Bunkai taught in the original kwans?

[MAist25]

^^^ Fortunately, my lineage has kept many of the Okinawan kata alive in my system, although I have yet to be taught practical applications. It is most likely that this is because my teacher was not taught. Like you said, I would also love to see some written/quick access to this information as well, as it is difficult to understand what the kata is truly trying to teach without the help of an instructor who has this knowledge.

I do not have Grandmaster Son's book but if you review it and find anything describing bunkai, then please do share!

Also, I find it very interesting that you've heard GM Hwang taught practical applications to forms. I say this because it is my understanding that he learned kata mostly from Funakoshi's books. And although his early writings did include some applications, they were certainly just an introduction to the concept and some basic ideas compared to what was really contained in the kata. Also, my grandmaster, Richard Chun, trained under Chong Soo Hong, who was a very early and well-respected Moo Duk Kwan practitioner, and GM Chun's writings never mention applications being taught, as well as a training environment that was very strict, formal, and regimented, with very little explanation given, and no questions were to be asked. This environment makes it seem highly unlikely that bunkai would have been discussed, although I'm just speculating.

 

[dancingalone]

My instructor has said for years, that Hwang Kee was a proponent of teaching practical applications, and passed on that it was essential to the study of Tang Soo Do.

I don't think GM Hwang taught applications. There's a dearth of information from his senior students about the very subject, and one would think the opposite would be the case if form applications were considered central to his art. In fact, SBN Dan Segarra, who used to be close to HC Hwang, says outright that HC Hwang had him make up his own interpretations of what the Chil Sung hyung could mean for public demo purposes.

Depending on whom you ask, GM Hwang either learned the Japanese kata from a book (likely the Funakoshi Kyohan if so) or from GM Won Kuk Lee. In either case, neither source, Shotokan nor Chung Do Kwan, is noted historically for their bunkai either though certainly present day practitioners aim to change that.

Also, I have Song Duk Song's book at home on Korean Karate. I'll have to review it but I'm pretty sure he'll mention bunkai if he was teaching it in the '60s, in his book.

I've discussed his book briefly here on MT before. His words on haiwan uke were laughable without meaning any insult to GM Son. I wouldn't look in that direction for this type of information.

 

[reeskm]

Wow, you study under KJN Chun's group! Respect
He wrote the intro to a TKD book that my sister gave me for Christmas one year. I was surprised to find out the intro was written by Richard Chun and that he mentioned fondly his memory of training in the old days and is MDK! My sis had no idea that I actually studied MDK Tang Soo Do

Sure, I'll see if I can find time to look over that book "Korean Karate" by Master Son.

I think you have to be very careful regarding KJN Hwang Kee. Maybe you could write a letter to your KJN kindly asking him his opinion or knowledge on this matter? It's my strong belief that Hwang Kee did not learn from books as he claimed, but instead because of political reasons wanted to distance himself from any Japanese culture or link. Some Kwan heads were actually accused and "found guilty" of being "Japanese sympathizers" after the war and it wasn't too good for them at the time. I believe Won Kuk Lee was one of them. He redeemed himself by spending time teaching the police force, supposedly.

My personal hypothesis, is that between 1937 and 1945, Hwang Kee learned Karate through some experienced teachers, maybe even Japanese ones, during his time in Manchuria. But according to his own biography he fled Korea over the Great Wall of China to escape the Japanese in Korea for reportedly teaching Chuan Fa without permission, this is hard to come to terms with.

Perhaps, he never told anybody, maybe even his own family, of what he did between 1937 and 1945. In his MDK history book, there is a massive gap concerning 8 years of his life. That's strange, seeing that time period is what he credits for developing his martial arts. Also, he claims he stopped learning Chuan Fa from Yang, Kuk Jin from 1937 on, and was only able to return briefly for a short time in 1941 to see him. So, what exactly was he doing in Manchuria while working for Mantetsu?

Many Karate masters went to Manchuria during the war. Tons of practitioners also were there while stationed in the army. Ex: Gogen Yamaguchi
It is very possible that as a railroad worker, he might have found himself under a Japanese boss, and while serving his boss then been privilege to learning Karate. There are documented stories of this happening to other men during this time period.

Hwang Kee was too smart and knowledgeable about martial arts - he would have known that studying from a book only was not enough.
Also, he seems to have been well respected among the other early Kwan founders and students. If his techniques or personal history never had any substance at all he would have been outed as a fraud from the get-go. But, that doesn't seem to be the case. He seems to have been respected as an equal.

The only thing for sure is that there is a huge gap in history there, that nobody has ever adequately addressed. And so I maintain that he was taught by an instructor, but the question is who?

 

[reeskm]

In fact, SBN Dan Segarra, who used to be close to HC Hwang, says outright that HC Hwang had him make up his own interpretations of what the Chil Sung hyung could mean for public demo purposes.

I am familiar with SBN Segarra. He has a great deal of knowledge and kind enough to share it. I follow what he says closely. I am dissapointed to hear that HC Hwang would say such things, but I believe too much has been pushed onto him and maybe was not knowledgeable enough when he was forced to take over the SBD MDK system when his father passed.
I have practiced the Chil Sung hyung for a while. They are quite good considering they are so modern. However, they are not of Okinawan origin and so at the moment I wish to leave those out of this discussion. While you can use Tan Tui and Tai Chi applications here, I was never taught any to go along with the Chil Sung Hyung.

I've discussed his book briefly here on MT before. His words on haiwan uke were laughable without meaning any insult to GM Son. I wouldn't look in that direction for this type of information.

I will try searching for your posts. Are you saying the photos on his book of haiwan uke were not very good at all?
Most karate books have lousy pictures and are filled with mistakes though.

 

[dancingalone]

I am familiar with SBN Segarra. He has a great deal of knowledge and kind enough to share it. I follow what he says closely. I am dissapointed to hear that HC Hwang would say such things, but I believe too much has been pushed onto him and maybe was not knowledgeable enough when he was forced to take over the SBD MDK system when his father passed.

By all accounts HC Hwang was capable of incredible feats well into his fifties. He still looks very fit and strong today. I don't know the man personally, but I'd argue it's more instructive to look at all the past MDK seniors that never merged into taekwondo. People like CS Kim and JC Shin and even HC Hwang despite him being a generation or so behind. Look at all their respective organizations - look at their syllabus and what typical practice is like. It sure doesn't look like kata-based application study. To me that speaks volumes about what the MDK taught in the early days. Again, this is not to be taken as a negative thing exclusive of the bunkai discussion we are having.

I have practiced the Chil Sung hyung for a while. They are quite good considering they are so modern. However, they are not of Okinawan origin and so at the moment I wish to leave those out of this discussion. While you can use Tan Tui and Tai Chi applications here, I was never taught any to go along with the Chil Sung Hyung.

I take SBN Segarra's anecdote as further evidence that 'bunkai' just wasn't and isn't a Moo Duk Kwan artifact. These were GM Hwang's creations after all. No need to workout or guess what their meaning was. If he thought their application was important, their study should be front and center in a place of prominence.

I will try searching for your posts. Are you saying the photos on his book of haiwan uke were not very good at all?
Most karate books have lousy pictures and are filled with mistakes though.

Been a while, but his explanation on the purpose of haiwan uke is lacking IMO, to say it mildly. I found the book interesting as a historical example of ma writing from its time though.

 

[MAist25]

My personal hypothesis, is that between 1937 and 1945, Hwang Kee learned Karate through some experienced teachers, maybe even Japanese ones, during his time in Manchuria. But according to his own biography he fled Korea over the Great Wall of China to escape the Japanese in Korea for reportedly teaching Chuan Fa without permission, this is hard to come to terms with.

Perhaps, he never told anybody, maybe even his own family, of what he did between 1937 and 1945. In his MDK history book, there is a massive gap concerning 8 years of his life. That's strange, seeing that time period is what he credits for developing his martial arts. Also, he claims he stopped learning Chuan Fa from Yang, Kuk Jin from 1937 on, and was only able to return briefly for a short time in 1941 to see him. So, what exactly was he doing in Manchuria while working for Mantetsu?

I think this is quite interesting, and it does make sense to me. But my only question is, why wouldn't he have written about it? Surely he was no longer at risk when he was writing his book and I'm sure he would have documented any formal Karate training he had, certainly to boost his credentials. It doesn't make sense that he would write extensively about his martial arts training, yet leave out the time gap in which he had the greatest amount of formal training!

 

[MAist25]

I have to agree with dancingalone that it seems much more likely that bunkai was not something trained in the MDK. In fact, it is my personal belief, based on my knowledge of GM Hwang's training, that if bunkai was trained in any of the original kwans, the MDK would have been the least likely one... And I am a Moo Duk Kwan guy through and through, with a very strong lineage. However, this just seems most logical to me. But hey, anything is possible, and that is why I am really enjoying this discussion so far.

 

[MAist25]

Maybe next time I see GM Chun I will ask him. I do have his phone number and have spoken with him on the phone on several occasions, but it still feels weird calling someone so high up in the Taekwondo world, while I am but a speck of dirt.

 

[reeskm]

Yeah, I'm MDK through and through. My Kwan Jang stressed many many times the importance of always teaching practical applications. His general method was to teach forms separately from bunkai. He never used the word "bunkai", however. He would always call it applications. I would say that for our black belt classes, from the time I first started attending them, he would always give us at least one or two new applications each week. He would often quiz us: "what form is this from?" or "from this move, what do you think it could be?". After we guessed pretty well at the more omote, he'd almost always blow us away with something we never thought of. He knew
these techniques well.

Regarding the Chil Sung forms:
In the last several years, we began teaching and learning Chil Sung. Before that, we didn't even have them in our curriculum. The only reason he added them was because the other groups in Tang Soo Do he had contact with started learning them too, and he didn't want us at a disadvantage at tournaments. However, if he had a deeper reason he didn't say. As he was very old-school TSD, to him the newer forms were less important than the classical set based on Okinawan karate.
Not that he didn't have a huge depth of knowledge tho - he holds very senior ranks in TKD WTF and ITF, Chung Do Kwan TKD and Hapkido as well. He just made a decision since the 1990's to return to the MDK TSD roots.

-If you look at GM Ferraro's videos and material, every single one of his forms he presents contains applications following the form.
-C.S. Kim's videos follow the same style (I have his VHS tapes dating back to the 80's and 90's). They are remarkably consistent and both stress on every video the importance of practical applications.
-The American Tang Soo Do association's videos especially those featuring an intro from GM Byrne also follow the same format, and this is my source for the statement that Hwang Kee always said to teach applications with the hyung.

 

[reeskm]

Maybe next time I see GM Chun I will ask him. I do have his phone number and have spoken with him on the phone on several occasions, but it still feels weird calling someone so high up in the Taekwondo world, while I am but a speck of dirt.

I hear you loud and clear. However, after meeting a lot of senior members, although some of them are hard to approach or it feels intimidating, almost all I have met are getting older. Most of them seem to be very willing to share their knowledge of martial arts freely. Traditional martial arts is not as popular as it once was. The key is to approach with respect and to speak to them at the right time. I think they will greatly respect our desire to get at the root of our art.

Besides getting chewed out, do we really have anything to lose by asking politely?

 

[MAist25]

I agree, he has always been very open and welcoming, telling me to call him if I ever had any questions about anything. Still, I do not wish to be a bother, and he is quite a busy man. Last time I emailed him, he actually responded by asking me to call him, so I might try sending an email. I am positive he will respond, as he always does, and perhaps he will wish to speak to me about my questions on the phone.

 

[reeskm]

Yeah, it seems most grand masters prefer to speak over the phone. That's how mine always is!
Good luck, and if you have a chance please tell him he has a big fan over here in Canada

 

[MAist25]

^^^ Yes, this does seem to be true. Where in Canada are you?

 

[reeskm]

Calgary. Black Belt Academy, Calgary, Alberta

 

[Gorilla]

Gorilla, this is great to hear. Do you know for a fact that Young Sup Lee was actually taught bunkai by Byung Jik Ro while training at the Song Moo Kwan?

Spoke the GM practical application were definetly part of his training but any reference to its Japanese roots was downplayed to say the least. The war was not that far away and the Martial Art were being nationalized in Korea. In using the term Bunkai would have been discouraged.

 

[MAist25]

Very interesting, thank you for asking. It is exciting to hear that applications to the forms were in fact a part of your GM's training. Do you know what forms he practiced back then? I'm assuming the pyung ahns, naihanchi, and the typical Okinawan kata?

 

[reeskm]

I looked through the old books I have this morning.
1) "Korean Karate" by Son - has very simple but well explained applications throughout all his forms in his book.
2) "Karate-Do Kyohan" 2nd Ed by Funakoshi - has no bunkai that I can see directly related to his kata in the book
3) "Best Karate vol. 5 - Heian and Tekki" by Nakayama - has no bunkai on these two kata sets in his book
4) "This is Tang Soo Do" by Byrne and Mitchell - applications are throughout the forms in the book and well explained. I am very familiar with this as I graded to 1st Dan in their association and know a lot of other members. Applications were always taught with the forms and GM Byrne was always insistent applications should be taught with the forms.

I guess, the question comes down to
1) what are you looking for regarding the depth and detail of applications?
2) how far back do practical applications go in Tang Soo Do or Japanese Karate?
3) were practical applications or bunkai always taught in the original kwans?

So far, I have proof back to 1968 as that was the date of publication of Son's book.
Next, I will try and get a copy of an older version of Hwang Ki's books and have a quick read. Not many people I know can afford a copy! LOL

 

[reeskm]

I don't think GM Hwang taught applications. There's a dearth of information from his senior students about the very subject, and one would think the opposite would be the case if form applications were considered central to his art.

Could you qualify "dearth" a bit better? I understand what you are saying but would like to know, compared to your main style, how much more would you be expecting to see?

And let me qualify that I didn't say applications were "central to his art" - what I meant was that applications are an essential part of training in and with kata. That teaching the kata as a pattern or sequence alone is not enough to reach a true understanding of them, which I would agree, a lot of martial artists are probably doing these days.

 

[dancingalone]

Spoke the GM practical application were definetly part of his training but any reference to its Japanese roots was downplayed to say the least. The war was not that far away and the Martial Art were being nationalized in Korea. In using the term Bunkai would have been discouraged.

The operative phrase is 'training applications'. What exactly do we mean by that?

Most everyone says they train kata/hyung applications. Of course they do - the alternative would be 'well, we think the forms are good exercise and they teach idealized form, and they're kinda pretty and cool for competitions'. Furthermore, I'm sure all those people probably are speaking truth as they understand it. They aren't liars.

But the devil is in the details. What does one's syllabus really look like? A typical practice? What do the drills look like? How do you measure or determine competency in bunkai? Questions of these sort go further in my opinion to peel back the nature of the martial art one studies rather than just blankly stating that 'yeah, we study apps'.

Not necessarily aimed at you, Gorilla. Your post just gave me an opportunity to sound off.

 

[dancingalone]

Could you qualify "dearth" a bit better? I understand what you are saying but would like to know, compared to your main style, how much more would you be expecting to see?

I'm occupied right now but will try to jot a few thoughts down later this afternoon.