I read a fantastic article recently by Rob Redmond on the current fad in the karate world, which is to my knowledge spreading into the kung fu world as well, of the study of Bunkai, or kata application. The fact is that there is an entire movement within the martial arts to study the applications of the movements found within the styles individual forms. It has become quite fashionable, and it really is nothing more than a fad. Forms are making a transition from being the rank qualifiers into the “ancient textbooks”. There are instructors who are staking their future on the idea that this will be what saves the traditional martial arts. Unfortunately, I do not think that this will save anything, especially when I look at some of the absurdities which are being promoted. But, in order to keep things coherent, I will take everything one point at a time. I first found out about this trend from another martial arts instructor named John. He presented a training session after attending a seminar from Patrick McCarthy. At first, when things were being verbally presented, I thought, “Hey, this is really something that is lacking in modern sport karate.” Most karate people cannot fight, this is known fact, and proven time and again in many MMA events where there are still the occasional karate guys who think that the reason the other karate guys lost was a lack of skill. I thought that this type of subject would be very good for karate people to study. Coming as I do from a Chinese martial arts training where application was everything, (not all Chinese martial arts take this approach, I just got lucky in finding the instructor I found). When we got to the physical part of the class, there was a severe letdown for me. In the presentation prior to the start of the physical portion, a good bit of time was spent of the degradation and alteration of kata through time and ignorant instructors. The physical portion, however, took the degraded postures and tried, in near desperation, to understand the fighting applications. This, to me, was worse than mere absurdity; it was a terrible waste of time. I just wanted to go home. For me, as well as many other martial artists, I have often felt a disconnect between the forms and the fighting. This applies especially to the Korean and Japanese forms I have studied. Had I not studied under the one who taught me Chinese martial arts, it is more than likely that I would feel the same about the Chinese arts as well. One need not look at Chinese martial arts classes when they practice both form and fighting for long before you will see a much more pronounced disconnect. Kung fu people in general, cannot fight at all, which is why they are the laughing stock for the Korean, Japanese martial artists (old fashion), and MMA fighters today. Most martial artists rightly look at form and fighting as two separate fields of study. For as taught, they are just that – separate fields. When looking into the forms to find the fighting applications, one must remember that there are trends in fighting, just as there are trends in anything else in the world. When the forms from whatever system of martial art you study were created, there was also an acceptable and rather common method of fighting which the form was created in order to address. (Keep in mind I am speaking only of the old forms, not the modern garbage where people want to be special and so create their own forms to make themselves head of a system). An east target for me in this topic is weapon forms. If you look at any of the staff work from my system, you will instantly realize two things. One; you will never win a tournament using my staff forms. Two; you could kill someone using my staff forms. But when most Chinese martial artists fight, they do kickboxing, and poorly. This is the result of only one of two things. They do not know how to apply their system, or their system is full of non-functional garbage. And then there is an added difficulty. Most martial arts classes make the clear distinction for you by dividing their classes into two different disciplines, form and fighting. By and large, most martial artists view the form as a type of performance art. There are those who would argue the point, but the arguments will be very weak, as the facts are the facts. Most martial arts schools reward the students who can take a form and turn it into a stunning display. This begs the question, is it fighting? Then we have the sparring contests. With the interest of the safety of the competitors in mind, the techniques are limited to those which can be performed without causing too much damage to the opponent. There are pads and time limits, and referees. Is this fighting? There is very little crossover between the two disciplines. The people who are most ardently promoting this Bunkai movement tend to claim that they are “reclaiming” their rightful karate heritage. The idea put forth is that Bunkai study is a traditional art, and that the karate brought from Okinawa to Japan, and that brought from Japan to America and Europe was only partial taught, and was a drastically less effective version. This is of course the same story used by Chinese martial artists when they speak of karate being a cheapened version of kung fu. And that story also states that somewhere along the line, either a mass conspiracy, or an end result of a string of poorly taught teachers. But this begs the question, then where are these applications coming from. To me this all sounds as ridiculous as when some Chinese martial arts “masters” claim to have recovered “lost” arts through means as various as meditation or study with monks hidden in the mountains. These types of stories are preposterous, and should be completely ignored. The article which started this one made a point which I feel speaks volumes about why the sudden rediscovery of hidden applications from our martial arts forms should not be completely trusted. This field of study gained its foothold with the rise of MMA events, where traditional martial artists kept getting their nalgas handed to them on a silver platter. Remember what I said about there being trend in fighting styles? Well, do you really want to put all of your faith into a Bunkai directed toward an attack which was common to 18th century Okinawa? Look, you want to know the real applications to the style of martial art you study? Look at the technique, and find a partner and get to work. If you find a way to make it work against a straight punch to the face, a kick to the groin, or a tackle, you have discovered something that could be useful someday. If it only works against the types of attacks which are common to your style of martial art, you have found something less valuable, but you should still invest some time in working it out. Otherwise, forget it. If your Bunkai requires several steps to accomplish, or a lot of space or posture transitions, you are really wasting your time.
I think you’ve made a few good points here. To say that “complex bunkai are a waste of time” assumes a particular context though.
Martial art should have some practical use, but it is still art after all. Was the Sistine Chapel a waste of time?
Well, in short, complex Bunkai are a waste of time. Now, as stated many times here, these are only my opinions, but allow me to explain the thought process which brings about this opinion.
When you are in the middle of a fight, there are a ton of things going on all at once, and unlike what happens in many training halls, your opponent is not only resisting your offense, he is actually trying to hurt you back. If your Bunkai is going to go through a series of techniques on your way to the coup de grace, I feel that you are losing valuable time in ending the conflict.
Would it not be much better to end it quickly?
You are correct in asserting that martial art is still art. And, as such, it is going to have those elements which are more artistic than applicable. But why should there be any practice of those elements which are artistic and not applicable in the study of Bunkai, which is supposed to be application? Regarding the Sistine Chapel…as a painted ceiling, yes it would be a waste of time. As art, by no means could it be classified as a waste of time. It is all in what you are looking for.
I am not attacking your position, just trying to open the conversation and state my position more clearly.
The original “Chinese martial art” was more strongly related to yoga, thus we might conclude that not all applications are martial applications.
I need to differ from this statement, respectfully of course.
This point of view would depend entirely upon what one believes is the “original Chinese Martial Art”. If you were to follow the Bodidharma story, then yes, you would probably be right. But the Bodidharma story is very shaky at best. It is well known and well worn. If I may refernce an article by Chris Toepker (which may be found at http://www.hungkuen.net/article-damo.htm);
“This story has been under scrutiny in China for a very long time, but gone largely unquestioned in the west. For example, Tang Fan Sheng’s 1930 book “A reference on Shaolin and Wudang,” reports that this fable can be traced back to a single source: the preface by Li Jing to the “Marrow Washing Classic.” Li Jing states in this preface that he is writing in during the Tang dynasty. Mr. Tang notes that the Shaolin monastery indeed held a great attraction for literati who wrote many poems and essays featuring the monastery during this time. Shaolin enjoyed such fame not only because it held royal favor, but also because it was also the fountainhead of Chan (Zen). However, Mr. Tang’s research finds many contradictions and anachronisms.
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction Mr. Tang considers is the difference between Damo’s actual teachings and those recorded in the Classics. While Damo preached and practiced a method of direct transmission of enlightenment, the heart and soul of Chan teaching, the Classics are full of chants and “contortions.” Therefore, according to Mr. Tang, the contents are anathema to Damo’s aim and it is hard to believe that anyone living near the time of Damo would have dared to pass on such an obvious disparity. Still, there are even more concrete examples that point directly to the piece’s fraudulence. Among these obvious mistakes is Li Jings report that Damo arrived in the Wei kingdom during Xiao Ming’s “Tai He” year. However, this would place Damo’s arrival more than 30 years before the establishment of Shaolin at all. Someone writing at the time probably wouldn’t make such a mistake. Secondly, much of the text seem to be copied directly from the “Transmission of Light,” a largely allegorical book describing Chan enlightenment which was not written until the Ming dynasty.”
This article inspired me to do my own research, and I have come to be quite convinced. I am currently working on an article to be published here on the very subject of Bodidharma.
There is also much evidence to suggest that China had her own martial arts long before the arrival of Bodidharma as well.
However, the point that “not all applications are martial” is well taken. I need only look to the opening section of the first set that I teach to see this. Some of the Hei Gong sections of the Hung Gar sets have little to nothing in the way of actual combat use.