A kata/form tip for beginning students

[JR 137]

I don't want to offend or "trigger" anyone, so my apologies for the analogy but studying kata is like studying the Bible. Many students do kata like reading a newspaper or magazine. You don't read the Bible like you read a newspaper. Both the Bible and kata are there to draw deep meaning from them. It shouldn't be something you do lightly or superficially. I mean you can, but it misses the point. Someone in an earlier post called forms a " pattern" . I am sure that is the way they were taught but to me that is all wrong. It is so much more. The value of the Bible is not found in its binding or how many pages or the quality of the paper. The pages are necessary to draw out the meaning just as linked motion is necessary to draw meaning from the form. To not understand that is "not seeing the forest from the trees"
I was told once "the Bible doesn't mean, what it says.....it means MORE than it says."
Kata is the same.

Nothing wrong with your statement, at that what it is TO YOU.

I look at kata as the quintessential “art” of the martial arts. Take a work of art like a painting. Better yet, take possibly the most famous painting of all - the Mona Lisa...

Everyone who looks at it gets a different impression of what DaVinci intended. Some take a very superficial view, some take a very deep view. Some have analyzed the hell out of it, coming up with all these theories - She’s really a man, she’s pregnant, she’s his mother, etc. Then there’s Freud-like psychological theories for why he painted a man or his mother that way. Then there’s people who look at it and wonder what the fuss is all about.

Without looking it up and confirming things, I’ve read it’s been x-rayed and they’ve found at least one (I think more though) paintings under it that DaVinci covered up. People have their theories as to that, ranging from he didn’t like the others and re-used the wood (it’s painted on poplar, not canvas) to it’s all intentional code, conspiracy theories, etc.

People have replicated it, making those replications whimsical, serious copies, put them on the most inane things like cigarette lighters, etc. Some hold the painting like a work from a God, not to be messed with; while others view it as nothing more than some paint on a piece of wood.

Using your Bible reference, people interpret that differently too. People who hold it sacred use it in different ways and for different purposes in a sense. I priest/pastor/minister will read a relatively brief section and give an entire sermon around it. They don’t give a sermon based on the entire book and/or every other accepted book connected to it. All the other parts should be read and understood so that the part they’re focusing on has context and they’re not misinterpreting it though. Then there’s interpretation of the Bible. If there’s only one way to read and understand it, there’s only one church within Christianity without other denominations such as Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, et al.

I look at kata as art because it can be interpreted in so many different ways. It can also be used in so many ways. It can be studied deeply, or it can be used just to pass a test and move on. It can be the whole basis of a fighting system, or it can be strictly a performance piece. It can be used to get a good workout, or it can be a simple warmup.

I use it as different things as I feel necessary. I’ve used it to compete, I’ve used it to pass a test, I’ve analyzed some deeper than many others think necessary yet not nearly as deeply as others. Basically, the situation and my mood at the time dictates how and what I do with a kata at that moment. The only time it’s wrong is if I’m using it differently than I should be at that particular moment, like analyzing “hidden fighting moves” when I’m trying to use it for competition.

If we’re discussing bunkai, every post I said previously is way off. If we’re thinking standardized and using it solely as a robotic performance for a competition, I’m wrong again. If we’re thinking of different ways to use it and learn it, we’re all correct.

 

[JR 137]

Does he do the spins on the heel of the foot? Is that how you teach them? That would be different to our teaching. We also turn forward instead of to the back. Sonal blocks are done slightly different also. Good form.

I didn’t look at his feet for what part his weight and spin was from. I look at his knees, head height and overall balance for how he was spinning, and when he was spinning (on which counts/moves).

We spin on the ball of the foot. Or at least I’m pretty sure we’re supposed to My feet are pretty flat and heavy, so I’m more of a ball of the foot and beyond guy. Definitely not my heels though; if there’s only one part of my foot not touching, it’s definitely the heel.

 

[Yokozuna514]

The Pinan 1 Ura is exactly how we do ura kata. All spins were on steps forward, notably not on the first count where he stepped to his left and counts like that. And his spin is how I was describing mine - his feet come in closer rather than the back leg staying straight through the turn.

What doesn’t make sense to me is why he spun on the opening move of Pinan 3, but not in Pinan 1.

Not really sure why we don't either. Never heard a reasonable explanation as to why that kata is different but I suspect it may have to do with the fact it is the 1st kata in the series and the movement is the most basic. Not a great explanation but it's the only one that seems reasonable to me barring any better explanation.

 

[Yokozuna514]

Very interesting... yeah I guess a few aspects of the kata have to change in order incorporate ura more efficiently.

Wow, your Shodan grading sounded fun . Havent heard of Kyokushin no kata Tsuki Uke, is it similar to Tsuki no kata? And yeah ours involved all Sokugu kata in ura and tate, didn't have the pleasure of experiencing them haha.

I've never heard of Enshin Tensho! Am curious, looked it up but couldn't find it anywhere at all.. just looked in my old syllabus and we have something called 'Enkei Tensho' at Sandan, but I have no idea what that is... multidirectional Tensho...?

Yes, my grading was SO fun . Kyokushin no kata Tsuki Uke is an Oyama Karate Kata if I am not mistaken. They are the only folks (besides us) that do it. It is very different from Tsuki no kata. Kyokushin no kata Tsuki Uke only has 10 steps and incorporates all the basic stances and blocks done mostly from a kumite dachi. It's very simple in concept but looks great when you two people do it face to face. If I find a video, I will post it.

 

[Yokozuna514]

I don't want to offend or "trigger" anyone, so my apologies for the analogy but studying kata is like studying the Bible. Many students do kata like reading a newspaper or magazine. You don't read the Bible like you read a newspaper. Both the Bible and kata are there to draw deep meaning from them. It shouldn't be something you do lightly or superficially. I mean you can, but it misses the point. Someone in an earlier post called forms a " pattern" . I am sure that is the way they were taught but to me that is all wrong. It is so much more. The value of the Bible is not found in its binding or how many pages or the quality of the paper. The pages are necessary to draw out the meaning just as linked motion is necessary to draw meaning from the form. To not understand that is "not seeing the forest from the trees"
I was told once "the Bible doesn't mean, what it says.....it means MORE than it says."
Kata is the same.

This, as an absolute statement, presupposed that as the intent and purpose of forms. I have no doubt some forms were created with that approach in mind. I know with certainty that some were created for a more superficial purpose.

Here’s the rub (to me): my original intent in creating a form only matters somewhat. If someone uses them for purposes I didn’t intend, that’s fine...so long as they don’t try to get from them something that’s not in there. If they cross that line, they are likely to get wonky results. Trying to understand hip throw via kata would be a big mistake, for instance; it’s not in there, nor are the set-up mechanics.

I can see how some people may be offended by that analogy but I think I understand what you are getting at. There is a deeper meaning to kata if one chooses to delve deeper. It contains the essence of movements that can be translated into proper practice to make oneself better.

There are throws that are in kata. Does the kata give you all the proper mechanics to do all the throws ? No, but it gives you the essence which can be extracted and extrapolated for deeper consideration. Two people can look at the exact same form, done the exact same way and still see very different things. It takes a proper instructor to guide you through the movements and help you understand how they can be used to improve one's practice.

 

[hoshin1600]

i try never to say that anyone else's training is wrong..though i do have opinions that i sometimes express based on goals and purposes.
when i started my training i learned Taikyoku Shodan kata. it was learned as a pattern. it had no depth beyond the sequence of step, block, punch. it was only an exercise in memory, something to be memorized. then the next form and the next and the next. at some point i remember thinking that these forms have to have more to it. there is something i am missing here. as time progressed i began to dig into kata like an archaeologist. i find great depth of meaning in forms now. it is something that keeps me interested in the art, always learning more, finding something new.

i am not saying my way is correct and others are wrong,, i am only sharing my view.

 

[JR 137]

i try never to say that anyone else's training is wrong..though i do have opinions that i sometimes express based on goals and purposes.
when i started my training i learned Taikyoku Shodan kata. it was learned as a pattern. it had no depth beyond the sequence of step, block, punch. it was only an exercise in memory, something to be memorized. then the next form and the next and the next. at some point i remember thinking that these forms have to have more to it. there is something i am missing here. as time progressed i began to dig into kata like an archaeologist. i find great depth of meaning in forms now. it is something that keeps me interested in the art, always learning more, finding something new.

i am not saying my way is correct and others are wrong,, i am only sharing my view.

I knew what you were getting at. Please don’t interpret my response to yours as anything but that.

Like I said earlier, IMO kata is the best representation of art within karate.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i try never to say that anyone else's training is wrong..though i do have opinions that i sometimes express based on goals and purposes.
when i started my training i learned Taikyoku Shodan kata. it was learned as a pattern. it had no depth beyond the sequence of step, block, punch. it was only an exercise in memory, something to be memorized. then the next form and the next and the next. at some point i remember thinking that these forms have to have more to it. there is something i am missing here. as time progressed i began to dig into kata like an archaeologist. i find great depth of meaning in forms now. it is something that keeps me interested in the art, always learning more, finding something new.

i am not saying my way is correct and others are wrong,, i am only sharing my view.

And there's nothing wrong with that, especially if you acknowledge some of that depth is your own divination - you digging into principles and finding things the creator of the form may not have intended, but which the forms can be used for.

 

[pdg]

Someone in an earlier post called forms a " pattern" . I am sure that is the way they were taught but to me that is all wrong

I call them patterns, because that's the translation from "tul" - at least, it's the translation used in the encyclopaedia.

It doesn't mean that they are just a pattern of moves to me, it's just a name for that portion of practice.

Like using "forms" - that word has no deeper meaning than "pattern" unless you choose to assign one.

Calling them "Bob" wouldn't change that.

Calling the ones I practice "kata" would be incorrect on at least one level - it's a Japanese word which shouldn't really be applied to a Korean art.

If you personally choose to interpret me using the word "pattern" as me lacking understanding in some way there's very little I can do about that - I could argue but it'd be pointless and futile.

 

[JR 137]

I call them patterns, because that's the translation from "tul" - at least, it's the translation used in the encyclopaedia.

It doesn't mean that they are just a pattern of moves to me, it's just a name for that portion of practice.

Like using "forms" - that word has no deeper meaning than "pattern" unless you choose to assign one.

Calling them "Bob" wouldn't change that.

Calling the ones I practice "kata" would be incorrect on at least one level - it's a Japanese word which shouldn't really be applied to a Korean art.

If you personally choose to interpret me using the word "pattern" as me lacking understanding in some way there's very little I can do about that - I could argue but it'd be pointless and futile.

A lot of Korean stylists (non-Korean speakers) use Japanese terms, which I find odd and funny at the same time.

Come to think of it, I haven’t heard Japanese stylists use Korean terms. I guess that one doesn’t work both ways.

 

[hoshin1600]

I call them patterns, because that's the translation from "tul" - at least, it's the translation used in the encyclopaedia.

It doesn't mean that they are just a pattern of moves to me, it's just a name for that portion of practice.

Like using "forms" - that word has no deeper meaning than "pattern" unless you choose to assign one.

Calling them "Bob" wouldn't change that.

Calling the ones I practice "kata" would be incorrect on at least one level - it's a Japanese word which shouldn't really be applied to a Korean art.

If you personally choose to interpret me using the word "pattern" as me lacking understanding in some way there's very little I can do about that - I could argue but it'd be pointless and futile.

i dont mean to imply that you personally have any lack of understanding. its just my opinion that the English word pattern and its definition just seems off to me form is a little better. the two words while very close in nature have different meanings in my view. i would say that when i first started training the word pattern does actually fit well for the way i was training but for i see things now it doesnt really fit. going back to my Bible analogy to say that you have read the Bible gives the meaning that you skimmed through it once or twice. where if you join a group they would not call it a Bible reading but a Bible study, and yet they are reading it. semantics,,,nothing more.

 

[dvcochran]

i dont mean to imply that you personally have any lack of understanding. its just my opinion that the English word pattern and its definition just seems off to me form is a little better. the two words while very close in nature have different meanings in my view. i would say that when i first started training the word pattern does actually fit well for the way i was training but for i see things now it doesnt really fit. going back to my Bible analogy to say that you have read the Bible gives the meaning that you skimmed through it once or twice. where if you join a group they would not call it a Bible reading but a Bible study, and yet they are reading it. semantics,,,nothing more.

And I see the opposite. A pattern is a path, or something that is precise with little deviation. A form is a loose consolidation of things. IMHO. I get that the definitions are similar. I just helps me to think of it this way.

 

[hoshin1600]

And I see the opposite. A pattern is a path, or something that is precise with little deviation. A form is a loose consolidation of things. IMHO

EXACTLY.
Google says a pattern is a repeated design / a model used as a guide. so yes a pattern is meant to be done in a predefined way, perhaps with no alterations. but a form as a verb is to bring together parts to combine or create something/ to make or fashion something into a certain shape.
for me ,,, my training uses a form in a jazz like way rather than a classical piece where you only play whats on the page. the kata has a form but it is like a clay to mold.

 

[dvcochran]

Nothing wrong with your statement, at that what it is TO YOU.

I look at kata as the quintessential “art” of the martial arts. Take a work of art like a painting. Better yet, take possibly the most famous painting of all - the Mona Lisa...

Everyone who looks at it gets a different impression of what DaVinci intended. Some take a very superficial view, some take a very deep view. Some have analyzed the hell out of it, coming up with all these theories - She’s really a man, she’s pregnant, she’s his mother, etc. Then there’s Freud-like psychological theories for why he painted a man or his mother that way. Then there’s people who look at it and wonder what the fuss is all about.

Without looking it up and confirming things, I’ve read it’s been x-rayed and they’ve found at least one (I think more though) paintings under it that DaVinci covered up. People have their theories as to that, ranging from he didn’t like the others and re-used the wood (it’s painted on poplar, not canvas) to it’s all intentional code, conspiracy theories, etc.

People have replicated it, making those replications whimsical, serious copies, put them on the most inane things like cigarette lighters, etc. Some hold the painting like a work from a God, not to be messed with; while others view it as nothing more than some paint on a piece of wood.

Using your Bible reference, people interpret that differently too. People who hold it sacred use it in different ways and for different purposes in a sense. I priest/pastor/minister will read a relatively brief section and give an entire sermon around it. They don’t give a sermon based on the entire book and/or every other accepted book connected to it. All the other parts should be read and understood so that the part they’re focusing on has context and they’re not misinterpreting it though. Then there’s interpretation of the Bible. If there’s only one way to read and understand it, there’s only one church within Christianity without other denominations such as Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, et al.

I look at kata as art because it can be interpreted in so many different ways. It can also be used in so many ways. It can be studied deeply, or it can be used just to pass a test and move on. It can be the whole basis of a fighting system, or it can be strictly a performance piece. It can be used to get a good workout, or it can be a simple warmup.

I use it as different things as I feel necessary. I’ve used it to compete, I’ve used it to pass a test, I’ve analyzed some deeper than many others think necessary yet not nearly as deeply as others. Basically, the situation and my mood at the time dictates how and what I do with a kata at that moment. The only time it’s wrong is if I’m using it differently than I should be at that particular moment, like analyzing “hidden fighting moves” when I’m trying to use it for competition.

If we’re discussing bunkai, every post I said previously is way off. If we’re thinking standardized and using it solely as a robotic performance for a competition, I’m wrong again. If we’re thinking of different ways to use it and learn it, we’re all correct.

Damn that's good.
There is only one church IMHO. The denominations are man made fluff.

 

[hoshin1600]

 

[pdg]

A lot of Korean stylists (non-Korean speakers) use Japanese terms, which I find odd and funny at the same time.

Come to think of it, I haven’t heard Japanese stylists use Korean terms. I guess that one doesn’t work both ways.

I view that as a lack of understanding (ignorance, in the strict definition).

I've seen both Korean and Chinese derived stylists refer to their teacher as "sensei" for example. It would be perfectly understandable if it were a Japanese person, but for an English (or any other language) speaker to use Japanese terms seems a little disrespectful to me.

It's maybe a personal choice, and I'm not a Korean speaker, but I don't wish to use doubly foreign terms.

i dont mean to imply that you personally have any lack of understanding. its just my opinion that the English word pattern and its definition just seems off to me form is a little better. the two words while very close in nature have different meanings in my view. i would say that when i first started training the word pattern does actually fit well for the way i was training but for i see things now it doesnt really fit

If that's how you choose to interpret the meaning of the terms in your usage that's absolutely fine - I would however respectfully request that you make a linguistic exception for me

I don't use form because it's not the accepted name in my school, my interpretation of the patterns (or use thereof) is my own.


(Just like I'm very purposefully filtering your Bible references and removing them from any post of yours I quote, and will do the same with any post containing religious connotations)

 

[hoshin1600]

(Just like I'm very purposefully filtering your Bible references and removing them from any post of yours I quote, and will do the same with any post containing religious connotations)

is that because your religious or because your not? i happen to be Buddhist. seriously.

 

[JR 137]

I view that as a lack of understanding (ignorance, in the strict definition).

I've seen both Korean and Chinese derived stylists refer to their teacher as "sensei" for example. It would be perfectly understandable if it were a Japanese person, but for an English (or any other language) speaker to use Japanese terms seems a little disrespectful to me.

It's maybe a personal choice, and I'm not a Korean speaker, but I don't wish to use doubly foreign terms.



If that's how you choose to interpret the meaning of the terms in your usage that's absolutely fine - I would however respectfully request that you make a linguistic exception for me

I don't use form because it's not the accepted name in my school, my interpretation of the patterns (or use thereof) is my own.


(Just like I'm very purposefully filtering your Bible references and removing them from any post of yours I quote, and will do the same with any post containing religious connotations)

I guess people call others whatever they’ve been told to call them or whatever that person introduced themself as. If a Kung Fu or TKD teacher introduced himself as sensei, it would make sense that his students call him that. Stupid on the teacher’s end, but sensible on the student’s end.

I see a lot of TKD and TSD students use (or write on forums) gi, dojo, and sensei most often (when they’re wrong) for their stuff. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a karateka use dobok, dojang or sabum in reference to their stuff. Odd.

 

[dvcochran]

I guess people call others whatever they’ve been told to call them or whatever that person introduced themself as. If a Kung Fu or TKD teacher introduced himself as sensei, it would make sense that his students call him that. Stupid on the teacher’s end, but sensible on the student’s end.

I see a lot of TKD and TSD students use (or write on forums) gi, dojo, and sensei most often (when they’re wrong) for their stuff. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a karateka use dobok, dojang or sabum in reference to their stuff. Odd.

I think if you consider Korean occupation over the years it can make more sense. Korea never ruled over Japan or China than I am aware of.

 

[_Simon_]

I don't want to offend or "trigger" anyone, so my apologies for the analogy but studying kata is like studying the Bible. Many students do kata like reading a newspaper or magazine. You don't read the Bible like you read a newspaper. Both the Bible and kata are there to draw deep meaning from them. It shouldn't be something you do lightly or superficially. I mean you can, but it misses the point. Someone in an earlier post called forms a " pattern" . I am sure that is the way they were taught but to me that is all wrong. It is so much more. The value of the Bible is not found in its binding or how many pages or the quality of the paper. The pages are necessary to draw out the meaning just as linked motion is necessary to draw meaning from the form. To not understand that is "not seeing the forest from the trees"
I was told once "the Bible doesn't mean, what it says.....it means MORE than it says."
Kata is the same.

Nothing wrong with your statement, at that what it is TO YOU.

I look at kata as the quintessential “art” of the martial arts. Take a work of art like a painting. Better yet, take possibly the most famous painting of all - the Mona Lisa...

Everyone who looks at it gets a different impression of what DaVinci intended. Some take a very superficial view, some take a very deep view. Some have analyzed the hell out of it, coming up with all these theories - She’s really a man, she’s pregnant, she’s his mother, etc. Then there’s Freud-like psychological theories for why he painted a man or his mother that way. Then there’s people who look at it and wonder what the fuss is all about.

Without looking it up and confirming things, I’ve read it’s been x-rayed and they’ve found at least one (I think more though) paintings under it that DaVinci covered up. People have their theories as to that, ranging from he didn’t like the others and re-used the wood (it’s painted on poplar, not canvas) to it’s all intentional code, conspiracy theories, etc.

People have replicated it, making those replications whimsical, serious copies, put them on the most inane things like cigarette lighters, etc. Some hold the painting like a work from a God, not to be messed with; while others view it as nothing more than some paint on a piece of wood.

Using your Bible reference, people interpret that differently too. People who hold it sacred use it in different ways and for different purposes in a sense. I priest/pastor/minister will read a relatively brief section and give an entire sermon around it. They don’t give a sermon based on the entire book and/or every other accepted book connected to it. All the other parts should be read and understood so that the part they’re focusing on has context and they’re not misinterpreting it though. Then there’s interpretation of the Bible. If there’s only one way to read and understand it, there’s only one church within Christianity without other denominations such as Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, et al.

I look at kata as art because it can be interpreted in so many different ways. It can also be used in so many ways. It can be studied deeply, or it can be used just to pass a test and move on. It can be the whole basis of a fighting system, or it can be strictly a performance piece. It can be used to get a good workout, or it can be a simple warmup.

I use it as different things as I feel necessary. I’ve used it to compete, I’ve used it to pass a test, I’ve analyzed some deeper than many others think necessary yet not nearly as deeply as others. Basically, the situation and my mood at the time dictates how and what I do with a kata at that moment. The only time it’s wrong is if I’m using it differently than I should be at that particular moment, like analyzing “hidden fighting moves” when I’m trying to use it for competition.

If we’re discussing bunkai, every post I said previously is way off. If we’re thinking standardized and using it solely as a robotic performance for a competition, I’m wrong again. If we’re thinking of different ways to use it and learn it, we’re all correct.

Both really excellent points and posts, thoroughly enjoying this discussion .

I love the analogies used and they make sense to me. Kata to me is a much deeper study than a list of techniques. I've even heard that each kata is trying to convey an idea or a principle, a particular way of being, moving and a specific intention with how you use your body, and that makes sense.

Compare the principles within Seiunchin which is very rooted in a solid stance, unbalancing an opponent and in close range. A real push/pull dynamic within a solid structure. With an intention and posture of "I'm not moving". That's powerful...

Then you look at a kata like Empi/Enpi. Teaching agility, quickness, ability to move and generate power through dynamic movement, and also to create/summon a dynamic, free-moving energy. It has a lightness to it, like a flying swallow (apparently the name translates to "flying swallow"). Also just as powerful in it's own way.

There's very much (from what I've seen) a psyche and spirit to each kata, an intentionality, and THAT fascinates me... that way you can really practice it with the orientation of trying to tap into that, what's it trying to communicate or imbue into you? What qualities?

(And like has been said, kata can mean different things to different people, also within different contexts and reasonings for sure. I personally don't feel it's simply just a bunkai and stimulus/response sequence, but something more)