Something else comes to mind in this discussion. When interpreting kata, do you assume the opponent has a cutting weapon in hand? Even if you don't know for sure, do you assume they do? Does this affect your bunkai? In bunkai dealing with an initial attack, should the bunkai be interpreted and worked out according to the assumption that the other person has a cutting weapon in hand? I could definitely be wrong, but one of the reasons I don't believe karate was meant for back and forth fighting is precisely this point. I don't particularly think karate as a system assumes the other person is empty handed
Uselessness of kata in the real world!
- Thread starter scottie
- Start date
Well, most of what we call knowledge are intelligent guesses, which survive experiment. There's nothing particularly special with kata understanding. Some things, we are told. Some others, we observe, make hypotheses on and experiment, finding a predictive theory, which we then verify.
For katas is very often possible because they're relatively new stuff, made by human people, we know the general idea of application (combat), and we can to a great degree peel off the layers of misunderstanding and disinformation because we know pretty much when and how it began happening. To make an example, fantasy swords can be completely useless because nobody actually uses them.
The game of Uno is much more arbitrary and simple and would be much harder to decode from nothing (even though once one's got the key idea..). Occam razor's also helps: if one agrees that kata was born from actual, selective experience (in evolutionary terms), it would rapidly be reduced to the simplest form achievable with the means of the time.
To make another example, Champollion did it with far less for hieroglyphs, which nobody alive had been able to read for thousands of years. He did it by looking at patterns, using the knowledge he had of the rosetta stone, making hypotheses, validate them and then trying to apply them to stuff he hadn't seen yet.. and it worked.
In other words, the fact that many people don't have a clue of what the context of kata was, doesn't mean it's not possible to know. It just means that not many yet take the time and effort to drop their preconceptions and trace the history we know of and take the consequences (sadly, the same happens in all courses of life).
And even if some do, the information is not yet disseminated enough yet to become common knowledge.
Actually, often this process is actively countered, because there's already a "common knowledge" and not enough selective pressure to dislodge it (since combat is a very rare occurrence nowadays, so it matters little if interpretations are correct or not).
And finally, there is a huge selective force - money - that pushes in the direction of keeping alive the current idea of context, which makes kata hard to understand.
Imagine commercial interests pushing for a completely different game than Uno but using the same cards, and lots of people invested in playing it. Even knowing the original rules, you would have a hard time getting them out.
In practice, once you realize karate is a set of ideas to deal with close-range confrontations (because these are the confrontations that happened, and still happen, for which we know karate was designed.. exactly like we knew that hieroglyphs were for writing, not just art), without requiring youth, incredible athletic skills and has to be relatively simple, you have most if not all of your context.
Then you observe the katas - as many as you can - and find patterns and ideas that seem to work in that context - where "work" means surviving an encounter with attackers by quickly disabling them. Then you deduce the principles - which must match what you have observed. Here we are aided by the Rosetta stone of texts, writing and direct and indirect comments of people who lived when the art was actually applied and under selective pressure.
Then you put katas and principles together and come up with ideas, putting them to the test, hard - meaning with multiple situations and levels of intensity. Most often only one will actually "work" consistently, in realistic conditions. If there's more than one, you keep looking at situations and find if one works significantly better than the other, or you can apply Occam's razor - if there's a simpler way to achieve the same aim, then the one you're looking at ain't it.
Sometimes one won't manage at all and then yes, that bit of kata is truly lost (that is, maybe until someone more brilliant comes along) but most often you can.
It can be done, it's just that not many do it.
As a person whose art doesn’t have Kata, I’d like to opine anyway. I have a lot of friends who have/had dojos where Kata are an integral part of their art and training.
I’ve trained and taught in all of their dojos.
When they’re learning their Kata, the Kata is explained.
When they’re drilling techniques oftentimes there will be mention of some move from such and such Kata.
When they’re doing one step Kumite, there will sometimes be a particular Kata mentioned as well.
Seems to work pretty well for them.
I think kata comes about when you don't have a partner to train with.
_Simon_
Senior Master
As a BJJ guy, do you assume your opponent has spikes ring on his hand when you play ground game with him?
A boxing girl challenged a Kung Fu girl for a match. During the fight, the boxing girl brought her boxing gloves. The Kung Fu girl brought her Guan Dao.
Same Trick
Purple Belt
There are weapon kata
Iai uses them exclusively
Last edited:
Kata are for training, balance, poise, coordination of limbs which are often expected to do the same action in counter directions or even the same direction (which is harder), improving the memory, and cultivate the tenacity to practise repeatedly.
Then there’s the stochastic possibility that one could be attacked in precisely the way of one of the many kata you have learned. It could happen, just like chimps and typewriters and the works of William Shakespeare.
Then there’s the stochastic possibility that one could be attacked in precisely the way of one of the many kata you have learned. It could happen, just like chimps and typewriters and the works of William Shakespeare.
Fungus
Black Belt
I found out during a xmas party that walking in ura, is an optimal method for moving against the stream in a crowd, especiella if you align to the left-wall, and then walk against the stream in ura you minimize hooking into peoples shoulders and knees.
Edit: I believe it is one of these mythic bunkais that most never find out.
Edit: I believe it is one of these mythic bunkais that most never find out.
Fungus
Black Belt
I's a way to complicate katas, instead of moving forward with one leg, you spin like a ushiro mawashi (but don't kick) and instead just place your back foot in front. We sometimes get to do katas with all movements replaced by the ura version; just to complicate things. In particular when higher and lower ranks to kata in group, the higher ranks get to do the simpler kata but while moving in ura, to get challenged.
I think I understand. We sometimes start a kata facing into the corner of the room rather than the wall. That can be surprisingly disorientating!
SirKicksAlot
Yellow Belt
Also, knowing that Anko Itosu removed some of the more deadly moves of kata and reworked them to be a physical fitness regime for school aged children doesn't help getting to the source. It would have been amazing to watch some of these original kata creators get attacked and see how they defended themselves, then we would have the proverbial smoking gun interpretation of their intended techniques.
SirKicksAlot
Yellow Belt
I also wanted to add that I practice Korean arts (Tang Soo Do, Taekwon Do). So I know a lot of forms but hardly any bunkai is taught. I doubt that the creators of the Taekwon Do tul had any deep meaning embedded in them beyond the basic blocks/ punches/ kicks. It seems their understanding of karate was limited to the outward expression of it without any deeper understanding. In Tang Soo Do, we practice bastardized Shotokan forms that in turn come from the older Okinawan kata. I get that kata/hyung/tul practice is good for concentration, balance, and the like, and I am not against their practice as I have devoted much time to their practice, I just am curious as to the original meaning. I know 1 kata move can be multiple moves, but there was 1 original technique for each move preserved. And I doubt when the old masters were creating kata they thought, "hey, let's make an exercise routine for concentration and balance." I would think they thought, "hey, this move is wicked awesome, we need to never forget it, let's make an exercise to always remember it."
Prince_Alarming
Black Belt
True enough. If I had a buddy or two to practise with at home, i'd be doing that.
That looks very similar to long fist movement.
One of my philosophies and teaching, of kung fu is that Kung Fu should flow from any position. No matter what position I'm in, kung fu should be able to flow from it. I should be able to do some sort of kung fu. This mind set keeps me from trying to only move like kata.
My Kung Fu shadow boxing is like this but less formal. It is done like this.
1. Start with punching. Only punches. String various punching techniques into meaning full combinations that are not from the form. You can only move straight forward once, and you have to take an angle before you can move forward again. Angles movements can be taken consecutively
2. Only kicks. Follow the same rules for #1
3. Kicks and Punches. Follow the same rules for #1
Long fist would take that type of movement to power an attack using the forearm or to power a backfist
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
I think you're incorrect. Karate (and its precursor) and weapons have pretty much always been two separate disciplines. Before 1879 Okinawa had its own tiny rarely used army that fought with weapons as do all armies. Empty hand combat by the army was a distant secondary consideration.
For everyone else, there were periodic bans on weapons, and this became part of the culture. People who were trained in empty hand were highly skilled aristocratic specialists who acted as royal bodyguards and security against pirates. Pre-karate was a separately taught skill. There is no evidence that the CMA forms they learned (or the native Okinawan te) were concerned with armed combat. Okinawa was relatively free from local armed threats.
By the 1880's these combat specialists were converted to police work, where their fighting skills were put to civil, non-lethal uses for the most part. Karate, as we know it, was now developed and its early practitioners' kata was based on empty hand combat, which is karate's heritage.
Defending against a knife is much different than against a punch or grab. Early karate did have some knife defenses (not too effective against a skilled knife wielder) but these were not taken from kata.
