"Ryu"ShiKan stated:
I agree with you (Chufeng) on the "spoon feeding" part. Something that is earned too easily is easily taken for granted or disregarded.
Your teachers in school didn't stand there and tell you the answers to all the questions.........you wouldn't learn anything if they did.
What they did do was teach you how to find the answer yourself thereby letting you learn more.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day........teach him how to fish and you feed him for life.
Fellow karateka (and other martial artists). Following is a long post. (Did someone expect a short one from me?) I started this new thread to take the non-application issues off the application thread, as I and several others have requested. I think our colleague "Ryu"ShiKan deserves a thorough rebuttal to his point above regarding the need to limit what you teach a student.
I imagine that from the perspective describe in the quote above, that all martial arts teachers must somehow limit what they show to their students. It seems it would be fine to show their students some techniques, but not others.(What these are, or how they are determined, I don't know). Perhaps it is appropriate if these techniques are limited to basic kicks, blocks and strikes, or body shifting, or other basic patterns. Perhaps if merely a simple kick is shown, then the teacher would not be "tell[ing] you (the student) the answers to all the questions."
But if an interpretation to a series of movements in a kata is shown, then it seems to appear, according to the above argument, that the student would then be denied the ability to learn for himself. Rather, it seems from the above perspective, that it would be optimal to leave kata as somewhat of a mystery to students.
This approach shouldn't be surprising. It pretty accurately describes much the way that kata has been handed down over the past 50 years. And the results are a dismal failure. System after system practices kata as a dance, as something to be done only for promotions and in tournaments. Countless hours of students' practice time are spent mindlessly going over repetitive movements they have no hope of making meaning out of. System after system has downplayed the practice of kata to where a given form may be practiced, in the dojo, perhaps a few times a month. And this is in the "kata oriented" systems.
Many systems have reacted by abandoning kata altogether. I fully support this. I think it is foolish to practice a movement that has no meaning for you. For those interested in self-defense, as do the vast majority of the students who have trained with me, the key to success is massive repetition of effective techniques. A technique will never be effective if you don't know how to apply it. For perhaps hundreds of thousands, if not millions of students in karate and Tae Kwon Do, there is blind repetition of movements that will never make sense to them.
This is a failed experiment on a grand scale.
I take a different approach. I train in, and teach a system that does nothing but kata, as well as partner work for the practice of applications from kata. Of course, we include makiwara and bag work to build power for these combinations, as well as other strengthening exercises. After two weeks, my beginning students practice Pinan Shodan 25 times per evening. After a semester, they will have practiced 1000 repetitions. This repetition only begins to approach the level of repetition practiced in Okinawa 100 years ago. Is this the only way to practice self-defense, or karate? Absolutely not, there are many, many ways. I just try to model my training as best I can on how karate might have been practiced 100 years ago. (This is not all that clear, as the historical record is spotty.) But there are many wonderful arts out there that do things a lot different.
I too agree with the "teach a man to fish" concept but before he can fish, he needs a pole, a line, and a hook (or in Okinawa, perhaps a net or a nunte sai). I don't think students have the luxury of not learning practical applications right away. When are they best taught? Should they wait a year? How about two? What happens to the two year students who are attacked and hurt seriously, if not killed? Do you then apologize and say that the time just wasn't right for you to teach them practical applications?
I start right away, with movements from kata. Like other teachers, I could teach any movements I want. I choose those that Itosu taught, the movements from his kata. Others choose other techniques and combinations. There is lots good out there. The key is that it is best if they are effective.
I have a couple of goals for my students. Like in Okinawa 100 years ago, the key is massive repetitions in the air, and then lower repetitions to the bag (improved substitute for makiwara) and with partners. My students take sequential movements from kata, and practice them with partners in self defense patterns, all the way to a takedown. The finish after the takedown is often added, but in many cases, (like my Naihanchi Shodan stomp), the finish can often come from the next step in the kata. This approach is not that common. It is but one. But it is effective. You leverage the muscle memory built by countless repetitions to execute, just as in the kata. No changes are necessary. You have power where you need it and relaxation where you need it.
It is all too unfortunate that so many, many karate systems have such simplistic approaches to bunkai. A block then a strike, or a block then a kick and a strike. How about this ridiculous interpretation. As you proceed forward with several steps (for example in Pinan Shodan where there are three sequential steps forward with a shuto (knife hand) movement, the opponent is stepping back, one step at a time and striking. I find it difficult to imagine that anybody could imagine a fight unfolding like this. But this bunkai is found in many systems. Students often blindly follow what their sensei teach, without the critical question, "would it work for me?"
In some of the kenpo (Japanese and Chinese) and other Chinese systems, an attack is often met with a response that can only be considered a barrage. Multiple strikes, kicks and locks. This multi-counter response seems to make such good sense. A single counter might not work. It might be blocked or miss. It might not hit hard enough, whatever.
But in many Japanese, as well as Okinawan systems today, there is often a significant emphasis on ikken hisatsu. (One strike kills or better, one strike, certain death). Often, the bunkai of many karate systems leans heavily on a single counterstrike to the solar plexus. In fact, jiyu kumite in general, and certainly most tournament jiyu kumite is built around this very principle.
Naïve students accept the teachings of their teachers that they can hit a large aggressive opponent with a single strike to his mid-section and end the fight. The notion that the solar plexus is the prime target in a real life fight, with the high stakes that are involved, is, in my view, a fantasy. It is very hard to hit, and even harder to kick. And surrounding it is perhaps the best protected part of the body.
For many who study other martial systems, the whole notion of ending the attack of a large aggressive attacker with a single strike is absurd. Are there masters out there that can do this? Sure. Oyata is a great example. Mas Oyama, probably even a better one. But it takes many, many years, perhaps decades, and countless hours at the makiwara, to get this power. Yet this technique is taught as if students who train once or twice a week will acquire this capability in perhaps a short period (two to three years perhaps).
Teaching ikken hitatsu to gullible beginners is to me, simply wrong. You are taking a dangerous situation (an attack) and compounding it by having a response that is likely to be completely ineffective. But if some poor student gets seriously hurt, perhaps even after years of training, the sensei has no skin in the game.
There are a growing number of systems and dojos that have transcended beyond this, and teach not just any old bunkai, but meaningful bunkai. But they are still well in the minority. We all can be thankful that Oyata has exposed much, especially regarding locking techniques and striking to vital zones.
There are many other contributors to the bunkai resurgence, especially those that have cross-trained in grappling arts. In order for people to look deeply inside the kata, they need glimpses of what is there. Let them see a variety of ideas for the movements, and maybe they too can find something that works for themselves.
In some cases, they can take non-sequential movements, say this block, coupled with that step two movements earlier, and add this counter from three moves later. They can patch it altogether and come up with a technique. That is one approach, and Oyata has done this with great brilliance in his technique. But then when the kata is practiced, that combination is not practiced. However, if combinations using sequential movements are studied, then they are practiced, as they are executed, when the kata is.
One of Itosu's 10 precepts urged students to study the meaning of the movements (kata) for themselves. But, and here is the key requirement, they FIRST need to learn the theory of torite (usage). Many systems today do not teach much in the way of torite. They do not teach the breadth of atemi waza (striking techniques). Many karate systems rarely teach the importance of obvious vital zones such as the neck and groin, rather than just the solar plexus. Many do not teach locks and joint manipulations. Many do not teach much in the way of takedowns, and they certainly don't teach all that many takedowns from within the movements of kata. Many systems teach no groundfighting despite the rather high probability that an attack can be more than a punch, kick or grab, and that you can easily wind up on the ground.
And many pay only lip service to the repetitions needed to make techniques useful, especially when it comes to the practice of kata. Perhaps a few each week, rather than the many dozens, or better yet hundreds, needed to really develop effectiveness.
But other "non-karate" systems are replete with some of these concepts. Many include great repetitions of movements. The Chi na of Taichi is a rich art of grappling or seizing, as are many of the Chinese systems. Judo, Ju Jitsu and Aikido, teach an abundance of locking and throwing techniques, as do many Phillipino systems. And ti, is it was practiced in Okinawa, 100 years ago, was full of these concepts. What has happened? Who knows? Many of us have our pet theories.
My posts are intended to provide some insight into the vast capability of kata, to those who have not considered such possibilities before, and to learn from others that have developed or learned other useful applications. What I have done in my interpretations is not all that difficult, and I want to encourage others to do the same. My ideas come from a simple series of "what-if" questions. What if it was a right strike. What if I wanted to effectively hit him on this next move. What if I tried to use the next direction to take him down.
My threads are somewhat lengthy because I am introducing some karateka to concepts they might not have considered before. I think of this as Itosu's notion of torite, or theory of usage. For example, in Aikido, as well as other arts, you treat your body as the weapon. It is used in virtually every move. That differs from some karate systems where many blocks, and sometimes the strikes as well are done with just arm movements with little or no gain from body rotation. Here is another example. In Aikido, Judo and Ju Jitsu, large turns are used to throw an opponent to the defender's rear. Great concept. You can't see what is behind you, so you take no chances. Just insert attacker A into the path of potential attacker B, whom you can't see.
Here's another. Movements have lots of meanings and should be looked upon with as a blank slate. Take any arm movement. It may look like a block in the kata, but what could be accomplished if it were viewed as a lock, or a strike. Here's another. Imagine your opponent is a lot bigger and is punching to your head with a right hook. Many view this as a high probability attack. The typical outside blocks, found everywhere in the kata, which one may think can only protect the solar plexus, can be raised up, every so slightly to protect your very vulnerable head. Here's another, your front kick to your own stomach or solar plexus level, is about the perfect height for a groin kick to a larger opponent, so just because you practice a kick to your own solar plexus height, doesn't mean you necessarily have to use it against an attacker's solar plexus. Think groin, and the neck becomes a great target.
This is all torite, or theory of usage and I include these concepts in my posts to help karateka understand perhaps a different way to think about the movements they practice every day. When I started the application thread, I was informed that text was not a useful way to pass along ideas. I disagree. As long as the detail is there, text can do accomplish a great deas.
I like to think that instead of showing people how to fight, I help them understand how they can look into their own repetitive movements (kata) such that they can teach themselves how to fight. I never claimed to have all the bunkai, not even a small percentage of it. I have effective bunkai out of the sequential movements of the kata. Anyone can find new applications, and they can found what I have found, if only they take the time to look.
Kind of like teaching a man to fish.
