What is Kata?

To take things right back to basics, for a kata to have value within the fighting arts it has to have a function. Without the function it is a hollow and empty form, it is meaningless and has little value outside of aesthetic appeal.

Arguably aesthetic consideration has been the driving force behind the development of kata competition within modern karate both inside and outside of Japan. It is perhaps interesting to note the recent proposals for the world organizations that team kata members must also perform the “Bunkai” to their chosen kata! This hot issue has caused many eyebrows to rise, and we are perhaps seeing the beginning of the slippery slope! "Official Bunkai", "official standardised kata", history has taught us that the headlong rush towards homogenized systems all too often indicates the beginning of the end.

But how does codifying and packaging a series of moves into a set form (kata) ensure efficiency in fighting and the continuation of a body of elite knowledge? Because it is obvious that this is an issue of continuity, of developing a tradition to be passed on.

Also the value of these forms must in part be judged by their survival rate. If the functions were unworkable or translated badly, their survival and the survival of those who adhered to their principles would be endangered. But perhaps here is where critics could find a gap in the armour of the traditionalists. In these times of relative peace, of the reliance of firearms as instruments of self defence, civil and military, could it not be said that these antique principles are in danger of being unproven, not trialed in real situations? Hence the predominance of the advocates of street karate, usually little more than a hotch-potch of boxing techniques mixed with a little judo or wrestling. Where does kata fit into all of that? Yes, there has been a lot of scurrying around by various individuals, usually prompted by the temptation of making a quick buck, to link vicious techniques known to any street hooligan to exotic kata, and sometimes it’s very difficult to separate this chaff from the wheat.

So what are these skills embedded in the traditional ancient kata, and how do they translate?

The prevailing wisdom informs us that these skills are generally made up of a mixture of the following categories:

• Seizing and grasping.
• Striking to vital points and other anatomical weak points.
• Attacks directed to joints.
• Escapes and reversals.
• Chokes and strangulations.

And, often neglected or ignored,
• Principles of movement.

The kata are used as a kind of textbook, a manual and catalogue of fighting techniques. However, it would be naive to think that the katas have remained unchanged for hundreds of years. I'm certain that their outward appearance today would be unrecognisable to the ancient masters who originally created them, and as for their function….!

So it surely must be with Naihanchi.

I applaud those intrepid pioneers who in modern times have sought to find their own answers to the true function of Naihanchi. What is perhaps most revealing is how diverse these conclusions are! Are we seeing the positive side of "reverse engineering"? Or is this just another example of the old parable of the blind men's exploration of an Elephant? Could it be that each one sees what he wants to see, based on his own experience, and no one gets the full picture?⁸


"Function dictates Form"

This phrase, "function dictates form" has become a motto for those who have a serious interest in the true meaning of the classical kata. The only problem with this is that if all you're left with is the Form then we are making the assumption that the function will reveal itself in common sense ways.

An example being; “Danger! If it looks like a block it must be a block!”
Again, this is an assumption based upon our general perception (Blind men exploring Elephant yet again!) If we have had no experience of trapping or Kansetsu waza (joint attacks) then this movement that in our normal training functions as a block will always be read as a block. It would be a fair also to assume that the making of a fist, or any hand form, does not always imply a strike.

We know from research already conducted that when certain ancient katas made the geographical and cultural jump from China to Okinawa they were “tidied up”. Hand forms that were originally open were changed to the closed fist. Further adaptations were made when Okinawan karate slipped into the mainstream of Japanese Budo and, rather like the previously mentioned Tai Chi Chuan, a shift of emphasis occurred and physical culture (and to some degree spiritual/psychological culture) became the main promotional selling point.

It is only natural that kata functions within modern karate systems (post 1921) to a large degree have their own revised thinking. The early Japanese karate pioneers, people like Yasuhiro Konishi and Hironori Ohtsuka obviously found something in the Okinawan karate that they felt could augment their already well-established understanding of the martial arts. They extracted, adapted, and where necessary sought the additional information to make the techniques (kata) they were adopting work within their own framework of martial culture.

Interestingly, numerous modern karateka attached to the major contemporary styles formed by people like Hironori Ohtsuka, are finding themselves adopting a revisionist attitude. They are questioning the kata taught to them by their Senseis and do not seem content with the answers they are getting.

In an attempt to resolve this dilemma they find themselves looking towards the methods employed by the Okinawan stylists. The problem with this is that the Okinawan methodology is not always compatible with the martial traditions, principles and methods of operation of the Japanese martial arts schools, and Ohtsuka Sensei was a product of these very same traditions.

The quest for so-called “Bunkai” and resulting interpretations, usually borrowed from outside of the particular system, or even “rediscovered”, is frowned upon in some traditional circles. While it is accepted that martial artists should be creative, experimental and always searching for further refinements in their skills and knowledge, it is also possible that the search for “fool’s gold” can become a crusade in itself. All that glitters is certainly not the full and total answer. There are Dan grades out there teaching Bunkai as if they have found the Philosopher’s Stone, and the one and only true interpretation of a particular move or sequence from a kata.


Are these applications the true ancient uses for the moves that make up the kata Naihanchi? (From various sources)

The flaw in this type of thinking appears when it comes to the point of realization that the discovered kata interpretation is one-dimensional. For example, when you know what the move is, and have an answer that you think works and takes you into a lock or joint attack, what do you do with it? Do you wait for that one situation to arrive and then just do your thing? And then by extension, do you develop a whole arsenal of techniques for a huge range of individual attacks? No, what is missing here is the study of principles! Principles that create freedom of opportunity and encourage flexibility. Obviously Principles need to work hand in hand with mechanical skills, but mechanical skills without principles of movement, balance, correct application of force, etc. slip to the lower levels of crude brutality, with severe limitations of workable options.

The "Bunkai" way of thinking is essentially a mechanical model, it has a certain structural convenience, all component parts clip together easily, and to me, here is where the weakness lies. Mechanical models do not necessarily mesh with organic models. The variables of the human frame, human emotions even, have a type of complexity that, no matter how you push them, will not easily comply with an artificially constructed model. Nature has its own logic. It is perhaps this type of logic that has both enticed and eluded the ancient sages. The Taoists claim to have an insight in to the logic of nature, hence the Tao is both simple and complex and maddeningly elusive. It is not by accident that Taoist thought and principles are woven in to the traditional Martial Arts of China and Japan. Ancient thought has in its own way sought to codify the natural laws of movement.

The eight trigrams of the I-Ching (China's most ancient book of wisdom, attributed to the legendary figure Fu Xi (2953 - 2838 bce) could be viewed as the embodiment of the laws of natural movement and is intricately connected to Taoist thought and the dynamism of the laws of opposites and complementaries. The "trigrams" or "hexagrams" that make up the framework for the I-Ching are at one level descriptions of the dynamics of all natural movement and as such hold considerable significance for those involved in the study of movement and the flow of forces.9

Many of the important principles of movement and use of energy are found in the basics, after all, weren’t basic just ways of practicing the kata but in small repeated sections? Within Wado Ryu (The Wado Ryu of the Wado Ryu Karate Do Academy) the basic principles of Naihanchi are introduced at novice level, the working of the stance, the rotation of the hips and generation of energy are all taught at this stage.

The tendency to undervalue these principles is endemic in some modern styles of Karate. This is partially a result of modern karate being pressurised into the market place. Karate instructors who are running a business have to deliver what the students want and not necessarily what they need. The accumulated effect of this way of teaching is that generations of students will have an impressive list of set-pieces and a poor grounding in principles of movement, making these set-pieces empty of the foundation principles necessary for freedom of movement and fluidity, which by its nature will enable them to freely move from one possibility to another.

So we have the ludicrous situation of high-ranking karate-ka running around inventing Okinawan style “Bunkai” without examining the differences between the earlier katas (from Shorin Ryu schools that still exist with these katas still preserved, as if in a time-capsule) and the Wado or Shotokan etc. versions.

To impose the rules and techniques of Okinawan "Bunkai" on to Wado katas is almost an admission of ignorance that testifies to a lack of the correct understanding of the principles of Wado Ryu.


More creative and interesting applications from the kata Naihanchi. (From various sources)

We know that Hironori Ohtsuka and Gichin Funakoshi (or Gigo Funakoshi, his son) changed the kata, so it is a logical step to make an attempt to unravel the reasons behind these changes. However, this is not an easy task.

One would imagine that a good starting place would be the published material of the late masters. Unfortunately in these all we find are bald descriptions of movements, with little or no embellishments or explanations. They are like catalogues of techniques, and any descriptions of applications that do appear are basic or “shop-front” answers. So nothing given away there! But closer examination does reveal some clues, which need to be cautiously read.

Ohtsuka Sensei once said that he would never write a book detailing his techniques, as the possibilities and details would be too complex to translate into print. It is also reported that when he eventually did publish his one and only book on Wado Ryu karate some of his students commented that the book was too complex and asked him to simplify it. To which, in a gesture of disgust, he refused to publish any further books and future projects were cancelled.

So, how did this work with Naihanchi kata? Any attempt to answer this question must involve a serious examination of the known, working towards the unknown. The best place to start is with the modern masters.



credits, footnotes and sources
next: Modern masters

© WadoWorld/Tim Shaw