Saturday, March 19, 2011

Bunkai, Kyusho, and the Death Touch – Part VI

In my last post, I stated that “…(strikes) to points often far from the effected internal organ can produce serious, even lethal consequences,” is scientifically possible. Before going further into this, let me explain why I think that.

First, we have statements made by some of our greatest traditional instructors. The Bubishi, which outlines these types of vulnerable points, has long been held in extremely high regard by our martial arts forefathers, people who were clearly far more knowledgeable and skilled than I am or will ever be. The Bubishi had, until recently, been considered a highly secret document. The following quote is taken from Patrick McCarthy’s latest edition of his masterful translation of the Bubishi:

        the Bubishi is a historically important document whose secrets, until only just recently, have remained closely guarded by karate-do masters in Okinawa.
     “In addition to the copious amount of intriguing information contained within the pages of this profound document, the Bubishi also reveals the original application of orthodox kata and the moral precepts that govern the behavior of those who understand these secrets. Disclosing the principles of tuidi and kyusho-jutsu (art of attacking vulnerable points of the human body), the reader will come to understand that which was been kept secret for generations.
     “The Bubishi must be considered mandatory reading for all serious enthusiasts of true karate-do and is therefore an essential addition to one’s personal library, a work to be deeply studied by both teacher and student alike.”

This was written by Shoshin Nagamine. But he was far from alone in his assessment of the value of the Bubishi. The book is known to have been cherished by many of our legendary forefathers, including Ankoh Itosu, Kenri Nakaima, Kanryo Higaonna, Chojun Miyagi, and Kenwa Mabuni. Gichin Funakoshi mentions it. So, even if I didn’t have any additional information than that, who am I to question these great men? I must at least keep my mind open.

But I do have additional information, things based on something more concrete for me.

While a graduate student in Motor Learning at Stanford, I was required to take several classes in anatomy and physiology. Of all the classes I took during my many years as an undergraduate and then graduate student at Stanford, probably the toughest was Gross Anatomy. It was taught at the Stanford Medical School and was the first half of what was required of the school’s first year medical students.

Only twelve students were allowed in the class. Four were assigned to each of the three dissection tables, where we dissected fresh cadavers (ones never dissected before). The class was taught by two surgeons and a PhD in Anatomy. So we had one of these very knowledgeable men assigned to our table the entire time.

We were required to memorize pretty much every muscle, bone, bit of soft tissue, internal organ, and other structure within the human body. Every bone had a bunch of holes and bumps and notches and we had to know the name and purpose of each – muscles attached and their points of origin and insertion, neural innervations, arteries and veins, etc.

We also studied in depth the various pain sensors (Golgi Receptors, etc.), the nervous system and how it functions, and the rest. From it, I gained a great deal of knowledge about the human body and learned much about our many points of vulnerability. But I also acquired a huge appreciation for our engineering and the wonderful biological machine that we are.

I’ll cut this off for now so it doesn’t become so long that only the most hardy will read it. As always, I greatly appreciate your reading my humble ramblings. Feel free to repost this and share it with anyone who might be interested. It would be nice to expand our readership and increase input from more people. (I'm posting this in a larger type. Is this better or worse?)

2 comments:

  1. Mather, Hanshi: Great post as usual. The sage wisdom you render is a gift to your readers. I hope they appreciate it!

    The font Tahoma 14 or 16 pt will be easier to read on this screen as opposed to printed publications. I believe you are using Times New Roman 14 pt. there are whole issues between using a sans-serif vs serif type/font. Also, reverse type is harder to read on the screen unless it's 16pt. sans-serif font. I'll be happy to send you over my popular article titled:

    11 Basic Laws Of Choosing Easy-To-Read
    Typography For The Web.

    By Andrew S. Linick, Ph.D.—The Copyologist®
    Andrew@AskLinick.com • www.AskLinick.com

    If anymore else reading this wants a copy just mention you saw it on Hanshi's Blog and I'll email it to your email address. Backup email: HanshiLinick@gmail.com. Osu!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you. I received your article and will definitely apply it in coming posts.

    ReplyDelete