective way of doing some part of their system, they would test it and change that part. I really can't fathom why they would not. I'll also bet that's exactly what they did when putting their system together.

As for Kiai, each to his own. I'll use it any way the mood strikes me.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 11, 2020)

My opinion is that nobody of any system understands it exactly like his/her instructor did.  So all of us practice according to the best of our understanding, which may change over the years.  And yet people teach during this time, while their own understanding and approach was changing.

One of my instructors would talk about different people within a system, people who had studied under the same teacher, and yet their rendition and practice of the system was markedly different from each other.  This was because each person had studied under the  same teacher, but during a different era.  One studied when the teacher was younger, the other studied when the teacher was older.  So what they did, and what they then passed along to their own students, was different. 

I believe that any system changes somewhat with every person who learns it, even with the strongest desires to keep it exactly the same.  Welcome to being human.  We are not carbon copies of our instructors, even if we try to be.  Many people never teach, so their “changes” never get passed along, and die with the individual.  Those that do teach, if their “changes” prove to have merit, then they get passed along to the next generation. 

We practice.  We get better.  Our understanding improves.  We change how we practice.  Some of us teach.  How we teach changes. 

I believe it is impossible for it to be otherwise.

My Sifu is the best example that I have, and I do my best to internalize and understand the lessons he gives me.  But I’ve given up on trying to be exactly like him, or striving for “perfect” or “complete” understanding.  I don’t believe they exist.  I just practice to the best of my understanding and I put it to work for me.


----------



## _Simon_ (Aug 12, 2020)

Chris Parker said:


> Okay, but what does that mean? Well, it basically means that a ki-ai is the action, or concept of acting in total concert with yourself. It's the body and intention all working together; your arms, legs, core, breath, mind, intent, and so on. But you might notice that I haven't said anything about any sound or noise yet... and that's because it's not a part of the concept of ki-ai. It is used to express ki-ai, but it's not actually the ki-ai itself...
> 
> So what is the noise/shout, then? In Japanese terms, it's called the kakegoe (懸聲), which is literally a "suspended voice". From this, we can understand that the shout is not the ki-ai, although it can be part of the expression of a ki-ai, and that the presence of a shout (or noise) is not necessarily indicative of ki-ai.



Ah this was fascinating, never heard it expressed like that nor thought of it like that. Makes sense, awesome


----------



## _Simon_ (Aug 12, 2020)

JR 137 said:


> I’ve told this story several times here, but it needs repeating. And it never gets old for me...
> 
> We had this group of students who were about 6 months in or so. They kept saying “kiai” every time they kiai’ed. My teacher explained the concept and made it clear they weren’t supposed to say kiai, but the were supposed to kiai. What do they do? They keep saying it. Over and over, even after being told repeatedly.
> 
> ...


Love it.

We had something similar in Kyokushin, when we were sparring at a big day seminar session or memorial training, the Branch Chief would hate hearing that "choo choo" or "chshh chshh" noise as we exhale on hitting someone. Said this is Kyokushin not boxing, we should be kiaiing!

And that if he heard one more "choo" it's 100 pushups. The noise in the room changed dramatically as we started sparring again XD


----------

