Bunkai/Hidden techniques - Split from "How Do I Quit"

[K-man]

Which is why I hold Iain Abernethy in such high esteem and wish that he would visit Australia more regularly!

 

[K-man]

K-Man wrote:
Anyone here can believe anything they like. I provided references from numerous sources regarding the role of Chinese military providing instruction to Okinawans. I think it would be helpful to me to have you specifically state which sources you disagree with.

You seem to be assuming I am challenging what you are saying which in fact is not the case. You took my remarks out of context. What I said was ..
"I don't believe the Okinawans were taught by Chinese military. In fact I would go even further and say that with a couple of documemented examples, the Chinese taught very little to the Okinawans. The exception may have been the guards and garrison at Shuri Castle."

(I think my spell check substituted examples for exceptions .. Sorry )

Your reference is fine but it talks about the teaching of a handful of people being taught, not the hundreds that would be required to protect the ships. And, there is no inference that the people were being taught weaponry.

I have presented historical information that states Chinese men, some in the military, taught the Okinawans kata. It you want to disagree with the statements of Funakoshi, the historical record of Higashionna and Nakaima, the statements of Motobu, Nakama and Nagamine, feel free. The record shows the Chinese taught Okinawans kata. You can believe what you like. As noted above, you might want to post here on which specific sources you disagree with.

I don't disagree at all. All I ask is, if they taught the kata did they teach the bunkai or application? Bearing in mind this part of the article you quoted .. "After arriving in Fuzhou, China, Kanryo Higaonna visited Wai Shin Zan to ask for kungfu training. But Wai Shin Zan did not accept him, because military officers were not allowed to teach martial arts to civilians."


K-Man wrote: "Could he kata be used for weapons? Possibly, but why wouldn't you learn a specific weapon kata like the jo kata we learn in aikido? Why wouldn't there be some historical evidence to show that the kata had been used that way?"

There are two answers to this. One is that everything was handed down in secret. So if this translation was not typically handed down with the kata, then we could attribute that to secrecy.

Karate training was undertaken in secrecy and the applications if divulged at all would have been given in the understanding that they would not be shown. No problem. But do you really think you could teach a thousand or so Okinawan sailors all these secret techniques and expect them not to tell? And, if they weren't shown the application of kata then learning the kata would be as useless as learning the kata is in most schools today.

Second, we do have abundant historical evidence to show that the kata can be used that way. We have the kata. They are historical records. Whether or not we choose to study the kata to determine if the movements can propel a short polearm is up to each student of the art.

Yes, we have the kata, and I have seen some attempts at using the regular karate kata to accommodate weapons such as sai and tonfa. Using a two handed weapon such as bo or jo does not work without changing hand positions. It would be easier to make a new kata than to adapt an existing one.

K-Man wrote: "Regardless of he origin, kata are more than just a collection of techniques although at beginner level that would appear to be the case. In fact, kata taught without a deep understanding of the application, is just that, a collection of techniques."

I agree that the historical record shows that kata, with a few exceptions, are Chinese in origin. I would also agree that kata are more than just a collection of techniques. I believe they were designed to be used, as is, in combat.

And that is why you and I differ from most here on MT and why I would like to pursue your ideas further.

I have looked at a great deal on youtube. And I find much of it lacking. That leads to another question, “why is it lacking?” One answer is that all the good stuff has been kept secret. Another answer could be that for some movements, there just aren’t ways to map them to effective empty hand fighting.

Or that most of the real applications were never passed down other than to a very select few who have either maintained that tradition or who have died along with their secret knowledge.

K-Man wrote: "But, what brought me back into the discussion was the question relating to movements that perplex. I have just spent more than 3 months mulling over one particular move in Kururunfa kata. Eventually I have settled on two applications, one a take down, the other an arm bar. To get to my current understanding I was working from the previous move and looking at the following move as the fail safe."

This statement reveals a lot about the way in which kata have been handed down. In most translations of Itosu’s sixth lesson of toudi, he states that it is up to the student to figure out how to use movements. There are many on this forum, and others that argue that is what they have been taught, you have to figure it all out for yourself.

Once again, I am totally in agreement. But, the reason or his is that most teachers who came out of Okinawa and spread karate across the world had just a couple of years of part time training while they were serving with the US military post war. They never learned karate beyond the basics and those of us they taught knew no better. We just accepted what we were told and shown. In most cases we didn't even have the opportunity to question.

When I step back and think about that approach to learning how to defend one’s self against a dangerous attack, I find it quite odd indeed. If one goes to an Aikido, Aikido, Jujutsu school, one immediately begins learning applications.

I'm not sure of the others but we have no kata in Aikido, just the move and its application. We learn the same application in karate. A Shuto strike is a knife hand blow to the body. Where on the body is not always shown or even if it is shown as a strike to the neck, for example, the direction and angle is not. But, in aikido there is a great difference in the way some techniques are taught and most do not show the atemi which is integral to the success of the technique.

Kata are in support of applications. In boxing and Muay Thai schools, one immediately begins learning applications, how to hit in combinations and how to combine those multiple strike movements with parries, evasions, etc. Same with Indonesian and PMA systems. Same with western fencing. Same with wrestling. You learn the fighting sequences by practicing them with others, in application. Where there are kata, they are secondary

I believe kata to be much more than just support of applications. Each kata is by itself a total fighting system. This has changed slightly in some ways in Okinawa when a kata might have been shortened, but the principles still apply.

How does that compare to schools that teach forms and kata. One learns the forms/kata, whether in a Chinese TMA or a karate school, and maybe, just maybe, one will be shown useful fighting applications for some of the movements. In karate schools, it is a given that in part, it is up to the student to “figure stuff out”. While that may make sense to some, I find it simply astounding that one is expected to practice kata, and then “go figure out” how to use the movements so that they could be effectively applied when their life is on the line. That is just not the way that fighting instruction is done in other systems.

Which just reinforces the fact that the real applications were rarely shown and certainly not put out into the public domain.

There’s an important point that needs to be made here. I am not arguing, and never have, that Okinawan kata movements can’t be used for empty hand fighting. There are all sorts of movements that lend themselves to useful fighting sequences.

I would argue that the traditional kata are 99% empty hand. Unless a kata was designed just for a particular weapon I can't see how the rules of kata can be applied.

Rather, I look at the body of kata, as a whole, and wonder why there are so many sequences that have been handed down, with no apparent use in empty hand fighting.

That my friend is what has taken me so long to get to the understanding I have. Months of searching to come up with one explanation. Utilising the rules of kata regarding angle, stance, preceding and following moves etc. Just because I can't understand a particular move doesn't mean an application isn't there. And, often, when it does reveal itself you have to ask, why didn't I see that before?

If you are successful in fully decoding all the movements from all the goju kata you have learned, and others as well, more power to you. My goal is not to convince those that are satisfied with what they have and what they have been taught. Rather, I am seeking out those that have been frustrated. If none are here, we don’t need to take this any further. I imagine that there are karateka here and there that have not been all that happy with the application they have been taught. This thread and numerous others on this and other forums is a testament to that.

Once again, I agree totally. I doubt there is anyone who has decoded all the movements. That is a lifetime journey. I have been frustrated for years by seemingly meaningless techniques and I am under no illusion that my knowledge is in any way comprehensive. As such I would welcome informed discussion regarding the bunkai.

That addresses your reply to my post. What I would like to do is look at an issue you raised in another post.

Originally Posted by Cayuga Karate


I like to use the term “directional sequence”. The kata have all of these sequences forward that consist of several steps (stances), with associated hand movements. For example, in Heian Shodan (Pinan Nidan) there are two sets of four step sequences in front stance. These sequences cover about ten feet. And it is this distance that sequences cover that make it so difficult to find applications for them because this distance doesn’t map to way empty hand fighting occurs. The obvious challenge here is in the defensive art of empty hand fighting, there is an opponent an arm's distance away. He is physically blocking the the way of your four step forward path.


So how do karateka get around this massive hurdle of interpretation? Well one way is to have the attacker retreat while the defender charges forward. This is common in early Shotokan Heian applications.

i think the bunkai shown in the applications you linked is typical of the schoolboy interpretation we all grew up with. Kata does not address multiple atackers with choreographed moves. Any bunkai starts with an aggressive move, either from us or our opponent and from that point onwards the attacker doesn't have to do any move to enable the bunkai to proceed.

But to address the issue of travelling distance in the kata. If, for example, the kata has three steps forward, that means that we start right foot forward, step forward left and again with the right. But, it could also mean we just change feet. It might mean that we step forward right, step back which gives us left, then forward again right. Now our three steps have just moved us one step. Just a thought. :asian:

 

[geezer]

...But to address the issue of travelling distance in the kata. If, for example, the kata has three steps forward, that means that we start right foot forward, step forward left and again with the right. But, it could also mean we just change feet. It might mean that we step forward right, step back which gives us left, then forward again right. Now our three steps have just moved us one step. Just a thought. :asian:

I like this way of thinking. Although I'm not a Karate practitioner, I apply the same approach to my training. I believe it leads to a deeper understanding of how to apply the movements. When we take movements from forms and practice them in two-man drills, we always "mess with them" like this.

 

[punisher73]

i think the bunkai shown in the applications you linked is typical of the schoolboy interpretation we all grew up with. Kata does not address multiple atackers with choreographed moves. Any bunkai starts with an aggressive move, either from us or our opponent and from that point onwards the attacker doesn't have to do any move to enable the bunkai to proceed.

But to address the issue of travelling distance in the kata. If, for example, the kata has three steps forward, that means that we start right foot forward, step forward left and again with the right. But, it could also mean we just change feet. It might mean that we step forward right, step back which gives us left, then forward again right. Now our three steps have just moved us one step. Just a thought. :asian:

What is often forgotten in these discussions is that kata are a mnuemonic device. For example, "Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally". What does that mean? For many of us, we remember after all these years that it was taught to us as school children to remember the order of operations in math. Without that context the mnuemonic device means nothing and does nothing for us. We could spend endless hours on the ettiquette rules that it shows us on how to properly address our elder relatives and we would all miss the point.

Kata is the same way. Until the advent of picture books, labels were not given to the techniques. For example, the movement of an upward/rising block. Just by calling it an upward/rising block we have given it's function and now try to find out how to use the "block" in that sequence. We may rule out that it's not even a block but a forearm strike under the chin. The kata gives us both examples in it by reminding us of the motion, so that we can train multiple applications with one set of movements. That is why there is the big push (in okinawan karate) to not change kata. If I change the kata to fit a certain application, I have lost the other applications contained in that movement.

Going back to kata and multiple steps in one direction. It doesn't necessarily mean that the whole sequence is to be taught all together to one attacker all at once. In many cases it can mean different attack scenarios with similar variables based on attacker's positioning or attack (right vs. left). Even in some katas, angles were changed to accomodate the space available. For example, Sanchin kata used to be just moving foward and then get to the end of the dojo and turn around and go back. It wasn't until later that the number of steps were added and then things were put so you started and ended in the same spot, why? So everyone wouldn't run into each other.

Also, we need to understand that up more recent times (around WW2 era) that one kata was considered a complete fighting system so it would contain LOTS of information to be contained within it and not just "an application", it would be multiple applications all very similiar to the movements. So you may find things in the kata to train your body to move in a certain way that don't have an EXACT combat application but train something important for combat, for example 90 and 180 degree turns, or movements built into them to promote health/fitness. Isometric moves in Seisan kata anyone? Or going very slowly in a kata to highlight an aspect, which we know wouldn't be performed that way in a fight.

So, we need to acknowledge that without being told the specific purpose of what the specifc creator of the kata intended, we are guessing at straws. As far as the empty hand katas containing weapons techniques, I don't agree with that, if you mean attacking with a weapon and not defending against one. The reason is that Okinawa had a very rich Kobudo history and almost all of the early karate masters taught weapons seperately even though that didn't get passed down. It doesn't make sense that they would teach staff techniques and how to use a staff along with basics, drills and sometimes kata and then tell a student that they way to really use the bo is hidden in their empty hand kata. That being said, I think that there are some personal weapons that were used in kata that aren't talked about. For example, I used the example of Chotoku Kyan talking about using the Jiffa (hair pin) in Kusanku. Kyan also talked about using the cloth headwrap with a rock in it to strike an opponent. So, if a kata was a whole system it would make sense that once in awhile you would have that mnuemonic device to remind you of that fact, but it would also mean that there were other uses for that movement and it wasn't exclusive.

 

[lklawson]

Which is why I hold Iain Abernethy in such high esteem and wish that he would visit Australia more regularly!

He's a super nice guy and has been generous in not only letting me post my republished old school boxing books on his forum but even gave a recommendation for my Banned from Boxing book in one of his articles.

Class Act.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[punisher73]

Sorry, in my last post I mixed a phrase (which I hate) and didn't catch it until too late.

I was typing and was debating between just saying "we are guessing" and "we are just grasping at straws". I have no idea what guessing at straws is....LOL

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Punisher wrote:

Going back to kata and multiple steps in one direction. It doesn't necessarily mean that the whole sequence is to be taught all together to one attacker all at once. In many cases it can mean different attack scenarios with similar variables based on attacker's positioning or attack (right vs. left).

There are scores of hours of video online of aikido usage, jujutsu usage, kali usage, boxing usage, actual video of the way the movements are used with two persons. And there are scores of examples of kata application online.

From all that available bunkai online for karate application, are you aware of any video that shows what you are describing?

Again, the issue at present (I have others) is that kata sequences of several movements forward (steps/shuffles/jumps) that cover several or more feet, often don't translate to actual fighting because the attacker is in the way of the forward movement. Now he can retreat. And some Okinawan systems practice application that uses a retreating attacker. However some of the ways Okinawans practice bunkai where attackers retreat does not map to the actual ways in which humans fight. There are several systems that practice applications where the attacker retreats, a step at a time, striking with each step. Humans don't fight this way.

Here's a sequence from Kusanku in Matsubayashi Shorin Ryu. (1:50 to 1:55), and another from Pinan Shodan in Shidokan 05 to :08)

There are quite a number of these four step sequences in the Pinan. And throughout the kata there a variety of sequences in a single direction that cover quite a bit of ground, enough ground that would require either the attacker to retreat, if not, the technique would cause the defender to run his body into the attacker before completing the sequence.

Consequently, those who practice bunkai for these sequences have had to adapt them. A good place to look at examples of these kinds of adaptations is in the Higoanna videos from the 1980s.

For example in his suparenpei bunkai video, Higaonna performs the movement in the kata at :56. But he leaves off a step and block that precede it. I believe Higaonna reveals the fundamental challenge of doing this forward jumping kick to a target at arm's length, in his performance of the kick. At 1:10, he moves his left foot, which in the kata is in front of his right foot, back well behind his right foot. This is just not the way the movement is done in the kata. It's clear to me that this is an adaption for an attacker at arm's distance.

A better example of this truncation is found in Higaonna's Sanseru bunkai video. If you look at the way the actual movement is performed in kata, 21 to 27) you can see that the movement where the two open hands thrust downward is done with the right foot forward. Then there are two stepping kicks forward. In the bunkai video, beginning at :01, the left foot is forward with both hands down. One kick is eliminated from the application.

We can see this "truncating" again in the Sesan bunkai video. In the kata video, there is a left hand thrust at :33, and it is followed by a big shuffle forward. In the bunkai video, at 1:15 he begins an angular retreat, and has no shuffle forward prior to the triple strike.

The kata Seipei has a long opening sequence forward. 01 to :17). In the bunkai video, this was broken down into defenses against three separate attacks. The first defense has a single counter, a spear hand to the abdomen. The second, has an escape from a grab followed be a single elbow to the abdomen, the third technique has two counters. The last two movements of the sequence are left unaddressed.

My purpose here is not to be critical of Higaonna's movements. It's only to point out the challenges of adapting sequences of forward movements to empty hand fighting where the opponent is at arm's length, and likely not retreating.

These sequences forward that cover distance happen throughout the kata. Many kata are sets of movements that don't cover much ground combined with those that cover more ground. There are the side-to-side sequences, and the forward sequences.

I have listed below, a number of sequences from a range of Okinawan kata where the number of steps shuffles and jumps forward would put the defender past the initial position of the attacker.

Unsu (2:18 to 2:36)
Oyadomari Passai 45 to :49)
Wankan 18 to :24)
Kusanku 38 to :45, 1:25 to 1:30, 1:37 to 1:41)
Naihanchi Nidan 06 to :13)
Wansu 10 to :18, 34 to :37)
Gojushiho 30 to :36)
Chinto 32 to :39, :42 to :54, 1:01 to 1:07)
Jion 23 to :28, :37 to :51, 1:01 to 1:10, 1:17 to 1:24)
Chinte (1:10 to 1:16, 1:18 to 1:27, 1:50 to 1:56)
Jitte 23 to :24)
Matsumura Passai 22 to :29)
Koryu Passai 15 to :19)
Ananko 36 to :43)
Anan (7:43 to 7:50, 8:02 to 8:06)
Pachu (3:56 to 4:00)

Now one can argue that in these sequences, that they were never designed to be done against a single individual. Or that they were designed to be deconstructed and reassembled in sequences that were more stationary.

That is one way of looking at these movements. Another would be to wonder why they shouldn't be designed to be used as they appear in the kata, as they are practiced, in the kata.

And from that frame of reference, if they really don't work all that well against an opponent at arm's length, one could then speculate why were they taught in the first place.

My question remains.

Why did Chinese military authorities, tasked with the defense of Investiture missions to Okinawa choose to teach these Okinawans the Kaishu (open hand) kata that have survived until today?

Were they concerned that the Okinawans, who couldn't carry swords, needed to be able to defend themselves on the rough and tumble streets of Naha, Shuri and Tomari?

The answer to that, in my opinion, lies in the kata. For those that think they can argue successfully that the kata were indeed designed for empty hand fighting, perhaps they could provide evidence to support their case.

Please, post some links to youtube videos that support your ideas. Any of the sequences from the list I have provided above might be a good place to start.

One last point. I am not arguing, and have never argued that there aren't movements, and sequences of movements in kata, that don't lend themselves quite efficiently, to empty hand fighting. Armed kali movements translate into empty hand kali. Koryu sword movements translate into locks and throws in Aiki and Jujutsu arts. The Chinese art of Xing Yi Quan, is said to be a "martial art based on the combat principles of the spear." There are commonalities in the movements if Taichi empty hand, sword and staff. My arguments that military arts may have been the basis for empty hand arts is based, in part, on the fact that this is common across a number of martial arts.

This doesn't make the empty hand art weak, or deficient. In my view it is empowering. It ties movements back to the days when men's lives utterly depended on their skill with a weapon, skill developed from intense training over many years. The ability to propel something in your hands strengthens and hones your ability to propel your hands when not holding a weapon.

I find karate to be an extraordinary training tool for strengthening, developing agility, and providing a broad set of good fighting skills. I am not bashing karate when I evaluate the kata and find some movements lacking for self defense. I am celebrating the art. I no longer have to ask "why, why are there so many kata movements that don't map to fighting." They all do, every one of them. And the added bonus is that quite a number of them map quite effectively to empty hand fighting.

So I have two requests. One, if posters here want to go on criticizing my statement that we should consider the potential that these movements can effectively propel a polearm, I ask for evidence to support your claims that kata were designed for empty hand fighting. There are a number of links/times above. Please consider taking the time to provide some evidence. I, and so many others, have been searching for a long time. Let us know where we can find it. (But please, don't refer us to a couple of people who charge for their recently developed applications)

My second request is that I again invite those that may be frustrated by what they have seen with bunkai and application to post a link to what you find perplexing. I might be able to help point to a different view of the kata, one that others just might find interesting, rewarding, and worth the effort.

 

[K-man]

Again, the issue at present (I have others) is that kata sequences of several movements forward (steps/shuffles/jumps) that cover several or more feet, often don't translate to actual fighting because the attacker is in the way of the forward movement. Now he can retreat. And some Okinawan systems practice application that uses a retreating attacker. However some of the ways Okinawans practice bunkai where attackers retreat does not map to the actual ways in which humans fight. There are several systems that practice applications where the attacker retreats, a step at a time, striking with each step. Humans don't fight this way.

Here's a sequence from Kusanku in Matsubayashi Shorin Ryu. (1:50 to 1:55), and another from Pinan Shodan in Shidokan 05 to :08)

I think we have a fundermental problem. You are posting kihon kata video links and the schoolboy explanations that we were given years ago and now are taken as gospel by people who have not seen reality based bunkai. All the bunkai you have posted is choreographed. That is not what a fighting system is about. It is a system based on predictable response. That is why weapon kata cannot ever be a fighting system as one move does not cause a predicted response. To my mind a weapon kata is what others try to make an empty hand kata, a collection of techniques which are useful in fighting but of themselves don't make up sequential fighting moves.

There are quite a number of these four step sequences in the Pinan. And throughout the kata there a variety of sequences in a single direction that cover quite a bit of ground, enough ground that would require either the attacker to retreat, if not, the technique would cause the defender to run his body into the attacker before completing the sequence.

Consequently, those who practice bunkai for these sequences have had to adapt them. A good place to look at examples of these kinds of adaptations is in the Higoanna videos from the 1980s.

For example in his suparenpei bunkai video, Higaonna performs the movement in the kata at :56. But he leaves off a step and block that precede it. I believe Higaonna reveals the fundamental challenge of doing this forward jumping kick to a target at arm's length, in his performance of the kick. At 1:10, he moves his left foot, which in the kata is in front of his right foot, back well behind his right foot. This is just not the way the movement is done in the kata. It's clear to me that this is an adaption for an attacker at arm's distance.

A better example of this truncation is found in Higaonna's Sanseru bunkai video. If you look at the way the actual movement is performed in kata, 21 to 27) you can see that the movement where the two open hands thrust downward is done with the right foot forward. Then there are two stepping kicks forward. In the bunkai video, beginning at :01, the left foot is forward with both hands down. One kick is eliminated from the application.

Once again, these are not reality based applications.

We can see this "truncating" again in the Sesan bunkai video. In the kata video, there is a left hand thrust at :33, and it is followed by a big shuffle forward. In the bunkai video, at 1:15 he begins an angular retreat, and has no shuffle forward prior to the triple strike.

The kata Seipei has a long opening sequence forward. 01 to :17). In the bunkai video, this was broken down into defenses against three separate attacks. The first defense has a single counter, a spear hand to the abdomen. The second, has an escape from a grab followed be a single elbow to the abdomen, the third technique has two counters. The last two movements of the sequence are left unaddressed.

My purpose here is not to be critical of Higaonna's movements. It's only to point out the challenges of adapting sequences of forward movements to empty hand fighting where the opponent is at arm's length, and likely not retreating.

Again, these are not reality based examples. In my bunkai for that opening sequence, for example, I have hold of the throat. (That entry BTW comes from many different attacks. Even here there is no choreography.) There are three scenarios, all which faithfully follow the kata. First is that the grab is not countered in time resulting in the neck being twisted and probably broken. If the grip is removed by the left hand an arm bar and resultant break occurs and if he grip is removed by the right hand kota gaeshi and take down follow.

These sequences forward that cover distance happen throughout the kata. Many kata are sets of movements that don't cover much ground combined with those that cover more ground. There are the side-to-side sequences, and the forward sequences.

I have listed below, a number of sequences from a range of Okinawan kata where the number of steps shuffles and jumps forward would put the defender past the initial position of the attacker.

Unsu (2:18 to 2:36)
Oyadomari Passai 45 to :49)
Wankan 18 to :24)
Kusanku 38 to :45, 1:25 to 1:30, 1:37 to 1:41)
Naihanchi Nidan 06 to :13)
Wansu 10 to :18, 34 to :37)
Gojushiho 30 to :36)
Chinto 32 to :39, :42 to :54, 1:01 to 1:07)
Jion 23 to :28, :37 to :51, 1:01 to 1:10, 1:17 to 1:24)
Chinte (1:10 to 1:16, 1:18 to 1:27, 1:50 to 1:56)
Jitte 23 to :24)
Matsumura Passai 22 to :29)
Koryu Passai 15 to :19)
Ananko 36 to :43)
Anan (7:43 to 7:50, 8:02 to 8:06)
Pachu (3:56 to 4:00)

Now one can argue that in these sequences, that they were never designed to be done against a single individual. Or that they were designed to be deconstructed and reassembled in sequences that were more stationary.

I have looked at all your examples and they are all performed as kihon kata. Have you ever seen advanced forms of these kata. Personally, I have only seen the advanced forms of the Goju kata but there must be practitioners of the other styles teaching advanced forms. (Sorry, I have seen advanced bagua kata performed by Erle Montaigue.)

That is one way of looking at these movements. Another would be to wonder why they shouldn't be designed to be used as they appear in the kata, as they are practiced, in the kata.

Purely because they were never designed to be used with weapons. That is not to say they couldn't be adapted to use with weapons but the function would change entirely.

And from that frame of reference, if they really don't work all that well against an opponent at arm's length, one could then speculate why were they taught in the first place.

None of the empty hand kata work at all beyond arm reach because the whole principle is that you are constantly controlling your opponent throughout the engagement. You respond to an attack with any move from a kata, (the kata give you multiple entry points) and that move in itself is designed as a finishing technique. The attacker has one option and that is to block. If he fails then he is hit or incapacitated or both. If he manages to block, then you move to the next part of tha kata. Because his block is the result of the technique that you have practised until it is second nature, his response is predictable and your progression to the next part of the kata is automatic.

My question remains.

Why did Chinese military authorities, tasked with the defense of Investiture missions to Okinawa choose to teach these Okinawans the Kaishu (open hand) kata that have survived until today?

That is your take on the situation. I don't believe here is any evidence to suggest more than a handful of people were taught by Chinese military on Okinawa. And, the ones that were taught may well have been taught with the proviso that they wouldn't pass on that information, or at least the application of it.
Were they concerned that the Okinawans, who couldn't carry swords, needed to be able to defend themselves on the rough and tumble streets of Naha, Shuri and Tomari?

The answer to that, in my opinion, lies in the kata. For those that think they can argue successfully that the kata were indeed designed for empty hand fighting, perhaps they could provide evidence to support their case.

I think history does that. I know of no other person making the claim that the Chinese based Okinawan kata were designed with the use of weapons in mind. Your reference to the principles of aikido being based on the sword are sound but for the wrong reason. The aikido techniques work if the principles of sword are applied. It is not the same as actually using a sword in the technique although in some instances you could.

Please, post some links to youtube videos that support your ideas. Any of the sequences from the list I have provided above might be a good place to start.

OK. This is the first bunkai I teach and here Taira Sensei follows the kata (Gekisai di ichi) faithfully from beginning to end. In reality there is no way it would last that long in a real confrontation but here it is being performed at less than full speed as a training drill. You can see that even when his partner knows what is coming next he has to perform the predicted response or he would be hit.

http://khdownload.com/play-video/IwMZNPkCdL0/taira-bunkai-gekisai-1.html

One last point. I am not arguing, and have never argued that there aren't movements, and sequences of movements in kata, that don't lend themselves quite efficiently, to empty hand fighting. Armed kali movements translate into empty hand kali.

Yes, some of them do, but it doesn't mean the reverse is true.

Koryu sword movements translate into locks and throws in Aiki and Jujutsu arts. The Chinese art of Xing Yi Quan, is said to be a "martial art based on the combat principles of the spear." There are commonalities in the movements if Taichi empty hand, sword and staff. My arguments that military arts may have been the basis for empty hand arts is based, in part, on the fact that this is common across a number of martial arts.

A practitioner of xingyiquan uses coordinated movements to generate bursts of power intended to overwhelm the opponent, simultaneously attacking and defending. Forms vary from school to school, but include barehanded sequences and versions of the same sequences with a variety of weapons. These sequences are based upon the movements and fighting behavior of a variety of animals. The training methods allow the student to progress through increasing difficulty in form sequences, timing and fighting strategy

Your reference is not accurate. Xingyquan may well be based on the combat principles of the spear but that is different to saying that the open hand form is the same as the armed form.

This doesn't make the empty hand art weak, or deficient. In my view it is empowering. It ties movements back to the days when men's lives utterly depended on their skill with a weapon, skill developed from intense training over many years. The ability to propel something in your hands strengthens and hones your ability to propel your hands when not holding a weapon.

I don't see how you can verify that statement. Are you suggesting that boxers should take up the sword, or would a jo be better?

I find karate to be an extraordinary training tool for strengthening, developing agility, and providing a broad set of good fighting skills. I am not bashing karate when I evaluate the kata and find some movements lacking for self defense. I am celebrating the art. I no longer have to ask "why, why are there so many kata movements that don't map to fighting." They all do, every one of them. And the added bonus is that quite a number of them map quite effectively to empty hand fighting.

You my not be 'bashing' kata but you are demonstrating your lack of understanding of the principles of kata. Unfortunately you are not alone. That is why we see such poor examples of kata application on YouTube. What we learned thirty years ago was sound basics and crap applications. What most of us learned then is still being taught as the 'real' karate and it will not change until a lot of high ranking karateka open their eyes, swallow their pride and acknowledge that what we learned back then was wrong. Sport karate allows the garbage we were taught to continue. Competition is mainly points based and bears no resemblance to a pub brawl. Sports kata is kihon kata sometimes performed exceptionally well but many times embellished in such a way that any original application is meaningless, and the bunkai demonstrated is the same basic kihon type prearranged, choreographed garbage that wouldn't work on the street.

So I have two requests. One, if posters here want to go on criticizing my statement that we should consider the potential that these movements can effectively propel a polearm, I ask for evidence to support your claims that kata were designed for empty hand fighting. There are a number of links/times above. Please consider taking the time to provide some evidence. I, and so many others, have been searching for a long time. Let us know where we can find it. (But please, don't refer us to a couple of people who charge for their recently developed applications)

If you really believe that the kata can effectively propel a polearm then I would suggest it is you who should provide the evidence. Your claim is the same as me saying Saturn is composed totally of cheese, against all conventional wisdom, and asking anyone who disagrees to disprove it. Then when the evidence of history is produced I just say I disagree.

My second request is that I again invite those that may be frustrated by what they have seen with bunkai and application to post a link to what you find perplexing. I might be able to help point to a different view of the kata, one that others just might find interesting, rewarding, and worth the effort.

I will post one link that I found that shows some aspects of what I am saying.

http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/taira-sensei-demonstrating-bunkai-seipai-kata

Not surprising that it is the site of the man who singlehandly change my understanding of kata many years ago and features the man whom I now consider my Master and whom I have spent many hours training under both in Australia and overseas. I am thinking that these are the people you are referring to when you say "please don't refer us to a couple of people who charge for their recently developed applications." Both of these men have devoted their lives to their work and I have no hesitation in paying for their knowledge.

And, yes I am frustrated by my lack of understanding of certain techniques in kata, but I'm working on those and with the help of like minded people I'm sure we will come up with reasonable, testable and practical applications in due course. :asian:

 

[punisher73]

Punisher wrote:



There are scores of hours of video online of aikido usage, jujutsu usage, kali usage, boxing usage, actual video of the way the movements are used with two persons. And there are scores of examples of kata application online.

From all that available bunkai online for karate application, are you aware of any video that shows what you are describing?

Again, the issue at present (I have others) is that kata sequences of several movements forward (steps/shuffles/jumps) that cover several or more feet, often don't translate to actual fighting because the attacker is in the way of the forward movement. Now he can retreat. And some Okinawan systems practice application that uses a retreating attacker. However some of the ways Okinawans practice bunkai where attackers retreat does not map to the actual ways in which humans fight. There are several systems that practice applications where the attacker retreats, a step at a time, striking with each step. Humans don't fight this way.

Again, you are making the mistake that kata is a LITERAL translation of an exact sequence. Reread my whole post. Kata is a mnuemonic device, a REMINDER of the lessons that you learned. It is the motion that is important. There are MULTIPLE applications (each one slightly) different contained in the kata. Some of them will need adjustments depending on the circumstance, but if you taught a kata with EVERY "what if" or consideration they would be ungodly long to remember or train each one.

As to some of the kicks. Okinwan kicks used to NOT extend past the end of your punch when being used in conjunction (low level knee attacks etc.) When you see a long front kick like that followed by a punch, the kata has been altered for the japanese sport style sparring approach. Lower those kicks to the knee and you will find most don't need adjustments.

 

[K-man]

As to some of the kicks. Okinwan kicks used to NOT extend past the end of your punch when being used in conjunction (low level knee attacks etc.) When you see a long front kick like that followed by a punch, the kata has been altered for the japanese sport style sparring approach. Lower those kicks to the knee and you will find most don't need adjustments.

And just to elaborate. The kick is not necessarily a 'kick'. At close range it becomes a knee, a takedown or even a means of relocating your attacker's feet to destabilise.

And, you are so correct in highlighting the difference in focus between the Japanese and Okinawan kicks. :asian:

 

[punisher73]

And just to elaborate. The kick is not necessarily a 'kick'. At close range it becomes a knee, a takedown or even a means of relocating your attacker's feet to destabilise.

And, you are so correct in highlighting the difference in focus between the Japanese and Okinawan kicks. :asian:

Correct, I was pressed for time and didn't elaborate too much. But, it goes back to the mnuemonic device thing. When you step, it could be all of those things whether I am in close or the attacker is just a little bit farther away etc.

Same with the arm movements, the reverse motion, the chambering motion, the return motion etc. are all parts of techniques that have other applications. Not to even get into talking about enlarging your motion or tightening your motion to change between offensive and defensive movements in kata.

Here is another problem I have with the karate katas are for weapons training. I have not heard of any chinese system saying that their empty handed sets/forms are really designed to teach weapons fighting and that those applications were somehow lost/hidden. They were always seperate. Now that does NOT mean that you won't find systems that integrate their weapons training to match the concepts of their empty hands (Wing Chun) or integrated their empty hand fighting to match their weapon training (Filipino MA's). But, to me, this is different than claiming that the karate katas somehow never knew that their motions was for weapons training and disguised as empty hand forms.

I would strongly suggest if anyone wants a good understanding of how kata is/was designed and how it was to be used. Read "The Way of Kata" by Kane and Wilder. The examples are from Goju-Ryu, but their analysis and breakdown applies to all okinawan systems.

I would also point out that any theory of lost/hidden stuff from a japanese karate standpoint, is fairly obvious from those who's lineage stem from the Funakoshi/Shotokan line. Funakoshi took out many things and altered many other things for the japanese audience. For example, when comparing Shuri-style Wansu with Shotokan's Empi. Wansu shows a student how to do a fireman's carry throw in it (Kata Guruma), but Empi has a jumping/spinning move in it's place. Of course now the sequence has been altered and lost so you are now looking at a missing piece that doesn't make sense at all.

Go to about the 55 second mark for Shotokan's Enpi

Now look at the older version from Chotoku Kyan's lineage. Go to about the 35 second mark, and it is the same move.

I think this alteration from okinawan karate to japanese karate is where many things were lost and we got the block/kick/punch applications, and theories abounding as to what the applications were supposed to be. Step one: Close your distance

 

[chinto]

Correct, I was pressed for time and didn't elaborate too much. But, it goes back to the mnuemonic device thing. When you step, it could be all of those things whether I am in close or the attacker is just a little bit farther away etc.

Same with the arm movements, the reverse motion, the chambering motion, the return motion etc. are all parts of techniques that have other applications. Not to even get into talking about enlarging your motion or tightening your motion to change between offensive and defensive movements in kata.

Here is another problem I have with the karate katas are for weapons training. I have not heard of any chinese system saying that their empty handed sets/forms are really designed to teach weapons fighting and that those applications were somehow lost/hidden. They were always seperate. Now that does NOT mean that you won't find systems that integrate their weapons training to match the concepts of their empty hands (Wing Chun) or integrated their empty hand fighting to match their weapon training (Filipino MA's). But, to me, this is different than claiming that the karate katas somehow never knew that their motions was for weapons training and disguised as empty hand forms.

I would strongly suggest if anyone wants a good understanding of how kata is/was designed and how it was to be used. Read "The Way of Kata" by Kane and Wilder. The examples are from Goju-Ryu, but their analysis and breakdown applies to all okinawan systems.

I would also point out that any theory of lost/hidden stuff from a japanese karate standpoint, is fairly obvious from those who's lineage stem from the Funakoshi/Shotokan line. Funakoshi took out many things and altered many other things for the japanese audience. For example, when comparing Shuri-style Wansu with Shotokan's Empi. Wansu shows a student how to do a fireman's carry throw in it (Kata Guruma), but Empi has a jumping/spinning move in it's place. Of course now the sequence has been altered and lost so you are now looking at a missing piece that doesn't make sense at all.

Go to about the 55 second mark for Shotokan's Enpi

Now look at the older version from Chotoku Kyan's lineage. Go to about the 35 second mark, and it is the same move.

I think this alteration from okinawan karate to japanese karate is where many things were lost and we got the block/kick/punch applications, and theories abounding as to what the applications were supposed to be. Step one: Close your distance

I agree, as a student of Okinawan Karate I see a lot of holes in the shotokan kata compared to the okinawan kata of the same name or type. I think this was done by Funikoshi to differentiate it from Jujitsu more clearly to the Japanese people who were completely unfamiliar with Karate.
That is Not to say the Japanese Karate systems are not good, but just different. I myself much prefer the Okinawan Originals to the Japanese modified versions for myself. They fit me better, but I do know some Shotokan people who much prefer and are better fitted by shotokan and such. all karate is good karate in general.. just a different take on it... once again in general. there are exceptions to every rule.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

K-Man wrote:

I don't believe the Okinawans were taught by Chinese military. In fact I would go even further and say that with a couple of documemented examples, the Chinese taught very little to the Okinawans. The exception may have been the guards and garrison at Shuri Castle."

I put together this graphic in powerpoint and exported to jpg. Over the next couple of weeks I will redo it in Visio where I can do it better. I will have an additional document that lists the sources for each connection.

I believe this information is not consistent with your statement above.

 

[K-man]

K-Man wrote:


I put together this graphic in powerpoint and exported to jpg. Over the next couple of weeks I will redo it in Visio where I can do it better. I will have an additional document that lists the sources for each connection.

I believe this information is not consistent with your statement above.

Not at all. It is exactly as I said.

Let's look at these in order.

Wansu

This kata is said by many to have been brought to Okinawa by the 1683 Sappushi Wang Ji (Jpn. Oshu, 1621-1689). It is possible that it is based upon or inspired by techniques that may have been taught by Wang Ji.


The problem with this theory is that why would such a high ranked government official teach his martial arts (assuming he even knew any) to the Okinawans? Also, Wang Ji was only in Okinawa for 6 months (Sakagami, 1978).


Wang Ji was originally from Xiuning in Anhui, and was an official for the Han Lin Yuan, an important government post (Kinjo, 1999). In order to become an official for the Han Lin Yuan, one had to be a high level scholar, and pass several national tests (Kinjo, 1999). Just preparing for such a task would all but rule out the practice of martial arts, just time-wise. However, assuming that Wang Ji was familiar with the martial arts, the Quanfa of Anhui is classified as Northern boxing, while the techniques of the Okinawan Wansu kata are clearly Southern in nature (Kinjo, 1999).


So, if Wansu was not Wang Ji, just who was he? This is as yet unknown. However, in the Okinawan martial arts, kata named after their originators are not uncommon. Some examples include Kusanku, Chatan Yara no Sai, and Tokumine no Kon. It is entirely possible that this kata was introduced by a Chinese martial artists named Wang. As the reader probably already knows, in the Chinese martial arts, it is common to refer to a teacher as Shifu (let. Teacher-father). Could not the name Wansu be an Okinawan mispronunciation of Wang Shifu (Kinjo, 1999)?


Other schools of thought are that Wu Xianhui (Jpn. Go Kenki, 1886-1940) or Tang Daiji (Jpn. To Daiki, 1888-1937), two Chinese martial artists who immigrated to Okinawa in the early part of the 20th Century, may be responsible for the introduction of the Wansu kata (Gima, et al, 1986). As a side note, Wu was a Whooping Crane boxer and Tang was known for his Tiger boxing. They were both from Fujian.
Shimabuku is believed to have added on several techniques to this kata, such as the side kicks, evasive body movement into double punches, and elbow smash as these are not found in any other version of Wansu known in Okinawa karate.
http://www.karateblogger.com/stari/articles/Aishirnryu.htm

No mention of Chinese military.

RuRu Ko

Ryū Ryū Ko (ルールーコウ Rū Rū Kou?, died before 1915), also known as Ryuko, Ryuru Ko, Liu Liu Gung, Liu Liu Ko, To Ru Ko, was a teacher of a style possibly Fujian White Crane, notable for instructing many of the founders of Okinawan martial arts which later produced Karate. The kata Sanchin, taught in Gōjū-ryū and most other styles of Karate, was originally taught by Ryū Ryū Ko.
Although Ryū Ryū Ko is mostly known from the accounts of his Okinawan students, he is sometimes known, based on the research of Tokashiki Iken, as Xie Zhongxiang, born in Changle, Fujian,. Xie Zhongxiang (謝宗祥）was also known as Xia YiYi (謝如如）in local Fukian Dialect, or Xie RuRu in modern Mandarin. Those who believe that Ryu Ryu Ko is Xie Zhongxiang refer to his alias Xie Ru Ru, whereby as a term of endearment amongst friends, he was often referred to as Ru Ru Ko，the suffix ”Ko“ （哥）meaning "Brother", and hence, Ru Ru Ko was a nickname for Xie Zhong Xiang which meant Brother RuRU.
By some accounts he was one of the first generation masters of Míng hè quán (鳴鶴拳, Whooping Crane Fist), which he either learned from his teacher Kwan Pang Yuiba (who was a student of Fāng Qīniáng, the originator of the first White Crane martial art), or created himself, based on more general White Crane style of his teacher. He had to conceal his name and aristocratic lineage and took on the name Ryu Ryu Ko, under which he worked, making household goods from bamboo and cane. He has been teaching martial arts at his home to a very small group of students, which included Higaonna Kanryō, who stayed with Ryu Ryu Ko from 1867 to 1881. Ryu Ryu Ko expanded his class to an actual public school in 1883, running it with his assistant, Wai Shinzan (Wai Xinxian).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryū_Ryū_Ko

Not military and not in Okinawa.

Wai Shinzan

What persons are "Wai Shinzan" and "Tou Ruko"?( These are the pronunciations of an old Okinawa language.)
"Wai Shinzan" is Chinese martial artist and teacher of ARAGAKI Sesyo (Teacher of HIGAONNA Kanryo) . His real name is WANG Daxing(1793?～1894&#65311. He came to Okinawa twice at 1838 and 1866 as a military arts executive of the Chinese government accompanying.. The pronunciation "Wai Shinzan" originates in "Wang Shijiang (meaning of Wang Sensei)".. Wai Shinzan had kept deeply relations with Shihan in Okinawa. In martial arts book "Bubishi" mainly handed down to Goju-ryu, his philosophy is recorded with his pen name "WANG Yuedeng".( "Bubishi" can be called Bible of Goju-ryu&#65294　. He was regarded as one of the origins of Goju-ryu. But MATSUMURA Sokon was his student too.And thereares his influences also in the Syuri-De (the roots of Syotokan-Ryu and Shito-Ryu) and Tomari-De. For example.the Kata's names such as "Wankan", "Wansyu" "Unsu" originate in the alias named Wang Shijiang. "Wankan" is a shortened form of "Wan-Bukan". Bukan is a meaning of martial bureaucrat. "Wansyu" is a shortened form of "Wang Shijiang (meaning of Wang Sensei)". "Unsu" is the one that the shortened form of "Wang Shijiang" and the pronunciation were changed. By the way, he was a famous martial artist in China "White Crane Kung Fu ". Therefore, Karate has the influence fron this Kun-Fu.
(attention; Wai Shinzan = WANG Shijiang =WANG Daxing = WANG Yuedeng)
http://www.japan-karate.com/goju-ryu karate history.html

What is a 'military arts executive'?

Ason

Shaolin Kempo (also Shorin Kempo, Shaolin Ryu, Shorin Ryu, Zhao Ling Liu in Chinese) was first mentioned in an ancient Japanese document. Ason, a Chinese martial arts teacher, taught some students in Kumemura on Okinawa in the art of Shaolin Kempo. However, this first line ended with Tomigusuku. Next one finds no mention, also which time Ason stayed on Okinawa is not clearly proven. In the fifties of last century, the martial art of Kempo is introduced under the name Kuntao in the Netherlands. To what extent it is a similar system is, which was taught by Ason Liu as Zhao Ling on Okinawa, one could only speculate. Historians believe, however, that Kuntao in the course of trade relations between China and Southeast Asia is widespread in this area. Assuming, then the Okinawan Kempo has the same roots as the Southeast Asian Kuntao styles that you search in the southern Chinese province of Fujian (Fukien jap) must. There was the White Crane style of Baihequan justified the significant influence on the martial arts in Okinawa and had probably also in Southeast Asia.
http://www.shorin-kempo-ryu.com/articles.php?lng=en&pg=7

Can't find any reference to 'military' and he was in Tomari.

Kusanku

The mysterious Kusanku of a Chinese envoy settled in Okinawa for some time.His most famous student was Satunuku "Tode" Sakugawa (1733-1815). It is believed Sakugawa became a student of Kusanku in 1756. Sakugawa was a student of Takahara Peichin (1683-1760) (Peichin is a title of status) until the arrival of Kusanku in Okinawa. At that time Sakugawa was granted permission from Takahara Peichin to train under Kusanku.


Sakugawa traveled to China with Kusanku to study Kempo. He returned to Okinawa in 1762 to introduce this fighting method. Before long Sakugawa was considered an expert in the Chinese hand fighting method. It is said that Sakugawa was awarded the title of Satonushi for his services to the Okinawa King.


Sakugawa soon started to teach the Chinese hand way in Okinawa. Combining what both his teachers had taught him, he structured a training system. This made him the first Okinawan teacher of Tode. Many of his students rose to greatness. Among them were Chokun Satunku Macabe, Satunuku Ukuda, Chikuntonoshinunjo Matsumoto, Kojo, Yamaguchi ("Bushi" Sakumoto), Unsume, and Sokon "Bushi" Chikatosinumjo Matsumura.


It would be Sakagawa's student, Sokon Bushi Matsumura, who would be considered the forefather of many Karate styles.


Sokon "Bushi" Matsumura (1797-1889)


Sokon (Title of honor) Bushi (Warrior) Matsurmura's (1797-1889) first teacher was seventy eight years old and a past student of both the great Takahara Pechin (Pechin is a title of status) (1683-1760) and Kusanku (Chinese official). His name was Tode (Chinese hand way) Sakugawa (1733-1815). Matsumura was the last of many students of Sakugawa but became the most famous.


Many years later Bushi Matsumura studied with a Chinese trader named Chinto. It is believed Bushi Matsumura created the kata Chinto after his teacher from the movements he had taught him.


The Royal family of Sho acquired Bushi Matsumura for their service. There he became Chief Tode Instructor and a bodyguard of the King. Some time later around 1830 he traveled to China to study Shaolin Gong-fu (Kempo or Fist method). Most secret of what Bushi Matsumura learned was the White Crane method. This system he taught only to his son, Nabi Matsumura (1860-1930). As part as an envoy of the King he had the opportunity to travel into the Chinese province of Fukien. It is believed while there he studied under Ason and Iwah, both military attaches.


The title "Bushi" was given to him by King Sho for his great accomplishments. Many times Bushi Matsumura had to prove his ability against foe, though never was he defeated.

http://www.angelfire.com/ak4/tw/Karate_History.html

Matsumura was taught by Chinto, a trader.

Iwah

Good luck finding much on this guy. Military? Probably, I did find one reference as military 'envoy', but no suggestion he taught weapons.

Castaway (Chinto)

Legend tells of a shipwrecked Chinese sailor named Chinto who hid in an Okinawan cave and stole his food at night. The villagers complained and Matsumura, the best Samurai, was sent to capture the sailor. When confronted, Chinto successfully blocked or eluded each of Matsumura’s offensive techniques and then he ran away. Matsumura eventually found him hiding in a cemetery and befriended him. Chinto taught Matsumura his “form”. This form was thought to be from Shorin-Ji Kempo and many feel that this is how Shorin-Ji Kempo was brought to Okinawa.
http://www.ashsokinawankarate.com/history_karate.html

Military? Very doubtful. Weapons? No mention.

"Te the evolution"
The development of "Te" continued over many years and was mostly practiced in secret by only a few individuals. development was centered primarily in the three Okinawan villages of Shuri, Naha, and Tomari and village had a master who is credited with developing the style unique to that area. Since Tomari was a town of farmers and fisherman, it was scorned by the villages of the more sophisticated Naha and Shuri. However, many Chinese fisherman came to the port of Tomari and the people there also learned a martial art, which is important to the history of karate also. The two primary Sensei's of Tomari were Matsumora (1829-1898) and Oyadomari (1831-1905). These men never became as famous as Itosu or Higaonna but they each taught men who later played an important role in the history of karate. Oyadomari taught Kyan Chotoku (1870-1945) who created one of the three styles of Shorin-Ryu, Sukunaihayashi Shorin-Ryu. Matsumora's student Motobu, Choki (1871-1944) became known as an excellent fighter.
http://www.angelfire.com/ak4/tw/Karate_History.html

No mention of weapons even though Mutsumura and Higaonna had learned weapons in China along with their Gung fu.

Karate’s origin has been obscured by myths and legends. However, near the time karate was developing, it is known that many scoundrels would rob and kill travelers, not caring if the travelers were beggars or monks. Monks were not allowed to carry weapons. In the monasteries, the monks were taught various forms of self-defense along with their Buddhist religion.
http://www.ashsokinawankarate.com/history_karate.html

Little doubt Kenpo was open hand and was the basis of karate. Weapons were taught, but separately.

So what exactly did I say?

"I don't believe the Okinawans were taught by Chinese military. In fact I would go even further and say that with a couple of documemented examples, the Chinese taught very little to the Okinawans. The exception may have been the guards and garrison at Shuri Castle."


(I think my spell check substituted examples for exceptions .. Sorry )

Maybe I should have qualified Chinese military. Organised military no, individual military in a private capacity, perhaps.

How is that in terms of what you claim? Out of seven teachers maybe two or three were attached to the military and they only taught a handful of Okinawans. Hardly a militia capable of protecting a fleet of ships and no mention anywhere of them teaching weapons. Even though two or three of these men may have been soldiers (they may have just been military in administrative positions as envoys) there is no evidence of large scale military instruction.

And finally, it depends on what you consider empty hand kata to be. I believe that, in China and transmitted to Okinawa, the kata were fighting systems. They only work as a fighting system when you have direct physical control of your opponent. When you introduce weapons the scenario changes. Weapons by their very nature are at arms length. Knives are closer range than sword or bo, spears longer again. You cannot have a predicted response so a weapon kata as such becomes a training system rather than a fighting system. There are weapon kata and there are open hand kata. You may be able to adapt an open hand kata to work with weapons but not without changing a lot of the kata. Why would you bother? :asian:

 

[punisher73]

Maybe I should have qualified Chinese military. Organised military no, individual military in a private capacity, perhaps.

How is that in terms of what you claim? Out of seven teachers maybe two or three were attached to the military and they only taught a handful of Okinawans. Hardly a militia capable of protecting a fleet of ships and no mention anywhere of them teaching weapons. Even though two or three of these men may have been soldiers (they may have just been military in administrative positions as envoys) there is no evidence of large scale military instruction.

And finally, it depends on what you consider empty hand kata to be. I believe that, in China and transmitted to Okinawa, the kata were fighting systems. They only work as a fighting system when you have direct physical control of your opponent. When you introduce weapons the scenario changes. Weapons by their very nature are at arms length. Knives are closer range than sword or bo, spears longer again. You cannot have a predicted response so a weapon kata as such becomes a training system rather than a fighting system. There are weapon kata and there are open hand kata. You may be able to adapt an open hand kata to work with weapons but not without changing a lot of the kata. Why would you bother? :asian:

Agreed about the military idea. It was not like we see in the US, where we send instructors and groups over for the SOLE purpose of training foreign military people from the ground up in certain ways of doing things.

Also, agree that "Yes" there are movements in the katas that if you had a weapon in your hand would still work fairly well for striking. But, that is far different than it being a tool to properly train/strategize/implement a weapon. I am reminded of the movie, "The Little Mermaid" when people start finding certain ideas of what the katas are for.

I think there are too many kata "dinglehoppers" out there.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

In support of my contention that longer forward sequences in kata don't appear to be all that well suited for empty hand fighting, I posted the following links to a range of kata across a number of systems. I am interested in seeing the evidence that these sequences do map well to empty hand fighting.

Unsu (2:18 to 2:36)
Oyadomari Passai 45 to :49)
Wankan 18 to :24)
Kusanku 38 to :45, 1:25 to 1:30, 1:37 to 1:41)
Naihanchi Nidan 06 to :13)
Wansu 10 to :18, 34 to :37)
Gojushiho 30 to :36)
Chinto 32 to :39, :42 to :54, 1:01 to 1:07)
Jion 23 to :28, :37 to :51, 1:01 to 1:10, 1:17 to 1:24)
Chinte (1:10 to 1:16, 1:18 to 1:27, 1:50 to 1:56)
Jitte 23 to :24)
Matsumura Passai 22 to :29)
Koryu Passai 15 to :19)
Ananko 36 to :43)
Anan (7:43 to 7:50, 8:02 to 8:06)
Pachu (3:56 to 4:00)

K Man replied:

I have looked at all of your examples and they are all performed as kihon kata. Have you ever seen advanced forms of these kata. Personally, I have only seen the advanced forms of the Goju kata but there must be practitioners of the other styles teaching advanced forms. (Sorry, I have seen advanced bagua kata performed by Erle Montaigue.)

I would be most grateful if anyone could provide two videos of any Okinawan kata, especially ones from this list, one of the "kihon" kata and one of the "advanced form".

I am also interested in any responses from any non-Goju students. Are there, in your schools, kihon and advanced versions of kata? Did any of Kyan's students, or Itosu's students, or Hohan Soken, provide kihon versions and advanced versions of the kata that have been handed down. Are they done in less widespread systems like Uechi Ryu, Ryuei Ryu, Genseiryu, or Bugeikan?

I was not aware that Higaonna or Miyagi passed down two (or more) versions of each kata, one basic, the other advanced. I have not seen that in any literature, nor seen that in the several Goju dojos I have been in, nor heard that Mabuni, who trained with Higaonna as well as Miyagi, taught multiple versions of kata. I would be most interested to learn if this practice is done in more than one of the systems of Miyagi's students (Higa, Yagi, Miyazato, Toguchi, Yamaguchi), as well as in Toon Ryu, which also descends from Higaonna.

I would be grateful to K Man for links to one Goju kata (please not Gekkisai or Tensho) in both kihon and advanced versions.

Update, I think this is getting very off-thread, so I have reposted this to another thread. Please post any responses on the new thread.

 

[punisher73]

In support of my contention that longer forward sequences in kata don't appear to be all that well suited for empty hand fighting, I posted the following links to a range of kata across a number of systems. I am interested in seeing the evidence that these sequences do map well to empty hand fighting.

Unsu (2:18 to 2:36)
Oyadomari Passai 45 to :49)
Wankan 18 to :24)
Kusanku 38 to :45, 1:25 to 1:30, 1:37 to 1:41)
Naihanchi Nidan 06 to :13)
Wansu 10 to :18, 34 to :37)
Gojushiho 30 to :36)
Chinto 32 to :39, :42 to :54, 1:01 to 1:07)
Jion 23 to :28, :37 to :51, 1:01 to 1:10, 1:17 to 1:24)
Chinte (1:10 to 1:16, 1:18 to 1:27, 1:50 to 1:56)
Jitte 23 to :24)
Matsumura Passai 22 to :29)
Koryu Passai 15 to :19)
Ananko 36 to :43)
Anan (7:43 to 7:50, 8:02 to 8:06)
Pachu (3:56 to 4:00)

K Man replied:



I would be most grateful if anyone could provide two videos of any Okinawan kata, especially ones from this list, one of the "kihon" kata and one of the "advanced form".

I am also interested in any responses from any non-Goju students. Are there, in your schools, kihon and advanced versions of kata? Did any of Kyan's students, or Itosu's students, or Hohan Soken, provide kihon versions and advanced versions of the kata that have been handed down. Are they done in less widespread systems like Uechi Ryu, Ryuei Ryu, Genseiryu, or Bugeikan?

I was not aware that Higaonna or Miyagi passed down two (or more) versions of each kata, one basic, the other advanced. I have not seen that in any literature, nor seen that in the several Goju dojos I have been in, nor heard that Mabuni, who trained with Higaonna as well as Miyagi, taught multiple versions of kata. I would be most interested to learn if this practice is done in more than one of the systems of Miyagi's students (Higa, Yagi, Miyazato, Toguchi, Yamaguchi), as well as in Toon Ryu, which also descends from Higaonna.

I would be grateful to K Man for links to one Goju kata (please not Gekkisai or Tensho) in both kihon and advanced versions.

Update, I think this is getting very off-thread, so I have reposted this to another thread. Please post any responses on the new thread.

Again, this is a misunderstanding of the kata when you say an "advanced" version of the kata or a "basic" version of the kata. The kata will not appear to change (not referring to the refinement as a student advances) it is the application and understanding of the movements that change so there aren't multiple versions of the same kata that a student is learning. Why? There are at LEAST three applications for every sequence in a kata. There is no "only" application to them. When referring to "kihon" or fundamental/foundation/basic applications, those are the movements that appear very plain on the surface and only take into account striking aspects and not really the grappling aspects.


Here is advanced bunkai for some Goju-Ryu katas:

I only looked at a couple of the clips you listed (Wansu and Kusanku). Again, it comes back to the assumption that the whole string is one long continuous single attack and it is not. Notice in that first section of Wansu, there is the downblock followed by the punch, and then a step forward and then movements done very slowly. This type of thing denotes a seperation of ideas, much like a comma does. The slow moving parts usually denote joint/locking aspects of the art. In the case of this video we see the hand come back across to the head/face on the opposite side and then a punch with the other hand. If you look at other versions, that is not a punch but actually a groin grab. So here we see an example of a technique being hidden in plain sight as to the other applications. The older style okinawan katas had more open hands in them to denote grabbing/tearing motions and then were changed to closed hands (horizontal punches) when taught to the general public.

In the part about kusanku, one of the things that it teaches is how to fight at night. The series of steps and "knifehands" aren't strikes at all, but moving forward to find your attacker in the dark. You will also notice many dropping movements in the kata to obscure yourself. In the Isshin-Ryu version, they even highlighted some of the ideas more and included a heel stomp to distract your attacker from your true position.

When you look at Naha based styles (Goju, To'on, Uechi and I would even include Isshin in this analysis) they stayed closer to the source material than the Shuri (Shorin ryu) styles. Itosu admits that he altered the kata for school children to make it less dangerous. Funakoshi admits that he further altered the kata as well. One of the big differences that you see between Naha and Shuri styles is the amount of open hands. Most of the Shuri styles closed alot of the hands and are shown as punches now. This is one reason why I included Isshin-Ryu in with Naha styles, Tatsuo Shimabuku trained with both Miyagi and Kyan and while utilizing many Shuri katas, he reopened alot of the hand strikes to illustrate certain areas of grabbing and such.