Kata

[Battousai]

Great insight tigerstorm.
My instructor is always trying to get everyone to see what they don't see, besides looking at things that they do see. It certainly is a challenge to wrap your brain around things in different ways all the time.

 

[kingkong89]

many times

in some styles a strike may be closed fist in a kata then the other style it was open palm strikes

 

[Jin Gang]

Does anyone know if there is a significant philosophical/conceptual difference in Shotokan and Shorin ryu (Matsubayashi)? If so, how does it affect the practice of the Heian/Pinan kata in the two styles?

Damn. I'm nosey, ain't I?

Cthulhu

I practice the Matsubayashi Ryu kata, and I have seen the Shotokan versions. There have been many discussions of the reasons/philosophy behind the changes made in shotokan kata. In general, shotokan seems to have lower, wider stances. In all the pinan kata, cat stances become back stances. The so-called "knife hand block" is also delivered differently. Matsubayashi Ryu, moreso even than in other shorin ryu styles, uses natural, shorter stances, and emphasises "whipping" power coming from the hips.
As far as the philosophy or conceptual differences, I think that will vary depending on who's teaching it. Like everyone, I have theories about why, in general, certain changes took place in the kata, but there's no point getting people riled up and protective about their style. I prefer the more relaxed and natural method of matsubayashi ryu to the "harder" way of shotokan. My style is more to use lighter footwork, getting off-center to apply redirections or grabs as I strike. That is my preferred application of the knife hand "block", (I see it as a strike, much like a crane wing/whipping technique, with the rear hand deflecting or grabbing as I wind up for the whip) I don't know if this concept could be applied to the shotokan version of the technique, if it is performed the way it is in their kata.

In general, my style is lighter on the feet, techniques are shorter with less winding up and chambering, and more close range grabbing, pulling, and bumping. I personally have other influences besides matsubayashi ryu, so my take and performance is not exactly what a "pure" shorin ryu student would look like...but really there's no such thing as "pure" karate.

 

[chinto]

I like th idae of slowing down the movment in a dorm (from time to time).When a stdent first learns a form I have them do it slowly without powr or speed a few times (one to 5 moves repeated over and over then the next group,etc.) Untilthey have an idea where they are going and what to do next. Then I have them put in the power and speed.
At verious times I have them do the form by the numbers ( this is a great way to correct the small flaws)
At black belt level I have the student break down the form then I make them see some of the other possible ways a technique may have been intended to be used. Eyes get wide at times when one has been thought of a strike or block in only one way then is shown a completly diffrent concept to the technique
Folks I once again tell you I have no spell check capabilitis on webtv and I spell like crap. Sorry
Shadow

well first I cant spell and dont have spell check capibility either.... LOL

but in our dojo sensei does the same kinds of things in meany ways. the main diference is that by 6th kyu or so you start to be tought bunkai and shown some of the more advanced interpitations and asked to come up with others in some of the kata you have learned already. It is amazing how meany you may find flow from a single movement. I remember thinking at that point.. "ok maybe one or two more aplications for this movement..maybee?" and in about 15 minutes we ( my fellow 6th kyu and I ) found 6. the last one took a while to find but we found it and I am sure there are others. the old men who designed and made the old kata were very very smart! they were extreemly skilled in combat too, as well as having often experianced useing the techninques in real fights that were not for sport. please remember this whole concept of sport and rules in a fight are very much a modern thing. the old karateka who developed and refined the old kata were training and teaching themselves and others to survive a life and death encounter with a homicidal attacker.

 

[chinto]

I practice the Matsubayashi Ryu kata, and I have seen the Shotokan versions. There have been many discussions of the reasons/philosophy behind the changes made in shotokan kata. In general, shotokan seems to have lower, wider stances. In all the pinan kata, cat stances become back stances. The so-called "knife hand block" is also delivered differently. Matsubayashi Ryu, moreso even than in other shorin ryu styles, uses natural, shorter stances, and emphasises "whipping" power coming from the hips.
As far as the philosophy or conceptual differences, I think that will vary depending on who's teaching it. Like everyone, I have theories about why, in general, certain changes took place in the kata, but there's no point getting people riled up and protective about their style. I prefer the more relaxed and natural method of matsubayashi ryu to the "harder" way of shotokan. My style is more to use lighter footwork, getting off-center to apply redirections or grabs as I strike. That is my preferred application of the knife hand "block", (I see it as a strike, much like a crane wing/whipping technique, with the rear hand deflecting or grabbing as I wind up for the whip) I don't know if this concept could be applied to the shotokan version of the technique, if it is performed the way it is in their kata.

In general, my style is lighter on the feet, techniques are shorter with less winding up and chambering, and more close range grabbing, pulling, and bumping. I personally have other influences besides matsubayashi ryu, so my take and performance is not exactly what a "pure" shorin ryu student would look like...but really there's no such thing as "pure" karate.

in meany ways I think I would agree. you study a style with a lot of Tamari-te influince from Master Kyan. I also study a system with a large Tamari-Te influince frim Master Kyan, Shobayashi Shorin Ryu. from what I have seen of Matsubayashi our kata are extreemly similer and in meany cases identical. the shotokan kata I have seen are longer and slightly wider stances wtih a very liner technique. they switch what for us is Pinan shodan and Pinan Ni dan with each other. but like you I see them less into reaching out and grabbing the other combatent and much more in a liner mindset and so less likely to move off line or in a circuler fashion when they find themselves in a confrentation.

 

[chinto]

I've trained in Kyokushin and Shotoakan, and have trained in Goju the past 5yrs. I have learned the Pinan / Heian Katas. the Shotokan versions and Kyokushin versions. they were farily similar. But recently My iiado Sensei who is also very knowledgable of Shurite and Tomarite systems showed me Pinan Shodan, I recognized it as Pinan but had no idea it was the first one. It really got CHANGED alot from its more orignal Shuri te form to the modern Shotokan and Kyokushin version. Made me a little ill to think it had been that altered. It had been altered so much it was uncrecognizable.

Michael
http://www.inigmasoft.com/goyukai

I have to say there seems to be at least some variation in the pinan katas of most systems. I have wonderd a bit myself if Anku Itosu who designed and developed the pinan katas from kusanku, ( mainly kusanku dai in my opinion) did not teach diferent students perhaps some what slightly diferent versions? the other option is that the Pinan kata were developed at least partly to teach in the Okinawan school systems, so perhaps the age of the students that would be learning the kata had a barring on the version given by Itosu. He may have modified it then given it to that student to teach to his school in their public school system. I dont know that this is the case at all. but I have observed that some pinan kata have even at the kihon level much nastier bunkai then some others.

 

[Jin Gang]

There's some variation in all the kata between styles. No two schools or styles do everything (or anything) exactly alike. If your version of kusanku, passai, and chinto are different, then your pinan should probably match the techniques displayed in those kata.
I think the pinans evolved as Itosu developed them, so earlier students didn't learn the same thing later students did, and his students probably didn't learn the same thing that was evenually taught in schools. And not every school teacher may have taught the exact same way, either.
The pinan, I think, are sort of an adjunct or afterthought, added on to the curriciulum to give beginners something more to do before you get to the "real" traditional kata.

I read in an article somwhere, that Kentsu Yabu, one of Itosu's top students, made this statement to his students:
"(sic) If you have time to practice the Pinan, practice Kushanku instead."

Having learned the traditional kata, there's really no reason to practice pinan anymore. You're practicing the same techniques and strategies, just in a more "basic" format. I believe the purpose for their creation was to make a "standard" style of kata that could be taught to school kids, that would have a floor pattern conducive to teaching a large group of people.
Nowadays, pinan being a part of "traditional" shorin ryu curriculum, people will study them for years and years, looking for the bunkai and applications, assuming they were created purposefully with some form of deadly combat in mind...I don't think this is the case. People are creative and will come up with all kinds of great applications for the combos specifically in the pinans, and that's good. But I think that Itosu didn't create these kata specifically with fighting applications in mind. The applications are incidental, due to the inclusion of the techniques from the traditional kata.
In my personal practice, I don't spend any time on pinan anymore. Like Kentsu Yabu suggested, I practice kusanku instead. There's only so much time in a day, especially when you've got a full time job apart from martial arts, and you've got to decide what is worth spending time on. This is outside of a dojo, of course, where what you practice is dictated by your instructor. I actually like the pinan kata, I practiced them for years, like most shorin ryu students, when I first started. But if I started teaching, I think I wouldn't use them. Naihanchi would come first, and then dive into one of the traditional kata.

 

[chinto]

i think the pinan have things to teach, and have value even after you have learned kusanku. But then I practice both.

 

[Tez3]

i think the pinan have things to teach, and have value even after you have learned kusanku. But then I practice both.

But do you know the important part? the Bunkai! Kata of any sort is pointless with out it surely!

 

[exile]

Having learned the traditional kata, there's really no reason to practice pinan anymore. You're practicing the same techniques and strategies, just in a more "basic" format. I believe the purpose for their creation was to make a "standard" style of kata that could be taught to school kids, that would have a floor pattern conducive to teaching a large group of people.
Nowadays, pinan being a part of "traditional" shorin ryu curriculum, people will study them for years and years, looking for the bunkai and applications, assuming they were created purposefully with some form of deadly combat in mind...I don't think this is the case. People are creative and will come up with all kinds of great applications for the combos specifically in the pinans, and that's good. But I think that Itosu didn't create these kata specifically with fighting applications in mind. The applications are incidental, due to the inclusion of the techniques from the traditional kata.

I think one has to very, very careful in making this sort of assumption. Consider, as a counterpoint, Iain Abernethy's observation that

The Pinan katas are often thought of as training methods for beginners or children and are hence undervalued by more experienced karateka. The main reason for the katas being viewed this way is the fact that they were first established at the time Itosu was introducing Karate to the Okinawan schools. Some say that the Pinans are merely watered down versions of the advanced kata and were developed solely for children. If this were the case then why did Itosu also teach the Pinans to his adult students? It is far more likely that Itosu had developed the Pinans over a period of time and meant for them to be a synthesis of the best methods being practised in the Shuri region. When karate was introduced to the Okinawan schools the Pinans would be the natural choice because they are relatively short. This is probably the only reason they were selected and has nothing to do with the effectiveness of techniques contained within them. The main difference between the adults and children's training would simply be a matter of approach, as opposed to any change in subject matter. As mentioned earlier, the children would be taught the katas as 'block and punch' whereas the adults would receive instruction in all the methods contained within the katas including throws, chokes, strangles, joint locks, hair pulling, gouging methods etc. One of the problems with karate today is that it is the children's applications that are most commonly practised. This has lead to the majority of karateka practising the art as a rather limited striking system as opposed to the complete fighting system it was intended to be ...​

(from his free downloadable article `A short history of the Pinan/Heian katas' at http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_10.asp). And Abernethy has backed up this assessment of the Pinans in his free downloadable set of articles `The Pinan/Heian series as a fighting system' here,here,here,here and here, and in his free downloadable e-book The Application of the Pinan/Heian Katas (to get the e-book, you need to sign up for his monthly newsletter, a terrific resource, and again, completely free with no strings attached whatever). Abernethy shows in meticulous detail that the Pinan sequence as set forth by Itosu was originally constructed not on the basis of increasing difficulty, as is often suggested, but rather in terms of fighting ranges: the first three Pinan take you from `first-engagement' distance to close in grappling and ground defense tactics. The fourth and fifth Pinans, he further shows, involve backup and more advanced techniques for all three fighting ranges (sort of the supplements to the combat encyclopædia that the first three constitute).

The great advantage of Abernethy's bunkai for the P/H series, compared with others I've seen, is that the detailed bunkai he argues for in detail at each step of the way, through all five kata, are geared not to kumite, which is unlikely to have been Itosu's objective, but to defense against violent street attacks of a kind which, so far as we know, haven't changed much in the century-plus since Itosu `went public' with them. Anyone who's really interested in the origins and use of the P/H series would do well to look into Abernethy's deep decoding of them into practical applications, which he and his group have tested out under highly non-compliant conditions, before coming to any fixed conclusions about either Itosu's original intentions or the katas' inherent applicability to real street defense.

 

[Jin Gang]

I can see that the pinan are a "summary" of important techniques, as Abernathy says in his article. They are summarizing many of the techniques and principles of the traditional kata. Those kata were not geared toward kumite, either. There is nothing wrong with the pinan, adults get as much out of them as children. But I find them mostly redundant with the traditional kata. Before they were invented, all the fighting techniques within them were learned from those older kata.
In my opinion and preference, I would choose the longer, more complex kata over the "reader's digest" version. Instead of starting someone on pinan for a couple years, then starting the traditional kata...why not start on the traditional kata? They are longer, more complex, and take more time to master...so wouldn't you want to begin learning them as soon as possible? The foundational stances and techniques that must be learned are the same in these kata as they are in the pinan...and really, I don't think they are too difficult for a beginner to learn. All of shorin ryu's kata are really quite short and simple compared to some of their Chinese ancestors (some say this is part of the appeal and beauty of Okinawan karate).

It's just my opinion that the pinan are redundant. It all depends on how you train...you may find something unique and useful in them that you don't get out of kusanku or chinto or gojushiho or passai or naihanchi or any of the others that might be in your particular style. In general, every teacher and school is working out the applications for these kata on their own, as very few were originally taught real, practical applications in a straightforward manner. This is why researchers and developers like Mr Abernathy are so important, to help re-develop "schoolboy" karate into the self-defense/fighting tradition we know it is meant to be.

 

[exile]

In my opinion and preference, I would choose the longer, more complex kata over the "reader's digest" version. Instead of starting someone on pinan for a couple years, then starting the traditional kata...why not start on the traditional kata? They are longer, more complex, and take more time to master...so wouldn't you want to begin learning them as soon as possible?

I suppose in the end it all depends what one's learning style is. Let's say Itosu took older materials (which I've no doubt he did) and recompiled them into a kind of `sequenced' presentation, along the lines Abernethy was suggesting, to kind of compartmentalize the curriculum for different fighting ranges. You would learn the material in terms of these ranges, more distant (the periphery of the close-in fighting range) to more entangled, and the technical repertoire would shift accordingly. Learning the older, more elaborate kata would probably cover the same ground, but possibly in a more dense fashion, where material from different ranges was mixed together in a single kata, and the karateka had to be more experienced to tease out the applications. If you like that sort of thing—and there are probably plenty of karateka who would rather do it that way—and working out the bunkai from the `mixed bag' these longer, older forms presented, then that's a perfectly productive thing to do, most definitely.

The foundational stances and techniques that must be learned are the same in these kata as they are in the pinan...and really, I don't think they are too difficult for a beginner to learn. All of shorin ryu's kata are really quite short and simple compared to some of their Chinese ancestors (some say this is part of the appeal and beauty of Okinawan karate).

That is true for certain; the Chinese antecedents of the Okinawan forms were extremely long and complex, from what I've seen of them.

It's just my opinion that the pinan are redundant. It all depends on how you train...you may find something unique and useful in them that you don't get out of kusanku or chinto or gojushiho or passai or naihanchi or any of the others that might be in your particular style. In general, every teacher and school is working out the applications for these kata on their own, as very few were originally taught real, practical applications in a straightforward manner. This is why researchers and developers like Mr Abernathy are so important, to help re-develop "schoolboy" karate into the self-defense/fighting tradition we know it is meant to be.

100% agreement there, JG. And my own feeling, again, like yours, is that your personal preference should guide how you approach the learning process—this is one of the clearest cases where all paths lead to the same summit. I have a lot of affection for the Pinans personally, based on my own response to how much information they package into a relatively short sequence of moves in each kata, but that's just me. My concern (not in connection with anything you've posted!) is that people may tend to devalue them, based on their relative simplicity and compactness. But there seems to be less of tendency for people to do that these days, judging from the number of books that have come out about their bunkai in the past couple of years!