Bunkai, history, and "authorities"

[dancingalone]

Pangainoon, as taught in the Southern Fukein Providence used Seisan and Suparinpei.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Pan-gai-noon does not exist today in China as an extant style, right? In other words, you can't find Pan-gai-noon schools there teaching Seisan nor Sanseiryu, yes?

That is the point I am making. I have no quarrel with what you and Punisher or Cayuga have posted regarding the historical link between Chinese martial arts and Okinawan karate. Given the trading and political ties, the Ryukyu islands had with mainland China, there was bound to be substantial cultural exchanges, including martial arts practices.

At the same time, I'm not sure how much 'practical worth' there is to proclaiming that a form is so-called 'Chinese' if we can't find clear CURRENT examples of a close matching pattern in contemporary practice. Or even in an archaic record somehow. I don't deny the influence was and is there - but I'd like to get beyond the rote history. HOW is what we practice 'Chinese'? And how does this make a difference in our daily training? How can we use the Chinese linkage to get better? Musing over this type of research is more interesting IMO.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Pan-gai-noon does not exist today in China as an extant style, right?

I would say that you are correct. I've looked over the years for schools and/or organizations that are pre-Uechi. I have not found any, though I can't be dogmatic and say they don't exist. Post-Uechi is another story as Uechi broke into fragments in the early 90's and you were able to find Pangainoon Jutsu, Kempo, Karate, Do etc.

 

[puunui]

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

According to one American born scholar who lived in China for decades, all of the history surrounding the martial arts is vague, made up, or whatever term you wish to use. He has translated all of the texts frequently discussed, bubishi, muyedobotongji, etc. After he left China, he taught himself Japanese and is now working on japanese texts. He lives here in Hawaii now. I wish to be his student.

 

[punisher73]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Pan-gai-noon does not exist today in China as an extant style, right? In other words, you can't find Pan-gai-noon schools there teaching Seisan nor Sanseiryu, yes?

That is the point I am making. I have no quarrel with what you and Punisher or Cayuga have posted regarding the historical link between Chinese martial arts and Okinawan karate. Given the trading and political ties, the Ryukyu islands had with mainland China, there was bound to be substantial cultural exchanges, including martial arts practices.

At the same time, I'm not sure how much 'practical worth' there is to proclaiming that a form is so-called 'Chinese' if we can't find clear CURRENT examples of a close matching pattern in contemporary practice. Or even in an archaic record somehow. I don't deny the influence was and is there - but I'd like to get beyond the rote history. HOW is what we practice 'Chinese'? And how does this make a difference in our daily training? How can we use the Chinese linkage to get better? Musing over this type of research is more interesting IMO.

Part of that is the confusion. Pangai Noon wasn't the name of the style per se, it was what Kanbun Uechi described it as. It only means Half Hard/Half Soft, much like Goju is Hard/Soft. Both Higaonna and Uechi learned in Fuzhou at very close times (Uechi 1897 for 13 years and Higaonna 1869 for 13 years). So no one knows what "style" they actually learned. Now, for the second problem. Many chinese teachers taught in concepts and not a hard set of things so knowing that they would teach on an individual basis and on a students strengths etc. you could have very divergent forms/katas taught by the same instructor. THEN we will throw in that many chinese words weren't translated but just pronounced phonetically and that could have been altered, you will find very close movements but no direct match for katas like you would see from okinawan to japanese versions of the same kata.

Knowing the history is fun for some, but "how" does it help us? If a person can track down the probable style of kung fu and can find similiar movements then you can find applications that are probably closer to the original intent. Also, you can understand what the kata/form was designed for. In chinese systems many times a movement was not a direct combat application, but a concept to reinforce an idea. For example, the arm isolation movements at the beginning of many Hung Gar forms; They give you 3 corners and expect you to find the 4th type idea. Other times the movement was for health purposes only (Chi Kung) and was not meant to be a combat application.

Not knowing where something came from or what it's purpose was leads us to the problem of Japanese arts like Shotokan that try and base their applications of off sport-style sparring distance and the applications because very contrived to make them fit in that parameter. Knowing, first and foremost, that the parent styles were for civilian self-defense starts to help you look in that direction to help you find applications. Now, to toss in the chinese influence. You know that the chinese systems had 3 levels of applications in their form and that included stand up locking/grappling/throwing techniques. Each style would have an approach and philosophy to how and when they applied their Chin Na, so trying to find that out can lead you to find those chin na ideas in your own kata and how they would be applied and when.

 

[puunui]

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.

Can you be more specific about the "documented evidence" that "we" have? What documents? Kusanku's passport or visa records? Certificates he gave to his Okinawan students? Photos? Documentation of Kusanku's own training?

 

[puunui]

At the same time, I'm not sure how much 'practical worth' there is to proclaiming that a form is so-called 'Chinese' if we can't find clear CURRENT examples of a close matching pattern in contemporary practice. Or even in an archaic record somehow. I don't deny the influence was and is there - but I'd like to get beyond the rote history. HOW is what we practice 'Chinese'? And how does this make a difference in our daily training? How can we use the Chinese linkage to get better? Musing over this type of research is more interesting IMO.

Good points. At least when people argue taekwondo is nothing more than shotokan, they can look at the forms and point to that. But with Okinawan karate, where is that link? The styles don't exist anymore? Did they ever exist at all? Or was it maybe that the Okinawan people felt that "all good things come from China", and wanting to make their martial art "good", created a vague, dubious unsubstantiated link to china that was never there in the first place? All there really is is the bubishi, supposedly a white crane manual, but we have no evidence, at least not any that was "documented" about where that came from. For all we know, someone could have bought that at Barnes and Noble in Fujian and brought it back to Okinawa. I have a book on Uechi Ryu, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I studied that art from an Uechi Ryu practitioner. I just means I have the book.

My point being, if you are going to hold korean arts to a high standard, then the least one can do is apply that standard to japanese, okinawan or chinese arts as well.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Dancingalone wrote:

At the same time, I'm not sure how much 'practical worth' there is to proclaiming that a form is so-called 'Chinese' if we can't find clear CURRENT examples of a close matching pattern in contemporary practice. Or even in an archaic record somehow. I don't deny the influence was and is there - but I'd like to get beyond the rote history. HOW is what we practice 'Chinese'? And how does this make a difference in our daily training? How can we use the Chinese linkage to get better? Musing over this type of research is more interesting IMO.

Above, I have provided what I believe are significant references to the origins of much of the kata found in karate today. I believe these can be very useful in trying to understand the origins of these kata, the combative skills they were designed to develop.

Funakoshi names five Chinese by name who taught combative arts in Okinawa. Four were military attaches. One was a shipwrecked Chinese sailor. One of the military attaches, Waishinzan, is a central figure in the history of karate. Funakoshi names eight Okinawans he trained while in Okinawa. While his time in Okinawan is not fully documented, there are some sources that indicate the time frame. The Wikipedia Ryuei Ryu page hints that he was part of an investiture mission in 1866. These missions lasted a number of months. Funakoshi names one of his students as Arakaki, born in 1840. There are some sources that state that Higaonna trained with Arakaki before traveling to China in 1873 at the age of 20. One source claims that after his arrival in China, he sought out instruction with Waishinzan, but was not able to train with him. At that time military officials were prohibited from training civilians. He then sought training under an associate of Waishinzan, Ru Ru Ko, where he trained for several years. Nagamine writes that before returning to Okinawa, Higaonna did wind up training with Waishinzan.

The Ryuei Ryu Wiki site also states that Norisato Nakaima (born in 1850) traveled to China when he was 19 (1869), and trained under Ru Ru Ko until his departure in 1876.

There is a record that hints at Ru Ru Ko's military background. Before Higaonna departed for Okinawan, Ru Ru Ko gave him a gift of a spear shaft, whose blade was cut off in battle with a swordsman. Despite the dramatic reduction in the effectiveness of his weapon, he still went to defeat (likely kill) his opponent.

Now some may dismiss this history as not relevant to the karate the train in today. I have a quite different perspective. I think it fundamentally important to explore this heritage for a quite simple reason. Why is it that Chinese military officials taught Okinawans combative arts? What was their motivation? I have taken the time above to review historical sources on the role of Chinese in the transmission of combative arts, specifically kata, to Okinawans. That is the first step in a broader discussion. There are some who reference nameless sources that it is the Okinawans who created kata from lessons they learned from the Chinese. There are some that look at Chinese fighting systems practiced today, find little or no similarities to old Okinawan kata and assume therefore that these kata must be of Okinawan origin.

The truth will forever be debatable. Karate was taught and practiced in the utmost of secrecy, right up until the early years of the 20th century. We have but a few historical speculations from the old masters who have documented the past.

However, if we take at face value, those sources we do have, and dismiss speculations that have no support in the historical record, we are left with a few key bits of history. Call the speculations, call them beliefs. It is what has been handed down.

1. There are kata specifically attributed to Chinese origin. Motobu and Funakoshi name thirteen kata practiced today, as having come from China. Included are two three kata Higashionna learned in China. Other sources state he also learned Sanseiru. Nakaima brought back a number of kata from China that comprise the Ryuei Ryu family. Funakoshi attributes two other kata to the Chinese sailor.

2. Funakoshi names four military authorities who taught combative arts in Okinawan. Higaonna is recorded as having sought one of these men out in his travels to China in 1873, but was refused as military authorities were forbidden from teaching civilians combative arts. He then trained under a person who quite possibly had military experience. Three of the military officials cited by Funkakoshi, as well as one shipwrecked sailor, apparently taught combative arts in Okinawa in the mid 1800s. The fourth military official named by Funakoshi, Kusanku, shipwrecked in Okinawa, taught Okinawans until his return voyage several years later. Both Motobu and Nagamine write that the practice of combative arts goes back hundreds of years.

3. All of this transmission was done in the strictest of secrecy. And once Okinawans did learn from the Chinese, it was common for Okinawans to pass down their combative arts from father to eldest son only. The practice was so secret that even other family members were no permitted to learn what was taught.

Let's for a moment, take all this information at face value. Let's assume it is all true. How can it help us to better understand these kata today.

It gets back to the question I posed above. "Why did Chinese military authorities teach kata, some of which has survived until today, to Okinawans?" That is, to me, a fundamental question that strikes at the heart of Okinawan karate. Why did military officials in Okinawa teach these kata, to Okinawans.

I will explore this more fully in another post.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[punisher73]

Can you be more specific about the "documented evidence" that "we" have? What documents? Kusanku's passport or visa records? Certificates he gave to his Okinawan students? Photos? Documentation of Kusanku's own training?

In the year 1762, a tribute ship sent to Satsuma from Ryukyu was blown off course during a storm, and ended up landing at Tosa Province in Shikoku, where they remained for a month. The Confucian scholar of Tosa, (Tobe Ryoen 1713-1795), was petitioned to collect testimony from the crew. The record of this testimony is known as the Oshima Hikki (literally "Note of Oshima", the name of the area of Tosa where the ship had run aground). In this book, there is some very provocative testimony by a certain Shionja Peichin, describing a man from China called Koshankin, who demonstrated a grappling technique (McCarthy, 1995; Sakagami, 1978).

All of the other stuff wouldn't be documented because it wouldn't have been important at the time. Back then, they wouldn't have given certificates to students like we do now for training. Most documentation if it did ever exist was probably destroyed in the Battle of Okinawa where the US bombed the crap out of the country destroying almost everything. What we have left are just a few personal journals that survived that are related to other items. Also, I didn't state that Koshankin taught a style called "kusanku", it is known that the kata was created after studying with a chinese master and taking certain lessons from him.

 

[punisher73]

Good points. At least when people argue taekwondo is nothing more than shotokan, they can look at the forms and point to that. But with Okinawan karate, where is that link? The styles don't exist anymore? Did they ever exist at all? Or was it maybe that the Okinawan people felt that "all good things come from China", and wanting to make their martial art "good", created a vague, dubious unsubstantiated link to china that was never there in the first place? All there really is is the bubishi, supposedly a white crane manual, but we have no evidence, at least not any that was "documented" about where that came from. For all we know, someone could have bought that at Barnes and Noble in Fujian and brought it back to Okinawa. I have a book on Uechi Ryu, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I studied that art from an Uechi Ryu practitioner. I just means I have the book.

My point being, if you are going to hold korean arts to a high standard, then the least one can do is apply that standard to japanese, okinawan or chinese arts as well.

Seems to me you are comparing apples to oranges in the history of the arts. There is documentation that people have posted in this thread and also how the chinese influenced the okinawan arts. That seems to be the issue. The Okinawans never said that they were teaching kung fu, no one on here has said that they were teaching kung fu. The Okinawans and researchers have always stated that the okinawans already had their own martial arts (Te and Tegumi) and then were INFLUENCED by the chinese.

The problem with the korean arts isn't that they are saying that they were influenced by the japanese arts, they completely take them out of the equation and state that TKD is an ancient martial art of Korea. THAT is the probelm. It isn't about having a high standard for one and not the other. If the "historians" had come out and said that TKD was japanese Shotokan that went through several revisions and was influenced by a child's kicking game and stated that as their history no one would have an issue with it. But, you have one korean martial art (Tang Soo Do) that claims that the 5 Pinans katas were learned in China and were an ancient martial art from there and assigned animals to the katas. We have documented history that Itosu created the katas and direct students of his who stated what the purpose of the 5 Pinans were for.

What about the Bubishi? Again, another piece that says that the okinawan arts were INFLUENCED by chinese martial arts.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

But, you have one korean martial art (Tang Soo Do) that claims that the 5 Pinans katas were learned in China and were an ancient martial art from there and assigned animals to the katas. We have documented history that Itosu created the katas and direct students of his who stated what the purpose of the 5 Pinans were for.

I was never taught this "story" of the Pyung Ahns, nor do we associate any animals to our forms. I have seen the animals attributed certain TSD/SBD schools, but it wasn't something that my KJN ever did. I wonder when/where this "story" came about?

It was never made a secret that the forms that we practice are adapted Japanese form sets.

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Punisher73 wrote:

it is known that the kata was created after studying with a chinese master and taking certain lessons from him.

Could you provide the text you are referring to that states that "Okinawans created kata after studying with Kusanku"? I do not believe the quotation provided necessarily leads to that conclusion.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[punisher73]

I was never taught this "story" of the Pyung Ahns, nor do we associate any animals to our forms. I have seen the animals attributed certain TSD/SBD schools, but it wasn't something that my KJN ever did. I wonder when/where this "story" came about?

It was never made a secret that the forms that we practice are adapted Japanese form sets.

I have seen a TSD book that had it in it, but I can't remember which one it was that I was looking through at the bookstore. Here is a personal article from someone that examines the "official" story vs. known facts.
http://www.usadojo.com/articles/tang-soo-do-forms.htm

I'm sure that not all taught that, but many did teach it that way.

As to the animals, I can't remember all of them right off hand, but the Pinans are "turtle" and Kusanku is "eagle".

 

[dancingalone]

I have seen a TSD book that had it in it, but I can't remember which one it was that I was looking through at the bookstore.

If we are referring to the TSD 'animal' attributions in forms, GM Kang Uk Lee's book has them. http://www.amazon.com/Tang-Soo-Do-Ultimate-Martial/dp/0865681708

 

[Cayuga Karate]

Punisher73 wrote:

We have documented history that Itosu created the [Pinan] katas.

We also have documented history that he learned Channan from a Chinese man and modified these into Pinan. This is found in a Nakama quote in Bishop's text.

There is also an online reference (I will have to dig it up) that Motobu knew of these Channan, and when he later saw Itosu's students doing Pinan, he immediately recognized the Channan pattern, but it had been modified.

Assuming these accounts are correct, we can all recognize that we will never be able to verify what in Pinan were in Channan, as those kata apparently did not survive. We can however look at a wide variety of the Pinan movements and see identical and similar movements in Kusanku, Passai, Naihanchi, Chinto, Jutte and perhaps other kata. In addition, we can never know what these Pinan kata may have had in common with other Chinese kata, taught in Okinawa, that have been lost to time.

Therefore, we can never truly know what original ideas, outside of existing Chinese kata of the time, that Itosu chose to add to the Channan kata he modified into Pinan. What specifically are the Itosu-created movements that are in Pinan? We can never know.

I would argue that based on the prevalence of movements found in other Chinese kata, coupled with the information from Motobu and Nakama that Pinan are modified Channan, which Nakama says is of Chinese origin, that specific Itosu-designed movements in the kata may not be all that significant.

I would also argue that a careful study of the currently existing Chinese kata practiced in Okinawa, especially those known as shuri kata, coupled with a careful study of Pinan, would reveal remarkable similarities in embusen, hand movements, and stepping/kicking sequences. When looking at the thousand or so movements found on youtube of kata that are likely of Chinese origin, the entirety of movements found in Pinan kata represent no significant departure.

-Cayuga Karate

 

[Tez3]

I see we've moved into the 'is TKD Korean etc. etc.' territory again.

 

[punisher73]

Punisher73 wrote:



Could you provide the text you are referring to that states that "Okinawans created kata after studying with Kusanku"? I do not believe the quotation provided necessarily leads to that conclusion.

-Cayuga Karate

The quote that I had mentioned was in response to who "Kusanku" was and if he even existed at puuniui implied.

Here is one of the various oral traditions about Kusanku outside of the historical reference.

Sakugawa studied under Master Kushanku until he was 29 years old and his first instructor died. It was at this time that he developed Kusanku kata from a series of techniques he learned from Kushanku and Peichin Takahara and then named the kata in honor of Kushanku. Therefore, we can say Masters Peichin Takahara and Kushanku both influenced the development of Kusanku kata. Master Sakugawa passed his kata down to Master Matsumora and Master Itosu. Itosu then developed two versions of Kusanku: Kushanku dai and Kushanku sho and incorporated them into his own system of karate. A very well known student of Itosu's, Gichin Funakoshi became very well known for his mastery of these kata.

Historian Joe Swift also acknowledges that Kushanku was the inspiration of the kata (or even the kata itself), but agrees outside of the previous mention no one knows much about the person.

 

[punisher73]

I see we've moved into the 'is TKD Korean etc. etc.' territory again.

Not the intent, just that one person wanted to argue that okinawan karate can't say where the chinese influence stemmed from and claimed that it was the same case with the Korean arts. Just showing that they are VERY different ideas and claims. Much like, how the Japanese refused to state that their karate came from chinese sources originally.

Another historical point is that the Okinawans called their own system just by "Te" and added the "Kara" meaning "China" to it later to reflect that additional influence. Seems odd that something that was practiced by such a small group of people in secret would need to change the name since they didn't have commercial dojos and the name change would bring in more students.

 

[dancingalone]

I would argue that based on the prevalence of movements found in other Chinese kata, coupled with the information from Motobu and Nakama that Pinan are modified Channan, which Nakama says is of Chinese origin, that specific Itosu-designed movements in the kata may not be all that significant.

I would also argue that a careful study of the currently existing Chinese kata practiced in Okinawa, especially those known as shuri kata, coupled with a careful study of Pinan, would reveal remarkable similarities in embusen, hand movements, and stepping/kicking sequences. When looking at the thousand or so movements found on youtube of kata that are likely of Chinese origin, the entirety of movements found in Pinan kata represent no significant departure.

I would sincerely appreciate any further information you would care to share in specific about the movements you feel are Chinese. Perhaps an example or two to illustrate. Also, do you feel there is any value to be found by analyzing the curricula in current usage with our Chinese martial arts cousins?

 

[Tez3]

Did they train 'in secret' or 'in private'? doing something privately is very differently from doing it in secret.

 

[puunui]

Seems to me you are comparing apples to oranges in the history of the arts. There is documentation that people have posted in this thread and also how the chinese influenced the okinawan arts. That seems to be the issue. The Okinawans never said that they were teaching kung fu, no one on here has said that they were teaching kung fu. The Okinawans and researchers have always stated that the okinawans already had their own martial arts (Te and Tegumi) and then were INFLUENCED by the chinese.

Again, if you ask those who actually learned in Japan, or those who learned from those who learned in Japan, they will readily and without hesitation that they learned in Japan. No one is saying that taekwondo was not INFLUENCED by karate or that Koreans did not have their own martial arts. So apples and apples.

One question for you though. What parts of karate today come from te or tegumi that is not from chinese martial arts?

The problem with the korean arts isn't that they are saying that they were influenced by the japanese arts, they completely take them out of the equation and state that TKD is an ancient martial art of Korea. THAT is the probelm. It isn't about having a high standard for one and not the other. If the "historians" had come out and said that TKD was japanese Shotokan that went through several revisions and was influenced by a child's kicking game and stated that as their history no one would have an issue with it.

Have you seen this:

http://tkd.stanford.edu/documents/tkd_history.pdf

But, you have one korean martial art (Tang Soo Do) that claims that the 5 Pinans katas were learned in China and were an ancient martial art from there and assigned animals to the katas. We have documented history that Itosu created the katas and direct students of his who stated what the purpose of the 5 Pinans were for.

The gentleman who created the name Tang Soo Do, GM LEE Won Kuk told me that he learned shotokan while he lived in Japan. It isn't a big secret. he even went on to explain the differences in the way FUNAKOSHI Gichin Sensei taught and how his son Yoshitaka Sensei taught.

What about the Bubishi? Again, another piece that says that the okinawan arts were INFLUENCED by chinese martial arts.

My understanding is the bubishi was a white crane manual. So that book is chinese martial arts, not something that was influenced by chinese martial arts.