# Wandaun kata



## Muwubu16858 (Aug 30, 2007)

Where would I be able to find information on the Wandaun kata. I've found almost nothing except that it is in the list under Itosu Ha kata in the Book by Sakagami Ryusho.


----------



## ppko (Aug 30, 2007)

Muwubu16858 said:


> Where would I be able to find information on the Wandaun kata. I've found almost nothing except that it is in the list under Itosu Ha kata in the Book by Sakagami Ryusho.


contact this guy it seems he studies this kata I personally dont know much about it so I will contact him as well
*Grand Master Kenneth H. Balliet*
20 Casey Drive, Williamsport, PA 17701
E-mail: Dr. Kenneth H. Balliet
Telephone: (570) 327-8645


----------



## chinto (Aug 30, 2007)

Muwubu16858 said:


> Where would I be able to find information on the Wandaun kata. I've found almost nothing except that it is in the list under Itosu Ha kata in the Book by Sakagami Ryusho.


 

hmm have not heard of that kata.. what system do you study?


----------



## Victor Smith (Aug 31, 2007)

The first reference I've seen of Wandaun kata is shown in Patrick McCarthy's older book on Okinawan Karate. 

John Sells (which gives a brief explanation of the kata in his books Unanate and Unante II) has a video tape showing the form (or his version of it), and a quick search on youtube shows the following version (which appears to be copied from the McCarthy version).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLn9hM-k4O0&mode=related&search=

The form, IMO, seems to show Goju, Shorin and Uechin influences leading one to suspect 1) it is an older form that those traditions drew upon in their formation or 2) it is a newer form designed to link the main Okinawan traditions.

I'd suspect the latter as Uechi was not formally taught on Okinawan till about 1948, but you can make your own choice as I see it.

pleasantly,


----------



## Muwubu16858 (Aug 31, 2007)

In the book I have, which is a book of Hyung by the late GM of Orthodox Itosu-ryu, Sakagami Ryusho, the Wandaun kata is listed under the Itosu Ha kata list. A few others that I was wondering about where I can get more info on were Chinshu(Itosu-ha), and a form pronounced shin ha  writen 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





, and is under the list for Uechi Ryu ha kata.


----------



## Victor Smith (Aug 31, 2007)

Michael,

While chinsu is not in my interest (nor are other obscure kata references) I've taken a few minutes to do some research.

I've found a book describing chinsu here:  http://www.karatedo.co.jp/champ/e_books/e_book.html

There is Scot Mertz that I recall was selling a dvd with his version of the form.  I remember seeing it several years ago but was not my interest.  
http://karatethejapaneseway.com/kar...p=144163&sid=f10533d2f862317e5381327b5af290ce

It is also said that the katas Chinpe, Chinsu, Juma, and Uenibu are of the lineage of Tomari, however, they were probably introduced in the 20th from Taiwan.  http://www.msisshinryu.com/history/tomari-te/

Trying to find Shin Ha I found reference to Shin Pa  http://www.dhammika-karatedo.com/Contact/Kata.htm
It may be some variant spelling of the original term?


All of which I found in a few mintues on a Google search.

Over my years I find it interesting to see what is there, but I'm always curious why one asks about forms from old lists?

Is it that they're obscure? Is it a thought that they hold some key other kata don't?

Personally old standards like Chinto, Kusanku, Gojushiho or Superimpe probably hold everything that really is there.

pleasantly,


----------



## chinto (Sep 1, 2007)

Victor Smith said:


> The first reference I've seen of Wandaun kata is shown in Patrick McCarthy's older book on Okinawan Karate.
> 
> John Sells (which gives a brief explanation of the kata in his books Unanate and Unante II) has a video tape showing the form (or his version of it), and a quick search on youtube shows the following version (which appears to be copied from the McCarthy version).
> 
> ...


 

I think that I would tend to go with the latter choice from what I can see there.. but that is a very small amount of data to go by ...


----------



## chinto (Sep 1, 2007)

Victor Smith said:


> Michael,
> 
> While chinsu is not in my interest (nor are other obscure kata references) I've taken a few minutes to do some research.
> 
> ...


 
I did not see any thing that was not in most of the kata mentioned as "old standerds"  as to old form/Kata lists, might show some diferences in some cases in the style now and say 100 years or 200 years ago.. but then again it very well may not.


----------



## samertz (Sep 18, 2007)

Greetings,

It was brought to my attention that you guys were wanting to know about Wanduan.  So here is what I was told about it.

I learned this kata from Masamichi Daiyo.  He told me that it was originally taught to him by Shigeru Nakamura in the 1950's.  The kata's name means "The kings way", and it is also sometimes called Wando.  Daiyo told me that it originally came over with Rohai and a few other kata.

Now in my travels I have seen some people doing a different version of this kata that what I know.  The Motobu ha guys have a version which I have no idea where the origin is.  The one that I do is very Goju-ish and nearly identical to the one that John Sells does.

I'm sorry this isn't the best of help, but it's what I have on the subject.

Scot

Scot Mertz
www.toudijutsu.com


----------



## chinto (Sep 19, 2007)

samertz said:


> Greetings,
> 
> It was brought to my attention that you guys were wanting to know about Wanduan. So here is what I was told about it.
> 
> ...


 
ok, thanks for the information.  
It is not a kata that is tought in the system I study and I had asked about it a while back.
what systems is it tought in?


----------



## Muwubu16858 (Sep 20, 2007)

the list I have by Sakagami ryusho has Wandaun under Itosu-ha.


----------



## chinto (Sep 21, 2007)

Muwubu16858 said:


> the list I have by Sakagami ryusho has Wandaun under Itosu-ha.


]


ok .. thanks.. if there are any other styles, I would hope they would chime in that they also use that kata...


----------



## Shotochem (Sep 25, 2007)

When I studied Shotokan (SKIF (Kanazawas group))we had a Kata called "Wankan" meaning the kings crown or something to that effect.  

It was a very short kata and legend has it that it is all that remains of a larger kata forgotten over the years.  I can hardly remember it myself.  If it is the same kata or a variant of it, you should be able to get a few clips online.  I may have a clip in my computer at home if you can't find one.

-Marc-


----------



## chinto (Sep 25, 2007)

Shotochem said:


> When I studied Shotokan (SKIF (Kanazawas group))we had a Kata called "Wankan" meaning the kings crown or something to that effect.
> 
> It was a very short kata and legend has it that it is all that remains of a larger kata forgotten over the years. I can hardly remember it myself. If it is the same kata or a variant of it, you should be able to get a few clips online. I may have a clip in my computer at home if you can't find one.
> 
> -Marc-


 

ok, there are 2 systems that teach it.. Like I said , my system does not teach it so I have no Idea where it came from or its history.


----------



## Victor Smith (Sep 26, 2007)

Hi,

Wankan is a different kata from Wandaun. 

I worked on it for a few years from Patrick McCarthy's book, and later saw that John Sells  has a video tape on the kata.  I haven't been able to find a group that incorporates it, it appears there may be individuals who use it in their schools. The one exception may be those people in Patrick McCarthy's group. If one is interested I contact Patrick McCarthy or John Sells.


----------



## chinto (Sep 27, 2007)

Victor Smith said:


> Hi,
> 
> Wankan is a different kata from Wandaun.
> 
> I worked on it for a few years from Patrick McCarthy's book, and later saw that John Sells has a video tape on the kata. I haven't been able to find a group that incorporates it, it appears there may be individuals who use it in their schools. The one exception may be those people in Patrick McCarthy's group. If one is interested I contact Patrick McCarthy or John Sells.


 

OK, Like I said earler  we do not teach it in the style I study so am not fumilure with it...


----------



## Garcia_Hanshi (Feb 2, 2008)

Hello,
Thank you all for been interested in ancient Okinawan kata lineage, history, technical aspects, and practical usage of such.
Previous to 1905 and the conversion of old-type Okinawan Uchinadi (Okinawa-te) into modern Karate, katas did not form part of any standard curriculums. Ushinadi was taught to students based in two factors: developed skills, and personality.
Most ancient masters did reserved certain teachings for selected students.
This is the reason why there are several unknown or uncommon katas such as Wanduan (also Wandoh) kata.
Wanduan is a privately kept kata by very few experts who were luicky enough to have learn certain katas such as Wanduan.
Wanduan is a Chinese kata originated at the Shaolin temple, and pertains to the 5-Ancestors Fist.  It is a highly combative pattern using as basis the 5-animal system of the Shaolin sect.
Based in certain technical peculiarities, Wanduan was devised at the Shaolin Fukien temple.
However, because of certain techniques it does presents, this pattern seems to have been modifien by experts from the Fukien White Crane Boxing.
This would explain many technical aspects of the kata, as well as the import of the pattern into Okinawa.
However, because it is a pattern meant to be reserved for very few, one must understand that there were very few Okinawans that could have gained the trust and that possesed the necessary advance knowledge and skills, along with been in possition to have learn such pattern.
Among those few Okinawans who could have ever learned this pattern based in the previous requirements, there were: Sokon Matsumura, Taitei Kojo, Seisho Arakaki, and some others.  However, when the Kata is seen as who carried the kata in Okinawa and capable of teaching such advanced pattern, the list limits to the 3 previous mentioned masters.
Another factor to be taken in consideration is the fact that during the 1800's most Okinawans who trained in martial arts often shared knowledge with peers from different locations.
This is one of the reason why Wanduan is classify nowadays as a Tomari-te kata and not as Naha-te or as Shuri-te.
I learned this kata in Okinawa during the early 1960's and as far as I know, it was considered a secret kata with very few masters that knew it.
In Okinawa there are many lineages (ryu) that are not known in the western world because they are family ryu and have never been commercialized or opened to any outsider.
Wanduan kata is one of the treasures of old-type karate, if you manage to learn this kata, please preserve it intact and do not place any stylist input into it.
The name in Chinese translates as a name of a head of state (king).
In Okinawa it means the same, but it should not be confused with anyone's particular name.  It is just a way to refer to a king who is a great martial artist.
A point that should also be clarified is that some people consider certain techniques as exclusive of Naha-te, Toimari-te or as Shuri-te styles; however, prior to this modern separation of styles and technical preferences, techniques where practiced as the combat method and not (as nowadays is done) because this or that technique or movement belongs to this or that style.
All modern styles are the product of particular masters presferences or techniques they could perform, leaving out those they did not mastered.
Do not think that this or that technique belongs to this or that particular style.  In old-type karate, there was not such thing as this or that technique belonging to this or that style.
Remember, prior to 1932, there were very few Ryu in Okinawa, in fact there were only four ryu established, and only one Ryu during the 1800's which was formulated in 1830.
Thank you, hope you would benefit from this writting.
If you wish to communicate with me or have further questions, please contact me through this blog or write to our email address seitokan@hotmail.com
Have great trainings,
Garcia G. A., Hanshi


----------



## cstanley (Feb 2, 2008)

Victor Smith said:


> Michael,
> 
> While chinsu is not in my interest (nor are other obscure kata references) I've taken a few minutes to do some research.
> 
> ...


 
This echoes my experience. The traditional kata from Shuri, Naha, and Tomari are the essential kata. It is popular nowadays for people to seek some karate "Holy Grail" that will have all the secrets. Several wannabees claim to have found the "lost kata" Channan, from which the Pinan were developed. One even wrote an entire book on the subject. It was awful. Others are busy reverse engineering kata in order to insert grappling techniques or some other fad based bunkai.
There are too many self-styled "masters" out there trying to find an edge for marketing themselves. Shun them. Look more deeply into what you already have. My first sensei said, "Anyone who calls himself a master probably isn't."


----------



## exile (Feb 2, 2008)

cstanley said:


> This echoes my experience. The traditional kata from Shuri, Naha, and Tomari are the essential kata. It is popular nowadays for people to seek some karate "Holy Grail" that will have all the secrets. Several wannabees claim to have found the "lost kata" Channan, from which the Pinan were developed. One even wrote an entire book on the subject. It was awful. Others are busy reverse engineering kata in order to insert grappling techniques or some other fad based bunkai.
> There are too many self-styled "masters" out there trying to find an edge for marketing themselves. Shun them. Look more deeply into what you already have. My first sensei said, "Anyone who calls himself a master probably isn't."



CS&#8212;what is the actual problem with identifying grappling applications of various kata moves where these can be shown to be effective self-defense techniques? Funakoshi in his writings was explicit that locks, throws and other techniques that are standardly described as grappling elements were part of karate's technique set, so why is it implausible at the threshold to include such methods in bunkai? (And _he_ was promoting a largely stripped-down version of karate to the Japanese, compared with what had been practiced on Okinawa.) Why does locating such bunkai elements not constitute part of the 'looking more deeply' that you're recommending? 

I'm also curious as to which people you have in mind who are calling themselves `masters'. The people I'm familiar with who do the kind of expermimental bunkai analysis that you seem to be condemning in this broad-brush fashion include folks like Iain Abernethy, Rick Clark, Bill Burgar and other respected karateka, practitioners of long standing, whose work is out there, fully accessible, to be criticized or defended on its own basis; none of them, so far as I know from anything of theirs I've read, has ever referred to himself as a 'master'. You seem to be dismissing such people outright, while not saying anything about their actual analyses and proposals. Surely, if their approaches to kata are incorrect, it should be possible to give specifics, rather than dismiss the people themselves in a couple of sentences. So just what is there, for example, about Abernethy's analyses of the Pinan or Naihanchi bunkai, or Burgar's treatment of Gojushiho, that you think is unsound, and _why_ is it unsound?


----------



## cstanley (Feb 2, 2008)

exile said:


> CSwhat is the actual problem with identifying grappling applications of various kata moves where these can be shown to be effective self-defense techniques? Funakoshi in his writings was explicit that locks, throws and other techniques that are standardly described as grappling elements were part of karate's technique set, so why is it implausible at the threshold to include such methods in bunkai? (And _he_ was promoting a largely stripped-down version of karate to the Japanese, compared with what had been practiced on Okinawa.) Why does locating such bunkai elements not constitute part of the 'looking more deeply' that you're recommending?
> 
> I'm also curious as to which people you have in mind who are calling themselves `masters'. The people I'm familiar with who do the kind of expermimental bunkai analysis that you seem to be condemning in this broad-brush fashion include folks like Iain Abernethy, Rick Clark, Bill Burgar and other respected karateka, practitioners of long standing, whose work is out there, fully accessible, to be criticized or defended on its own basis; none of them, so far as I know from anything of theirs I've read, has ever referred to himself as a 'master'. You seem to be dismissing such people outright, while not saying anything about their actual analyses and proposals. Surely, if their approaches to kata are incorrect, it should be possible to give specifics, rather than dismiss the people themselves in a couple of sentences. So just what is there, for example, about Abernethy's analyses of the Pinan or Naihanchi bunkai, or Burgar's treatment of Gojushiho, that you think is unsound, and _why_ is it unsound?


 
Granted, I painted with a pretty broad brush, and I really do not have anyone specific in mind. However, in my opinion and experience, there is too much reverse engineering/home cooking going on out there. I have seen Abernathy's stuff, and it isn't bad...but it isn't new, either. My impression of many of these folks is that they are suddenly re-discovering the wheel. Most of the so-called "new" applications I see that actually make sense in the context of the kata have been taught for decades by Higoshi, Kuniba, Hayashi, Demura, Higaonna and others. Most of the peopleI know who have been in Okinawan karate for any length of time know most of these bunkai. 

There are too many self-styled "masters" out there who, in an effort to come up with something new and different, generally end up with something that doesn't fit the context of the kata or which won't work without a lot of modification.

Most of the kata have applications that have always been a part of the kata. Some were passed on, some were not. In many cases, it is impossible to know what the originators intended. Many first and second generation American instructors never learned all the bunkai, so they flew by the seat of their pants. The situation got better as more and more Japanese and Okinawan instructors began coming over here to teach, but there are still many gaps.

Certainly there are grappling techniques in many kata, but some people have gone overboard and find ground techniques in everything from gedan barai to mae tobi geri. I remind them that karate is primarily an atemi art that prefers standing on one's feet.

So, I supppose I am attempting to provide some balance and perspective. There is certainly nothing wrong with trying to find applications that work for kata for which you have not been taught bunkai. But, I think you have to be careful and try to have it make sense in the overall context of the kata. It also helps if it works on a resisting opponent.


----------



## exile (Feb 2, 2008)

cstanley said:


> Granted, I painted with a pretty broad brush, and I really do not have anyone specific in mind. However, in my opinion and experience, there is too much reverse engineering/home cooking going on out there.



I agree&#8212;there's a lot! And some is pretty implausible. The trick though is, always, _sincere_ noncompliant testing, I think. What looks good on one's mental drawing board may not work out well in real time at all. Absolutely, that's a given.




cstanley said:


> I have seen Abernathy's stuff, and it isn't bad...but it isn't new, either. My impression of many of these folks is that they are suddenly re-discovering the wheel. Most of the so-called "new" applications I see that actually make sense in the context of the kata have been taught for decades by Higoshi, Kuniba, Hayashi, Demura, Higaonna and others. *Most of the peopleI know who have been in Okinawan karate for any length of time know most of these bunkai.*



Well, this may be the clue. I have the sense that a lot of sources for kata bunkai come from the Shotokan side, and these have tended, with the passing of time, to become more and more 'literal', if I can put it that way. If you're saying that a lot of the stuff that people like Abernethy are rediscovering was already known to the Okinawan practitioners, I'm perfectly ready to believe it. But the flip side is that the Okinawan perspective on those kata moves is probably a good deal less well known than certain standard Shotokan views. In Abernethy's case, I think what happened was, he trained in Shotokan and learned the standard line on kata bunkai, and over time became less and less convinced that this line represented the true effective application of the techs. So in a sense, you could see his 'career path' as his personal effort at reconstruction of the Okinawan interpretations from the base of disenchanted Shotokan.



cstanley said:


> There are too many self-styled "masters" out there who, in an effort to come up with something new and different, generally end up with something that doesn't fit the context of the kata or which won't work without a lot of modification.
> 
> Most of the kata have applications that have always been a part of the kata. Some were passed on, some were not. In many cases, it is impossible to know what the originators intended. Many first and second generation American instructors never learned all the bunkai, so they flew by the seat of their pants. The situation got better as more and more Japanese and Okinawan instructors began coming over here to teach, but there are still many gaps.



Yes. But I think it's a good thing that people have come to recognize, more and more, that the bunkai that came prepackaged with their training may very likely not be the original interpretations intended.



cstanley said:


> Certainly there are grappling techniques in many kata, but some people have gone overboard and find ground techniques in everything from gedan barai to mae tobi geri. I remind them that karate is primarily an atemi art that prefers standing on one's feet.



Right, and that is a point that Abernethy, for one, insists on: while there are ways of adapting the vertical controlling techs implicit in the kata to horizontal positions, the fact is that the actual techs themselves are vertical controlling moves. The name of the game is striking, and setting up those strikes. 



cstanley said:


> So, I supppose I am attempting to provide some balance and perspective. There is certainly nothing wrong with trying to find applications that work for kata for which you have not been taught bunkai. But, I think you have to be careful and try to have it make sense in the overall context of the kata. *It also helps if it works on a resisting opponent.*



Can't argue with any of that!  And especially, the emphasis on noncompliant training has to be the acid test.


----------



## cstanley (Feb 3, 2008)

exile said:


> I agreethere's a lot! And some is pretty implausible. The trick though is, always, _sincere_ noncompliant testing, I think. What looks good on one's mental drawing board may not work out well in real time at all. Absolutely, that's a given.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I think we are pretty much on the same page here. I think you are right on about the Shotokan thing. I have had a number of Shotokan dan come and train in our dojo, and some have become students. Their knowledge of bunkai is often limited, but they hit hard as Hell, are in shape, and they are very aggressive. As an instructor, I'll settle for that.:high5:


----------



## TimoS (Feb 3, 2008)

Garcia_Hanshi said:


> Remember, prior to 1932, there were very few Ryu in Okinawa, in fact there were only four ryu established, and only one Ryu during the 1800's which was formulated in 1830.



Interesting. What ryu are we talking about? I know that Itosu wrote that there used to be two ryu, Shorin and Shorei ryu. Are you referring to these by any chance?


----------



## cstanley (Feb 3, 2008)

Garcia_Hanshi said:


> Hello,
> Thank you all for been interested in ancient Okinawan kata lineage, history, technical aspects, and practical usage of such.
> Previous to 1905 and the conversion of old-type Okinawan Uchinadi (Okinawa-te) into modern Karate, katas did not form part of any standard curriculums. Ushinadi was taught to students based in two factors: developed skills, and personality.
> Most ancient masters did reserved certain teachings for selected students.
> ...


 
The first Okinawan ryu to be named was Goju. Myagi's students attended a big martial arts shiai in Japan and, upon their return, told Myagi that all the ryu in Japan had names. So, Myagi decided upon the name "Goju." This was around 1931. My understanding is the same as TimoS's...initially there were Shuri, Tomari, and Naha (te or ti), then the broad categories of Shorei and Shorin. Gradually, the various ryu developed from these traditions. There were, of course, family or village ryu which developed along a different path.

Please don't regale us with stories about the "secret knowledge" you got on Okinawa in the sixties because you were so special. There must be a thousand people in America running around with the same story.

Among the traditional ryu with which I am familiar, and among senior practitioners of those ryu, it is considered incorrect to refer to oneself as "Hanshi," "Shihan," or other such titles. "Hanshi" is not a title that is given based upon skill, either, as so many misguided people seem to imagine. It is more like "Monsignor" in the Church. It is an honorary title, meaning "so-and-so is a good guy and has contributed something to the ryu or kai," or something like that. To refer to oneself in such a way is though to be bad manners or, at the very least, tacky.


----------



## exile (Feb 3, 2008)

cstanley said:


> The first Okinawan ryu to be named was Goju. Myagi's students attended a big martial arts shiai in Japan and, upon their return, told Myagi that all the ryu in Japan had names. So, Myagi decided upon the name "Goju." This was around 1931. My understanding is the same as TimoS's...initially there were Shuri, Tomari, and Naha (te or ti), then the broad categories of Shorei and Shorin. Gradually, the various ryu developed from these traditions. There were, of course, family or village ryu which developed along a different path.
> 
> Please don't regale us with stories about the "secret knowledge" you got on Okinawa in the sixties because you were so special. There must be a thousand people in America running around with the same story.
> 
> Among the traditional ryu with which I am familiar, and among senior practitioners of those ryu, it is considered incorrect to refer to oneself as "Hanshi," "Shihan," or other such titles. "Hanshi" is not a title that is given based upon skill, either, as so many misguided people seem to imagine. It is more like "Monsignor" in the Church. It is an honorary title, meaning "so-and-so is a good guy and has contributed something to the ryu or kai," or something like that. To refer to oneself in such a way is though to be bad manners or, at the very least, tacky.



Many good points in this post, CS! :wink1: 

The whole mantra of almost-lost-secret-lore-to-which-only-a-select-few-are-privy gets really tiresome, doesn't it....


----------



## chinto01 (Feb 4, 2008)

Garcia_Hanshi said:


> Hello,
> Thank you all for been interested in ancient Okinawan kata lineage, history, technical aspects, and practical usage of such.
> Previous to 1905 and the conversion of old-type Okinawan Uchinadi (Okinawa-te) into modern Karate, katas did not form part of any standard curriculums. Ushinadi was taught to students based in two factors: developed skills, and personality.
> Most ancient masters did reserved certain teachings for selected students.
> ...



Thanks for your input on this thread. It was very informative. Does anyone have a video of this form?

In the spirit of bushido!

Rob


----------



## HankinSalem (Feb 5, 2008)

As a student of John Sells, I've learned the kata Wando or Wanduan from him and teach it to my advanced students.

What questions do you have about the kata? It is a nice form, the version that we practice is a "karatefied" version, not the original long Chinese version which I believe John knows and practices.

Wando could easily fit into a Goju-ryu syllabus and not stand out particularly, unlike the Aragaki kata Niseishi, which, to my eyes is very "kung-fuey" in it's movment and applications, at least in the version we practice in seito shito-ryu.

BTW, the kata Shinpa that someone (Victor?) mentioned is one created by Mabuni Kenwa.


----------



## chinto01 (Feb 5, 2008)

I have seen the youtube video of this form. How similar is this compared to the form you do?

In the spirit of bushido!

Rob


----------



## TimoS (Feb 19, 2008)

samertz said:


> It was brought to my attention that you guys were wanting to know about Wanduan.  So here is what I was told about it.
> 
> I learned this kata from Masamichi Daiyo.  He told me that it was originally taught to him by Shigeru Nakamura in the 1950's



Interesting. Then why do you on another forum say that you learned the kata from a friend, who learned it from John Sells? Actually in there you give two sources for who taught you the kata: Nakamura sensei in Naha and the aforementioned friend. So which of these three individuals did you learn the kata from?


----------



## Garcia_Hanshi (Feb 26, 2008)

Hello,
This is to answer Mr. cstanley

First - The first Ryu to be registered in Dai Nippon Butokukai indeed was Goju-ryu in 1930.  However, if you research a little bit more, you will find that Choshin Chibana was already writting his style as Kobayashi since 1920, that Yasutsune Ankoh Itosu was referring to his Karate as Shorin-ryu since around 1908, that Taitei Kojo was referring to his family art as Kojo-ryu since 1875, that Isei Kojo and his ancestors were also using Kojo-ryu as a family art since the mid-1800's, that Sokon Matsumura referred to his teachings as Shorin-ryu since 1830, that the Motobu family referred to their art as Motobu-ryu since the 1800's.  Therefore, there are other Ryu that indeed existed in Okinawa and even used a name way before Chojun Miyagi used Goju Ryu for his art.  However, because Uchinadi was practiced without the government authorization, these lineages (Ryu) were used only in closed circles.  Does that mean that there was no other style previous to Goju-ryu?

Second - I am not boating about anything in my writting, I merely stated that to my understanding Kata such as Wanduan (Wandoh) were not part of any formal open curriculum and that indeed there were some masters who did know and teach the Kata in close circles.  I am not anyone special proclaiming to have learned any secrets in Okinawa.  There are many Katas (as well as lineage's "ryu") which no-one have heard of and that to this day still kept private in family circles. You should perhaps stop listening to those who talk for talk and contact serious instructors such as Hanshi John Sells, and ask respectfully about material and information he might know and teach that is not common to the general Karate community.  A good example of this fact is the Katas that Ryuei-ryu and other non-common lineage's teach which until not long ago were not even heard of, but indeed did exist and were preserved within small circles.

Third - In regards to the titles I would only say this: I did not auto-proclaimed been a Hanshi licensed holder, the license was issued to me years ago, as many others legitimate Hanshi license holders.  Hanshi is not a title, is a teaching license.  The fact that when someone has a license and as professional, indicates his license after his name, has nothing to do with autoproclaiming anything, it has to do with proper identification in a field by such licensee. To place the "Hanshi" before the name, yes it is considered rude and inpolite, but to sign using your license after your name is considered proper.  My students refer to me as sensei, not by license. I do NOT consider myself a "master" or a "grandmaster", I am simply a martial arts student and practitioner whoi after more than 50 years in this field still study and learn.

Fourth - I got in here to share some information about a certain ancient Kata, not to argue with anyone.  If my writting or my person is not of everyone's please in here, I will simply abandon this site and will not recomend it for it would be a blog for arguments and controversy; and that is not where I like to be. Martial arts philosophy teaches respect, and if you are a martial artist you should not be disrespectful to someone just because you don't know the person, or because you might disagree with someone.

Thank you, have a good day everyone and continue your trainings
Goodbye


----------



## TimoS (Feb 26, 2008)

> Fourth - I got in here to share some information about a certain ancient Kata, not to argue with anyone.  If my writting or my person is not of everyone's please in here, I will simply abandon this site and will not recomend it for it would be a blog for arguments and controversy



Come now, if you've been in the martial arts as long as you say you have (longer than I've been alive), you must've realized already that nobody can please everybody. There will always be arguments.

The history part of your message I will have to concentrate on later, because there are some issues that are in conflict with what I've been told, but I want to review those issues with my contacts


----------



## chinto01 (Feb 26, 2008)

Garcia_Hanshi said:


> Hello,
> This is to answer Mr. cstanley
> 
> First - The first Ryu to be registered in Dai Nippon Butokukai indeed was Goju-ryu in 1930.  However, if you research a little bit more, you will find that Choshin Chibana was already writting his style as Kobayashi since 1920, that Yasutsune Ankoh Itosu was referring to his Karate as Shorin-ryu since around 1908, that Taitei Kojo was referring to his family art as Kojo-ryu since 1875, that Isei Kojo and his ancestors were also using Kojo-ryu as a family art since the mid-1800's, that Sokon Matsumura referred to his teachings as Shorin-ryu since 1830, that the Motobu family referred to their art as Motobu-ryu since the 1800's.  Therefore, there are other Ryu that indeed existed in Okinawa and even used a name way before Chojun Miyagi used Goju Ryu for his art.  However, because Uchinadi was practiced without the government authorization, these lineages (Ryu) were used only in closed circles.  Does that mean that there was no other style previous to Goju-ryu?
> ...



As I posted before I found your posting in regards to this kata very informative. I would encourage you to stick around and interact more on this site. I have been here for a couple of years and I have seen a great deal of debate on certain topics. In the end nobody wins if you just take your ball and go home. I will once again repeat my instructor who says "Everybody's karate is #1." The more I examine that statement the more I believe it.

In the spirit of bushido!

Rob


----------



## cstanley (Feb 26, 2008)

Garcia_Hanshi said:


> Hello,
> This is to answer Mr. cstanley
> 
> First - The first Ryu to be registered in Dai Nippon Butokukai indeed was Goju-ryu in 1930. However, if you research a little bit more, you will find that Choshin Chibana was already writting his style as Kobayashi since 1920, that Yasutsune Ankoh Itosu was referring to his Karate as Shorin-ryu since around 1908, that Taitei Kojo was referring to his family art as Kojo-ryu since 1875, that Isei Kojo and his ancestors were also using Kojo-ryu as a family art since the mid-1800's, that Sokon Matsumura referred to his teachings as Shorin-ryu since 1830, that the Motobu family referred to their art as Motobu-ryu since the 1800's. Therefore, there are other Ryu that indeed existed in Okinawa and even used a name way before Chojun Miyagi used Goju Ryu for his art. However, because Uchinadi was practiced without the government authorization, these lineages (Ryu) were used only in closed circles. Does that mean that there was no other style previous to Goju-ryu?
> ...


 
Don't let the door hit you in the *** on your way out.


----------



## chinto01 (Feb 27, 2008)

cstanley I must admit I found your last post to be a bit strong. Are we all not here to learn from one another? I thought these forums were a place for all of us to exchange ideas and try to link the past together and have it make some sense while getting other peoples opinions. I think we would all agree that comments like yours will do nothing but drive people away from internet forums like this and in the long run not help anyone. Not knowing anything about this kata myself I found Garcia Hanshi's post informative right, wrong, or indifferent it was still his opinion and now we have lost a resource in learning any more about this kata from him possibly because of your strongly worded last post. I hope that in the future he returns.

In the spirit of bushido!

Rob


----------



## TimoS (Feb 27, 2008)

Garcia_Hanshi said:


> First - The first Ryu to be registered in Dai Nippon Butokukai indeed was Goju-ryu in 1930.  However, if you research a little bit more, you will find that Choshin Chibana was already writting his style as Kobayashi since 1920, that Yasutsune Ankoh Itosu was referring to his Karate as Shorin-ryu since around 1908, that Taitei Kojo was referring to his family art as Kojo-ryu since 1875, that Isei Kojo and his ancestors were also using Kojo-ryu as a family art since the mid-1800's, that Sokon Matsumura referred to his teachings as Shorin-ryu since 1830, that the Motobu family referred to their art as Motobu-ryu since the 1800's.  Therefore, there are other Ryu that indeed existed in Okinawa and even used a name way before Chojun Miyagi used Goju Ryu for his art.  However, because Uchinadi was practiced without the government authorization, these lineages (Ryu) were used only in closed circles.  Does that mean that there was no other style previous to Goju-ryu?



Sure there were styles before the name Goju ryu was established, but _named_ ryu? I seriously doubt that! Just an example, Kyan Chotoku's karate was simply known as Chan Migwa (or Migua, I've seen both used) ti. I would love to see where you've gotten the information that says Itosu used the name Shorin ryu of his style, especially as early as 1908 or that Matsumura called his teachings Shorin ryu already back 1830. Can you back these claims by any documents? Or are they simply stories passed by word of mouth? If so, then sorry, that really doesn't count as proof. Stories get changed, because people are people (I think you are familiar with this game: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_telephone). Oh and as for Chibana, according to the information I received, he registered his style in 1933. Sure, he must've called it Shorin ryu prior to that, but I think 1920 is stretching things. Why would he wait 13 years to officially register his style? Again, I would love to see *proof* of your claims


----------



## cstanley (Feb 27, 2008)

chinto01 said:


> cstanley I must admit I found your last post to be a bit strong. Are we all not here to learn from one another? I thought these forums were a place for all of us to exchange ideas and try to link the past together and have it make some sense while getting other peoples opinions. I think we would all agree that comments like yours will do nothing but drive people away from internet forums like this and in the long run not help anyone. Not knowing anything about this kata myself I found Garcia Hanshi's post informative right, wrong, or indifferent it was still his opinion and now we have lost a resource in learning any more about this kata from him possibly because of your strongly worded last post. I hope that in the future he returns.
> 
> In the spirit of bushido!
> 
> Rob


 
Garcia was wrong, insisted he was right, and full of himself. It is a funny thing about many of these forums: if someone calls someone on their nonsense or questions claims or titles, that is considered disrespectful. In my opinion, it is far more disrespectful toward the members here for people to come on here with half-baked "research," sporting improper or phony titles and rank, and making statements about "history" and "theory" that are baloney. I would rather someone speak a bit harshly toward someone than for somebody to come on here assuming we are all idiots. THAT is real disrespect. I still hope that door doesn't hit him in the ***.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2008)

cstanley said:


> Don't let the door hit you in the *** on your way out.


 
Why would he let a door hit his donkey? 

As they say on Father Ted   "****".


----------



## Myrmidon (Mar 14, 2008)

cstanley said:


> Garcia was wrong, insisted he was right, and full of himself. It is a funny thing about many of these forums: if someone calls someone on their nonsense or questions claims or titles, that is considered disrespectful. In my opinion, it is far more disrespectful toward the members here for people to come on here with half-baked "research," sporting improper or phony titles and rank, and making statements about "history" and "theory" that are baloney. I would rather someone speak a bit harshly toward someone than for somebody to come on here assuming we are all idiots. THAT is real disrespect. I still hope that door doesn't hit him in the ***.


Although I agree with you in many aspects, specially in the usage of certain titles, we should always try to be as polite as possible. I think that it would be better to discuss the issues in controversy rather than being dismissive towards others.


----------



## Myrmidon (Mar 14, 2008)

*If this is Wanduan/Wando(h) kata, it is basically a composite kata containing movements from several Goju Ryu kata such as Seisan, Pechurin, Seiunchin and Kururunfa. It also has a couple of movements from the Uechi Ryu Seisan and a couple of movements that could be from some Shorin Ryu kata.*


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2008)

Myrmidon said:


> *If this is Wanduan/Wando(h) kata, it is basically a composite kata containing movements from several Goju Ryu kata such as Seisan, Pechurin, Seiunchin and Kururunfa. It also has a couple of movements from the Uechi Ryu Seisan and a couple of movements that could be from some Shorin Ryu kata.*


 
Seems an interesting kata. I have no one to teach it to me though. I will learn anything from anyone, I have no interest in scoring points on forums as to the exclusiveness of my styles. Nor will I judge others on a forum.
People will always express opinions that others will consider wrong, how boring would it be if we all thought the same, shades of 1984. However, no one should set themselves up to be an arbiter of just who is telling the 'truth' and who isn't, it's no one's job here to be harsh to another poster.
another point to bear in mind that for many of the posters on here English is not their first language nor for many is writing and expressing themselves in words always an easy thing. 
I admire passion in a person for what they do and what they believe but never at the cost of hurting another.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 17, 2008)

cstanley said:


> Please don't regale us with stories about the "secret knowledge" you got on Okinawa in the sixties because you were so special. There must be a thousand people in America running around with the same story.


 
I do agree with this statement, but also disagree with a little bit of it.  Garcis Hanshi made a statement regarding kata that was only taught to a few people and not taught to the masses.  In Gichin Funakoshi's autobiography, Gichin tells a story of being contacted by a karateka who wanted to pass on a special kata before he died so the kata would not die with him since he had not taught it outside the family.

So, yes I think alot of people do that for a marketing edge, but at the same time it did happen that not all knowledge was openly shared and things did die out with certain family ryu.


----------



## JWLuiza (Feb 6, 2010)

Sorry to revive the dead... But Wanduan is also found in McCarthy Sensei's Classical Kata of Okinawan Karate. Great book for reference. If you can find a copy, I highly recommend.


----------



## Ojisan (Mar 4, 2010)

My understanding is that Wanduan was an old "classic" karate kata practiced up until the late 1800's. I believe it has since been lost. The Wanduan that Sells and McCarthy teach is Wando and is a modern kata.

Wankan is a different kata alltogether and is practiced in Matsubayshi as "Okan".

The Wankan in Shotokan is ...... well.. strange and appears to only sleightly the Shorin Ryu Wankan, but that's another story.


----------



## JWLuiza (Mar 4, 2010)

I haven't come across anything that suggests Wando and Wanduan are different. Any references? Just curious.


----------

