# Defining Bunkai



## K-man (May 10, 2015)

This discussion is splitting off from the 'Shotokan for SD' thread because it is just too mixed up to pursue a more detailed discussion.



ShotoNoob said:


> I want to explore your statement above about the design of kata.  And more specifically, what you mean by saying, "Bunkai works on a predetermined response...."  Are you talking about bunkai experts such as I.A. demonstrating practical applications grown out of the bunkai form  presented in kata?


Traditionally karate is a close quarters fighting system based on the principles of Tegumi and  incorporating the techniques and modified kata (or forms) brought back from China. Before we can understand bunkai we have to look at the kata. What is it and what is its purpose? Well for someone seeing it for the first time it is purely a sequence of techniques performed in a particular pattern that starts and finishes in the same position. Some people never get beyond that point. People that simply look at kata as a grading requirement would be in that category.

Fortunately for the rest of us we have numerous excellent publications on kata from guys like Lawrence Kane and Kris Wilder and practitioners like George Dillman, Iain Abernethy and Masaji Taira who have taken training in kata and kata bunkai to a new level of understanding.

Kata in its pure form is a fighting system. It's a bit like an incredibly complex piece of machinery that you could look at, appreciate, but really not understand what it does or how it works.

So, if karate is a close quarter fighting style and kata is a fighting system how do they come together? As an example ... I am facing my partner just outside sparring distance. He attacks me. Can I use the bunkai? Maybe, if I am dead lucky. I don't know what he is going to do. Will he punch, kick or try to take me down? Will he hit with the left or right hand? I can't predict what he will do but what I do know is that if I retreat and he misses he will attack again. If I block his attack he will attack again and eventually he may succeed. I must engage at some point and it is actually a huge surprise for an attacker to suddenly find he is being attacked. So I do exactly as you have written, 'move-in-and-destroy'.  Now when I move in I will find myself in some form of grappling situation. The secret of the bunkai is to recognise the situation you are in as a particular point of the bunkai you have trained and you move from there.

I'll paint a word picture ...
Old mate has attacked me and I have over-hooked his right arm with my left arm. My right arm is protecting against him striking with his left. I strike heel palm to his face. He has only one option to stop his head being snapped back. He must use his left hand or arm to prevent my strike because I have his right arm trapped under my left arm. If I haven't trained bunkai I now am in the situation where I have successfully entered and engaged but my attack has failed. What do I do next? Do I use my knees, do I start to wrestle ... what is my next move? If I have trained the bunkai I might recognise a situation from training Seiunchin bunkai or Shisochin bunkai where I use my left arm now to sweep under his left arm into an elbow break or an arm bar. I can do that because I knew ahead of time his only means of escape, hence my use of the term 'pre-determined response'.



ShotoNoob said:


> To me, the concept of bunkai is pretty straightforward.  The applications, then become more complex as the base form shown in kata must be adapted & applied to a particular self defense situation which we can only infer from the kata.


The concept of bunkai is straight forward. It is getting to the stage where you can utilise the bunkai without hesitation that takes the time and training. The applications themselves don't have to complex but you do need to instinctively recognise where in the bunkai you are, to be able to move to the next technique, if the move you have just tried has failed. You don't actually infer anything from the kata.



ShotoNoob said:


> In terms of kumite style, my personal style should be defined as "infighting."  I believe I have always used the Okinawan model which you describe "close quarter fighting," which I dub move-in-and-destroy."  This is generalized to include step-back-and-destroy, stand-still-and-destroy.  It's the opponent's actions that contribute to the choice of precise positional strategy....


I would define my style in similar terms although the 'step-back-and-destroy' would be more 'step-back-step-in-and-destroy'.



ShotoNoob said:


> However, contrary to yours & popular opinion, IMO, the "infighting concept," these tactical concepts I've spelled out are presented in the Japanese karates & Korean-karate based styles.   This highlight's one of my lead-in to calling such "traditional karates."


I don't have any issue with that. We each train to our own understanding. However, if we are actually using kata bunkai we must be using the principles outlined in the kata regarding position relative to our opponent and the angle and direction of the strike, the understanding that each technique is designed to be a finishing move, etc. if you are not doing that, I would argue that you are just fighting using the knowledge you have obtained from your 'traditional karate' teaching.



ShotoNoob said:


> Since I have dubbed my kumite style as "move in & destroy,"  In line with what K-Man I think may be talking about predetermined responses, the motion of the assailant will dictate or more accurately play a part in our response on how we move ourselves.


For me it is quite the opposite. Once my attacker has made the first move, assuming mine wasn't a pre-emptive strike and I have engaged, it is me determining his response. His choice, block or be hit. His act of blocking gives me his arm. The concept is really just the same as the sticking hand methods of the CMAs.



ShotoNoob said:


> However, I favor the "move-in" response because it accomplishes several working objectives.  We establish a presence that the attack will not go unanswered.  This typically startles the aggressively minded who may presume the defender will be put on the defensive & retreat or cover-up, etc..


This is how it was explained to me in Okinawa. The exact words, "you enter and engage and don't disengage until it is over".



ShotoNoob said:


> Secondly, it changes the technical dynamic where the spacing has changed therefore the initial sortie on the part of the attacker will likely fail.  The prone to failure will be completed by enacting defensive & offensive tactics made advantages by the move-in.  One of the tactical advantages is that the attacker's vulnerable body parts is now within reach & one or more exposed.  Furthermore, any committed technique by the attacker based on my position before I moved in, that target is now no longer where it was.  Moreover, my movement signals that I now may take any number of actions which the attacker is now faced with figuring out--BAM--too late!!!


Once you are engaged none of that really matters if you are using the bunkai and remember, the bunkai isn't designed to go for fifteen techniques. It is designed to finish the fight with the first strike. Only if the first strike fails do you move to the second.


ShotoNoob said:


> In discussing kumite, the fighting dynamic, I would replace the word Pre-determined with determine.


Again the terms used must be within your own understanding. For me it is definitely 'pre-determined'.


----------



## Hanzou (May 12, 2015)

Unfortunately, I'm forced to define Bunkai as a method to make up techniques that have nothing to do with the kata itself. I have yet to run across any consistent methodology to break down bunkai, nor have I seen anyone utilize bunkai in an alive manner. We only see bunkai utilized for demonstration purposes.

In my honest opinion, bunkai has been simply manufactured in order to give some meaning to kata practice; A practice that is rapidly losing ground to more direct methods of instruction that have abandoned the practice of kata altogether. I still believe that karate would be better off by eliminating kata, increase sparring practice, and teach the techniques themselves in a method similar to boxing or MMA.

That's simply MY opinion though.


----------



## K-man (May 12, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Unfortunately, I'm forced to define Bunkai as a method to make up techniques that have nothing to do with the kata itself. I have yet to run across any consistent methodology to break down bunkai, nor have I seen anyone utilize bunkai in an alive manner. We only see bunkai utilized for demonstration purposes.
> 
> In my honest opinion, bunkai has been simply manufactured in order to give some meaning to kata practice; A practice that is rapidly losing ground to more direct methods of instruction that have abandoned the practice of kata altogether. I still believe that karate would be better off by eliminating kata, increase sparring practice, and teach the techniques themselves in a method similar to boxing or MMA.
> 
> That's simply MY opinion though.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 12, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Unfortunately, I'm forced to define Bunkai as a method to make up techniques that have nothing to do with the kata itself. I have yet to run across any consistent methodology to break down bunkai, nor have I seen anyone utilize bunkai in an alive manner. We only see bunkai utilized for demonstration purposes.
> 
> In my honest opinion, bunkai has been simply manufactured in order to give some meaning to kata practice; A practice that is rapidly losing ground to more direct methods of instruction that have abandoned the practice of kata altogether. I still believe that karate would be better off by eliminating kata, increase sparring practice, and teach the techniques themselves in a method similar to boxing or MMA.
> 
> That's simply MY opinion though.


Since you do not train In karate, why would you care?


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 15, 2015)

K-man said:


> This discussion is splitting off from the 'Shotokan for SD' thread because it is just too mixed up to pursue a more detailed discussion.


|
Although your post speaks to the practice of bunkai, the way I see your explanation is more of a description of the practice of Okinawan karate.  You make very clear, though extensive which makes it difficult to paraphrase, your approach to self defensive by Okinawan standards.
|
I can related to your definition of predetermined responses.  I think there is a semantically overlap in what I am saying & what you are describing.  The way I think, however, suggests more KIME as opposed to instinct or PRE-determination.  The KIME I am referring to here is not just the colloquial version of mental focus usually referred to , but active decision making.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 15, 2015)

K-man said:


> I would define my style in similar terms although the 'step-back-and-destroy' would be more 'step-back-step-in-and-destroy'.


|
Perhaps by isolating out this narrow part of your comprehensive post, I will clarify my thinking.
|
I have posted illustrations of what have been considered kihon training (sometimes panned).  Yet the concepts in that training are precisely encompassed in your statement above.  The kihon alternatives of stand still, step back, & step in comprises base alternatives to repositioning.  We have established certain principles of repositioning.  Also @ the kihon level, we the exact example of step-back-and-step-in repositioning that you prefer or espouse.  We can either call this another principle or an adaptation of the first three alternatives, in principle.
|
Overall, I am no where near training specific bunkai on the sophistication level you are.  Using principles that I can apply & adapt, like you say, I can apply kihon karate technique so dynamically that I don't need I.A's sophistication technically.
|
My word picture.  You say if I block the opponent, he can continue the attack.  But even in Taikyoku kata, I do not block & stop.  I block & strike.  This is one of the great lessons in Taikyoku kata.
|
Moreover, it is the mind body union trained in these FIRST  CAUSE kata that provides the mental discipline to move so dynamically  the opponent cannot react fast enough against.  And on the mental side, It's not mental instinct alone.  It's KIME, includes KIME (as well as other mental skills).
|
this is also why I say Shotokan done well, though not trained to your traditional karate standards, is very effective for self defense.  The traditional karate principles I am taking about are foundational, not technical or so structurally sophisticated in actual training as represented by your Okinawan Goju ryu.....


----------



## K-man (May 15, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> I can related to your definition of predetermined responses.  I think there is a semantically overlap in what I am saying & what you are describing.  The way I think, however, suggests more KIME as opposed to instinct or PRE-determination.  The KIME I am referring to here is not just the colloquial version of mental focus usually referred to , but active decision making.


Just to clarify, how are you using the term 'Kime'. Not saying you don't use the term correctly but many others mean many different things by kime so before starting to discuss that we probably should have clarification.

Here is a start ...
What is Kime in Karate KARATE by Jesse


----------



## K-man (May 15, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> I have posted illustrations of what have been considered kihon training (sometimes panned).  Yet the concepts in that training are precisely encompassed in your statement above.  The kihon alternatives of stand still, step back, & step in comprises base alternatives to repositioning.  We have established certain principles of repositioning.  Also @ the kihon level, we the exact example of step-back-and-step-in repositioning that you prefer or espouse.  We can either call this another principle or an adaptation of the first three alternatives, in principle.


I don't have an issue with kihon. It is only through kihon than you can learn and understand karate. However, when it comes to using your karate in a martial sense, you have to be beyond kihon and that advancement is seen in most Shotokan sparring where some might say that the fighting is not what they see in the basic training. Just like the bunkai is the interpretation of kata, to me, jiu kumite is the interpretation of the kihon, however it is practised.



ShotoNoob said:


> Overall, I am no where near training specific bunkai on the sophistication level you are.  Using principles that I can apply & adapt, like you say, I can apply kihon karate technique so dynamically that I don't need I.A's sophistication technically.


Again, no problem. Iain is just adding a layer of understanding to the training that you can choose to incorporate or not. Those who say you don't need kata to fight are 100% right. But that doesn't mean that training bunkai doesn't have it's place.



ShotoNoob said:


> My word picture.  You say if I block the opponent, he can continue the attack.  But even in Taikyoku kata, I do not block & stop.  I block & strike.  This is one of the great lessons in Taikyoku kata.


In Taikyoku kata it is normally block then strike. If it is block and strike in the one movement then I can accept that, even though the concept of 'blocking' has no place in my understanding of any martial art.



ShotoNoob said:


> Moreover, it is the mind body union trained in these FIRST  CAUSE kata that provides the mental discipline to move so dynamically  the opponent cannot react fast enough against.  And on the mental side, It's not mental instinct alone.  It's KIME, includes KIME (as well as other mental skills).


To be honest, you have lost me here. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by First Cause kata.


ShotoNoob said:


> this is also why I say Shotokan done well, though not trained to your traditional karate standards, is very effective for self defense.  The traditional karate principles I am taking about are foundational, not technical or so structurally sophisticated in actual training as represented by your Okinawan Goju ryu.....


Again, I agree totally. I have seen some really good Shotokan practitioners and I have no doubt they could all look after themselves in a self defence situation.


----------



## tshadowchaser (May 16, 2015)

I look at Bunkai as a way of looking at a movement within the form and learning what that movement can be not what it looks like. So many times we are told a certain movement is such and such and that is all we know it as but it may means so much much more if we think about it. 
I truly believe that many of the older forms where simplified in their explanation for beginners and children and that it was not until years of study that people where told other meaning of the moves or discovered them for themselves only to have the instructor smile when told of the discovery and say "What took you so long to see that"


----------



## K-man (May 16, 2015)

tshadowchaser said:


> I look at Bunkai as a way of looking at a movement within the form and learning what that movement can be not what it looks like. So many times we are told a certain movement is such and such and that is all we know it as but it may means so much much more if we think about it.
> I truly believe that many of the older forms where simplified in their explanation for beginners and children and that it was not until years of study that people where told other meaning of the moves or discovered them for themselves only to have the instructor smile when told of the discovery and say "What took you so long to see that"


Exactly.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 20, 2015)

K-man said:


> Just to clarify, how are you using the term 'Kime'. Not saying you don't use the term correctly but many others mean many different things by kime so before starting to discuss that we probably should have clarification.
> 
> Here is a start ...
> What is Kime in Karate KARATE by Jesse


|
Yes, I read the article linked.  And that could very well be the definition of "kime."
|
The problem is in an overall sense defining & describing the mental dimension of what I call traditional karate.  KIME is defining & descriptive of part of the mental dimension.  But is the strictly biomechanical application referred to in the linked article the original, complete & correct or only proper interpretation of "kime."   Beats me.
|
I have had karate instructors generally refer to KIME along the lines of some of the definitions discounted or discredited by the article linked.  Do theses instructors local to me really know?  Or are the sources Karate by Jesse blog uses, are they the ones in the know?  So what is KIME?


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 20, 2015)

Defining "Bunkai"
|
I'm still digesting your explicitly precise description of Okinawan Goju ryu practice of bunkai.  Right now, I'm going to adopt a working conclusion that your description of your curriculum practice of bunkai is 100% correct by Okinawan tradition.  I believe you have thought this through & through.
|
What I am more interested in doing is answering fundamental conceptual questions.  Getting these universal traditional martial art concepts right, here traditional karate concepts right, provides to me a martial skill foundation that eclipses the structure of the style, the curriculum, and the particular practice of bunkai.
|
The Shotokan karate manuals I've seen as well as other traditional martial art manuals all speak in general to the mind & body trained together.  So what does this mean?   It means that the mental dimension of martial training is especially important, compared to sport-based fighting styles such as boxing, and the way BJJ is typically practiced, etc.  That is my interpretation.  KIME, then is an part or component of mental training.  There are other components, such as the "mental clarity" capability written about in another MT thread.  Is KIME covered by "mental clarity," is KIME separate but complimentary to "Mental Clarity," is KIME redundant to "mental clarity?"
|
To me, all these conceptual questions must be answered in order to tap the power of traditional karate.  It's not enough to define a traditionally acceptable definition of KIME, or to create and perform a traditionally correct curriculum of bunkai training according to Okinawan Goju ryu traditions.  We have to know what's really driving these traditions.  Karate bunkai, to me, is not traditional bunkai whether it be Japanese Goju Kai or Okinawan Goju Ryu unless the core concepts that drive the human capability behind the physical movements are what the traditional karate masters have sought to define.
|
Bunaki to me, is not really defined by close quarter grappling, one bunkai set meant to end the fight, etc. as you have so correctly laid out by your curriculum.  Bunaki to me is the ability to defeat the opponent quickly & efficiently.   That applied goal is done through mind / body unity with the mind exacting precise control over the body at all times.  Through mental discipline, the right technique is applied in the right way done at the right time.  The physical manifestation of that technique, whether it be the Shotokan conventional reverse point fighting punch or Okinawan bunkai of some sort must be driven by the process I've describe in order to qualify as traditional karate.. KIME, however defined or described or utilized, forms a part of that requisite mental discipline.
|
Bunkai, or anything else in traditional karate for that matter, must be driven by mental discipline, of which KIME is a necessary component.  The physical manifestation of the technique, while done in concert with the mind's direction, such physical action is completely secondary and subject to the mental dimension, including the mental process of KIME.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 20, 2015)

SUMMARY OF KIME, BUNKAI.
|
1. Traditional karate [my definition] is based on mind / body union.
2. The mind & body work as a highly coordinated unit.
3. In the process of the mind & body working as a unit, the mind is dominant and consciously controls the body at all times.  The mind exerts mental discipline over the body at all times.
4. KIME  comprises a part or component of that mental discipline.  KIME represents part of the mental function exerting control over the physical function.
5. TO ME, KIME has some commonality with the KARATE by Jesse article definitions, both of the article's author and the other definitions given.
6. KIME, to me, has at least a two-fold meaning.  One: the tensing of tall the musculature in the body in order to  BE ABLE channel the strength of the entire body into a technique.  NOTE, I said "be able."  So, there is a decision made to tense the musculature, and also by how much.  Second, KIME necessarily involves a broader connotation of decision making in what technique & how to enact or apply that technique when confronted by a threatening situation.  KIME then, carries into the element of "mental clarity," where we make considered decisions in martial counters.
7. So KIME, to me, has two interpretations which function together.  A mentally-disciplined bio mechanical contraction or tensing of the muscles ( and subsequent relaxation) to produce power, AND the capability to make tactically correct & effective technical decisions.
|
Gathering & applying the strength of the whole body (as needed), and exercising tactical choices which together result in effective martial action.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 20, 2015)

Again, your posts are very comprehensive in terms of describing the curriculum, the technical progression.  I'll just try to hit some points to shed some light on what I've learned.


K-man said:


> 1.I don't have an issue with kihon. It is only through kihon than you can learn and understand karate. However, when it comes to using your karate in a martial sense, you have to be beyond kihon and that advancement is seen in most Shotokan sparring where some might say that the fighting is not what they see in the basic training. Just like the bunkai is the interpretation of kata, to me, jiu kumite is the interpretation of the kihon, however it is practised.


|
This is a huge and expansive point you've made.  All correct, TMU.  Yet I feel what is missed to make it complete is that kihon trained & executed under the mental discipline guidelines (including the KIME I've defined & described) I've outlined above, kihon karate becomes very dynamic & effective in it's own right.  Very, very effective.  This is where I have always differed with you--on kihon.  I'll speak to interpretation into sparring below.



K-man said:


> 2. Again, no problem. Iain is just adding a layer of understanding to the training that you can choose to incorporate or not. Those who say you don't need kata to fight are 100% right. But that doesn't mean that training bunkai doesn't have it's place.


|
To me, the value of IA's work is that he has given a better toolbox of techniques, better practical applications from the principles represented in kihon and other traditional karate training form.  He's added sophistication which fulfill a purpose of advancing one to being a better fighter, or better @ self defense.
|
From my perspective, of approaching from the conceptual base I've described, there is no discord or conflict between kihon, kata, or bunkai.  You don't need bunkai from kata to be a very effective karate fighter (self defense).  You need the conceptual base I've talked about.  With the conceptual foundation properly laid, then kihon karate becomes very strong, very effective because one's our actions are very dynamic (quick, powerful as need be, precise & on target, correct in matching application....)  IA's work only makes your karate better because the design & application are more practical and specifically effective in certain effect, just as your painted in your "word pictures."  But it's the requisite mental discipline behind I.A.'s bunkai that makes the "traditional karate" difference.



K-man said:


> 3. In Taikyoku kata it is normally block then strike. If it is block and strike in the one movement then I can accept that, even though the concept of 'blocking' has no place in my understanding of any martial art.


|
Well, of course yours is a legitimate interpretation.  But IMO, it is not the comprehensive interpretation.  The comprehensive interpretation is not a standard of physically preferred or advantageous action.  The comprehensive interpretation starts with the mental & physical working in unity.  Then the mind, mental discipline dominates the physical action.  This is the value of training the kihon 'FIRST CAUSE" KATA.  To develop mind & body unity, to develop the strong mental discipline of the mind over the body, with mental qualities of KIME as I 've described as included in that mental discipline.  And there's more to the mental dimension than KIME....  That's the thrust of "FIRST CAUSE" training.... TMU.
|
This is why I can block an opponent's strike by merely checking the incoming blow.  I can KIME to do that.  I can also KIME to break his forearm or wrist bones (may not succeed).  This is why I can KIME block an opponent's strike and KIME counter strike with a simple straight or a reverse punch so dynamically he is unable to react appropriately.  It's really a kihon version (in physical structure) of your bunkai practice.  I could KIME to block & strike simultaneously just as you propose.  However, I also can KIME to do the 1-block, 2 strike so mentally disciplined that I am quite successful with that alternative.  The mind / bondy unity in place, I can bang the simpleton kihon out quite quickly & powerfully (& accurately) ....the FIRST CAUSE FOUNDATION is in place.  There are advantages to a 1-block, 2-counter strike tactic, you know.
|
The Shotokan karate syllabus specifically spells all this out tactically in the concept of "sen," or initiative by my understanding.
|


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 20, 2015)

MY DEFEAT OF SENIOR BELT "KICKBOXER" VIGNETTE.
|
My story on how I early on defeated the aggressive kickboxer type who fought with a more common competitive style.  Well Tez and some others kinda dumped on it, called me for bragging.
|
When really, it was a prime illustration of how kihon karate technique, powered by mental discipline, overcomes the superior athlete.  It was an example of the achievement (mine) of skill sought in FIRST CAUSE training.  Mind & body unity, with the mind driving every action consciously.
|
It's not just that I moved-in physically,  It's that I KIME'd in deliberately and KIME'd just enough force to deflect his Right Straight / Cross which had been aimed directly into my face.  Kinda like that softer block you  talked about in Goju (but really not so internally sophisticated I've sure).  All techniques including the block were chambered according to kihon principles, not exactly kihon form.  This is because we change the kihon training form to adapt the form to combat, yet keep the same principles of chambering.  My next move caught  the kickboxer completely off guard, just like the concept of your bunkai "word picture," mine a kihon follow-on taught to white belts.  Of course, done with black-belt mental skills (including KIME, but more).  Third, KIME'd 2nd Follow-on strike meant to end the fight KIME'd power strike) ,,, maybe not... then KIME on to next intelligent move as need be.
|
Traditional karate and everything under it is a mental discipline.  That's the over-riding theme in kihon kata meant to impart this FIRST CAUSE foundation.  And every part of traditional karate training (as I define it) is meant to do the same....


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 20, 2015)

Great discussion on defining Bunkai.  Very enjoyable so far!


----------



## K-man (May 20, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Yes, I read the article linked.  And that could very well be the definition of "kime."
> |
> The problem is in an overall sense defining & describing the mental dimension of what I call traditional karate.  KIME is defining & descriptive of part of the mental dimension.  But is the strictly biomechanical application referred to in the linked article the original, complete & correct or only proper interpretation of "kime."   Beats me.
> ...


I'm happy with that answer. In Jesse's article he is making it black and white but even in English words have multiple meanings and normally it takes context to determine what is actually being said. In Japanese it gets harder again, even for the Japanese. One of my friends hired a Japanese interpreter to translate at one of Masaji Taira's seminars and she had no understanding of the words used in the martial art context. A very close friend of mine, also Japanese, has had similar problems in understanding karate terms so really, I think we will have to just accept that even though kime might have a single dictionary meaning in the Japanese language, in martial arts it has been adapted to mean different things to different people.


----------



## K-man (May 20, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> I'm still digesting your explicitly precise description of Okinawan Goju ryu practice of bunkai.  Right now, I'm going to adopt a working conclusion that your description of your curriculum practice of bunkai is 100% correct by Okinawan tradition.  I believe you have thought this through & through.


Not quite. There is no curriculum for the study of the bunkai. Bunkai like 'kime' means different things to different people so the study of Bunkai is an individual thing. There is a general understanding of what Bunkai is but it is up to the individual to create their own Bunkai from any particular kata.


ShotoNoob said:


> What I am more interested in doing is answering fundamental conceptual questions.  Getting these universal traditional martial art concepts right, here traditional karate concepts right, provides to me a martial skill foundation that eclipses the structure of the style, the curriculum, and the particular practice of bunkai.


That's fine, but is there really simply one foundation. Okinawan karate has shorter stances and a more front on kamae than the Japanese styles. In particular Shotokan has exaggerated stances and because of the use of high kicks the kamae position is also very different, to me an example of how the sporting influence has modified the basic style.


ShotoNoob said:


> The Shotokan karate manuals I've seen as well as other traditional martial art manuals all speak in general to the mind & body trained together.  So what does this mean?   It means that the mental dimension of martial training is especially important, compared to sport-based fighting styles such as boxing, and the way BJJ is typically practiced, etc.  That is my interpretation.  KIME, then is an part or component of mental training.  There are other components, such as the "mental clarity" capability written about in another MT thread.  Is KIME covered by "mental clarity," is KIME separate but complimentary to "Mental Clarity," is KIME redundant to "mental clarity?"


I was discussing this with a senior Japanese Goju guy some years back. Goju meaning hard and soft has what I call hard Ki and soft Ki. Hard Ki is the easiest to understand as it is simply mind and body together. His understanding of hard Ki was to me a correct interpretation. When ready to fight he was fired up with intent and just going out to destroy his opponent. As the intent diminishes so the Ki aspect softens but it is still there in the practise of kihon.

Within this context, I don't see kime being part of it at all really unless it is where the mind is empty and there is a relaxed focus on what is happening around you. Now you could say that in the original meaning of kime we are all set and ready to go.



ShotoNoob said:


> To me, all these conceptual questions must be answered in order to tap the power of traditional karate.  It's not enough to define a traditionally acceptable definition of KIME, or to create and perform a traditionally correct curriculum of bunkai training according to Okinawan Goju ryu traditions.  We have to know what's really driving these traditions.  Karate bunkai, to me, is not traditional bunkai whether it be Japanese Goju Kai or Okinawan Goju Ryu unless the core concepts that drive the human capability behind the physical movements are what the traditional karate masters have sought to define.


This is getting pretty deep. How or why does the Bunkai need to drive the human capability beyond the physical movements? All the Bunkai is, is an individual interpretation of the kata that you can use in a conflict. It can be as simple or as complex as the individual determines. I don't believe it was ever defined by the masters. Bunkai is an area of individual endeavour. 



ShotoNoob said:


> Bunaki to me, is not really defined by close quarter grappling, one bunkai set meant to end the fight, etc. as you have so correctly laid out by your curriculum.  Bunaki to me is the ability to defeat the opponent quickly & efficiently.   That applied goal is done through mind / body unity with the mind exacting precise control over the body at all times.  Through mental discipline, the right technique is applied in the right way done at the right time.  The physical manifestation of that technique, whether it be the Shotokan conventional reverse point fighting punch or Okinawan bunkai of some sort must be driven by the process I've describe in order to qualify as traditional karate.. KIME, however defined or described or utilized, forms a part of that requisite mental discipline.


I would suggest you are talking about two different things here. How you control your body while fighting is the same whether you are using the concepts of Bunkai or not. Whether you fight with mind and body together or with mind and body separate is up to the individual and his level of training. Certainly either way involves kime.



ShotoNoob said:


> Bunkai, or anything else in traditional karate for that matter, must be driven by mental discipline, of which KIME is a necessary component.  The physical manifestation of the technique, while done in concert with the mind's direction, such physical action is completely secondary and subject to the mental dimension, including the mental process of KIME.


I can go with that, but I don't see the need to single out Bunkai for separate attention. It's just a variation of "learn the technique, forget the technique, use the technique".


----------



## K-man (May 20, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> SUMMARY OF KIME, BUNKAI.


I'm sorry but I cannot find anything in this post relating to Bunkai so I will approach it as a discussion of kime.



ShotoNoob said:


> 1. Traditional karate [my definition] is based on mind / body union.


I would suggest that is is much more complex than that. To understand "mind / body union" I think you need to go back a hundred years or more to China and look at the CMAs that formed the base of what we now know as karate. Those styles are basically internal styles and that is almost the opposite to what we see in most karate today which is basically a hard style. So how did it change so dramatically? I might suggest a lot of it had to do with karate becoming a fitness training exercise in the schools in the traditional Japanese way of lining people up and drilling in unison. And, in Japan, the transition of karate from a means of defending yourself to a competitive sport.

Having had the privilege of discussing this topic with Tetsuhiro Hokama in Okinawa, it is apparent that today's hard style of karate that you see around is nothing like the original Goju that he was taught. 


ShotoNoob said:


> 2. The mind & body work as a highly coordinated unit.


Technically, this statement is correct but what we see is mind and body working together which leads to both attacker and defender using the same timing which leads to a physical clash. In this situation, assuming similar ability, the bigger stronger person will win. Hence in most top level competitions there are weight classes. To overcome this the older traditional styles utilised broken timing, something you also see in the top levels of aikido.



ShotoNoob said:


> 3. In the process of the mind & body working as a unit, the mind is dominant and consciously controls the body at all times.  The mind exerts mental discipline over the body at all times.


Now here I have to disagree totally. What you are describing here is the beginner level of any martial art. When you are thinking about what you are doing you cannot respond instinctively. What you need is 'mushin', mind of no mind. There the body responds instinctively from a totally relaxed state. As I have quoted previously, we learn a technique (mind in control), forget the technique (empty the mind) and use the technique (no involvement of the mind). This means no conscious control of the body by the mind.



ShotoNoob said:


> 4. KIME  comprises a part or component of that mental discipline.  KIME represents part of the mental function exerting control over the physical function.


I really don't see it this way at all. Certainly kime by any description is a component of mental discipline but I really don't see it exerting control over physical function.



ShotoNoob said:


> 5. TO ME, KIME has some commonality with the KARATE by Jesse article definitions, both of the article's author and the other definitions given.


For me, perhaps more what he says it isn't rather than what he saysit is.



ShotoNoob said:


> 6. KIME, to me, has at least a two-fold meaning.  One: the tensing of tall the musculature in the body in order to  BE ABLE channel the strength of the entire body into a technique.  NOTE, I said "be able."  So, there is a decision made to tense the musculature, and also by how much.  Second, KIME necessarily involves a broader connotation of decision making in what technique & how to enact or apply that technique when confronted by a threatening situation.  KIME then, carries into the element of "mental clarity," where we make considered decisions in martial counters.


I think the important thing here is, kime is what it means to you. What it means to me is irrelevant.



ShotoNoob said:


> 7. So KIME, to me, has two interpretations which function together.  A mentally-disciplined bio mechanical contraction or tensing of the muscles ( and subsequent relaxation) to produce power, AND the capability to make tactically correct & effective technical decisions.


What I think you have encapsulated here is the difference between Japanese and Okinawan styles. We don't do that at all and her in lies a lot of the confusion others have when they say we don't fight as we train. Okinawan karateka, at least the ones I am familiar with do fight as they train but because it is not like the karate people see elsewhere they claim it is fighting like a (...insert whatever style you want, here...) fighter. The opposite is also true. Very few karate guys would fight like the training you are describing and that is why karate is taking a bashing on this forum from some of the MMA guys. Being stuck in a rigid deep stance is not the way we fight. I come from a Japanese Goju background and our training was very similar to Shotokan. We never even sparred the way we trained the kihon, let alone tried it in a tournament.



ShotoNoob said:


> Gathering & applying the strength of the whole body (as needed), and exercising tactical choices which together result in effective martial action.


Again we will have to disagree. I teach to use minimal strength to develop maximum power.


----------



## K-man (May 20, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> This is a huge and expansive point you've made.  All correct, TMU.  Yet I feel what is missed to make it complete is that kihon trained & executed under the mental discipline guidelines (including the KIME I've defined & described) I've outlined above, kihon karate becomes very dynamic & effective in it's own right.  Very, very effective.  This is where I have always differed with you--on kihon.  I'll speak to interpretation into sparring below.


What I think you are missing is that kihon is kihon. It is not designed for fighting, it is not at all practical for fighting. Kihon means basic. We learn the alphabet (basics), we string the basics together to print words (basics) and we string the words into sentences (still basics). When we write a letter we could still print each letter individually (basics) but normally we move into the written form (advanced). I see an enormous amount of kihon karate around but I have never seen it used in fighting. If you are using it that way, more strength to your arm.



ShotoNoob said:


> To me, the value of IA's work is that he has given a better toolbox of techniques, better practical applications from the principles represented in kihon and other traditional karate training form.  He's added sophistication which fulfill a purpose of advancing one to being a better fighter, or better @ self defense.


Again the tool box idea is the understanding I had of kata until I came across some of Dillman's work about twelve years ago. Iain's work is not about giving you better tools. The tools were always there. What he is doing is showing us how he uses the tools. More than that, kata contains a whole heap of individual components that must be assembled in sequence. Iain's work not only shows how to use the tools, it shows us how to build a system to fight with as well.



ShotoNoob said:


> From my perspective, of approaching from the conceptual base I've described, there is no discord or conflict between kihon, kata, or bunkai.  You don't need bunkai from kata to be a very effective karate fighter (self defense).


Agree totally.



ShotoNoob said:


> You need the conceptual base I've talked about.  With the conceptual foundation properly laid, then kihon karate becomes very strong, very effective because one's our actions are very dynamic (quick, powerful as need be, precise & on target, correct in matching application....)  IA's work only makes your karate better because the design & application are more practical and specifically effective in certain effect, just as your painted in your "word pictures."  But it's the requisite mental discipline behind I.A.'s bunkai that makes the "traditional karate" difference.


I have to disagree here for all the reasons I have put into other replies. Kihon was never designed for real fighting. Kihon is what is used to teach you the system, not to use the system and this is the problem caused when karate moved into the schools. What you have is a situation akin to cooking an omelette where you can't break the eggs.



ShotoNoob said:


> Well, of course yours is a legitimate interpretation.  But IMO, it is not the comprehensive interpretation.  The comprehensive interpretation is not a standard of physically preferred or advantageous action.  The comprehensive interpretation starts with the mental & physical working in unity.  Then the mind, mental discipline dominates the physical action.  This is the value of training the kihon 'FIRST CAUSE" KATA.  To develop mind & body unity, to develop the strong mental discipline of the mind over the body, with mental qualities of KIME as I 've described as included in that mental discipline.  And there's more to the mental dimension than KIME....  That's the thrust of "FIRST CAUSE" training.... TMU.


Again we will have to agree to disagree. Focusing on the mental and physical together is what I used to teach before becoming involved with Okinawan karate. Your understanding is from your experience, mine is from my experience. They will always be different. I have always said that the Pinan/Hian kata were more useful than the Goju Kai taikyoku kata but I see no need at all for them in my training. The basic Goju kata are more than sufficient.



ShotoNoob said:


> This is why I can block an opponent's strike by merely checking the incoming blow.  I can KIME to do that.  I can also KIME to break his forearm or wrist bones (may not succeed).  This is why I can KIME block an opponent's strike and KIME counter strike with a simple straight or a reverse punch so dynamically he is unable to react appropriately.  It's really a kihon version (in physical structure) of your bunkai practice.  I could KIME to block & strike simultaneously just as you propose.  However, I also can KIME to do the 1-block, 2 strike so mentally disciplined that I am quite successful with that alternative.  The mind / bondy unity in place, I can bang the simpleton kihon out quite quickly & powerfully (& accurately) ....the FIRST CAUSE FOUNDATION is in place.  There are advantages to a 1-block, 2-counter strike tactic, you know.


As I said, if you can do that more power to you. I disagree totally with that concept. Now it may be that I am not understandining you correctly but using 'basic' karate to fight with is not within my understanding. Beginners are taught basics. Someone using basics at an advanced level would be what I have seen described as an 'advanced beginner'.



ShotoNoob said:


> The Shotokan karate syllabus specifically spells all this out tactically in the concept of "sen," or initiative by my understanding.


Shotokan is Shotokan. I have no real depth of knowledge about it.


----------



## K-man (May 20, 2015)

Boy this has been quite exhausting!



ShotoNoob said:


> My story on how I early on defeated the aggressive kickboxer type who fought with a more common competitive style.  Well Tez and some others kinda dumped on it, called me for bragging.


Whatever. The important thing ... you won.



ShotoNoob said:


> When really, it was a prime illustration of how kihon karate technique, powered by mental discipline, overcomes the superior athlete.  It was an example of the achievement (mine) of skill sought in FIRST CAUSE training.  Mind & body unity, with the mind driving every action consciously.


I would have to see it to comment.



ShotoNoob said:


> It's not just that I moved-in physically,  It's that I KIME'd in deliberately and KIME'd just enough force to deflect his Right Straight / Cross which had been aimed directly into my face.  Kinda like that softer block you  talked about in Goju (but really not so internally sophisticated I've sure).  All techniques including the block were chambered according to kihon principles, not exactly kihon form.  This is because we change the kihon training form to adapt the form to combat, yet keep the same principles of chambering.  My next move caught  the kickboxer completely off guard, just like the concept of your bunkai "word picture," mine a kihon follow-on taught to white belts.  Of course, done with black-belt mental skills (including KIME, but more).  Third, KIME'd 2nd Follow-on strike meant to end the fight KIME'd power strike) ,,, maybe not... then KIME on to next intelligent move as need be.


You see, I would say that this has very little to do with kime and the critical thing is that you say you didn't exactly use kihon form. That is what I have been saying all along. You said; _"*This is because we change the kihon training form to adapt the form to combat*, yet keep the same principles of chambering."_
That is using advanced technique, not kihon. Your combat form is based on the kihon but it is NOT kihon. As to the chambering bit ... that's an entirely different discussion but suffice to say chambering has nothing to do with sport based fighting. If you are striking from a chambered position I would say your defence is compromised.



ShotoNoob said:


> Traditional karate and everything under it is a mental discipline.  That's the over-riding theme in kihon kata meant to impart this FIRST CAUSE foundation.  And every part of traditional karate training (as I define it) is meant to do the same....


Cool, whatever works for you.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 20, 2015)

Reading posts like K-man's above is what makes a forum like MartialTalk great!


----------



## K-man (May 20, 2015)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Reading posts like K-man's above is what makes a forum like MartialTalk great!


Thanks Brian. I appreciate the compliment.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> I'm happy with that answer. In Jesse's article he is making it black and white but even in English words have multiple meanings and normally it takes context to determine what is actually being said.


|
The value in the Karate by Jesse article on KIME is that he puts the concept in simple, understandable and digestible terms.  If if the definition is not complete or comprehensive, the author has moved everyone forward in understanding.  These mental processes are intangible & complex in function & action.  Getting a handle alone is tough.
|


K-man said:


> In Japanese it gets harder again, even for the Japanese. One of my friends hired a Japanese interpreter to translate at one of Masaji Taira's seminars and she had no understanding of the words used in the martial art context. A very close friend of mine, also Japanese, has had similar problems in understanding karate terms so really, I think we will have to just accept that even though kime might have a single dictionary meaning in the Japanese language, in martial arts it has been adapted to mean different things to different people.


|
Yes, the Japanese are more "colorful" in their approach to language, TMU.  It's  a kind of a cultural sophistication, if you will, in expressing the human experience.
|
And this is why I value the Shotokan karate style so highly, because of the founder's stress on fundamental concepts.  KIME is stressed over & over & over by staunch Shotokan traditionalist's (Funakoshi style).  Whether KIME is focus, attention to bio-mechanical movement, decision making, etc., the stress on the mental dimension is critically important.
|
There is a very large martial art audience both inside & outside TMA that believes that live sparring & full contact, resisting opponent's is what make's one martial ability "come alive."  On the contrary, it is the development of the mental abilities including that represented by KIME, that makes traditional martial arts "come alive."
|
The fact that Shotokan is practiced in form as a sport (as I believe you have pointed out), it is really the practice of Shotokan as a sport, purely physical training, that causes Shotokan's miserable failures in application, MMA, etc.  IMHO.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> There is a very large martial art audience both inside & outside TMA that believes that live sparring & full contact, resisting opponent's is what make's one martial ability "come alive."  On the contrary, it is the development of the mental abilities including that represented by KIME, that makes traditional martial arts "come alive."
> |
> The fact that Shotokan is practiced in form as a sport (as I believe you have pointed out), it is really the practice of Shotokan as a sport, purely physical training, that causes Shotokan's miserable failures in application, MMA, etc.  IMHO.


|
To quote myself, I will offer a simplified explanation, just like KARATE By Jesse style, of why the grappler cannot succeed in closing the distance on me for a takedown any more than the aggressive kickboxer can over power me with his assault.  The concept of KIME applies to universally against any assault of any kind or nature.  The 'bunkai,' if you will against a striker, will necessaryily change for when facing a grappler.  But just as you say in your discussion of bunkai, we never know what exactly the opponent will do.
|


K-man said:


> Just to clarify, how are you using the term 'Kime'. Not saying you don't use the term correctly but many others mean many different things by kime so before starting to discuss that we probably should have clarification.
> 
> Here is a start ...


So in your words, the predetermined response changes for an attack by a grappler vs. striker.  The dynamic of KIME, however, is a universal against grappler or striker.  It is KIME that powers my response.  The physical technique, the choice tactic, the selection of particular bunkai, is all done under the mental umbrella, including KIME.
|
This is why I say the nature of the assault DETERMINES my response, or rather points to the alternatives (you say predetermined).  Some of the difference is semantics.  The correct application of KIME, to me, involves active decision making and adaptation of tactics, techniques, amount of force, degree of chambering, etc, etc, etc.
|
I would conclude that I am not relying on the active training of bunkai to the extent you are by any means.  I am relying on dynamic movement powered by KIME.  The technique's effectiveness is primarily generated by mental disciplined application of the appropriate amount of speed & power & accuracy & positioning, targeting, chambering for effect & follow-on technique, etc.
|
SIMPLIFIED EXAMPLE:  Striker opponent throws a straight kick to my abdomen, I can apply KIME & counterkick & deflect that kick.  Or, I can KIME shift and counter kick his abdomen, as his kick misses 'cause I've shifted.
|
A Gracie protege ducks in and goes for my midsection to manhandle a takedown, I KIME kick to deflect his arms or body stalling his advance or knock him off course.  Or, I KIME shift to his duck and kick or knee to his head as he ducks in.
|
Although the physical form of  the attack has differed (grappler vs. striker), the KIME process powering a kihon karate response is precisely the same operation.
|
Notice that against the grappler posing a takedown, if I KIME to kick sooner, he is farther away on his closing the distance.  If I KIME later, I use a knee because he is closer.  Either, way, my KIME controls the situation, not the attacking grappler.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |The fact that Shotokan is practiced in form as a sport (as I believe you have pointed out), it is really the practice of Shotokan as a sport, purely physical training, that causes Shotokan's miserable failures in application, MMA, etc.  IMHO.


Interesting concept but I might suggest that in MMA where it may have failed it is more likely that the competitor hasn't achieved an appropriate level of complementary skills to compete with grapplers with stand up fighting skills. I'm sure the Shotokan karateka by even entering an MMA competition would have superior fighting skills to the average Shotokan practitioner. 

However, I would like to keep the thread on bunkai if we can. Once we introduce sport into the discussion the thread will be hijacked.


----------



## Drose427 (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> Interesting concept but I might suggest that in MMA where it may have failed it is more likely that the competitor hasn't achieved an appropriate level of complementary skills to compete with grapplers with stand up fighting skills. I'm sure the karateka by even entering an MMA competition would have superior skills to the average





ShotoNoob said:


> |
> The value in the Karate by Jesse article on KIME is that he puts the concept in simple, understandable and digestible terms.  If if the definition is not complete or comprehensive, the author has moved everyone forward in understanding.  These mental processes are intangible & complex in function & action.  Getting a handle alone is tough.
> |
> 
> ...



K-Mans is closer to the big reason,

THis is why in striking only mediums, i,e kickboxing, Karate, TKD, TSD, etc flourished. Many people even today still do with those styles as their base.

The biggest issue you see if you watch TMA guys transition to Kickboxing as their compeition of choice, is they stay pretty hell bent on fighting sparring like a point tournament, or whatever competitions they came from previously. 

If one starts training for full contact bouts, like Benny the jet and superfoot did, theyll do fine. Training doesnt even have to be changed, full and semi contact do nearly all the same drills. Especially coming from a competition focused school

But you have to train with your competition in mind. 

In MMA Kickboxing, Sport TKD, etc. many times the guys who regularly compete dont do forms and SD drills as much as other students. They;; still do them, but theyre back seated. 

You cant do one hour of free sparring based drills, and 4 hours of forms and expect to be a sparring world champ..

Although youd probably have some damn fine forms!


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> To quote myself, I will offer a simplified explanation, just like KARATE By Jesse style, of why the grappler cannot succeed in closing the distance on me for a takedown any more than the aggressive kickboxer can over power me with his assault.


Wow! That is a huge statement. I don't think there would be anyone else anywhere that would claim they are immune to a takedown by a skilled grappler or being overpowered by a top kick boxer. After that it comes down to a matter of degree. 



ShotoNoob said:


> The concept of KIME applies to universally against any assault of any kind or nature.  The 'bunkai,' if you will against a striker, will necessaryily change for when facing a grappler.  But just as you say in your discussion of bunkai, we never know what exactly the opponent will do.


This is fundamentally wrong. I think that regardless of what you really mean it is coming across that you view kime as some sort of shield that will protect you from any attack. 

Now, the bunkai will not change at all. Whether you can utilise bunkai or not is what will change. If you are using bunkai you are in control of the situation. I don't believe you can use bunkai if you are not in *total* control. So against a striker or kick boxer etc, you cannot use bunkai until you engage and control. Bunkai is hands on. It doesn't work in a free sparring situation. It is the same against a grappler. Against an accomplished grappler I would suggest that you won't be using much bunkai and if he takes you to the ground there will be almost zero chance of using bunkai. 



ShotoNoob said:


> So in your words, the predetermined response changes for an attack by a grappler vs. striker.  The dynamic of KIME, however, is a universal against grappler or striker.  It is KIME that powers my response.  The physical technique, the choice tactic, the selection of particular bunkai, is all done under the mental umbrella, including KIME.


You haven't understood what I am calling a predetermined response. If I have control of your left arm using a left hand hold and I strike with a forearm to the right side of your head with my right I will guarantee you will raise your right arm to protect. That is the predetermined response. If you prove me wrong you will be hit and I will continue to hit until you respond by lifting your arm or you fall down. 

Predetermined response has precisely zero to do with kime. One way or the other kime is within you, not a physical manefestation.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> Just to clarify, how are you using the term 'Kime'. Not saying you don't use the term correctly but many others mean many different things by kime so before starting to discuss that we probably should have clarification.
> 
> Here is a start ....


|
They may be other Shotokan terms (other karate style terminology) to describe the mental processes.  Tang Soo Do talks about the 8 key concepts, and a raft of other principles.  What's important in KIME is to also apply (decide) the requisite amount of power or force in order to have a disabling effect on your opponent overall... precisely as you advocated in your application of bunkai.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

Drose427 said:


> In MMA Kickboxing, Sport TKD, etc. many times the guys who regularly compete dont do forms and SD drills as much as other students. They still do them, but they're back seated.
> 
> You cant do one hour of free sparring based drills, and 4 hours of forms and expect to be a sparring world champ..
> 
> Although you'd probably have some damn fine forms!


The guys who compete don't do much in the way of forms because forms have no real relevance to their style of fighting. Forms alone have little value apart from training kihon or basics. The value of the forms is in the applications within the forms that we train as bunkai. Bunkai has zero application in free sparring and it is not designed for competition against skilled opponents. 

Can I just say again. You don't need to know forms or bunkai to fight. Bunkai is a specialised type of training that appeals to some of us and not to others. Because some people, with a vested interest in a different style of martial art, put bunkai down is testament to their ignorance, not the value of the bunkai.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> They may be other Shotokan terms (other karate style terminology) to describe the mental processes.  Tang Soo Do talks about the 8 key concepts, and a raft of other principles.  What's important in KIME is to also apply (decide) the requisite amount of power or force in order to have a disabling effect on your opponent overall... precisely as you advocated in your application of bunkai.


Again, that is totally at odds with my understanding of kime. Kime to me is a state of mind. In Aikido, two or even three of Koichi Tohei's four principles would be encompassed in kime. Maintain centre, relax completely and extend Ki are those three.

Determining the amount of force required has absolutely nothing to do with kime and really it is not what I was saying at all. If I am going to use a knife hand strike it will be with full power, not variable power. You are confusing that with selection of technique. If I don't need to hit someone I will choose a restraining technique. I won't hit softly. Applied to bunkai the only variability there would be, do I maintain a lock or do I destroy the joint? Nothing to do with kime.


----------



## Drose427 (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> The guys who compete don't do much in the way of forms because forms have no real relevance to their style of fighting. Forms alone have little value apart from training kihon or basics. The value of the forms is in the applications within the forms that we train as bunkai. Bunkai has zero application in free sparring and it is not designed for competition against skilled opponents.
> 
> Can I just say again. You don't need to know forms or bunkai to fight. Bunkai is a specialised type of training that appeals to some of us and not to others. Because some people, with a vested interest in a different style of martial art, put bunkai down is testament to their ignorance, not the value of the bunkai.



I agree, I've always explained that as a supplement.

Personally, I understand why some people have issues with Kata + Bunkai training. 

While I saw a move in pinan Odan and saw it was the exact movement as a common collar choke, not everyone will.

Not everyone sees our trip from our most basic form,

Some people need to be shown exactly how to do things and forms and bunkai training dont always do that.

Others, can see a kata and certain moves click  and they know what they need to do and can start live drilling immediately!

As you said, they are necessary. There have been successful professional fighters who train them, and many who dont.

Personally, while I practics the applications I've picked out and worked one whenever I have a partner, my favorite part of forms is the mental focus it helps give you and the sheer physical conditioning! 

Going through 9 forms equating to over 200 movements isnt easy whatsoever, regardless of what youre competing in.

That said, IMO, if you're going to do forms you NEED to be practicing/learning/going through Bunkai.

In the words of one of my instructors," I can teach a dog these forms! *Smack*"

But, he cant teach a dog how to apply them.....well....maybe if he smacks it hard enough


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> Wow! That is a huge statement. I don't think there would be anyone else anywhere that would claim they are immune to a takedown by a skilled grappler or being overpowered by a top kick boxer. After that it comes down to a matter of degree.


|
Well it's a rhetorical statement on the internet.  However, the power is in the principle.



K-man said:


> This is fundamentally wrong. I think that regardless of what you really mean it is coming across that you view kime as some sort of shield that will protect you from any attack.


|
Here's our fundamental difference.  The strength in the mental dimension.  And to be precise, KIME is central but it is a menu of mental abilities that have been spoken to here @ MT, very well spelled out in the Shotokan karate curriculum, with scant & general definitions,  Yet they are there.



K-man said:


> Now, the bunkai will not change at all. Whether you can utilise bunkai or not is what will change. If you are using bunkai you are in control of the situation. I don't believe you can use bunkai if you are not in *total* control. So against a striker or kick boxer etc, you cannot use bunkai until you engage and control. Bunkai is hands on. It doesn't work in a free sparring situation. It is the same against a grappler. Against an accomplished grappler I would suggest that you won't be using much bunkai and if he takes you to the ground there will be almost zero chance of using bunkai


|
Thanks to your very well detailed posts, really a well written karate manual, or chapters of one, I understand exactly what you are saying.  As I have mentioned, you are more a conventional traditionalist in strictly adhering to technicals for effect.  I am adhere more to concepts & principles for effect.
|
Let's put your precisely traditional definition of bunkai aside for a moment.  SCENARIO: Gracie grappler closes the distance for a takedown.
|
aLT 1: I sense the coming takedown immediately, and KIME at once.  I use a kihon karate kick (to the torso?) once he reaches kicking range.
Alt 2: I don't see his closing immediately but recognize it early on.  I KIME use a kihon straight punch (to the head?) within the hand striking range.
Alt 3: He catches me by surprise during an exchange of punches and closes & reaches me.  I KIME a kihon elbow to the (side of head?) @ infighting range.
|
What do we have by my definition of traditional karate?  Certainly the focused application of power under a series of conscious decisions.  KIME.
|
At infighting range, I could switch to one of your predetermined bunkai, or use the kihon elbow strike.  An exercise in KIME, either way,  ONLY the physical form of the actual technique & tactic has changed.



K-man said:


> You haven't understood what I am calling a predetermined response. If I have control of your left arm using a left hand hold and I strike with a forearm to the right side of your head with my right I will guarantee you will raise your right arm to protect. That is the predetermined response. If you prove me wrong you will be hit and I will continue to hit until you respond by lifting your arm or you fall down.


|
Got it.  Thanks.  You seek to achieve a predetermined response on the part of the opponent which you will then exploit when he responds in the predetermined way.  I seek to actively take away the ability of the opponent to respond by the dynamic application of technique powered by KIME.  I go in and like my example against the senior belt kickboxer--it's block-bang-bang--it's over.   He doesn't have time to react, let alone think, let alone respond.
|


K-man said:


> Predetermined response has precisely zero to do with kime. One way or the other kime is within you, not a physical manefestation.


|
Your description of  predetermined response is tactical on the part of the opponent.  Got it.  My physical response, however, is always a manifestation of kime ( combined with the rest of the mental dimension abilities).  IMO, that's what makes karate karate.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> Again, that is totally at odds with my understanding of kime. Kime to me is a state of mind. In Aikido, two or even three of Koichi Tohei's four principles would be encompassed in kime. Maintain centre, relax completely and extend Ki are those three.


|
And that's a valid definition by that Master's interpretation of traditional martial arts.  I would agree that KIME is a state of mind.  What specifically that entails is how we differ, again in interpretation.
|
Shotokan is problably on the opposite end of the spectrum when one talks about the use of Ki versus physical strength.  Yet the principles you relate to Aikido are spoken of in Funakoshi's Shotokan.  Again, my understanding.



K-man said:


> Determining the amount of force required has absolutely nothing to do with kime and really it is not what I was saying at all. If I am going to use a knife hand strike it will be with full power, not variable power. You are confusing that with selection of technique. If I don't need to hit someone I will choose a restraining technique. I won't hit softly. Applied to bunkai the only variability there would be, do I maintain a lock or do I destroy the joint? Nothing to do with kime.


|
You say that you don't hit softly or vary the amount of force.  Yet that is a decision.  A definition of KIME.  not yours, ok.  My definition(s) call upon the mental faculties to determine the physical actions.  The decision about technique & degree of force, that actual act of calling upon that physical strength entails the en-action of KIME.  To me, my definition.
|
If we want to come up with a separate term for what you are deciding, my point is I'm not sure there is one spelled out in the Shotokan curriculum.
To me, KIME directs relaxation (physical, mental both?), however, KIME primarily directs contraction, KIME involves choices.  KIME is integrated with action.
|
I guess to summarize, mind body unity is key.  Though the definition of mind & body are literally different, the traditional karate definitions of mind and body must recognize both the roles of each and their integration into one another....


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 22, 2015)

K-man said:


> I'm sorry but I cannot find anything in this post relating to Bunkai so I will approach it as a discussion of kime.


|
You covered an immense amount of ground, here, which I really do think is necessary.


K-man said:


> What I think you have encapsulated here is the difference between Japanese and Okinawan styles. We don't do that at all and her in lies a lot of the confusion others have when they say we don't fight as we train. Okinawan karateka, at least the ones I am familiar with do fight as they train but because it is not like the karate people see elsewhere they claim it is fighting like a (...insert whatever style you want, here...) fighter.


|
I think we are in much closer agreement than what can be accomplished over the internet.  That's my feeling....


K-man said:


> I'm sorry but I cannot find anything in this post relating to Bunkai so I will approach it as a discussion of kime.The opposite is also true. Very few karate guys would fight like the training you are describing and that is why karate is taking a bashing on this forum from some of the MMA guys.


|
Very few karateka in my local fight like me.  Because they're not really tapping into the mental side.  My global comment about traditional karate is that it is a mental discipline.  I took out a lot of your quote concerning the Chinese martial arts--funny, it is the kung fu stylists in my area that more readily embrace my discussions....


K-man said:


> Being stuck in a rigid deep stance is not the way we fight. I come from a Japanese Goju background and our training was very similar to Shotokan. We never even sparred the way we trained the kihon, let alone tried it in a tournament.


|
I use the same white belt to black-belt level curriculum of training when I engage in sparring.  And I almost always win.  Imagine that.  I use the same Kihon Principles, the same Ippon Kumite principles, the same Kata principles in my competitive kumite.  I don't use the monkey-see-monkey do boxing, kickboxing, sport Shotokan point fighting form, etc, etc, when I spar and never did.
|
The "being stuck in a rigid, deep stance when fighting" is incompetent Shotokan, or any other style of Japanese karate (or any of the Korean offshoots, IMO).  The lesson of line training, fighting combos, Ippon Kumite, and even the FIRST CAUSE kihon kata is that training is one thing and application is another.  The same lesson in the curriculum is that training is than one transitions from one stance to another.  Constantly as needed, Continuously as demanded.
|
One uses a low stance in fighting when a low stance achieves a tactical fighting objective.  One uses a low stance in training to build strength and mental discipline.  The Chinese kung fu schools in my local all set to get this automatically.  Never seen any disagreement about this.


K-man said:


> Again we will have to disagree. I teach to use minimal strength to develop maximum power.


|
My conclusion here is that your Okinawan Goju Ryu is a more sophisticated & stronger karate than Shotokan or my personal karate style.  This is no doubt partially due to better cultivation of internal energy. Shotokan karate, in seeking to achieve some of it's goals of understanding & training, relies too much on physical aggression & strength, physical mechanical force.  That's my appraisal.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> Here's our fundamental difference.  The strength in the mental dimension.  And to be precise, KIME is central but it is a menu of mental abilities that have been spoken to here @ MT, very well spelled out in the Shotokan karate curriculum, with scant & general definitions,  Yet they are there.


I have no idea of the Shotokan curriculum and it certainly in not in the curriculum of any Goju style I have seen. Certainly kime is there, but not in the form you describe.



ShotoNoob said:


> Let's put your precisely traditional definition of bunkai aside for a moment.  SCENARIO: Gracie grappler closes the distance for a takedown.
> 
> aLT 1: I sense the coming takedown immediately, and KIME at once.  I use a kihon karate kick (to the torso?) once he reaches kicking range.
> Alt 2: I don't see his closing immediately but recognize it early on.  I KIME use a kihon straight punch (to the head?) within the hand striking range.
> Alt 3: He catches me by surprise during an exchange of punches and closes & reaches me.  I KIME a kihon elbow to the (side of head?) @ infighting range.


I am tempted to use the *Hanzou* approach here. Shotokan is a sport based style and you are saying kime gives you the ability to take out the Gracie grappler. Why isn't straight traditional Shotokan starring in the UFC or MMA?



ShotoNoob said:


> What do we have by my definition of traditional karate?  Certainly the focused application of power under a series of conscious decisions.  KIME.


And I would totally disagree. If you are relying on conscious decisions you are basically stuffed. You fight by using instinctive decisions derived from your training.



ShotoNoob said:


> At infighting range, I could switch to one of your predetermined bunkai, or use the kihon elbow strike.  An exercise in KIME, either way,  ONLY the physical form of the actual technique & tactic has changed.


Not at all,mind to think that you can use bunkai in every situation is totally wrong. Plus, the bunkai is not predetermined. The bunkai depends entirely on the situation you find yourself in. Then it is the response that is predetermined, not the bunkai. You can change the bunkai at any time to suit the circumstance.



ShotoNoob said:


> Got it.  Thanks.  You seek to achieve a predetermined response on the part of the opponent which you will then exploit when he responds in the predetermined way.


Exactly.



ShotoNoob said:


> I seek to actively take away the ability of the opponent to respond by the dynamic application of technique powered by KIME.  I go in and like my example against the senior belt kickboxer--it's block-bang-bang--it's over.   He doesn't have time to react, let alone think, let alone respond.


OK, cool. But is that going to work against everyone?



ShotoNoob said:


> Your description of  predetermined response is tactical on the part of the opponent.  Got it.  My physical response, however, is always a manifestation of kime ( combined with the rest of the mental dimension abilities).  IMO, that's what makes karate karate.


And that's why we will have to agree to disagree on certain things.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> And that's a valid definition by that Master's interpretation of traditional martial arts.  I would agree that KIME is a state of mind.  What specifically that entails is how we differ, again in interpretation.


Cool. It wasn't that Master's interpretation of traditional martial arts. It was that master's teaching in relation to Aikido.



ShotoNoob said:


> Shotokan is problably on the opposite end of the spectrum when one talks about the use of Ki versus physical strength.  Yet the principles you relate to Aikido are spoken of in Funakoshi's Shotokan.  Again, my understanding.


Not at all. To my understanding there is hard Ki and soft Ki. Japanese Goju and Shotokan both use hard Ki. Mind and body together as you have previously stated. Funakoshi's Shotokan is different to modern Shotokan. Okinawan Goju is genuinely hard and soft. Just I didn't understand the soft until I started to train in Aikido.

When it comes to opposing physical strength, soft is better. Otherwise the biggest and strongest will normally prevail.



ShotoNoob said:


> You say that you don't hit softly or vary the amount of force.  Yet that is a decision.  A definition of KIME.  not yours, ok.  My definition(s) call upon the mental faculties to determine the physical actions.  The decision about technique & degree of force, that actual act of calling upon that physical strength entails the en-action of KIME.  To me, my definition.


OK, but to me it makes no sense. If I'm going to hit someone I am going to hit them as hard as I can. That isn't a decision. The decision was to hit in the first place.



ShotoNoob said:


> If we want to come up with a separate term for what you are deciding, my point is I'm not sure there is one spelled out in the Shotokan curriculum.
> To me, KIME directs relaxation (physical, mental both?), however, KIME primarily directs contraction, KIME involves choices.  KIME is integrated with action.


Whatever works for you. As we said earlier. It is all about interpretation.



ShotoNoob said:


> I guess to summarize, mind body unity is key.  Though the definition of mind & body are literally different, the traditional karate definitions of mind and body must recognize both the roles of each and their integration into one another....


And the opposite is mind and body separation. That is where Goju is so good. It trains both ends of the spectrum.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2015)

ShotoNoob said:


> I think we are in much closer agreement than what can be accomplished over the internet.  That's my feeling....


I don't disagree. If I did we wouldn't be having this discussion.



ShotoNoob said:


> Very few karateka in my local fight like me.  Because they're not really tapping into the mental side.  My global comment about traditional karate is that it is a mental discipline.  I took out a lot of your quote concerning the Chinese martial arts--funny, it is the kung fu stylists in my area that more readily embrace my discussions....


And very few karateka would fight like me. My style of training is heavily influenced by Kung fu.



ShotoNoob said:


> I use the same white belt to black-belt level curriculum of training when I engage in sparring.  And I almost always win.  Imagine that.  I use the same Kihon Principles, the same Ippon Kumite principles, the same Kata principles in my competitive kumite.  I don't use the monkey-see-monkey do boxing, kickboxing, sport Shotokan point fighting form, etc, etc, when I spar and never did.


Hmm, well I don't do any of that any more.



ShotoNoob said:


> The "being stuck in a rigid, deep stance when fighting" is incompetent Shotokan, or any other style of Japanese karate (or any of the Korean offshoots, IMO).  The lesson of line training, fighting combos, Ippon Kumite, and even the FIRST CAUSE kihon kata is that training is one thing and application is another.  The same lesson in the curriculum is that training is than one transitions from one stance to another.  Constantly as needed, Continuously as demanded.


And that is what I have been saying all along. You train the kihon but you don't fight using kihon. That just doesn't make sense. In reference to the stances, you mention the deep stance which is what *Hanzou* was saying when he said we don't fight as we train. I don't know about Shotokan but in Goju we have Moto dachi (fighting stance) which is pretty much the same as a boxers stance. Of course we are not going to fight from a deep stance because the deep stance was never meant to be used that way.



ShotoNoob said:


> One uses a low stance in fighting when a low stance achieves a tactical fighting objective.  One uses a low stance in training to build strength and mental discipline.  The Chinese kung fu schools in my local all set to get this automatically.  Never seen any disagreement about this.


Sorry to be the exception. We do very little work in low stances apart from the application which is in the grappling, nothing to do with building strength. If you are using it that way, fine, but there are plenty of better ways to build strength.



ShotoNoob said:


> My conclusion here is that your Okinawan Goju Ryu is a more sophisticated & stronger karate than Shotokan or my personal karate style.  This is no doubt partially due to better cultivation of internal energy. Shotokan karate, in seeking to achieve some of it's goals of understanding & training, relies too much on physical aggression & strength, physical mechanical force.  That's my appraisal.


I like the sentiment but I still think Shotokan is a great style and many of the guys studying it have gone back to the original principles that Funakoshi would have brought to Japan. In principle all karate has the same roots so it should have the same attributes. Just that sometimes you have to go looking by yourself.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 23, 2015)

K-man said:


> Interesting concept but I might suggest that in MMA where it may have failed it is more likely that the competitor hasn't achieved an appropriate level of complementary skills to compete with grapplers with stand up fighting skills. I'm sure the Shotokan karateka by even entering an MMA competition would have superior fighting skills to the average Shotokan practitioner.
> 
> However, I would like to keep the thread on bunkai if we can. Once we introduce sport into the discussion the thread will be hijacked.


|
Thanks for the reply.  Please realize your posts are covering the universe of traditional Okinawan karate re Goju ryu.  I view this as a positive, not a negative, and the correct format for contextualizing bunkai.
|
On MMA re grappler, of course complimentary skills are a part of that.  My perspective is that striking skills under KIME will wipe out the ploys of Gracei BJJ.  This is because of I can think, focus & make decisions very fast & correctly; hence implement kihon karate and disable them with a blow or blows.  The concept is tactically simple, mentally--highly sophisticated compared to sport fighting mentality.....  This is  the essence of traditional karate in action, my definition.
|
In terms of defining the average Shotokan fighter, there is too much reliance on physical ability.  That is the failing.  KIME along with other mental qualities is absent or lacking.  Shotokan practiced absent the mental dimension can be an absolute disaster.... Moreover as I believe you have pointed out, the simplified kihon and particular bunkai of Shotokan per se, is not as applicable or effective in practice compared to your practice of Okinawan Goju ryu.
|
When I talk about Shotokan, I am not talking about averages or how it is conventionally practiced as recreation, sport, a club, typical sport competitions.  I am talking about practicing Shotokan to the potential originally designed by Gichin Funakoshi, and then how all the traditions and conventions rise to that potential.
|
Shotokan--to me--in MMA or anywhere else is an exercise in KIME as opposed to knowing grappling specific manuevers, bunkai, tricky combos, whatever.
My thesis is the kihon karate of Shotokan powered by KIME will wipe out MMA fighters (conventional ones) as they train today.  The Anderson Silvas, the Matt Hughes, the Royce Gracies, The Jose Aldos, the Matt Browns, the Dan Hendersons, etc.
|
_*For sure, your Goju ryu training for close quarter encounters, including the grappling aspect of that, is going to provide technical expertise to thwart the MMA grappler's approach.*_  The emphasis of the Shotokan syllabus is not on grappling or very close infighting.  MT has covered this in other T's.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 23, 2015)

K-man said:


> I like the sentiment but I still think Shotokan is a great style and many of the guys studying it have gone back to the original principles that Funakoshi would have brought to Japan. In principle all karate has the same roots so it should have the same attributes. Just that sometimes you have to go looking by yourself.


|
I think we are on the same plane here, generally.  That said, my conclusion stands that Okinawan Goju ryu is a superior style to Shotokan.  That is my opinion.  If one practices Shotokan correctly and is not blinded by 'conventions' or 'averages,' then Shotokan is very good and very effective.  Is it then necessary to go the extra mile and switch to a more sophisticated karate style?  IMO, for most people, NO....
|


K-man said:


> Sorry to be the exception. We do very little work in low stances apart from the application which is in the grappling, nothing to do with building strength. If you are using it that way, fine, but there are plenty of better ways to build strength


|
Right, and this is one of the many differences among what is it, the thirty or forty or whatever number of karate styles under the main styles in both Okinawa and Japan.  To me, you have made a personal choice and one that certainly works.


K-man said:


> And that is what I have been saying all along. You train the kihon but you don't fight using kihon. That just doesn't make sense. In reference to the stances, you mention the deep stance which is what *Hanzou* was saying when he said we don't fight as we train. I don't know about Shotokan but in Goju we have Moto dachi (fighting stance) which is pretty much the same as a boxers stance. Of course we are not going to fight from a deep stance because the deep stance was never meant to be used that way.


|
I think my point is getting lost in typing text over the internet.  I am saying what you are saying yet saying more, presenting a broader context.  I do fight with kihon technique.  Is my fighting application of kihon always exactly the training form? NO.  Can I actually fight with the kihon training form__YES!  Do I fight with exact kihon training form--sometimes.  I always fight with kihon training principles.  *And to me, one of the huge kihon training principles is KIME which is embodied in all kihon technique.* This would be cleared up quickly by in person demonstration and discussion.  The first objective that would accomplish would to get the semantics and confusion over definitions out of the way.
|
You veiw kihon techniques as limited.  My view is kihon technique + kime = unlimited.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 23, 2015)

K-man said:


> OK, but to me it makes no sense. If I'm going to hit someone I am going to hit them as hard as I can. That isn't a decision. The decision was to hit in the first place.


|
How karate of you!


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 23, 2015)

K-man said:


> I am tempted to use the *Hanzou* approach here. Shotokan is a sport based style and you are saying kime gives you the ability to take out the Gracie grappler. Why isn't straight traditional Shotokan starring in the UFC or MMA?


|
I could give a K-Man answer--you'll have to ask them (Shotokan stylists).  My guess is many feel like I do that I'm not interesting in the ridsk reward of becoming a professional full contact fighter working for MMA organizations.  Let's hazard that....


K-man said:


> And I would totally disagree. If you are relying on conscious decisions you are basically stuffed. You fight by using instinctive decisions derived from your training.


|
EXACTLY , EXACTLY., EXACTLY, EXACTLY the difference, the divergence in our base approach to the mental side of traditional karate training!
|
Instincts and trained responses are ingrained.  Yet it is decision-making KIME that controls & overrides then guides  instinctual moves.  Mental discipline overrides instincts and takes over from mere reactions.  Conscious thought is the master control.



K-man said:


> Not at all,mind to think that you can use bunkai in every situation is totally wrong. Plus, the bunkai is not predetermined. The bunkai depends entirely on the situation you find yourself in. Then it is the response that is predetermined, not the bunkai. You can change the bunkai at any time to suit the circumstance.


 Yes, we got the semantics out.  I agree totally....



K-man said:


> Exactly.
> 
> OK, cool. But is that going to work against everyone?
> 
> And that's why we will have to agree to disagree on certain things.


|
IMO, It's the traditional karate thesis, the challenge.  The physically superior fighter falls / fails against the mentally-adept fighter who is physically well conditioned....  So after you've become physically well conditioned, how mentally adept are you,? is one,? am I?  That is the question.


----------



## ShotoNoob (May 23, 2015)

K-man said:


> Interesting concept but I might suggest that in MMA where it may have failed it is more likely that the competitor hasn't achieved an appropriate level of complementary skills to compete with grapplers with stand up fighting skills. I'm sure the Shotokan karateka by even entering an MMA competition would have superior fighting skills to the average Shotokan practitioner.
> 
> However, I would like to keep the thread on bunkai if we can. Once we introduce sport into the discussion the thread will be hijacked.


|
Right.  It's critical to know what powers my bunkai versus what powers yours.  That's the context for all this mental dimension talk.
|
In terms of knowledge & application of bunkai techniques, you are way ahead of me.  I'm always going to be talking on a more technically basic level.


----------

