Bunkai question, regarding interpretations of forms.?

I think that the original interpretations were lost to history, by and large. Many kata are over 100 years old, and I have to wonder how much information was actually passed down. Asian martial culture is built in a very hierarchical manner, and only chosen "inner door" students are taught the "secrets". In addition to this culture of secrecy, I think our own human frailties led to the original meanings being lost. An inner door student meets an early, unexpected death before passing on his knowledge; a student alters a technique because he thinks he's got a better way of doing things; failing memories cause more techniques to be lost or altered. Even from one school to another, within the same system, we sometimes see variations in how the kata are performed. For years, the vast majority of karateka didn't know what some movements were for, so they offered their best guess. I've got a book full of interviews of karate sensei; one from Japan confesses that when American GI's starting asking what certain techniques meant during their post-war practice, he and the other sensei were at a loss, so the started making stuff up. And this spur-of-the-moment interpretation, produced without much forethought or experimentation, got passed on to the next generation of karateka.

The differences between how the kata are performed are important when one is thinking of bunkai. Take even the basic movements of Shotokan as compared to the movements of Matsubayashi Shorin-Ryu. In the beginning of many kata, the practitioner moves to face his left; in Shotokan, this is done by stepping in that direction, while in Shorin-Ryu, the practitioner steps forward, then pivots to face left. Are these differences important? I think they are. Stepping straight into the theoretical attack means you're either crashing the lines or pre-emptively attacking, while the step-and-pivot takes you off the theoretical line of attack and keeps you at a distance.

For years, because kata seemed unrealistic to me, I all but abandonded their practice. In the past three or four years I've begun to re-examine them. I won't pretend to have all the answers, or even a lot of them, but I'm trying to keep an open mind. My guidelines for bunkai are:

-They must be realistic (pressure-tested against common attacks).

-They must reflect the movement in the kata (otherwise, what's the kata for?)

-They must make sense to me.

I must confess that I dislike the idea of a movement having more than one interpretation, but it seems perfectly viable. To this end I've taken a cue from Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming, and looked for a striking, locking, and throwing application of each movement set.

Anyway, I'm just one guy of many who are trying to put meaning to the forms that we've been practicing forever. I'm sure others have much more success than I have. But to your question, do they reflect the original meaning? I'm sure in some cases they do, but that's just the law of averages. I'm sure someone has come up with bunkai that matched the original, but until the kata's creator can point and go, "Yes, THAT'S what I meant!", we'll never know for sure. My two cents.

Great question Judomofo.

I do believe many techniques were hidden. Now many of those techniques are lost because no one knows what they are today. Some of them have been passed down while other were forgotten. Today it leave for private interpretations. There are 1001 possibilities within any kata. Much like when you are working on self defense techniques separate from your kata. How many ways can you block a punch? How many different ways can you counter attack? How many way can you finish off the attacker? How many ways can you control the attacker or use them as a shield if there are multiple attackers? How do I respond to an attack without leaving myself open to a counter attack? As we can see it is an endless amount of possibilities.

I believe something were taught by the old masters many years into a karateka studies. Some never completed the training and never learned. Some were never taught because the old masters past away without teaching them. The knowledge was left that there were hidden techniques. This left other with private interpretations. This also left other not teaching the art correctly simply because they do not know. Hence a kata being a dance for lack of a better term. Like Shihan J said the kata is your style. Id a person knows the style Shorin Ryu, they would know that the styles is made up of joint locks and pressure point strikes. It is very little kicking. The kicks are low kicks. But I dare you to go into most shorin ryu schools and you will find students practicing high kicks and jumping spinning kicks. Hmmmm. Many of those student will not be able to execute a simple wrist lock let alone a bent arm lock. I don't even need to mention a reverse bent arm lock

since non of us were there during the creation of the kata, we cant say what they meant a move to be,

karate, has always contained grappling techniques, such as throw, locks, trap, etc. this there is no doubt in.

what the bunkai and or oyo is in the kata, you have the obvious technique, a strike or block then you have the grappling part what we often say is hidden. neither bunkai nor oyo mean hidden, that is more of a misinterpretation of the words.

take the kata naihanchi this is one of the most misunderstood kata, it has always been a grappling kata, but when i was originally taught this kata 30 years ago, i was told the bunkai was just blocks and strikes, i was not originally taught the grappling parts.

when a novice looks at a kata he sees the obvious a strike or block, when a person that knows the kata or has a more advance understanding of kata, he can see what is a more appropriate bunkai to it or the so called hidden bunkai.

i think the term hidden bunkai or lost bunkai are more of a poor description of what we are describing.

Gichin Funakoshi once said it takes 3 years to learn the most simple kata, this more likely because while the movements can be memorized in a few hours the bunkai and the perfection of the movements cannot.

the old master use to only learn 1 or 2 kata the referred to the kata as ryu because this was there style, so passai was passai ryu, and naihanchi ryu. all the self defense techniques are inside of the kata for the style, now a days many people teach self defense separate because they have no understanding of there kata. kata with out bunkai and oyo are completely useless.

the person that created the kata very well may have had more then one interpretation for. i know if i had created some of them i would have, but since they lived long before most of us we wont know what there intent was. most of karate and kata was handed down to us through an oral history and little was written about its early development.

edit:> a lot of great answers to a great questions thumbs up to everyone

This is what this forum is about.

I feel that if the movement of the kata takes you there, that technique is part of it - whether it has been discovered before or not at all, by anyone - including the highest ranking/inheritor/hanshi/kancho/jukucho, kaicho - whatever. Just because they didn't extract it or discover it doesn't mean that the ap is not part of the kata.

Again, if it takes you there, then that's what it is. Believe me, it will take you there and other places too!

Not all of the leadership in Okinawa are versed in the knowledge of extracting hidden meanings.

There are definite concrete aps for all the techniques in all the kata, and we are learning them today. Even some of the Okinawan Leadership are learning them, after their Master has been dead and buried.

One of my Teachers is Taiwanese. I loved him immediately as soon as I listened to his logic. He was the assistant instructor of Chang Tung Sheng - the Iron Butterfly, before he passed.

Laoshr, which is how Taiwanese Senior Instructors are addressed - not Sifu, said it simply.

There was always someone who would ask him "what do you do if someone _____'s you?"

He would say "I don't know!, I don't care! - it's my art that does it!"

The other guys just didn't get it. They always wanted answers like 'you block a punch like this'.

I remember a day when a big guy from eastern Europe came to the gwan. He was a Dolph Lundgren type.

Laoshr was teaching Crane Spreads Wings from Tai Chi. The guy was grumbling under his voice as Laoshr applied the technique to us in the class. He noticed Dolph's murmurings, so he said -

"Okay, you come here". The guy got up and came on the floor and Laoshr told him to grab him - we were grabbing him by the wrists. Dolph grabs and tenses up his muscles are now bulging, to try and stoop Laoshr.

Laoshr says - "oh, okay, he make muscle I do this!" This guy was about 6'4" and muscular. He dropped like a sack o' scat

and the look on his face was a true kodak moment. I really wish someone was recording. He never came back.

I swear to the end of earth that this happened - I was there.

I included this to illustrate that application is not a fixed immutable thing.

This is where the theories of Yin Yang, Five Elements, Quadrant theory - come into play.

In my teaching method, I teach that each technique has multiple techniques and variations.

I believe that the "lost part" of the art is having the understanding that you will always find a new technique and the fact that the technique is there means that it was always there.

Some of the people I grew up with were students of GM Antonio Pereira - Founder of Miyama Ryu Jujutsu. I met his Senior students - Ibarra, Marquez and his Uchi Deshi - Shinan Negron.

Watching these Masters and hanging out with my buddies, I saw the whole curriculum and I can say that I was always able to spot techniques that were in my Goju Ryu kata.

When Laoshr told me that all the arts have the same techniques, just different delivery, I understood because I was able to pick it up.

Dude, answering this question was an exercise in itself!

Wow another excellent question, and I do nto know if my answer will do it justice.

I feel it is a combination of both "hidden" techniques and ones own perceprion. I do know that when I startesd training almost 19 years ago, back before grappling became so popular, my instructor was showing locks, chokes, and throws from our kata's, so in that essence, I think they were always there. I do think that the popularity of grappling has simply opened up more peoples eyes to the fact that standing grappling is included in kata, and they simply decided that they were hidden techniques.

As for ground fighting I really can't say, however I do know there is a version of Okinawan grappling called Tegumi, and that most of the great karate masters dids tudy it, so it is not beyond the realm of possibility that they included it. I have in fact seen ground technoques that look axactly like some of the standing motions in Nahachin kata.

I have seen the same moves interprited as striking by one person, grappling by another, and a combination of the two by yet another, and all of them worked for that person, but may not have worked for everybody. I think it has more to do with a persons experience and preference then actual set hidden techniques, and I also think this is part of teh reason that they say it can take a lifetime to master a kata.

There are only so many ways a human body can move, and I think we tend to forget that. I do think people tend to find applications in kata that suit them, and there fighting style, as opposed to those techniques having been "hidden" on purpose. I think they were designed to be able to be interprited many different ways.

I think that depends on the origin of the kata. There have been occasions where two different styles use the same form, called the same name but have slight variations. I attribute this to interpretation of the technique. To be completely honest, I do not believe that the ancient masters decided to put hidden moves when originating their katas. With the watered down version of martial arts here in the states and the ever present branching off of black belts to make their own style or what have you, everyone is going to have their own view of what each kata's techniques are. To make a short story long...no, I don't believe there are hidden techniques only different interpretations of what that technique is due to the true meaning being lost in translation resulting from many centuries of being passed down from teacher to student.

Your question brings up a good point and touches on the aspect that TMA was originally not slanted to be taught to young children in general originally. In Shito-ryu there are many knife hand strikes in kata at the intermediate and advanced levels and I think you can teach the kata first without teaching the actual application and them applying it in class until they have just a little more rank and maturity. Kids mature so fast in their thinking and there is a big difference in a nine year old and a ten year old in development if they are being raised properly. While that nine year old might be learning that is a shuto to the side of the neck they are not actually using and employing that technique until later in most of their training in my classes. Skipping over them in their training and them using and applying them I think is the right approach and the one that I take. As that child continues to train and study martial arts I can observe and view their attitude and approach and if they should learn lethal type techniques. I told more than one parent in the past that my school and classes were not for their child and to take them down the road where they play at learning and doing martial arts and not the real thing. This was often one of the things I would take into consideration when making such a decision along with the child's current approach and attitude towards things. A lot of schools play at teaching real martial arts and have a multitude of students that play at taking and doing martial arts. Can they learn enough to still hurt someone else? Most definitely I think but it won't be because I taught them or they were a student of mine. Beyond this I am not sure if there is anything else that can be done on my part that I don't already do. Your question does highlight a paradox though and I think the answer lies in downplaying some aspects until the student reaches a level of rank and maturity and then they practice applying and learning more in depth about those things that they might have been exposed to several months or more earlier in a kata or form.

I see a lot of excellent answers posted here and I doubt if I could give any better answer. But I do like to pick up on your question on whether it might be due to "the evolution of a Martial Artist to add new techniques that he has interpreted on his own to the art" and add my two cents on that line of thought. To be honest, I have not formally studied Karate, so I can't speak with any authority on Karate Katas. The only forms I have studied were those of Tai Chi way back in college as a form of exercise, the forms I learned where the 24 standardized exercise forms you see the old folks doing at the park and I've noticed that I could easily make out some hidden techniques in something as simple as the opening form for example due to my background in other martial arts. This got me thinking that maybe since most martial arts were created from universal principles of fighting and movements, it's conceivable that the highest refined forms the founders invariably chose to include in their Kata would somehow also be the ones that can easily transition into different applications as a platform that depends on the skill and experience of the practitioner to complete. Kinda like the way Jazz musicians can improvise on a standard melody and make their own music depending on their preference of whether to slow the tempo down or speed it up. Whether this could be true or not would be open to debate, but still, I say it is possible, after all, unless we grow an extra set of arms or legs, there are only so many techniques we can come up with, the only obstacles to truly learning all of them is time and our mortality. Although the old masters lived and breathed martial arts and strived to achieve perfection in it. A lifetime is simply not enough to learn everything. Maybe these Katas are their way of passing down what they have started for the next succeeding generations to continue to add to and finish. Whether this was their intention or not, we'd never know, I guess what's left for us to do is just to find out what works and what doesn't.

There is much to this subject and I'm afraid that I can't do it justice. So I'll answer it this way. I would agree with you that much of the so-called bunkai I've seen some people propose is of questionable nature. Some of it looks to me like they were determined to find something that would fit as an explanation. I'll not mention names or organizations of the offending parties. What I do know is this. My early instructors in the 1960's and 1970's would always tell us that there were hidden techniques in the kata. We would ask what techniques he referred to. He would always say that when we had studied many, many years, we would understand. For many years I wondered what these technique were. I had hoped that one day the light would suddenly go on and I'd be enlightened. After many years of training the light was not going on. In 1982, I was training with Ron Cherry Shihan/Hachidan. The dojo had many video tapes, which we advanced student were allowed to watch. One Saturday afternoon a friend pulled out one tape and told me that I had to see this guy. It turned out to be an old video of Seiyu Oyata doing kata and bunkai. This video was not intended for the public. On the video Oyata was doing the most amazing techniques that clearly was very different from anything I had ever seen anyone do. All my life I'd read about the legendary abilities of the old masters. Here for the first time I was seeing it for real. We viewed the tape at slow motion and freeze fram, with frame advance. We looked for any trace of a hint that the Uke were faking it. These guys were being hit really hard. They were unconscious before they hit the floor. From that day on, I knew that Kyusho and Tuite were real. Since that day I have been turning over rocks (so to speak) and looking to see what come up. Sometimes nothing. Sometimes I find some bunkai that looks made up like the ones you mentioned. Sometimes I run across bunkai that really makes sense and is an advanced yet practical way of looking at things. There are many nay sayers out there. I was one of them. Now i know that Hidden technique is not a fairy tale. People can laugh and say what they like. I will just quietly go about searching for keys and those that can show more bunkai. The hardest thing sometimes is to separate bunkai that is the real thing from those that are not.

First off, good question, this one is also getting marked as interesting.

I believe that Bunkai can really only be interpreted. Without the founder of the style or documented record of the complete style to verify your interpretation you can never say for sure whether it is anything more than that. This doesn't negate the value of the interpretation but I believe you should remain flexible and receptive to other possible interpretations.

You used the Bible as an example, I'll just use clouds. I could stare at a formation and see a bunny head. Another person could stare and see a hand giving the peace sign? Neither of us is right because ultimately we're just staring at a cloud but that doesn't mean we can't share our point of view.

Taking this a little further, people have an innate ability to perceive things that are familiar to them. This is why we see a face on Mars when really it's just rock formations casting shadows, it also let's us see Jesus on a grilled cheese sandwich. This hard wiring is primarily for spotting faces but idea applies to spotting what we're familiar with as well. With the exposure that grappling is getting, a lot of practitioners are now being exposed to it. Finding similar movements and adding new meaning to them based on new knowledge just makes a certain amount of sense.

Now this part I could be off base on, but it seems that some martial artists view their instructor and style in an ineffable regard. Flaws in their ability isn't the fault of the style or the teacher but in their own dedication to their training. The fact is that no style is perfect and the same holds true for people. If you like to maintain this regard from students despite obvious holes in your system, claiming the techniques are there and students just need to "discover" them perpetuates the illusion. While this is bad, it also encourages students to think for themselves after a point and develop the style further. It's a built in mechanism to promote evolution while maintaining reverence for the instructor and style. Pretty clever really.

It is true that many people who were trained incorrectly in Karate are now stating the subject matter about grappling but I was learning that in my kata as far back as 1978 when I began...and there are many that were learning it from farther back than I was. I will admit though that after began studying Judo in 1986 I was constantly looking for ways to apply that knowledge to my kata because the throws and locks were there...just different than what I was learning in Judo class.

I don't believe that there are lost techniques within Kata anymore but rather misinterpretations or made up things by people who failed to get the correct training...or did not have it all. That is why I began traveling to Okinawa back in 1989...to figure out what I was missing in my training.

Higoanna Sensei, one the highest respected Sensei of Goju Ryu, once told me that Bunkai is always subject to interpretation. Even though we may study a set manner of bunkai applications or atemi waza each person will do it differently because no two people are alike. As I progressed over the years I have figured out that I may perform a particular bunkai differently than most of my black belts because I have more knowledge but theirs is good as well.

I do believe that we, as westernized martial artists, place way to much emphasis on training for competition or concern about fighting rather than really seeing the bigger picture. I was guilty of this myself as well when I was younger. It had to look pretty for tournaments and I had to know how to sport fight...but now I see that the knowledge and life long study of perfection of the techniques is the true meaning behind studying a martial art. It is a shame that others do not share that ideal because we truly could grow if ego was not in our way.