Hey, you can attack now 'cause I'm stepping back!

I was recently reading someone espousing principles of kata analysis on a discussion forum and I was reminded--because they were repeating things they had been told--of something Toguchi sensei said in his second book: Okinawan Goju-Ryu II: Advanced Techniques of Shorei-Kan Karate. Of course, I've never been quite sure what may have been lost in translation, since it says right under the title that the book is "compiled by Toshio Tamano and Scott Lenzi." Since Toguchi sensei is dead, who's to know? But so much of Okinawan karate has been passed on by word of mouth. So much is learned in the dojo just by watching, and I've often wondered how many times we may have gotten something completely wrong, or only partially understood something. There was a wonderful description by Alan Ruddock of an Aikido class with Ueshiba sensei in an issue of Classical Fighting Arts (Vol. 2, no. 11, issue #34), where he describes Ueshiba sensei as stepping on the mat, demonstrating a technique, and then not saying another word! Ruddock says, in his memoir, that O-Sensei "went round smiling at everyone, with no clues, correction, or suggestions. There was no teaching as we understand it" (p. 46). The implication is that everyone interpreted what the teacher demonstrated in their own way. I find this fascinating in its broader implications.

Anyway, Toguchi sensei lists three rules of kata analysis:

1) Don't be deceived by the Enbusen Rule. 2) Techniques executed while advancing imply attacking techniques. Those executed while retreating imply defensive or blocking techniques. 3) There is only one enemy and he/she is in front of you (Toguchi, p. 49.).

Not to put too fine a point on it, but each of these "three main principles" is a little suspect. At the very least, they are ambiguous enough to leave one with serious questions as to their meaning. For example: Toguchi sensei (if we can indeed attribute these ideas to him and not to some intrepretation by those who have "compiled" his notions into book form) says, in explanation of the first principle, that "applying kata movements directly to kumite is a mistake" (p. 50). Why then do we have kata? To my way of thinking, if you apply the movements of kata exactly the way they occur in kata, you will not only have a very effective method of self-defense, but you will also thereby learn the principles--they just may not be the same sort of principles that Toguchi sensei refers to. Or was there something lost in the translation?

His second principle is that "techniques executed while advancing imply attacking techniques. Those executed while retreating imply defensive or blocking techniques" (p. 49). It is, of course, very difficult to separate out offensive and defensive movements in Goju-Ryu. For example, the first move in Seiunchin steps forward to apply an arm-bar to release one's hands from a wrist grab. Is this offensive or defensive? Sanseiru steps back (after the three slow "punches") to apply an arm-bar. But if we look at one of the more obvious examples of a technique that seems to show a defensive or blocking technique as the defender or kata practitioner is stepping back--the apparent "down block" in shiko-dachi that occurs in the middle of Seiunchin--we see that in this case, as in a number of others, one is stepping back to attack. In other words, there are enough exceptions for this rule to also be called into question.

Toguchi sensei's last principle--"There is only one enemy and he/she is in front of you."--seems on the surface to be the easiest to digest. There is one attacker, not multiple attackers. We turn in kata to face a single attacker, whether we are "flanking" them or fighting them on an angle, as is often the case, or facing them, kata does not show one surrounded by a gang--that's not the meaning of the turns.

So, I guess, one out of three ain't bad, is it?

Forums and stuff

Sometimes when I read posts on the Internet about Goju-ryu (or perhaps martial arts in general), I imagine the people actually having conversations face to face. One I read recently would go something like this:

"Hey, I'm thinking katas have themes...ya know, personalities that make them all distinct." (Does that mean the katas are different...not all the same?!)

"I can see that," his forum friend answers in a non-judgmental way, not wishing to offend. (Sometimes, IMHO, I wish people would be a bit more offensive.)

"So what do you think about Saifa?"

"I'm thinking the name pretty much says it all...you know, 'to destroy and defeat,'" his more knowledgeable friend replies. "The first three moves are the signature of the kata," he adds. (Signature? What's the rest of the kata?)

"Yeah, that helps when I'm visualizing techniques," the other agrees. (Really?! Helps what?)

"What about Seiunchin? I've always been told it means 'to control and pull into battle'."

"Maybe, but I think a more useful translation is 'attack, conquer, suppress'."

"What about Sanseiru? I mean I know that it translates as '36 Hands', but how does that help one understand the techniques of the kata?"

"Well, a very knowledgeable teacher once explained it this way: Thirty-six represents six times six. The first six is the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and spirit. The second six refers to color, voice, smell, taste, touch, and justice." (Whoa, those things all fit together, don't they?! What do you suppose my ten-year-old son would say if I gave him that math problem?)

At this point in the conversation, a small boy in karate gi and clutching a frayed copy of "The Emperor's New Clothes" comes into the chatroom. He just catches the last response and asks innocently, "How does that help one's understanding of kata?"

To which the older student responds, "If you have to ask, obviously you're not ready to learn. Face it, Junior, you don't even know Seipai yet."

"Okay, what's Seipai kata all about?" he asks.

To which the knowledgeable student responds (and here I'm quoting) "The true meaning of kata becomes clear only when one learns the application of it...In Seipai, and the three that follow, the applications are not immediately clear. Techniques were deliberately masked within these kata so that bystanders were not able to fully comprehend the depth of the applications being practiced." (Oh. Wow! Depth? I suppose that means there are all sorts of 'levels' of bunkai...level one, two, three, four...there's always one more. Did you pay your dues this month?)

"And Seisan?" the young boy asks.

"Seisan means thirteen hands. This kata contains many unusual techniques and demonstrates the difference between Go (Hard) and Ju (Soft)." (Well, that's suitably vague, isn't it? Don't all the katas contain go and ju techniques--afterall, it is called Goju-ryu, isn't it? Don't they all contain many unusual techniques? Of course, the discussion continues...but patience only goes so far. Hey, I didn't make this stuff up. Well, at least not all of it. Of course, by repeating it I'm no doubt offending a whole lot of probably very nice people.

But seriously...so many discussions of kata seem to provide so little useful information. Maybe I'm just getting old and my patience for stuff like this has deserted me over the years, but don't you wish people that said something actually said something?

Sanchin one more time?

I've read a lot about Sanchin kata recently. People talking about it as the fundamental or basic kata of Goju. People talking about everything being based on Sanchin or Sanchin exhibiting the essence of Goju. People even discussing bunkai for Sanchin. I've heard this sort of talk with Uechi folks, too. Hummm....

In what sense can Sanchin be seen as containing all Goju? There's basic stance or Sanchin dachi. There's a straight punch and a closed-fist middle-level block and a grab and pull in with both hands and a push out with both open hands and a mawashi-uke. That's all of Goju? Those who say that you can find all of the techniques of Goju in Sanchin are trying on the Emperor's New Clothes.

To me, there are a few really important things in Sanchin that are often ignored or passed over. And one of the most fundamental is the position of the arms throughout most of the kata. This position--with the elbow down and the angle between the forearm and the upper arm slightly more than 90 degrees--is fundamental in Goju-ryu. Learning to maintain this position or rather to instantly move into this position--whether the hand is closed as it is in the blocking position of Sanseiru or open with a vertical hand as it is in Shisochin or open with the palm up as it is in Kururunfa--is fundamental to good technique. It's similar to the arm position one sees in T'ai Chi ward off only in Goju it is done with the elbow down. The goal should be to maintain the integrity of this structure--with ligaments, tendons, muscles, and bones all involved. Whenever the arm comes up to "block" or rather to intercept the opponent's attack, this position of the arm is assumed. It is neither too stretched out nor too collapsed--both are weak.

The second is not always practiced, but it has to do with the kata being performed very slowly, though that really has nothing to do with it--it just makes it easier to work on--and that is, one should use the whole body in a truly integrated fashion. In other words, each punch and block is moved by the core of the body or by using the koshi if you will. This should not be exaggerated, but neither should the waist or shoulders be locked into place. One should feel this movement when the fist goes out and when it is drawn back. This is practiced in Sanchin because all movements should employ the body in this fashion. To paraphrase the Chinese classics, the waist is like a millstone and the arms and legs merely follow.

So what are the three battles beginners must fight in Sanchin kata? Is it "mind, body, and spirit," as students have always been told? Isn't everything mind, body, and spirit? Perhaps it is (1) how one breathes, gathering and directing one's energy; (2) how one moves, using the koshi, with a supple waist; (3) and how one maintains the integrity or position of the body, especially the position of the arms.

More on kata themes

Sometimes when I read posts on the Internet about Goju-ryu (or is it martial arts in general), I imagine the people actually having conversations face to face. One I read recently would go something like this:

“Hey, I’m thinking katas have themes…ya know, personalities that make them all distinct.”

“I can see that,” his forum friend answers in a non-judgmental way, not wishing to offend.

“So what do you think about Saifa?”

“I’m thinking the name pretty much says it all…you know, ‘to destroy and defeat’,” his more knowledgeable friend replies. “The first three moves are the signature of the kata,” he adds. I’m not sure if that means the rest of the kata is insignificant or what.

“Yeah, that helps when I’m visualizing techniques,” the other agrees. Really?!

“What about Seiunchin? I’ve always been told it means ‘to control and pull into battle'.”

“Maybe, but I think a more useful translation is ‘attack, conquer, suppress'.”

“What about Sanseiru? I mean I know that it translates as '36 Hands', but how does that help one understand the techniques of the kata?”

“Well, a very knowledgeable teacher once explained it this way: Thirty-six represents six times six. The first six is the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and spirit. The second six refers to color, voice, smell taste, touch, and justice.” Whoa, those things all fit together, don't they?!

At this point in the conversation, a small boy in karate gi and clutching a frayed copy of “The Emperor’s New Clothes” comes into the room. He just catches the last response and asks innocently, “How does that help one’s understanding of kata?”

To which the older student responds, “If you have to ask, obviously you’re not ready to learn. Face it, Junior, you don’t even know Seipai yet.”

“Okay, what’s Seipai kata all about?” he asks.

To which the knowledgeable student responds—and here I’m quoting—“The true meaning of a kata becomes clear only when one learns the application of it….In Seipai, and the three that follow, the applications are not immediately clear. Techniques were deliberately masked within these kata so that bystanders were not able to fully comprehend the depth of the applications being practiced.” Oh. Wow!

“And Seisan?” the young boy asks.

“Seisan means thirteen hands. This kata contains many unusual techniques and demonstrates the difference between Go (Hard) and Ju (Soft).” Well, that’s suitably vague, isn’t it? Don’t all the katas contain go and ju techniques—afterall, it is called Goju-ryu? Don’t they all contain many unusual techniques? Of course the discussion continues...but patience only goes so far. Hey, I didn't make this stuff up. Well, at least not all of it.

So many discussions of kata seem to provide so little useful information. Maybe I'm just getting old and my patience for stuff like this has deserted me over the years, but don't you wish people that said something actually said something?