I'm never far away but to move on in life is to choose. Most of my focus is on very old studies and my own students. I'm most likely to comment when a topic presents an interesting discussion.
For those who move in different dimensions, that's fine for them. Unfortunatly we see so much of people who want to define the variety in the world only by their own eyes.
It is a very, very big world in a much larger universe after all.
From beginer to high intermidiate many students are taught the full heian/pinan series. This is how the founders were teaching too. What i didnt understand, or what could be interpreted as a little hypacritical(sp) is that in their texts they all say how it is important to study A kata for a number of years. Why do you think they taught in this way? to make karate more interesting? or to allow us to choose which kata we prefer(this has given me an idea for a new thread)
The point that is how the founders studied is somewhat misleading. Funakoshi talked about spending 3 years of each of the Nihanchi kata when he was a beginner. The Pinan's weren't even created then (though it was his instructor who created them). In fact if I recall correctly, some claim Funakohsi had to study the Pinan forms from Mabuni (a younger colleague). Fuankoshi trained with Itosu about 40 years before he took his karate to Japan, his studies pre-dating what his art would later become.
As for masters, I guess it depends on which ones. Mabuni (Shito-ryu)and Funakohsi (Shotokan) certainly did use the pinan/heian kata. But on Okinawa there was no universal acclaim for their use. In fact that some schools taught them (and only the important/rich kids went to school, not the common kids who were likely working with their families) eventually caused them to be imported to some Okinawan systems.
Actually there were numerous attempts in Okinawa in the 30's or so for other forms. The Okinawan's commissioned one group of 10 training forms to be created, but they don't seem to have been used, just documented in an older Japanes karate text. Then Nagamine and Miyagi created the Fyugata kata together. Later Miyagi created two Geseki kata for Goju beginners.
But other groups never adopted any of their use. And how long people trianed on their kata depended on the instructor.
Miyagi used to only teach a student 2 or 3 kata. Sanchin and normally one other. So in that case it was 2 kata for life. After his death the surviving students banded together, taught each other the forms and seem to have created a more comprehsneive goju curricula, but one is founderd didn't seem to use.
Other isntructors like Kyan Chotoku, who gave birth to many other instructors, never used any of the Pinan kata, and only taught the original Nihancihi kata.
The concept of '5 years on one kata' isn't a bad one, nor is it a recommended practice. In actuality the karate experience as to what is right is varied and will remain so.
What one person passionately believes, another pays no attention to. And both choices can be made to work.
Registered: 02/06/03
Posts: 260
Loc: Ithaca, NY, USA
Victor Smith wrote:
“The point that is how the founders studied is somewhat misleading. Funakoshi talked about spending 3 years of each of the Nihanchi kata when he was a beginner.”
Certainly the history on the practice of kata is less complete than we would like, as it is with most of karate history. But there are some good sources available that describe a very different approach to the practice of karate 100 years ago as compared with today.
From Funakoshi we have three references:
In “Karate Do Kyohan”, he wrote:
“In the past, it was expected that about three years were required to learn a single kata, and it was usual that even an expert of considerable skill would only know three or at the most five kata. Thus, in short, it was felt that a superficial understanding of kata was of little use. The aim of training reflected the precept expressed by the words, “Although the doorway is small, go deeply inward." I, too, studied for ten years to really learn the three Tekki forms.”
In “Ryukyu Kempo Karate” he wrote:
"The old masters used to keep a narrow field but plough a deep furrow. Present day students have a broad field but only plough a shallow furrow."
And in “Karate-Do, My Way of Life” he gave a descriptive account of the training under Azato:
“Night after night, often in the backyard of the Azato house as the master looked on, I would practice a kata time and again week after week, sometimes month after month, until I had mastered it to my teacher’s satisfaction. This constant repetition of a single kata was grueling, often exasperating and on occasion humiliating. More than once I had to like the dust on the floor of the dojo or in the Azato backyard. But practice was strict, and I was never permitted to move on to another kata until Azato was convinced that I had satisfactorily understood the one I had been working on.
After executing a kata, I would await his verbal judgment. It was always terse. If he remained dissatisfied with my technique, he would murmur, “Do it again,” or “A little more!” A little more, a little more, so often a little more until the sweat poured and I was ready to drop: it was his way of telling me there was still something to be learned, to be mastered. Then, if he found my progress satisfactory, his verdict would be expressed in a single word, “Good!” That one word was his highest praise. Until I had heard it spoken several times, however, I would never dare ask him to begin teaching a new kata.
Funakoshi is not the only authority that states the old practice of few kata.
In "Tales of Okinawa’s Great Masters", Nagamine writes:
”It took virtually several years of diligent practice to completely learn a single kata, unlike today’s pointless, but popular, accumulation of many kata in a brief time.”
On this site, Dan Smith, a noted authority has written a brief biography of Chotoku Kyan. He writes:
"In those days, a Karate Sensei had only three or four Kata. Therefore, Master Kyan went to many teachers in hopes of getting a more well-rounded view of the art."
One might note that from the seven masters from which Kyan learned kata, he learned only one each from six. (Kusanku from Chatan Yara, Passai from Koken Oyadomari, Wanshu from Maeda PECHIN, Chinto from Kosaku Matsumora, Anaku from a Taiwanese, Tokumine no kun from Tokumine PECHIN) Even from Matsumura, whom he trained under for years, seems only to have taught him Naichachi, Gojushiho and Seisan. When Matusmura died in the late 1800s, Choto Kyan was in has late 20s and had been studying since he was a young child. That was plenty of time for Matsumura to offer him more than those three (or five, depending on how you count the Naihanchi.)
Regarding the degree of Funakoshi’s skill level when he learned Naihanchi (beginner or better), we can only guess. We do know he began first training with Azato, and only began the Naihanchi after beginning his training with Itosu. There appears to be no record of how long he trained with Azato prior to his training with Itosu but we should expect at least a small interim period. If we can judge from his own timeline, he would not have begun training on Naihanchi Sandan until after a minimum of 6 years after he began his training with Azato (to complete the training of Naihanchi Shodan and Nidan) but it was likely even longer since there is likely some interim period when he had not yet begun his training under Itosu.
Let’s note that it was expected that students train for 2-3 hours every day, far different than the norm today where it is not uncommon for beginner students to train only 2-3 hours per week. So after 6, 7 or more years (when Funakoshi began learning his third kata), Funakoshi had trained in hours more than many students today complete in 15 or even 20 years.
Again the issue comes to at what point you introduce second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh kata to students with only one to three years of training.
I am not arguing that students with 15 years training can't benefit from more kata. Of course they can, because over the period of training they have learned (hopefully) how to defend themselves.
The real issue is the best way to use kata as method for teaching good fighting skills to students who train for only a few years, which is far more common than for those who train for a lifetime.
The norm today in many Shuri-te systems is to teach a new kata every three to four months. After 4 years, that comes to 10-15 kata. In many dojos, each kata will be performed in dojo perhaps 50 times, maybe a 100, before the next is introduced. Then each kata being practiced tends to be de-emphasized to make time for the next one (or more) needed for the next belt. In many dojos, this works out just fine because there is no extensive practice of application. Occasionally a technique or two is practiced but rarely does the student train extensively in actually using the movements of a kata.
And why is it done this way? Because that is the way it was handed down. Let's take the extreme example to make the point. Mabuni, who studied widely, probably learned as many as 50 kata, and created a few more as well. In an effort to preserve his art, he passed it all down. Now his followers have to learn it all, regardless of whether there is any value in practicing so much. By the rank of Shodan, a Shito Ryu student learns 20 or more kata. During this training, the vast majority of the movements remain virtually meaningless, since there is no way for an instructor to introduce and have the students practice applications for the huge number of combinations found in those 20 kata. Rather, because Shito Ryu is a Japanese system, emphasis is given to kumite skills, much of it offensive, with elaborate kicking combinations. For much of these offensive combinations, there is little guidance found in the kata.
It is no secret that for beginners to learn good self defense they should focus primarily on a core of effective combinations that are practiced over and over until they are fast, powerful and automatic so that the karateka becomes better prepared for attacks from big aggressive opponents. For beginners, kata can help immensely in this quest. At least the practice of one, or at most a few kata can, with extensive training on applications with partners. But for the average karateka with 1-4 years of training, learning lots of kata takes away precious time needed to be working repetitively on good fighting combinations and the extensive partner work required to master the movements.
With 2-4 hours per week, (average training time of many beginners) one should be selective in what one practices. If beginners spend lots of training time doing movements that aren't understand, then they are probably wasting valuable training time which could be better spent on the repetitive practice of effective combinations.
[This message has been edited by kakushiite (edited 06-16-2004).]
You are quite accurate in the quotes you give. Yet I am coming to accept the brief accounts we have may have little to do with the actuality of the past.
Of course prior roughly to 1900 there is simply no reliable evidence outside of oral tradition.
Perhaps those who were karate-ka only had a few kata, and spent at least 3 years learning each one. Does that mean their instructors knew nothing else, or were they too young or too 'incompetent' to learn more or quicker? I'm not being argumentative, just suggesting there is no reliable information as to the true situation.
Evidence seems to suggest most will do what they can to learn as much as possible, or at least those that become truly commmited to their study. And I'm not suggesting Japanese lack of 'true' tradition was the reason they incorporated more kata into the development of Shotokan, or Mabuni's studies.
Take Mabuni, trained with Itosu and Hiagonna, and friend to Miyagi, and many others. He certainly went out of his way to honnor those who shared with him, and preserve those teachings.
Hohen Soken reportedly incorporated more than one instructors trainings in his teachings. So did Kyan as you've pointed out. Or Taira preserving Okinawan Kobudo studies with his art.
Contrast them with Motobu and the reportedly few kata he utilized and how far his art went.
I don't see right or wrong, just the reality things keep moving on.
If everyone really honored their insructors (and oral tradition often tells us the instructors encouraged them to study further too) why did they chagne things.
Forget system, take one kata, Patsai (Passai, Bassai). At least 15 or 18 different versions on Okinawa, a very, very small place, what 45 miles long. Was one person a good student and all the rest inferior ones? Or is the issue of preserving the past 'intact' actually irrelevant, instead preserving the way to move into the future with the art. I would suggest this is what actually happened.
Take Miyagi, an acknowledged great instructor. He was absolutely driven to only teach 2 or 3 kata to a student (mostly following his own instructors teachings path). Yet as soon as he died, his students openly created a new curricula teaching 'all' the kata, as well as disobeyed his belief and began awarding black belts. Does change make modern day Goju superior or inferior to Miyagi?
There is little simple answer from my perspective.
The truth to me is you teach appropriately to the situation you face. For example much of my progam the past 25 years is a youth program. Self defense (in short order) in the area I live is not a goal for many. So I focus on what the student needs in their 7 to 9 or so year development towards beginning sho-dan. And use 14 forms in that course of training (identical to my adult program).
But after that 7 to 9 year period I'm only looking for 'perfection of movement- a relative concept' in the first two Isshinryu kata, and very good execution in the rest.
I don't concern myself with kyu self defense development, chosing to focus on long range entry to basic attacks. But they're not stinting for true self defense by sho-dan either. For the last step they study bando short stick which hits harder than any fist and can peel skin, break bones and move through metal detectors with ease (in today's changing world).
It's not that I turn viscious predators loose, rather karate, with all its depth of use and viscious potential, isn't the answer for much self defesne either.
Okinawa's arts didn't stop the samuari and their shock and awe take over in the 1500's. They came and it was over.
Nor was Okinawa a violent place that karate was necessary to keep alive. Karate, oral traditions aside, seems to have filled a different nitch in reason, IMO.
For one thing it's too complicated to get into the depth of the art. I can take anyone in a few short weeks and make them very, very effective with a stick, more so than years required for basic adequacy with empty hand. And anything can be used as a stick, including the empty hand too.
I don't sell karate short, it's simply too easy to have a simple answer.
For every example one can think of, counter examples abound.
Many of the Chinese systems make the totality of Okinawan karate look like childs play. Which does not negate karate's effectiveness, but it does question what the answer is.
For example, one system, Northern Eagle Claw (Faan Tzi Ying Jow Pai) uses dozens and dozens of forms, but except for the instructor, students move through forms and then on to more complex ones. The basics have to be exact in the more complex forms so when they get them, they move on.
A large contrast to an Okinawan system using the same forms for decades for a student, Like Miyagi's Sanchin and Seiunchin answer for a student.
Yet there are different dimensions to study. On one hand uncountable forms, and variations, on the other hand uncountables ways to use one technique, multipled by uncountable techniques.
But the true answer is all one needs is one, and the ability to work it.
Likewise I'm a big proponent that the new student their first 3 or 4 years only need 2 to 3 hours training a week, but in very small group. I've found at about 10 years (when beginning skill starts to manifest) they're more than capable of holding their own against those who've trained 5 days a week in larger group settings for those 10 years.
It's not necessarily the quantity of training, but the quality that is most important.
Lets assume (as I do) that Funakoshi was correct, night after night for 3 years on one kata. That also meant night after night one instructor spending all those hours watching and correcting that level of training. Not just sweating, but correct, focused sweating.
I doubt there is anyone, anywhere, outside of a private coach who receives that level of training. And if you're training hard and making mistakes while you do it, guess what you're practicing how to be very good making those mistakes.
This is no blanket indictment of anyone. Just a comment on the diversity I've experienced and seen and live.
The truth is a student gets out of their training what they're putting into it. That means as much as the effort they make to find the instructor who offers what they actually want as well as how they train and what they actually want to do it for.
Previous Topic
Index
