Who created the Pinan katas?

I thought it was Walter Pinan from Badiddly-Boing, Bowidaho. But it seems not…
IMG_4888.webp
 
Of course there is some mystery to these katas, some claim Itosu created the Pinan katas out of a kata he learned from a shipwrecked Chinese sailor, the katas name went as something as ā€œchannanā€ whatever that translates to ?
Pinan meaning ā€˜to keep safeā€

(We have a bank and insurance company here with that name - Ping-an(Chinese) )

Oops I saw Gyakuto already mentioned the mystery kata, and even put a more Chinese sounding name to it šŸ‘
 
Last edited:
I thought it was Walter Pinan from Badiddly-Boing, Bowidaho. But it seems not…
View attachment 33934
Ha ! Thinking if that -ā€œchiang nanā€ might be as - ā€œriver southā€ - or more exactly - south of the river - and so in an Chinese context simply means - southern part of China,
It could actually refer to were I live - Huainan, which means - south of river huai, today just an almost insignificant area but a place that hold an importance in Chinese history
 
I thought it was Walter Pinan from Badiddly-Boing, Bowidaho. But it seems not…
View attachment 33934
AI said it so it's gotta be true? Believe me when I say this is an "ask 50 people, get 50 answers" question. And mot of them will be sprinkled with a modicum truth.
In reality, the fourth bullet answers the question best.
 
It's pretty well accepted that Itosu Anko developed Pinan 3, 4, and 5, using some moves found in other kata
during the first decade of the 20th century as has been discussed in other threads over the years. What's not really clear is the history of what we know as Pinan 1 and 2. Some possibilities:

1. He made them up inspired by other kata he knew like the other Pinans.
2. He learned them from Matsumura as two kata or one kata that he broke into two (with modifications).
3. He learned them from someone else (from the Shuri-te branch most likely but not impossible for some Tomari influence).

Like the history of naihanchi there is only conjucture and discussion, and while interesting, lead nowhere. Many questions remain unanswered in karate history as the art was transmitted orally one-on-one from teacher to student. By the time people started asking questions about it, the living links to the masters with the answers had passed away.
.
 
I find the Pinan kata a bit redundant if a system also has Kushanku in its repertoire (or vice versa).
 
It's pretty well accepted that Itosu Anko developed Pinan 3, 4, and 5, using some moves found in other kata
during the first decade of the 20th century as has been discussed in other threads over the years. What's not really clear is the history of what we know as Pinan 1 and 2. Some possibilities:

1. He made them up inspired by other kata he knew like the other Pinans.
2. He learned them from Matsumura as two kata or one kata that he broke into two (with modifications).
3. He learned them from someone else (from the Shuri-te branch most likely but not impossible for some Tomari influence).

Like the history of naihanchi there is only conjucture and discussion, and while interesting, lead nowhere. Many questions remain unanswered in karate history as the art was transmitted orally one-on-one from teacher to student. By the time people started asking questions about it, the living links to the masters with the answers had passed away.
.
I love the naihanchi forms. When I went to open tournaments back in the day where many different styles were competing against each other, I would combine a naihanchi form with a Yudanja pattern. If the tournament host(s) was a Japanese school, the naihanchi forms were usually well received when doing it low and hard.
Good times.
 
I love the naihanchi forms. When I went to open tournaments back in the day where many different styles were competing against each other, I would combine a naihanchi form with a Yudanja pattern. If the tournament host(s) was a Japanese school, the naihanchi forms were usually well received when doing it low and hard.
Good times.
Only once have I seen a competitor do tekki(shodan), it was at an international tournament, he was immediately eliminated.
Also at a national championship tournament it wouldn’t do.
Speaking of Europe and during the time I competed.

Not saying Naihanchi/tekki are bad kata(s), they’re my favorites too, but as for competition they’re too short and ā€œeasyā€
 
Only once have I seen a competitor do tekki(shodan), it was at an international tournament, he was immediately eliminated.
Also at a national championship tournament it wouldn’t do.
Speaking of Europe and during the time I competed.

Not saying Naihanchi/tekki are bad kata(s), they’re my favorites too, but as for competition they’re too short and ā€œeasyā€
That’s interesting. I think it shows that flashy kata impress judges more than well-performed kata. That’s a shame, but not an unexpected observation.
 
As others have pointed out, most of this is speculation and conjecture.

But, some historians point to Choki Motobu's comments about how he talked about the Channan kata and there is speculation that Channan wasn't a "lost kata", but was the working title for Itosu's Pinan katas. Or, that Channan was an earlier prototype that Itosu created before they were refined into the Pinan katas.

Also, as others have pointed out some katas may seem "redundant" when practicing both them and the Pinan katas. Some think that Itosu designed the Pinan katas to be a complete system for students and then those who wished would dig deeper into the roots of Karate and then learn the older katas.

But, most agree that it was Itosu (as many have already pointed out) that created and organized them.
 
Only once have I seen a competitor do tekki(shodan), it was at an international tournament, he was immediately eliminated.
Also at a national championship tournament it wouldn’t do.
Speaking of Europe and during the time I competed.

Not saying Naihanchi/tekki are bad kata(s), they’re my favorites too, but as for competition they’re too short and ā€œeasyā€
I never did one as a single form. As I said, I combined them with another form at open tournaments.
 
As others have pointed out, most of this is speculation and conjecture.
This can be an entertaining exercise, but sad, too, that there are so many things we'd like to know that have been lost to time.
But, some historians point to Choki Motobu's comments about how he talked about the Channan kata and there is speculation that Channan wasn't a "lost kata", but was the working title for Itosu's Pinan katas. Or, that Channan was an earlier prototype that Itosu created before they were refined into the Pinan katas.
Haven't heard this before, but per the quote above, possible I suppose.
Also, as others have pointed out some katas may seem "redundant" when practicing both them and the Pinan katas.
While the Pinans have some same/similar moves as other kata, this is seen in many other kata as well (especially in bo kata). Despite this, every kata is different in combos, transitions, flow, timing, and even (for me at least) mood. I never felt they were redundant, each having its own personality.
Some think that Itosu designed the Pinan katas to be a complete system for students and then those who wished would dig deeper into the roots of Karate and then learn the older katas.
I've read that he saw them as a full system, but whether a deep level of bunkai was taught in the public schools or other kata (except maybe naihanchi) I don't know. Enough kata needed to be taught to fill out the curriculum, but not sure what others were taught in that environment.
 
Also, asking a newbie to learn kushanku straight off is a bit of an ask. The pinans work great for beginners- more or less what they were designed for. I also believe they have certain virtues in their own right. The way the different postures teach you to use your hips, for instance.
 
This can be an entertaining exercise, but sad, too, that there are so many things we'd like to know that have been lost to time.

Haven't heard this before, but per the quote above, possible I suppose.

While the Pinans have some same/similar moves as other kata, this is seen in many other kata as well (especially in bo kata). Despite this, every kata is different in combos, transitions, flow, timing, and even (for me at least) mood. I never felt they were redundant, each having its own personality.

I've read that he saw them as a full system, but whether a deep level of bunkai was taught in the public schools or other kata (except maybe naihanchi) I don't know. Enough kata needed to be taught to fill out the curriculum, but not sure what others were taught in that environment.
I agree with your assessment/observations.

As to the "deep level", I don't think that this was taught in the public schools. Based on interview with Kyan's students (I'm not aware of interviews with Itosu to reference), they said that Kyan taught the basic applications to the "public" students and then taught deeper applications to his private students. These included the grappling and counter grappling applications.
 
A bit off topic to the OP, but in regards to Naihanchi, I remember seeing demonstrations at tournaments back in the 80's by Korean Masters, particulary Y P Choi, where they would combine all 3 Naihanchi's into one form performance. Even though it was very stylistically different than how I was taught to perform them, I always appreciated that.
 
Back
Top