Shorin Ryu Katas

[exile]

Excellent post, by the way, Exile. I enjoyed the explanation using the language metaphor. The premise you make explains why I always enjoyed trading kata and kata bunkai with other karate-ka particularly if they come from a different system than I do.

And thank you for your thought-provoking comments in your earlier post, dancingalone, that got me thinking about what follows from thinking of kata as a kind of code, subject to rules of combination and rule of interpretation!

I have to say, I find the aspect of kata training that involves deciphering the applications one of the most appealing things about the MAs... for the same reason that puzzles and logic problems are so addictive for so many people. The point you raise about the possibility that not all movements in a kata actually correspond to combat moves just raises the ante on the difficulty in the problem, in a way. In a sense, it's easy to solve a puzzle if you know that you have exactly the information you need to solve it, not one bit more or less. But if you're given extra information that doesn't play a part in the solution... but you don't know that that's the case... it makes the puzzle way trickier, eh? Having moves in kata that may not represent parts of the combat scenario—but you don't know for sure that that's the case, and you don't necessarily know in advance which moves those are—that makes it way, way more challenging...

 

[arnisador]

George Dillman has some fascinating (and also some nutty) thoughts on decoding kata. One I like is that sometimes when you point to something on your body it may be showing you a weak spot to jit on your oppoenent's body, e.g. a one-legged stance with your left foot against your right knee could mean "kick him in the knee with your foot" in code.

One hopes that, unlike There's a lion in the closet or It is raining, there are are no wasted "words" in kata. On the other hand, when people try to even interpret the opening bow as a technique I do get concerned about overinterpretation of the document.

 

[exile]

George Dillman has some fascinating (and also some nutty) thoughts on decoding kata. One I like is that sometimes when you point to something on your body it may be showing you a weak spot to jit on your oppoenent's body, e.g. a one-legged stance with your left foot against your right knee could mean "kick him in the knee with your foot" in code.

That bit isn't really so nutty, I suspect. Kane & Wilder and other prominent bunkai gurus like to stress the point that a movement in a kata that brings one of your limbs into contact with some part of your own body is 'code' for a strike or movement to the corresponding (or nearby) part of an attacker's body. All of those movements in the TKD Palgwes, for example, where you do an elbow strike with one arm into your other hand...

One hopes that, unlike There's a lion in the closet or It is raining, there are are no wasted "words" in kata. On the other hand, when people try to even interpret the opening bow as a technique I do get concerned about overinterpretation of the document.

See, that's the problem... how much is too much? I know what you mean here, I've seen analyses in which the 'ready' stance preceding the actual kata itself is taken to be code for a strike of some kind, or breaking out of a double-handed grab... and yes, you can wind up getting very skeptical about it all. But if you look at the work of people like Abernethy, whose demos seem to get at extremely effective application of the moves in the great classic kata, you don't get the feeling that what they're suggesting is all that much of a stretch... just, why didn't I think of that? The really good interpretations, I think, give you this feeling not just of plausibility, but of inevitability—yes, of course, that makes perfect sense!, etc. etc.

 

[arnisador]

Well, in part it's as with any piece of artwork: How do we know that what we think we see there is what was intended by the artist, and how much does it matter? Did L. Frank Baum mean to write about mentary policy in The Wizard of Oz, or did others impute it to be there? If it's an interesting and consistent reading, does it matter?

When I hear someone finding 5000 applications in one kata, I'm confident the cerator didn't place them all in there. He may have put in movements he knew had many useful interpretations, but surely he couldn't have held all 5000 in his mind! But...does it matter?

So when I see an opening salute interpreted as a wrist escape, I find myself thinking "probably that interpretation wasn't intended" and "what should I care as long as it's useful" at the same time.

I feel in my heart that useful physical motions are what is in the kata. You call it a reverse punch by focusing on the arm going out; I call it an arm drag by focusing on the arm coming back. Who is right? Maybe it's just a movement that was deemed useful since it (or something very like it) appeared so often.

Yet, when I 'find' a technique in there that the founder never meant to be in there, am I doing something not in keeping with the overall philosophy of the style? Does it conflict with some principle of the system?

So, I never know what to make of finding these bunkai in a kata (or anyo as we say in the FMA). I read this editorial piece recently about minor (and possibly intentional) translation issues completely changing the reading of a text. It matters to me to get both a good 'reading' of self-defense material and good fidelity to teh art I study as I believe one muct have a consistent base. The story in the gosepl gives a good read either way. For kata, most of these self-defense techniques are known to martial artists as a whole and are not, for the most part, new in that sense...so, the issue of the intended reading has some force.

I admit to being somewhat conflicted. While anyos are not emphasized in the system I study, similar issues can come up with much shorter drills and techniques.

 

[Victor Smith]

Exile,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victor Smith
So 'pose' kamae, pause points when inserted into someone's attack just as executed in the kata can drop people and do.

Can you elaborate on this a little bit more, Victor?

When I originally studied my kata, the kamae were taught as pause points, to wait for the next attack.

But systematic analysis of kata showed a different answer. Of course it's hard to demonstrate in words, but take a Kame from Isshinryu wansu (Quite similar to Yang tai chi's 'Play Guitar' position) where you end up in left front stance (similar to sanchin) with the left open hand raised and the right open hand at the left elbow.

If the attackers really trying to nail you with a right roundhouse punch and you just form the kamae at the point their right biceps is driven into your left open hand you see them bounce back big time from the pain. you didn't strike into their biceps, you formed the kamae as their biceps was in the process of creating the roundhouse strike and they struck your arm.

While just one exmple it might suffice. kamae might be the idea of the immovable force striking into the immovable object....

Just a small subtle point. I could care less if the originator meant it to be that way. If I can use it and cause great pain into an attacker, thats sufficient for my purposes. BTW the same kamae applied in similar manner fits many other spaces on an opponent as they're trying to rush you, such as angling into their kick and dropping the left elbow of the kamae into their shin....

So is it a pause point, a place that their biceps was not meant to invade, nor their face, nor their shin.

Just a Kamae?

Its much more fun when you attack and I can allow you to experience it personally....<GRIN>

 

[dancingalone]

Just a small subtle point. I could care less if the originator meant it to be that way.

I agree, but I also think it's important to pass along the so-called "original" system as is if at all possible. I make it a point to tell my students the source of what I am teaching them. If it came from my sensei, great. If it's not properly karate, that's fine too, but they need to know where it came from.

 

[chinto]

ok, teach the kata as you were tought it. but also remember if the kata was not modified then there are a minimum of 5 techniques to find for every movement of the kata.

 

[Victor Smith]

What the originator's intent for kata technique is always a very open question.

I agree you should 1) pass along all of the applications that were taught you (in my case 0), and 2) source what you are teaching (explain where you got it).

That said the only purpose of any application ought be to drop an attacker (replace drop with appropriate verb for the application potential being studied.

As for how many applications are found in a technique, it depends on the technique and how you define a technique.

Seisan one technique might be:
1. Step out with the left foot and left side strike, followed by a right punch.
2. Use the crossing hands before the initial step.
3. Use the crossing hands before the initial step, then Step out with the left foot and left side strike, followed by a right punch.
4. Step out with the left foot and left side strike, followed by a right punch and then step with the right foot.
5. Use the crossing hands before the initial step, then step out with the left foot and left side strike, followed by a right punch and then step with the right foot.

While there are many other possible definitions as to what one technique is, that represents a fair openign sample.

Then the application potential is limited by your work. I take that section and have my new sho-dan's work on maybe 50 application potential studies stopping any sort of attack. And this is still on a surface level.

Which is not impossible, for example the strike itself can be to many different targets, each of which becomes one application potential.

 

[Makalakumu]

Itosu Sensei told us that...

1. Some moves in kata are direct application.
2. Some moves are meant to teach principle.
3. Some moves are designed for martial oriented physical fitness.

In Itosu derivitive styles, this is very important, because it gives us a basic clue as to how to view kata.

Itosu further elaborates that there are a bunch of "clues" in kata that help you revert certain moves from the current "sanitized" state to the original more deadly state.

With this in mind, I believe that when we look at kata, we cannot discount any of the moves. We need to take a critical look at all of them with the criteria that Itosu provided us and attempt to understand them in the way that he urges us.

 

[arnisador]

Some moves are designed for martial oriented physical fitness.

Is this mostly Sanchin and similar dynamic tension kata, or is it in most kata?

 

[Makalakumu]

Most Itosu derivitive systems do not practice sanchin. And they do not practice the kind of dynamic tension that is practiced in naha-te systems.

IMHO, the moves that teach martial physical fitness are completely different in nature.

In character, they are much more subtle. They emphasize balance, stance and nimbleness, as well as strength, power and rootedness. Power is captured with certain anatomical configurations and is transfered with others.

The key to Itosu derivitive systems is footwork. Each different stance is essential in describing the type of technique being employed. They are also essential in strengthening the body.

My personal opinion is that every technique is all three of the criteria that I listed above. I don't think you can classify techniques as this or that or any combination. They all fit depending on what you are looking at.

 

[arnisador]

OK, thanks! I can imagine that at least most techniques are all three.

 

[chinto]

Most Itosu derivitive systems do not practice sanchin. And they do not practice the kind of dynamic tension that is practiced in naha-te systems.

IMHO, the moves that teach martial physical fitness are completely different in nature.

In character, they are much more subtle. They emphasize balance, stance and nimbleness, as well as strength, power and rootedness. Power is captured with certain anatomical configurations and is transfered with others.

The key to Itosu derivitive systems is footwork. Each different stance is essential in describing the type of technique being employed. They are also essential in strengthening the body.

My personal opinion is that every technique is all three of the criteria that I listed above. I don't think you can classify techniques as this or that or any combination. They all fit depending on what you are looking at.

true and the tamari-te linage use both the matsumura and Itosu techniques and some from the naha te linage as well... shobayashi shorin ryu and matsubayashi shorin ryu have tamari linage ...