In 1990 I translated the French edition of Mabuni Kenwa's 1934 \work Goshin Karate Kempo at the request of Joe Swift (For at time there was not an English transation). Later Mario McKenna translated the original Japanese edition.'
.png)
Victor
*I was just reviewing my translation of Mabuni Kenwa's applications for Seiunchin Kata.
*
*The thing standing out is how he's showing the application for the double low *block in the beginning section, as stepping to the rear as you block down.
*
*Then for the spear hand attack, in his application he changes it to a punch. *Or in movement 10 he shows a kick (which is not present in the kata).
*
*So as simple (grin) question. *Was Mabuni Kenwa illustrating a more basic principle than just doing the kata*100%, that being the basic principle of the technique is the most important*thing?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To me, it is obvious that Mabuni was using free associations of ideas. He was writing to the general public in the Budo’s perspective. From the tradition I belong, Seiyunchin has, from the beginning to the end, multiple variations of bearhug releases.
Fernando
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting Fernando-
I use a few in the kata bunkai I emphasize, but not for the whole kata.
This reminds me, however. A while back you mentioned that saifa in your tradition is a counter to judo techniques. I am wondering if you could give us some detail- given Miyagi's judo background and the possible timing of the kata's introduction into Goju, it could have been developed by Miyagi as a counter to a hugely popular Japanese art. Just curious!
Fred
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Victor, Bob, all,
>I am of the opinion that some changes/variations in kata come about because someone decides to physically place a technique in the kata that was previously just implied or was an extension (oyo) of the application.
Yes- or decides a movement has a certain meaning- over time the kata moves in that direction.
>>Was Mabuni Kenwa illustrating a more basic principle than just doing the kata 100%, that being the basic principle of the technique is the most important thing?
>>Or is there a more subtle reference to old style secrecy. And the kata may have been for physical movement practice, but the applications were different (hence more secret).
My opinion here is that he was demonstrating that the kata had meaning to a novice audience, without entering into the deeper details of how this needed to be related to the kata.
While I think the kata can be used in a number of ways, I have been working a good deal over the last few years with bunkai that relate as closely as possible to the movements in the kata. I don't think it is the only way to practice, but I have "found" two things in this manner. 1) as you get closer to the movements, the techniques wind up being simple in format. My opinion is that this makes sense, as simpler techniques are easier to use, but: 2) the techniques get much more complex in their technical attributes- to make them useful concepts of maai, kuzushi, angle of entry, kyusho, and so on are all needed. I feel this is why the kata are so important- they show that the deeper level of knowledge is needed to make simple techniques really work.
However, to do this in a book would require going through the details of these, which a teacher like Mabuni might be both hesitant to do, and understand as being very difficult and not to the benefit of his readers.
The idea of the applications as secret has never flown with me. Secret yes, in that they were not worked with novices or strangers, but I can't believe that they were secret within the training tools of the teacher. When these\ kata were being taught, there were no video tapes, and no public dojo. You only taught to those you chose to teach to. You could teach a form correctly, and have no reason to hide anything. The tools needed to unlock the bunkai could be taught on your own schedule as well, unlocking them as your student grew in trust and skill. There seems no need to me to take time and effort hiding things; this has always seemed more like a romantic version of training history. Since you had control over who trained, and who saw your training, who is there to hide it from? And as for demos, as Matayoshi once said, "ahh, go change it around. Its just a demo, do whatever you want".
>I believe that kata usually demonstrate entries and possible responses as a concept or principle. By extrapolating these principles and creating drills, ala PM, a small number of techniques can address a larger number of possible self-defense situations.
I like this- I have also found that the entry of the kata movements is the most important aspect, and the kata seems to be saying- "do this, and you will be ready to do one of a number of things. This (kata technique) is, I feel a really good option."
>>Which reminds me of my training with Tris Sutrision, where most of the 'bunkai' he taught had nothing to do with the movement of the kata and used the kata just as a mnemonic device.
I'm not sure- I think that the kata can be used this way, though I usually don't. I feel one aspect of that kata is unconscious- a conditioning tool that your body can use without actually thinking about it. To my mind, this means the application needs to be close to the kata movement, because otherwise you have spent years banging movements into muscle memory that won't work. The other aspects of kata discussed here- opening up the inner warrior ala Fernando, or HAV, can both be subsumed in this idea (hence I like it) :) because it does not take away from these possibilities, while also acting as a direct conditioning tool in the case of an attack. I feel, in general, if the kata were just a mnemonic, than they should be discarded, and replaced with simple movement drills and the pair work that they help to remember. Then you would not be wasting time.
>>Perhaps I shouldn't be trying to infer anything from his choices for applications, but its making me think.
That's the fun bit!
cheers,
Fred
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Knepp, Dale, ENV
Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 10:37 am
Subject: Kata creation
Mario,
Thanks for the translation. I have one question that I wanted to ask you concerning these articles.
When were the Uechi and Yagi articles published? Is it safe to assume that they appeared at the same time as the Chibana article in 1966?
This would help in accessing the contents at least for me.
Dale
This was from a private translation I did.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred,
Your analysis fits a pattern that has been deveolping in my mind as well. Kata were not likely fixed in structures prior to the 20th Century. The more that I listen to Taika about how his teachers taught him the more I'm convinced that was the case. The various components of the kata may have been around much longer with various associated "meanings." However, the distictive forms that are practiced today gradually came together as different teachers were inspired to choose which parts to "put together" and interpret in their own ways. So it might be quite appropriate to say that one's teacher created this kata or other.
Dale
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greetings Victor san, do you have a link for this translation ?
*
*I was just reviewing my translation of Mabuni Kenwa's applications for Seiunchin Kata.
*
*The thing standing out is how he's showing the application for the double low *block in the beginning section, as stepping to the rear as you block down.
*Then for the spear hand attack, in his application he changes it to a punch.*Or in movement 10 he shows a kick (which is not present in the kata).
*So as simple (grin) question.*Was Mabuni Kenwa illustrating a more basic principle than just doing thekata*100%, that being the basic principle of the technique is the most important*thing?
I have seen (on tape) seiunchin done with a kick, this was done at a demonstration in Japan by a group that I am not familiar with but, I think they could have been from a Japanese University club, (Kimo sensei had this on a Kodokan News letter) .
In the IR tradition, I also learned to raise the knee when entering on the diagonal movements culminating in a upper cut, in this case we were taught to enter inside rather than out and the knee was used as both protection and to attack into the Thigh on entry, while movements done in the beginning of the kata and on the first diagonals were done moving outside or to the back of the opponent. (no kick needed)
One of the principles that I was taught in this kata was that you must not allow your opponent to pass to the outside of your shoulder (to the rear), or gain your center line to the front. Hence, when moving forward entering you create and exploit this weakness, when moving away from your opponent you guard against this, and it is very important that you do not rotate the back foot off the line to your opponent, to expose your back or center.
In the beginning of Seiunchin I was taught to emphasize the two different aspects of this principle on the the first three movements of the kata and then again on the first diagonals to the corner in both directions which begin with a two handed motion.
In the Goju-ryu seiunchin I was taught the opponent was to the front and the technique are done on an angle keeping your opponent to the front and not allowing him to pass the shoulder (the diagonal horse stance), while in the Isshin-ryu version we do this movements on a straight line, but I was taught that this beginning was stepping behind your opponent on the first part of the movements. So, we have two different sides of the same principle practiced in the kata done by two different styles. One prevents this the other create the same.
On the other hand, I was taught many applications for these movements that reverse the principal emphasis. For instance using the step away from the opponent as part of a finishing movement or technique, and in the case of the inside movements above, using this to the outside, moving behind the opponent, using one hand to pull down and trap the arm and the uppercut motion to strike upward, passing under the backside of the elbow attacking the elbow joint , then using the backfist motion as a elbow strike into the ribs.(so passing behind instead of entering to the center)
I guess what I am saying is that (IMHO) sometimes principles are demonstrated in katas in a way that is not reflected the same way in all applications.
If it is important not to allow someone to pass the shoulder it does not matter if I prevent this by staying in front or passing behind, it only matters that I do not allow it, conversely, I can create and exploit weakness by doing exactly this same thing to my opponent.
The same kata movements can be used to, pass inside, outside , and defend against the same type of passing, the applications are endless and valid as long as they don't violate this premise.
Last thought, on one of Morio Higaonna's Tapes, he says that many specific movements were left out of kata like seiunchin, purposely to protect the secrets of the school when the kata was practiced in public. That is not to say that these were never taught as bunkai, only that they were not demonstrated for public consumption due to rivalry between schools.
Anyway looks like I'm back to long posts.
nice r.t.^..^ Romney
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 4:27 pm
Subject: RE: [Nafadi_Kenkyukai] Mabuni Kenwa
Stan Hart was once a student of Taika Oyata during the early 1980s when Taika first started doing open seminars.. He studied for only a few years and relatively a short time in the overall view of things. I did read an obscure reference to Hakuda mentioned in my research but only a basic description of it.
As far as I can tell Hart created his own version of Hakuda. Hart modified some of the concepts and principles that he learned from Taika and marketed it as Hakuda. Hart's story surrounding the origins of Hakuda and Hakushu have changed and grown over the years. I'd have to dig deep into the files to come up with his original explanation.
But you are right that he doesn't credit Taika Oyata or use his name for which we are grateful. So there is the reason for the similarities that you noticed.
Dale
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve
Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 6:09 pm
Subject: Re:Seiyunchin Bunkai
Here is a sick one for you, that can be used as an oyo to the first series of movement in the kata:
Tori (Attacker):
Kicks migi mae geri gedan, followed by migi oi zuki.
Uke:
Block kick with the overture movement, as you tai sabaki to the outside of the attacker.
Kick migi kansetsu geri to his knee. Do not retract, place all of your weight on that knee, which is now on the grout, and you are in shiko, at a 45 degree angle.
Now instead of using the sui uke (scoop block) as a block, grab tori's hair with your right hand, grip, rotate your hand/forearm as you would in the kata's sui uke block, thereby twisting his head/neck (clockwise as in the kata) into a very ugly and painful position, which places his throat toward you.
Now strike nukite to with the left hand to his throat. O.k., now you can get off of his knee, let go of his hair, and let him fall...
Steve
No comments:
Post a Comment