13 posts / 0 new
Last post
dhogsette
dhogsette's picture
Question about Kusanku Bunkai

Forgive me if this has been covered before or if this is a silly question, but I'm wondering about the repetition of Pinan sequences in Kusanku. Much of the movements in Kusanku are encountered in the Pinan forms (which most likely were derived from Kusanku). So, when we get to Kusanku, should we develop more advanced or different bunkai variations of those shared movements, or do we just focus on the unique movements in the form and refer back to the Pinan applications for those shared sequences? I suppose another way to frame the question is this: for those shared sequences and movements, is Kusanku teaching us any different or more advanced combative principles than the Pinans?

Thanks so much,

David

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

There are innumerable applications for every movement and sequence, so you certainly could approach Kusanku with the idea of looking at more advanced applications than you work for the Pinan kata, or you could just look for more advanced applications in the Pinan kata. I think the biggest thing to consider is that Kusanku may share sequences with the Pinan kata, but begins and ends them differently, which provides you with totally new options to use in conjunction with your Pinan applications. Additionally, there is a lot more variety in the versions of Kusanku that exist than in the versions of the Pinan kata that exist. This gives you a lot more reference material.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi David,

As Noah suggests, there are many ways to approach this. So I’ll add my own view to the mix:

dhogsette wrote:
for those shared sequences and movements, is Kushanku teaching us any different or more advanced combative principles than the Pinans?

The key think here would be to remember that Kushanku was created before the Pinans. Therefore we can’t say, from an historical and chronological perspective, that Kushanku was meant to follow on from the Pinans.

We also know that Kushanku was a huge influence on the Pinan series and therefore there is much overlap. For the common sequences, they have a common source, so they will have common applications. By way of analogy, if I take a spanner out of my home toolkit and place it in my car’s toolkit then the spanner’s use and purpose remain exactly the same; irrespective of the fact it is now part of a different set of tools overall.

Common motions, with a common source, will have common applications. Not more or less advanced, but exactly the same. However, there are differences between the Kushanku and the Pinans too of course:

Wastelander wrote:
I think the biggest thing to consider is that Kushanku may share sequences with the Pinan kata, but begins and ends them differently, which provides you with totally new options to use in conjunction with your Pinan applications.

That’s a very good point. It works both ways too. There are sequences that both the Pinans and Kushanku share and perform in the same way. There are also sequences that are similar, and have commonality, but start and finish differently. Variations on a theme if you will. And then there are sequences which are unique to each.

dhogsette wrote:
So, when we get to Kushanku, should we develop more advanced or different bunkai variations of those shared movements, or do we just focus on the unique movements in the form and refer back to the Pinan applications for those shared sequences?

It is possible to study Kushanku without ever studying the Pinans (as many karateka did in the past), but if we do have a modern syllabus that sees us learn the Pinans prior to Kushanku (as I do) then I would suggest that it would be most efficient to simply refer back to the common parts already learnt. I would then focus on the “signature methods” that are unique to Kushanku (including the variations on things already learnt in the Pinan series). That’s largely how I work it.

The Pinans and Naihanchi are the backbone of our practise. We have lots of drills for every single motion and sequence in the Pinans (and variations on them too). When we get to Kushanku, we don’t have drills for every sequence of the kata, but instead for just the signature methods.

The result of this is that the students still have drills for the whole of Kushanku, but many of them are the Pinan drills learnt previously. This results in just eight new core drills at the Kushanku stage (learnt over a minimum of two-years because they are a grading requirement for second dan); so not that many.

In our case, the aim is more to do with better understanding the Pinans at the core of what we do through studying the kata that gave rise to them; but the by-product is a pretty good understanding of Kushanku too.

In short, Pinan kata broken down in full. Kushanku is therefore already studied in part due to the commonality. We then just top that up with the “signature methods” drills.

There are other ways to approach this, but that’s what works best for us and I feel it is historically consistent (i.e. is in accord with the historical relationship between the Pinans and Kushanku; as opposed to superimposing the modern teaching order on to their nature and intent) and it is practical both in terms of time-management and practical application.

All the best,

Iain

PS The start of Kushanku is not found in the Pinans, so we have a drills for that. Imaginatively, I call it “Kushanku 1” and you can see it here:

Kevin73
Kevin73's picture

Just out of curiousity, I am going to ask a controversial question as to some of Kusanku's applications.

Do you feel that parts were designed for fighting at night?  I know that Jesse (karatebyjesse.com) states that this is a myth.  Others have as well.  But, there is also historical evidence that Chotoku Kyan taught, at least his version, as a kata to be used for night fighting.  http://www.karatebyjesse.com/11-useful-bunkai-for-the-kusanku-ninja-move/

Another application that I have seen various ideas on is the "chamber" with the palm up.  I have seen it used as a counter to a hair grab etc.  I have also seen an interview from a student of Chotoku Kyan that the application taught from Kyan was pulling the hairpin from your top knot and stabbing the attacker.  There were other applications that seemed odd, but would have made sense to their world at the time (can't remember the kata but I think it was Chinto, but it involved putting the hands together and kind of twisting them--the application taught by Kyan was getting loose from having your hands tied and it explained on how okinawan ropes were made and how this would have stretched them to work).

The reason, I ask is that the opening moves in some lineages say that the move is symbolic only and does not have application (symbolizes, heaven/earth/man).  I know that any motion of human movement can be made into application if we choose to.  But, I also think that sometimes we miss the cultural things imbedded into kata to teach moral principles as part of their art.

I don't have a set idea about this, just looking for various ideas to understand more.

dhogsette
dhogsette's picture

Thank you, Noah and Iain! These responses and videos are extremely helpful. My own inclinations were leaning toward what Iain Sensei outlined. I asked partly because there is a general notion in various traditional karate circles that masters who create a particular branch of a karate system picked certain katas and ordered them from more simple and basic to the more complex and intricate, and associating kata with specific belt ranks reinforces this notion. So, I had been left with the impression that as we move up the kata chain, so to speak, we should be seeing and exploring more complex and advanced techniques. 

But now that I’m exploring "practical karate" I'm starting to question that underlying impression and assumption. Maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems to me that the more "ancient" kata were entire systems in themselves, containing and expressing the combative principles of a particular master, fighter, or teacher. Collecting kata allowed the practitioner to discover different combative principles, learn new applications and techniques, and reinforce others. But in more modern times with the proliferation of styles and branches and more extensive kata collecting associated with belt rank levels, there is this suggestion, intentional or not, that the kata for higher belt ranks are more complex than the "lower" kata. I'm starting to think that maybe this isn't necessarily true. Instead of one kata being "higher" or more complex or richer or even better than the "lower"kata, I'm starting to see the kata as being not vertically arranged so much as horizontal in their relationship to each other. They are on the same plane, so to speak, and are revealing a variety of combative principles. 

Am I on the right track here? Thanks so much. 

Best,

David 

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Some kata are certainly more technically difficult to perform than others, but that doesn't necessarily make them "more advanced" than others, or imply that they must have "more advanced" applications. Indeed, there are plenty of "basics" in "advanced" kata! There are certainly some kata that were designed to present nothing but the most basic principles, like the Taikyoku kata, of course, but that doesn't mean that is a strictly linear or hierarchical relationship to kata. I think you're looking at things the right way.

@Kevin73 - There is a definite possibility that some of the original applications for kata aren't that practical in many of today's societies, as you mention with the popularity of topknots and hairpins, but also with the types of clothing and shoes that were worn. That doesn't mean we can't find useful applications, of course--motion is motion. There are certainly instances in which postures are purely symbolic, but they aren't terribly common. For example, I practice KishimotoDi, in addition to Shorin-Ryu, and in KishimotoDi, all of the kata start with the hands in a cupped position used in Bhuddist meditation. That's just because the founder was Bhuddist, and wanted to represent that in his practice. Honestly, that's the only example I can think of with a confirmed explanation, until you get into modern styles created after WW2.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

dhogsette wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems to me that the more "ancient" kata were entire systems in themselves, containing and expressing the combative principles of a particular master, fighter, or teacher. Collecting kata allowed the practitioner to discover different combative principles, learn new applications and techniques, and reinforce others. But in more modern times with the proliferation of styles and branches and more extensive kata collecting associated with belt rank levels, there is this suggestion, intentional or not, that the kata for higher belt ranks are more complex than the "lower" kata. I'm starting to think that maybe this isn't necessarily true. Instead of one kata being "higher" or more complex or richer or even better than the "lower"kata, I'm starting to see the kata as being not vertically arranged so much as horizontal in their relationship to each other. They are on the same plane, so to speak, and are revealing a variety of combative principles. 

Am I on the right track here?

I find myself in total agreement with that David. The modern learning order of the kata collected together into modern styles has no bearing on their function. They were created independently, to be used independently.

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Kevin73 wrote:
Do you feel that parts were designed for fighting at night?

Not at all. I would ask what these so called “night moves” were? I’d then ask if they were so effective for fighting when we can’t see, why are’t they widely used in visual impaired Judo?

In such judo competitions the rules are pretty much the same as for sighted folks (they just take a grip first). The reason being that it’s a lot more about “feel” than sight anyway; irrespective of whether you can see or not. I’ve done randori with VI judo athletes and it is not that much different from doing it with sighted people.

I think this comes from those who have watched one too many ninja movies.

Kevin73 wrote:
The reason, I ask is that the opening moves in some lineages say that the move is symbolic only and does not have application (symbolizes, heaven/earth/man).  I know that any motion of human movement can be made into application if we choose to.  But, I also think that sometimes we miss the cultural things imbedded into kata to teach moral principles as part of their art.

I don’t buy this either. Moral principles are not effectively taught as “symbolic motions” and it is generally a cop out by those who are not able to understand the combative function of the movement. For me, motions in the kata are 100% combative. There are no “exercises” or motions of a “philosophical” significance. All motions are designed to hurt other human beings.

Moral principles are things that need to be discussed and thought about. It makes no sense to try to impart them through “interpretive dance” when far more direct and effective ways are available.

We also need to be careful to mark the difference between legitimate martial moral principles (i.e. “never be the cause of violence”) and quasi-religious ones (i.e. “consider the oneness of the universe”). These supposed links with Buddhism, Zen, etc have been thoroughly debunked and they do need left behind.

We had a pretty in depth discussion on this recently:

http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/zen-and-martial-arts-why-it-bs

To me, when we get past the all the martial myths, the karate we have is far more honest, deep and rewarding then one mired in false history, pseudo-religion and “Kung-fu movie” narratives.

All the best,

Iain

Kevin73
Kevin73's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Kevin73 wrote:
Do you feel that parts were designed for fighting at night?

Not at all. I would ask what these so called “night moves” were? I’d then ask if they were so effective for fighting when we can’t see, why are’t they widely used in visual impaired Judo?

In such judo competitions the rules are pretty much the same as for sighted folks (they just take a grip first). The reason being that it’s a lot more about “feel” than sight anyway; irrespective of whether you can see or not. I’ve done randori with VI judo athletes and it is not that much different from doing it with sighted people.

I think this comes from those who have watched one too many ninja movies.

Kevin73 wrote:
The reason, I ask is that the opening moves in some lineages say that the move is symbolic only and does not have application (symbolizes, heaven/earth/man).  I know that any motion of human movement can be made into application if we choose to.  But, I also think that sometimes we miss the cultural things imbedded into kata to teach moral principles as part of their art.

I don’t buy this either. Moral principles are not effectively taught as “symbolic motions” and it is generally a cop out by those who are not able to understand the combative function of the movement. For me, motions in the kata are 100% combative. There are no “exercises” or motions of a “philosophical” significance. All motions are designed to hurt other human beings.

Moral principles are things that need to be discussed and thought about. It makes no sense to try to impart them through “interpretive dance” when far more direct and effective ways are available.

We also need to be careful to mark the difference between legitimate martial moral principles (i.e. “never be the cause of violence”) and quasi-religious ones (i.e. “consider the oneness of the universe”). These supposed links with Buddhism, Zen, etc have been thoroughly debunked and they do need left behind.

We had a pretty in depth discussion on this recently:

http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/zen-and-martial-arts-why-it-bs

To me, when we get past the all the martial myths, the karate we have is far more honest, deep and rewarding then one mired in false history, pseudo-religion and “Kung-fu movie” narratives.

All the best,

Iain

The night move applications were taught by Chotoku Kyan to his students (I have not been able to confirm any of the students taught in large public groups). If you look at Isshin-Ryu's version of Kusanku, they still teach it as a night fighting kata as passed on to them through Kyan.  After the lean to the side, then middle block.  Isshin-Ryu does a foot stomp before the punch.  If you look at Nakazato Sensei's version (also a student of Kyan), he does a motion similiar to the Naihanchi foot sweep after the middle block and before the punch.  This foot movement is absent in other versions of the kata.  So that may be where some of the discrepancy is.  As is it taught, moving off angle in the dark and then foot stomping is meant to confuse the attacker and buy a split second before finding your location.  The drop down technique is taught to show how you can use the night sky to silhouette the attacker and removing your outline temporarily from their line of sight (this same technique is taught in Ninjutsu as well).  Also, the drop downs to one knee while striking are applications as well.

As a side note:  While looking for a good video example, I came across some other posts about this and also realized that the versions of kusanku widely vary and some of the techniques considered for "night fighting" in Isshin-Ryu's version (the version I'm more familiar with) are absent from the others versions.  In Isshin-Ryu, the kata was taught by the founder (Shimabuku, who was a student of Kyan) as having night fighting applications.  In the other versions, this is not the case and will say that the "night fighting" idea is a myth or misapplication. 

To me it is interesting to me historically on the roots of okinawan karate.  BUT, in the final analysis, I think we are on the same page. What application can I do to meet TODAY's acts of violence and use the kata as a learning template.

To just add one more thing.  Historically, I find this interesting because many have said that the "night fighting" applications were misunderstandings from karate becoming more widespread and people making up applications to fit that might not necessarily.  But, we can see that someone considered by many to be a karate "great" (Chotoku Kyan) taught those applications in private to his students.  

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

As far as the "night fighting" aspect of Kusanku, I think it's worthy to note that Shimabukuro Eizo was quoted by BIll Hayes in his book, My Journey with the Grand Master, as saying that Kusanku was "Not FOR fighting at night. LIKE fighting at night."

DaveB
DaveB's picture

Another perspective you may wish to consider is that in moving away from the pinan kata you also have the opportunity to move away from drilling set piece applications and on to a more tactically minded overview of combat.

This can be done by evaluating the likes of kusanku as a single system/style of fighting as opposed to a collection of techniques.

That is not to say that there is anything wrong with the normal bunkai approach; I see it as vital, but as a side option I find analysing kata as whole entities can give very valuable guidance in terms of how to conduct a fight of any kind. It covers how to land blows, how to move with and against the opponent to best effect victory and depending how deep you go even different ways to generate power.

The basic idea is to consider how you apply force and weight and posture and distance across the kata. Are you chasing or sticking close? Are you shifting sideways, spinning to angles or driving forwards and what comes before and after you do? When you can see what you are doing then ask why and in doing so try to lift these concepts (not techniques) out of the kata and into a fight.

The effect should feel a bit like taking a 2d drawing into 3 dimensions.

Personally this kind of analysis has been of great value to me as I can take a kata into any situation regardless of the specific applications it holds.

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

Hmm, I'm intrigued by the night fighting and am wondering.  In the dark is different than unable to see.  For instance, if you close your eyes your sense of balance becomes different, but if just in the dark, it reamains almost the same.

I wonder if some sequences were used to simply improve balance.

Jr cook
Jr cook's picture

Regardless of who may have claimed Kusanku is for "fighting at night", it just doesn't make sense. The skills needed at night wouldn't vary from those used in daylight. People still attack and move the same. Gravity is still the same. Power generation, speed and all the other elements of violence remain intact in the dark. The only difference is vision may be slightly impaired, if you are in total darkness. The same can be said for being attacked in the light. Being hit in the face often impairs vision to some degree. I believe that good techniques are redundant enough to function without perfect vision or ideal conditions.

The idea of "fighting at night" is, like so many other tales we hear in Karate, a story. When you don't have a good application for a movement it is easy to get...creative. These nocturnal stealth-based applications are just preventing good students from practicing useful bunkai.

I don't recall reading about Kyan teaching night fighting. But I do remember interviews with students who described training in Kyans house and backyard at all hours. Maybe this is the root of the story.