Bunkai, history, and "authorities"

[Makalakumu]

One of Oyata's students has written that when a student asked about "bunkai" for a specific move, he might reply "What do you think?"

This is excellent teaching practice because it forces a student to begin looking at applications from the lens of their experience and needs. It's how you personalize bunkai.

But we should all recognize the distinct potential that historically, kata was handed down, perhaps without a whole lot of bunkai.

This is true. For the last 100 years, Shuri-te and Tomari-te kata were not taught with a lot of actual bunkai. Was this always the case? It seems like the further back you go in history, bunkai become more important.

Another thing to consider is that various karate kata have been so heavily modified throughout the years that they may have scrambled the bunkai they were supposed to teach.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Makalakuma wrote:

It seems like the further back you go in history, bunkai become more important.

I would be grateful if you would elaborate on this.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[kbarrett]

I use to teach "bunkai" application when teaching the "Hyungs" I stopped to this a long time back, I discovered that there where many different applications to any given technique within the "Hyung" also nobodies application is wrong, that's the application they see and works for them. So I teach the "Hyungs" but I let my students find their own applications for the techniques within that "Hyung" which work best for them. Ken

 

[Makalakumu]

Makalakuma wrote:



I would be grateful if you would elaborate on this.

-Cayuga Karate

From what I've read, the old masters talked more about the importance of kata, the applications of the moves, and what kinds of techniques one could expect from them. Here is an article from one of the premier experts in Hawaii in Karate. This man, Charles Goodin, accumulated the largest collection of rare karate books in the world and donated them to the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

http://seinenkai.com/art-bunkai.html

Before 1900, Karate was taught in private, usually to only one, two or a handful of students. Even great teachers like Anko Itosu had relatively few students. These were "private" students who often trained with a teacher for life. Such students, after learning the movements and sequence of kata, also learned the meanings. The term "bunkai" might not have been used. The study of applications was an essential part of the process of learning kata. An emphasis on "bunkai" as a distinct subject only became necessary when the study of applications was watered down or eliminated altogether.


When Karate was taught in public, first in the public schools in Okinawa and later in colleges and schools on mainland Japan, teachers suddenly had to deal with large groups. Instead of training with a teacher for life, students trained for only a few years, or even only a single term. In such a short time, teachers could only teach the most basic form of Karate. And without personally knowing each student (and his family) for many years, a teacher might be reluctant to teach certain dangerous applications of techniques.


It should not be surprising that private students (those who trained at the teacher's house or even at the family tomb) and public students (those who generally trained at schools) would be taught differently. Now take this forward a few generations. Soon, whole generations of students would learn Karate without studying applications -- and then they would become the teachers!

So, what tradition have you been handed down?

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Makalakumu,

Thanks for the source.

Before 1900, Karate was taught in private, usually to only one, two or a handful of students. Even great teachers like Anko Itosu had relatively few students. These were "private" students who often trained with a teacher for life. Such students, after learning the movements and sequence of kata, also learned the meanings. The term "bunkai" might not have been used. The study of applications was an essential part of the process of learning kata. An emphasis on "bunkai" as a distinct subject only became necessary when the study of applications was watered down or eliminated altogether.[Emphasis added]

If we go perhaps a few decades before 1900, karate was taught in complete secrecy, and had for hundreds of years prior. There are numerous references to this secrecy, and the lack of a historical record. Goodin provides no source for his quote, highlighted above, that students were taught the meanings of the movements after learning the movements. Without a source, it appears to be speculation to me. This isn't a minor issue. We have but a few authoritative references to the history of karate. Texts from Funakoshi, Nagamine and Motobu are extremely vague on the history of karate instruction prior to 1900. If there is an authoritative source that is more specific he should quote it.

Thanks for the reference.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[Makalakumu]

Makalakumu,

Thanks for the source.



If we go perhaps a few decades before 1900, karate was taught in complete secrecy, and had for hundreds of years prior. There are numerous references to this secrecy, and the lack of a historical record. Goodin provides no source for his quote, highlighted above, that students were taught the meanings of the movements after learning the movements. Without a source, it appears to be speculation to me. This isn't a minor issue. We have but a few authoritative references to the history of karate. Texts from Funakoshi, Nagamine and Motobu are extremely vague on the history of karate instruction prior to 1900. If there is an authoritative source that is more specific he should quote it.

Thanks for the reference.

-Cayuga Karate

I agree, I definitely would like to see something cited from people who lived at that time. Considering that we have the largest rare book and document collection on karate in the world right here in Hawaii, I'm sure we'll make some progress toward that. Incidentally, I have read in a number of books by Nagamine and other old karateka that the teaching method was essentially to learn the applications and eventually be taught the kata. When I talked to Goodin, he confirmed this as well. Supporting this position more academically, is going to take more work, however.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Makalakuma wrote:

Incidentally, I have read in a number of books by Nagamine and other old karateka that the teaching method was essentially to learn the applications and eventually be taught the kata.

I have the following texts.

Nagamine's Essence of Okinawan Karate and Tales of Okinawa's Great Masters.
Funakoshi - Karate Do Kyohan, Karate-Do, My Way of Life, The Essence of Karate and The Twenty Guiding Principles of Karate
Motobu - Okinawan Kempo
Bishop - Okinawan Karate

I don't think that is principle is mentioned in any of these. Can you please confirm? I would be very grateful if you could point to other texts that mention this.

This is a fairly essential topic relating to our understanding of what we have today (kata and bunkai) and how this relates to practices in the past.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[kbarrett]

Reading everybodies posts on this thread, does the true history and origins of the kata's come into question, I know everybody say's they came from China, but when you see Chinese Forms and compare them to Okinawan Kata's they really don't seem to have any similarities at all. Is it possible that the Okinawan Masters themselves created the kata's that we have today, I know iin TSD we practice that same kata's (Hyungs) as every other Karate style except for the Yuk Rho, Chil Sung & Hwa Sun Hyungs in these Hyungs to see some Chinese movement in them with the "Long Fist" which MG Kee created, so is it possiblle that the Master of Okinawa simply took what the Chinese taugh them and created their own kata's. Ken

 

[dancingalone]

Reading everybodies posts on this thread, does the true history and origins of the kata's come into question, I know everybody say's they came from China, but when you see Chinese Forms and compare them to Okinawan Kata's they really don't seem to have any similarities at all. Is it possible that the Okinawan Masters themselves created the kata's that we have today, I know iin TSD we practice that same kata's (Hyungs) as every other Karate style except for the Yuk Rho, Chil Sung & Hwa Sun Hyungs in these Hyungs to see some Chinese movement in them with the "Long Fist" which MG Kee created, so is it possiblle that the Master of Okinawa simply took what the Chinese taugh them and created their own kata's. Ken

The bolded text is probably true of most karate kata, particularly the ones handed down through Itosu Sensei which later made it into Tang Soo Do.

There are a few notable exceptions like Sanchin, perhaps Seiunchin, from the Naha-te systems which were imported to Okinawa more recently from China by comparison and thus the linkage is clearer with them. Sanchin kata has definite versions still practiced in Chinese gung fu systems such as Bai He Quan or Wu Zu Quan.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

kbarrett wrote:

Reading everybodies posts on this thread, does the true history and origins of the kata's come into question, I know everybody say's they came from China, but when you see Chinese Forms and compare them to Okinawan Kata's they really don't seem to have any similarities at all. Is it possible that the Okinawan Masters themselves created the kata's that we have today,

And Dancingalone wrote:

The bolded text is probably true of most karate kata, particularly the ones handed down through Itosu Sensei which later made it into Tang Soo Do.

There are a few notable exceptions like Sanchin, perhaps Seiunchin, from the Naha-te systems which were imported to Okinawa more recently from China by comparison and thus the linkage is clearer with them.

We have some texts that most in the karate community would consider authoritative that describe the belief that much of the kata came from China.

We know of some kata that are of relatively recent creation.

According to Nakama in Bishop's text, Itosu learned Channan from a Chinese man and modified them, creating the Pinan/Heian.

Miyagi is credited with creating Gekisai and Tensho. Mabuni with several kata, Funakoshi with Taikyoku. Nagamine with a Fukyugata. Toguchi a few, Miyazato created one, and Asai, a whole bunch.

But much of the kata we have are believed to go back to the 1800s during a time when they were taught and practiced in secrecy.

Funakoshi, Nagamine and Motobu have all stated that Chinese men are the likely origin. I will provide the supporting documentation in a future post.

We have more substantial documentation that Higaonna learned 4 kata in China. Nakaima learned the kata of his Ryuei ryu there. Uechi learned three kata in China. And Mabuni learned a few kata (including Nipaipo) from a Chinese in Okinawa.

However, I am aware of no historical record of Okinawans, prior to 1900, of creating the empty hand kata that have been handed down. The historical record does indicate that they were likely responsible for much of the kobudo kata that have come down.

In the absence of documentation for Okinawan origins of kata, and documentation from the leading masters who have written that the believe kata is of Chinese origin, it is probably best to assume that the kata we have that are known to have been handed down, in Okinawa, 100 years ago, are most likely of Chinese origin.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[punisher73]

Reading everybodies posts on this thread, does the true history and origins of the kata's come into question, I know everybody say's they came from China, but when you see Chinese Forms and compare them to Okinawan Kata's they really don't seem to have any similarities at all. Is it possible that the Okinawan Masters themselves created the kata's that we have today, I know iin TSD we practice that same kata's (Hyungs) as every other Karate style except for the Yuk Rho, Chil Sung & Hwa Sun Hyungs in these Hyungs to see some Chinese movement in them with the "Long Fist" which MG Kee created, so is it possiblle that the Master of Okinawa simply took what the Chinese taugh them and created their own kata's. Ken

Yes, we have documented evidence that certain katas were created by Okinawan masters after their exchanges with Chinese masters; Kusanku and Chinto both come to mind immediately. We also know that Itosu created the Pinans from existing kata. Others are also attributed to chinese sources, such as Wansu. I think it is fair to assume that many of the Shuri/Tomari katas were created by combining the lessons learned from the chinese sources and the existing okinawan te. I don't think all of them are direct katas brought from China since in those lineages we haven't seen them still kept in the parent style. Naha-te katas are more of a direct transmission with Seisan, Sanseiryu, Sanchin and Suparenpei, there have been cultural exchanges that have seen those kata practiced in various southern styles and we know that two of the big founders of the Naha systems (Higaonna and Uechi) both studied in China before coming back to Okinawa and sharing what they learned.

Think of the formation of okinawan karate like this, through the eyes of an American kid in the late 50's early 60's. Your dad teaches you some boxing so you can take care of yourself. You really enjoy it and want to learn more. You end up talking to one of your uncles one 4th of July and he talks about the stuff he learned in the military. You ask him to teach you and he shows you some moves from the H2H he learned in the Army while he was in. You start to combine that with the boxing your dad taught you and come up with something new and other people ask you to teach them what you do. I think alot of okinawan karate started like this, of course this is my opinion and there is probably research out there that may show otherwise.

 

[dancingalone]

kbarrett wrote:



We have some texts that most in the karate community would consider authoritative that describe the belief that much of the kata came from China.

...

-Cayuga Karate

Not that I necessarily disagree with the above - it is the generally accepted history left to us through the writings and interviews of the masters and seniors who came before us.

With that said, has anyone made a more than cursory attempt to link the various karate kata with current Chinese forms in practice across the various systems? It's a tall order to follow. To my knowledge, Sanchin is the only kata easily matched to a Chinese equivalent, again in Wu Zu Quan or Bai He Quan.

Some Hung fist people I am familiar with likewise said they could see some of the same things they do when I played Seiunchin for them, but they did say they didn't see a clear line of descent from anything they were familiar with in Seiunchin.

What about the famous Naihanchi kata? Or the Pinan forms which are believed to have been created from an older (Chinese?) form/Channan? Anyone come across equivalents for them in CMA over the years?

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Below are some of the historical records regarding the Chinese origins of kata [emphasis added throughout]:

Choki Motobu also has left behind his opinion on the origins of karate in Okinawa Kenpo

As to the origins of Karate, there are many theories, however I am inclined to believe that this art was taught by Chinese men since there were many contacts made between Ryu Kyu and China since ancient days. There have been numerous styles (kata) in Karate. Some have already been forgotten and others are still being used and developed into some other styles. Changes in the different styles are difficult to trace. Throughout the history of Karate the demands for changes by society and the lifestyles of the people and even geographic differences caused each school to choose its own course to become popular or unpopular. Among those styles or katas which have been used in Ryu Kyu from ancient days are:
Sanchin, Jo-Ju-Shi-Ho, Seisan, Seiunchin, Ippakkku-Re-Hachi, Naihanchi, (Ichidan, Nidan, Sandan), Passai, Chinto, Chinte, (bamboo-yari spear style), Wanshu, Rohai and Kusanku.

And especially the three styles Nai-hanchi, Passai (great and small), and Kusanku which are widely known to many islanders. As I have mentioned, Ryu Kyu Kempo-Karate originally came from China. Sanchin, Jo-Ju-Shi-Ho, Seisan and Seiunchin have been used there for many centuries. However, the Naihanchi, Passai, Chinto, [and] Rohai styles are not left in China today and remain only in Okinawa as active Martial Arts. Wanshu and Rohai were used only in Tomari until [the] geographic reorganization in 1871 was made as a part of the Meiji Restoration. No one in Naha or Shuri learned those two styles until then, but later they were introduced to those main cities in Okinawa. As to the Pinan, the modern-time warrior Mr. Itosu originated this style to use a teaching material for his students.

In the The Essence of Okinawan Karate-Do, Nagamine further discussed the secrecy in which karate was practiced.

Through oral tradition and hand-to-hand training, the secret performances of the Chinese masters in the art of self-defense came to be known and their kata integrated with te.

In his Historical Outline of Karate-Do, Martial Arts Of Ryukyu, (1934) Chojun Miyagi described the lack of a historical record, and reviewed three common hypotheses regarding the origins of karate:

When we consider how karate was introduced to Ryukyu (= Okinawa), we have various opinions without any historical evidence. We have not yet come to a correct conclusion on this matter. There are three main opinions, namely "Thirty-six Chinese Immigrants", "Oshima Notes" and "Importation in Keicho Period". Simple explanation of each opinion are as follows.
(1) Thirty-six Chinese Immigrants

In 1392 (Ming dynasty in China), thirty-six Chinese immigrants came to Ryukyu from Fujian province. At that time karate was introduced to Ryukyu by Chinese immigrants from Fujian province.(2) Oshima Notes

In 1762, the merchant ship of the Ryukyu Kingdom was caught in a heavy storm on the way to Satsuma, and cast ashore on the coast of Oshima, Tosa. Shiohira Pechin, a high rank official of the ship, was an intelligent person. He was helped by Choki Tobe, an intellectual who lived in Oshima. Tobe wrote down Shiohira’s interesting stories about the Ryukyu Kingdom. His notes was called "Oshima Notes". The 3rd volume of "Oshima Notes" says "Koshankun, a kungfu warrior, came from China to Ryukyu bringing his disciples with him." According to the Notes, at that time people called the martial arts "Kumiaijutsu" instead of karate. This notes is [sic] the most reliable literature on karate.

Bishop, in his text Okinawan Karate, quotes Itosu student Chozo Nakama as stating:

Many of the karate katas taught today are simplified versions of Chinese forms and consist mostly of block-then-strike techniques in two separate movements as opposed to the original Chinese block then strike-in-one-movement techniques. In the Okinawan arrangements of these Chinese katas, the punching techniques consist generally of the flat (closed) fist type, whereas originally all kinds of hand-form variations were employed.

Regarding specific Chinese authorities responsible for the propagation of combative arts in Okinawa, Funakoshi provides some insight in The Master Text:

There is no doubt that the many experts who traveled between Okinawa and China contributed heavily to the bringing of karate to its present level. For example it has come down by word of mouth that about 200 years ago, a certain Sakugawa of Akata, in Shuri, traveled to China and then returned to Okinawa after mastering karate to become known as Karate Sakugawa. Again, according to Shiodaira of Shuri, one hundred and fifty years ago (as noted in the Oshima Note, by Tobe of Tosa, Japan), a Chinese expert, by name of Ku Shanku, arrived in Okinawa with a few of his students and introduced a type of kempo. Okinawan experts such as Sakiyama, Gushi, and Tomoyori, of Naha, studied for some time with the Chinese military attache, Ason; Matsumuma of Shuri, Maesato and Kogusuku of Kume, with the military attaché, Iwah; and Shimabuku of Uemonden, and Higa, Senaha, Gushi, Nagahama, Aragaki, Higjuanna and Kuwae, all of Kunenboya, with the military attaché, Waishinzan. It is said that Gusukuma, Kanagusuku, Matsumura, Oyatomari, Yamada, Nakazato, Yamazato, and Toguchi, all of Tomari, was a Southern Chinese who drifted ashore at Okinawa."

In the text The Secret Royal Martial Arts of Ryukyu, Matsuo Sakon quotes noted Okinawan historian Higaonna Kanjun:

Once Toyotomi Hideyoshi began to flex his might on the high seas during the Bunroku era (late 1500s), the Chinese government changed its policies. In 1600, when King Sho Nei sent Tei Do and others to request a Sappushi (government envoys), the Emperor issued a decree, to send military specialists long [sic] with the scholars who oversaw the formalities.

In a 1914 article in an Okinawan newspaper, Funakoshi attributes Jitte, Jiin, Chinto and Chinte as being taught by the shipwrecked Chinese sailor referenced in the master text. There are references that Wansu was taught in the late 1600s by a Chinese diplomat (Sappushi). And it is documented that Higaonna, Nakaima, and Uechi all brought kata back from China.

Although karate was handed down in complete secrecy, and the absolute truth can never be determined, there is a general belief, documented in sources such as those above, that Okinawa empty hand kata are of Chinese origin.

Regarding the issue, raised by Dancingalone as to why there appear to be no similar kata still practiced in China, Morio Higaonna’s gives us his opinion when he describe the varying rate of change in Chinese and Okinawan fighting arts in the 1800s (Encyclopaedia of Goju Ryu, vol. 4: Sanseru and Seipai).

Goju-ryu makes no secret of its Chinese origins, yet it should not be considered a purely Chinese martial art. While the patriarch of Goju-ryu, Kanryo Higaonna, trained in China as a young man and was clearly influenced by the principles and practices of Chinese boxing, Okinawan Goju-ryu is more than just another form of White Crane Fist.

In the evolution of Goju-ryu karate, Okinawan self-defense methods were blended with Chinese combat techniques, principles, and strategies. Training methods were changed somewhat to suit Okinawan practitioners, their physiques, and lifestyles. What resulted after more than a half century of development was classical Okinawan Goju-ryu karate as presented in this series of programs. Ironically, this is without doubt closer, in a technical sense, to what Okinawan students were taught by 19th century boxing masters in China, than modern Chinese Wushu.

During the late Qing era and the early days of the Chinese republic, with notable exceptions, the martial arts went into decline in China. In the backwater of Okinawa, however, when change happened, it did so at a snail’s pace. As good Confucians, the Okinawans revered tradition and resisted change.

With the rest of Asia in turmoil for more than fifty years, the tranquil, rustic, sub-tropical islands of Okinawa provided a safe repository for Chinese boxing methods, as well as the crucible in which they were refined and developed for use by the generations that would follow.

I think it best to trust the meager history we have and assume that these old masters are not all wrong, that the origins of Okinawan kata are Chinese, and were often taught by Chinese military authorities who traveled to Okinawa.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[Kong Soo Do]

You are thinking of Geoff Thompson, Iain is an old fashioned Karateka training from being a child, also a Judoka. He, I know, does a lot of reseach into old Japanese writings, methods etc.

I think he (Abernethy) talks about his research in the Pinan/Heian series on his website, as well as some of the articles. He references Itosu Sensei and the writings of Funakoshi Sensei quite a bit. I would consider each an excellent source since they were closer to the source(s).

I would also suggest taking a look at Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neill as well. Whether they would consider themselves 'authorities' or not would be a question to ask them.

 

[dancingalone]

I think it best to trust the meager history we have and assume that these old masters are not all wrong, that the origins of Okinawan kata are Chinese, and were often taught by Chinese military authorities who traveled to Okinawa.

No one reasonable would dispute that. You've given some good citations from the available written record on karate history with information given directly by some of the greats in our recent memory. No one says the likes of Nagamine is wrong - I certainly don't.

However, I think it is fair to ask how far from the tree the apple has fallen. Where are the common patterns and kata between karate and "kung fu"? You'd think it would be easier to trace out a genealogical chart than it is, if the connection is so strong and true. Consider the example case of aikido and hapkido, two sister arts that may have descended from the same parent art of Daito-ryu Aikijutsu. In the example of aikido, we KNOW the connection. With hapkido, it's more shrouded and controversial, yet if we lay out the common techniques in both arts, we can see a clear similarity.

What about karate? Would anyone care to give their opinion on trying to connect it to the Chinese martial arts on a physical observance level, trying to discover actual relationships like kata/forms shared commonly? My general sense is that this is something hard to do, that considerable drift has occurred over the years. What Chinese styles practice versions of Kusanku and Wansu? Seisan, Suparinpei? What about those Uechi-ryu forms? The answer IMO is that likely none of them do although these kata are 'Chinese'. We won't find clear analogs of them in Chinese systems because they were created or adapted by Okinawan martial artists, albeit based on training received from Chinese sources.

 

[puunui]

What about karate? Would anyone care to give their opinion on trying to connect it to the Chinese martial arts on a physical observance level, trying to discover actual relationships like kata/forms shared commonly? My general sense is that this is something hard to do, that considerable drift has occurred over the years. What Chinese styles practice versions of Kusanku and Wansu? Seisan, Suparinpei? What about those Uechi-ryu forms? The answer IMO is that likely none of them do although these kata are 'Chinese'. We won't find clear analogs of them in Chinese systems because they were created or adapted by Okinawan martial artists, albeit based on training received from Chinese sources.

Funny how some people want to jump up and down about how vague korea's martial arts history is, not realizing that Okinawa, and by extension Japan's karate history is also vague and tenuous.

 

[Makalakumu]

Funny how some people want to jump up and down about how vague korea's martial arts history is, not realizing that Okinawa, and by extension Japan's karate history is also vague and tenuous.

You do have a point. Maybe we all need to take a deep breath sometimes.

 

[punisher73]

Funny how some people want to jump up and down about how vague korea's martial arts history is, not realizing that Okinawa, and by extension Japan's karate history is also vague and tenuous.

Big difference between "vague" and "made up".

 

[punisher73]

No one reasonable would dispute that. You've given some good citations from the available written record on karate history with information given directly by some of the greats in our recent memory. No one says the likes of Nagamine is wrong - I certainly don't.

What about karate? Would anyone care to give their opinion on trying to connect it to the Chinese martial arts on a physical observance level, trying to discover actual relationships like kata/forms shared commonly? My general sense is that this is something hard to do, that considerable drift has occurred over the years. What Chinese styles practice versions of Kusanku and Wansu? Seisan, Suparinpei? What about those Uechi-ryu forms? The answer IMO is that likely none of them do although these kata are 'Chinese'. We won't find clear analogs of them in Chinese systems because they were created or adapted by Okinawan martial artists, albeit based on training received from Chinese sources.

I don't have the resources right with me, but Kusanku, Chinto, and Wansu have all been talked about as katas created FROM their studies with the chinese masters and were not katas taught BY the chinese masters. In essence, they took the teaches of what they liked and created a kata based on those teachings to pass on in addition to what they did already.

As far as Seisan, Sanseiryu, Sanchin, and Suparenpei they can be all traced to one location in southern China where many okinawans worked and stayed. This is where Uechi, Miyagi and Higaonna all went and trained. What is not known is what exact style was taught, or if it was a unique style that was passed on to them and then died out. Not only is White Crane a source, but also 5 Ancestor Fist shows many similarities to the okinawan karate.

As to the Uechi katas, it is well documented that Kanbun Uechi learned Sanchin, Seisan and Sanseiryu while in China. We also have statements that Kanbun Uechi said that he did not learn all of Suparenpei. The other 5 Uechi kata, we know were created to bridge and flush out the material of the 3 foundation katas. They also contain some moves that are not in the other 3 and is believed that they may be parts of Suparenpei. So we have a source in China that taught the same 4 kata that were brought back to Okinawa and formed the Naha-Te styles.

So looking at the differences between Shuri and Naha styles, we could fill in the blanks between the known historical record and come to the conclusion that the Shuri styles were mainly developed from the native Te and Chinese masters visiting in Okinawa. The Naha styles were mainly developed by the native Te and then the Okinawan teachers going to China to learn and then bringing it back to Okinawa. Then we can add into the mix that Okinawan sailors would have come in contact with Siam and other neighboring places during their trade and were probably influenced by them as well.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Originally Posted by dancingalone What about karate? Would anyone care to give their opinion on trying to connect it to the Chinese martial arts on a physical observance level, trying to discover actual relationships like kata/forms shared commonly? My general sense is that this is something hard to do, that considerable drift has occurred over the years. What Chinese styles practice versions of Kusanku and Wansu? Seisan, Suparinpei? What about those Uechi-ryu forms? The answer IMO is that likely none of them do although these kata are 'Chinese'. We won't find clear analogs of them in Chinese systems because they were created or adapted by Okinawan martial artists, albeit based on training received from Chinese sources.

Funny how some people want to jump up and down about how vague korea's martial arts history is, not realizing that Okinawa, and by extension Japan's karate history is also vague and tenuous.

Actually no, it is pretty well documented (Japan/Okinawa history), and it can't be accused of historical re-writes to the same extent as Korean history. In regards to the quote by dancingalone;

What Chinese styles practice versions of Kusanku and Wansu? Seisan, Suparinpei? What about those Uechi-ryu forms?

Pangainoon, as taught in the Southern Fukein Providence used Seisan and Suparinpei. Uechi Kanbun Sensei brought back three forms, Sanchin (which differs from Gojo Ryu Sanchin), Seisan and Sanseiryu. He did not learn Suparinpei. Many of the Okinwan katas came from, or had direct connections to earlier Chinese forms. Both through the Uechi Ryu and also the Ryu that came from Itosu Sensei and of course the Goju Ryu.

Punisher above has done a fine job of explaining the connections between China and Okinawa. Well done.