Are Kicking, Blocking and Striking the only methods in Poomsae?

Funakoshi demonstrating a
grappling attack that looks
suprisingly as if it was taken
from Koryo Poomsae!

Often when you read stuff on Poomsae, Poomse, Hyung, Tul, Kata etc you will see that each movement is described as a technique and each technique belong to a specific class of techniques. The most typical way of describing them within my own school of Taekwondo ("Kukki-style") is thusly:

• Seogi (stance)
• Chagi (kicks)
• Jireugi (punches)
• Chigi (strikes)
• Makki (blocks).

Looking at the list and knowing that each movement in Poomsae blongs into one of these you can easily be led to believe that the only methods that Poomsae records are blocks, kicks and strikes.. Very few approach their study of Poomsae with the belief that there are more to Poomsae than this.

In my last post I posted a beautifull quote from Gichin Funakoshi

"You may train for a long time, but if you merely move your hands and feet and jump up and down like a puppet, learning karate is not very different from learning a dance. You will never have reached the heart of the matter; you will have failed to grasp the quintessence of karate-do."

So he believed that to truly understand both Karate (Taekwondo) you need to understand what you are doing, or else you are just learning movements without meaning (wich he describes as being akin to learning how to dance). What is also a little interesting about the quote is that he seems to think that your martial art need practical content for the exponent to truly understand "Do" (the way).

There has been a lot of discussion going on in the last few years that "Do"-arts do not practise in a practical way and lack realistic skills. "Jutsu" (or "Musul" in Korean) arts on the other hand is believed to contain all the pracitcal training methods that develop realistic skills that the "Do"-arts lack. Here you have one of the greatest pushers of Karate as a "Do"-art wich later influenced Taekwon to include the "Do" ending too, saying that to understand and reach "Do" you need to master "Musul" first.

But this is not a post on the difference  between Musul and Do or how "Do"-arts today practise lack pragmatisism it is a post on wether our martial forms contain other tactics than the usual blocks, kicks and strikes. I here chose once again to look to our teachers teacher so to speak. Today Karate and Taekwondo is usually believed to contain only kicks, strikes and blocks. No holds, no joint locks and no throws or sweeps are usually attributed to Karate and Taekwondo. This has not always been the case however here is one quote from Kenwa Mabuni (teacher of at least one Kwan head):

“The karate that has been introduced to Tokyo is actually just a part of the whole. The fact that those who have learnt karate there feel it only consists of kicks & punches, and that throws & locks are only to be found in judo or jujutsu, can only be put down to a lack of understanding … Those who are thinking of the future of karate should have an open mind and strive to study the complete art”

Choki Motobu demomstrating a
lock that looks as if it could be
from Sipjin Poomsae!
(often seen as a double punch)

So here we see that Karate did originally have everything you would expect from a well rounded martial art. The emphasis has always been kicking and punching but there was always a grappling part that is more or less lost today.

Did the founders learn this part of Karate? This is an ongoing discussion but I think we can safely say that the Karate that our founders learned contained a lot more grappling than the modern Karate styles have. Throws and locks are shown both in Kukkiwon Textbook (only in the "sparring" chapter) and they have their own chapter in the Taekwondo encyclopedia of General Choi Hong Hi. Throws as well as locks are shown in the writings of all the Karate Pioneers (even in Funakoshi`s who is often said to not know any shows numerous locks and throws in his writings).

So Karate contained more tactics that kicks blocks and strikes, were these aditional tactics recorded within the "Hyung" that the founders of Taekwondo learned? Here is what Gichin Funakoshi has to say:

“In karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods, throwing techniques and pressure against joints are included … all these techniques should be studied referring to basic kata”

Notice the last part of the quote (emphasis added by me). He says this quite clearly that the Hyung that the founders of Taekwondo learned all contained both throws, and locks. The forms we use today are not the same as the ones they learned, but the building blocks (basic techniques) are usually the same. There are two ways you can look at it and they are

• The locks and throws are in Kukkiwon Poomsae by accident as the basic techniques are the same as those used to reccord those movements in the original Taekwondo Hyung.
• The locks and throws are in Kukkiwon Poomsae by deliberate design.

There are many pros and cons on either viewpoint but no matter how you chose to look at it, throws and locks are found in Poomsae and the Poomsae can be intrepreted in such a way as to reccord a self defense syllabus. Just look at Simon John O`Neill`s "Taegeuk Cipher". He has reintrepreted all the Taegeuk to form a consise realistic self defense syllabus.