PDA

View Full Version : Most misunderstood shorin kata?



Timothy.G.B.
7th February 2005, 21:17
There is always a lot of discussion about bunkai and application of certain techniques in kata. Some are more plausible than others, but some are just off the wall!!

What are some of the oddest interpretations of shorin-ryu kata that you have been told, shown or heard about?

Specifically, what kata do you feel is the most misinterpeted shorin-ryu kata that you have seen and why?

I will place my vote for naihanchi kata...all three!! I don't think any other kata is as misunderstood by the general karate public. I believe it is so misunderstood because very few people actually know how to fight naihanchi "style" anymore.

What about others?

Best,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

johnst_nhb
8th February 2005, 00:33
Agreed on Naihanchi...

Hey Tim, were you in Washington when Onaga was here? I went to visit for a bit and may have met you. I met someone from a Canada dojo but cannot remember their name!

-j

Timothy.G.B.
8th February 2005, 00:41
Hi John:

Yes, we met in Issaquah that night you came by the dojo when Onaga sensei was here. I thought that might have been you but I wasn't sure. Fancy meeting you here on e-budo :)

Best,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

johnst_nhb
8th February 2005, 00:44
Hey Tim,

I thought that was you! I REALLY enjoyed that evening...truely great finally meeting Onaga sensei. What a character and karateka!

I wish we could have talked! Maybe some other time...

j

desparoz
8th February 2005, 06:19
Another vote for Naihanchin. Definitely a misunderstood kata.

Actually, I am looking forward to the day that I feel that I really deeply understand it, or at least one of its variations.

Best

Des

Ed Gingras
8th February 2005, 12:19
I vote for Naihanchi Kata.

Timothy.G.B.
8th February 2005, 17:47
So, naihanchi is taking the lead here so far. Several examples I have seen of the misunderstanding of the kata come from the different interpretations that people make regarding moves that are not self-evident as to their purpose.

Kata that is not well understood becomes, IMO, like a sunny day full of big puffy clouds. People can see all sorts of different things in ambiguous shapes of the clouds. As with naihanchi, people "see" or come up with so many different ideas when faced with a kata like naihanchi, because its applications are not self-evident.

I am curiuous regarding what are the major misunderstandings as demonstrated in the applications of the kata that people have seen or heard about?

In the last few years, naihanchi seems to have garnered some attention for being full of grappling moves. I find that confusing. In my view it is one example of bright people coming up with creative ideas in response to the ambiguous shapes in naihanchi. Hey, if it works, then who am I to argue? It's just that such an interpretation is incompatible with what I have learned the kata is for.

Other thoughts?

Best,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

Rob Alvelais
8th February 2005, 18:21
Unsu!


Rob

shisochin#1
10th February 2005, 20:50
nipaipo

Timothy.G.B.
10th February 2005, 20:56
shisochin#1:

Out of curiosity, whose shorin is nipaipo a part of?

Thanks,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

Rob Alvelais
10th February 2005, 21:17
Originally posted by Timothy.G.B.
shisochin#1:

Out of curiosity, whose shorin is nipaipo a part of?

Thanks,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

Nobody's. Nipaipo is a kata authored by Kenwa Mabuni, based upon the teaching of Gokenki. But, it's not the kata that Gokenki taught. So, it's a Shitoryu kata, but not a Shorin Ryu kata.

Rob

Timothy.G.B.
10th February 2005, 22:53
Thanks for clearing that up Rob!

Best,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

Troll Basher
20th February 2005, 12:16
Originally posted by Timothy.G.B.

In the last few years, naihanchi seems to have garnered some attention for being full of grappling moves. I find that confusing. In my view it is one example of bright people coming up with creative ideas in response to the ambiguous shapes in naihanchi. Hey, if it works, then who am I to argue? It's just that such an interpretation is incompatible with what I have learned the kata is for.

Other thoughts?

Best,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

I have done Naihanchi for over 25+ years. From day one in learning Naihanchi I was taught moves that were joint locks, strikes, and so on. This is long before the “grappling craze” came around.
I find all 3 of the Naihanchi the most eluding kata to understand. They are ambiguous to look at which makes them look deceptively simple and not very “sophisticated” as compared with say Kusanku. Japanese say “less is more”, so in the case of the Naihanchi kata they could be right.

Troll Basher
20th February 2005, 12:19
Originally posted by Rob Alvelais
Nobody's. Nipaipo is a kata authored by Kenwa Mabuni, based upon the teaching of Gokenki. But, it's not the kata that Gokenki taught. So, it's a Shitoryu kata, but not a Shorin Ryu kata.

Rob

OK, now I am confused even more. I swore I read some where that Pat McCarthy said Nipaipo was from China and he had picked up the original version from some Chinese teacher….RuRuko’s great grandson or something like that.

Rob Alvelais
20th February 2005, 17:00
I thought that the version that Mr. McCarthy did was "Nepai?"

Anyway, maybe there are other "Nipaipo" out there but as far as the one that's in the Shito Ryu syllabus, Kenzo Mabuni told me that his dad authored Nipaipo and that it wasn't the kata of Gokenki. Rather, Kenzo said that Dad authored the kata based upon the inspiration of Gokenki's "te".

I would imagine that there's versions of the form that Gokenki taught out there, but the Shito Nipaipo isn't it.

Does that clear it up?

Rob



Originally posted by Troll Basher
OK, now I am confused even more. I swore I read some where that Pat McCarthy said Nipaipo was from China and he had picked up the original version from some Chinese teacher….RuRuko’s great grandson or something like that.

harleyt26
20th February 2005, 21:11
My kobudo sensei accompanied McCarthy sensei on his trip to China where they were taught the form Nipaipo.I am also a Shito Ryu sylist and the two forms are nothing alike.But my sensei definitely calls it Nipaipo not Nipai. Tom Hodges

Troll Basher
20th February 2005, 23:46
Originally posted by harleyt26
My kobudo sensei accompanied McCarthy sensei on his trip to China where they were taught the form Nipaipo.I am also a Shito Ryu sylist and the two forms are nothing alike.But my sensei definitely calls it Nipaipo not Nipai. Tom Hodges

I think I heard McCarthy say he does a kata called Nepai as well.

So what I am wondering now is if Mabuni developed Nipaipo then why is there a Chinese version of it?....or is there?....Could it be that it is a kata derived from some Chinese kata and Mabuni just stuck the same name on it?

Rob Alvelais
21st February 2005, 01:24
Originally posted by Troll Basher
I think I heard McCarthy say he does a kata called Nepai as well.


On page 159 of his book, Bubishi, Mr. McCarthy says that he was taught Nepai by the great-grandson of Ryu Ryu Ko.



So what I am wondering now is if Mabuni developed Nipaipo then why is there a Chinese version of it?....or is there?....Could it be that it is a kata derived from some Chinese kata and Mabuni just stuck the same name on it?


FWIW, the kanji used by Mabuni are "Two", "Eight" and "Step" ("Ni" "Pai/hachi" "Po/Ho")

Rob

Harry Cook
21st February 2005, 01:28
There is a form called Er Shi Ba Bu (28 Steps) ie Nipaipo in a book on Fukien White Crane published in China in 1982. This seems very different to both the Shito Ryu Nipaipo and Pat McCarthy's Neipai.
Harry Cook

Troll Basher
21st February 2005, 02:37
Here is where I saw it.
http://www.koryu-uchinadi.com/patrick.htm

McCarthy Sensei frequently teaches application practices compatible with JKA-based kata and multi-style mainstream JKF traditions, such as Shito, Wado & Goju, etc. Specifically, Heian/Pinan, Tekki/Naihanchi, Hangetsu/Seisan, Bassai/Passai, Kanku/Kusanku, Nijushiho/Niseishi, Gangkaku/Chintou, Gojushiho/Ueseishi, Saifa, Sepai, Sanseryu, Shisoochin, Kururunfua, Suparinpei, and Tensho, etc. McCarthy Sensei has also spent years collecting, studying and teaching a plethora of unique and abstract kata, from older Okinawan traditions, and smaller family-based disciplines. Seventeen kata make up the principal curriculum he presents through Koryu Uchinadi. They include Chokyu (Gekkisai/Shinshi), Happoren (Paipuren), Kume Hakutsuru, Yara Kusanku, Naihanchi (Tekki), Nanshu, Nepai (Nipaipo) , Aragaki Niseishi (Nijushiho), Matsumura Bassai, Rakan-ken, Ryushan, Miyagi Sanchin, Aragaki Seisan, Aragaki Sochin, Tai Sabaki (Koryu Uchinadi version), Aragaki Unshu and Wando (Wanduan).

And again here:


http://www.ikkf.org/article3Q00.html


In fact, it was Itosu Ankoh (1832-1915) who collected and standardized the practice of many kata into a single tradition around the turn of the 20th century. Based upon this analysis, he went on to develop shorter geometrical representations of the older & longer traditions, which he called the Pinan/Heian kata. Up until that time in Okinawa's three principal districts [the old castle capitol of Shuri, Kumemura, the Chinese district of Naha & the deep water port of Tomari] there existed about fifty or so old-school kata which Itosu sensei, and his colleague, Higashionna Kanryo (1853-1917), brought together, including Chinto (Gangkaku), Chinte, Happoren (Paipuren), Hakutsuru, Jiin, Jion, Jitte, Kururunfua, Kushankun (Kankudai/Sho), Naifuanchin (Tekki), Nanshu, Nepai (Nipaipo) , Passai (Bassai Dai/Sho), Rohai (Meikyo), Rakkaken, Sobarinpai (Peichurrin), Sanseru, Seipai, Seiunchin, Seisan (Hangetsu), Shisoochin, Sochin, Unshu (Unsu), Useishi (Gojushiho Sho/Dai), Wando (Wanduan), Wankan (Matsukaze), and Wanshu (Enpi).


It would seem that according to McCarthy that Nepai and Nipapo are one in the same.

Rob Alvelais
21st February 2005, 02:53
Originally posted by Troll Basher

It would seem that according to McCarthy that Nepai and Nipapo are one in the same.

Otoh,

From his book, bubishi
-begin quote
"A principal quan of Xie zongxiang's Minghe Quan Gojgfu, Neipai , in Chinese characters means "Twenty-Eight Strikes". It emphasizes grappling and the striking of anatomical vulnerable points. Nepai was first introduced to Okinawa by GoGenki when he taught it to Kyoda Juhatsu and Mabuni Kenwa. To-On-ryu was the only Okinawan style that preserved and passed on Nepai. Mabuni's version of Nepai, considerably different from the To-On-Ryu version, is called Nipaipo, and is practiced by some sects of Shi To -ryu. Nepai is still practiced several styles of Fujian White Crane gongfu. The explanation on this page represents the original Whooping Crane version as taught to me by the great-grandson of Ryuru Ko, Xie Wenliang." -end quote

This stuff is a bit confusing.
Sure wish there was some resource online where one could see this Nepai and compare it with Nipaipo.

Rob

Troll Basher
21st February 2005, 03:00
Originally posted by Rob Alvelais

This stuff is a bit confusing.
Sure wish there was some resource online where one could see this Nepai and compare it with Nipaipo.

Rob

Yes it is.
Maybe Pat could shed some light on it.

Timothy.G.B.
28th February 2005, 18:49
Troll Basher:

When you say that naihanchi are not very "sophisticated" as compared to Kusanku, what exactly do you mean?

Respectfully,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

Troll Basher
28th February 2005, 21:30
Originally posted by Timothy.G.B.
Troll Basher:

When you say that naihanchi are not very "sophisticated" as compared to Kusanku, what exactly do you mean?

Respectfully,
Tim Black
Kokusai Shinjinbukan

Just exactly what I said before: “They are ambiguous to look at which makes them look deceptively simple and not very “sophisticated” as compared with say Kusanku.”

At first glance most folks would think Naihanchi (1,2,& 3) don’t contain much as far as technique as compared to a longer kata like Kusanku that has more changes in direction and looks flashier.

Patrick McCarthy
28th February 2005, 23:38
McCarthy here...

The routine [described in the Bubishi] is one and the same albeit altered by interpretation and understanding. Found predominately in Fujian, it is originally one of the five principal routines of old-style He-quan [Crane-fist]; The others being, #2. Ba Bu Lien Er Lu [Happoren/Paipuren…8 Continuous steps], #3. Roujin [Jusen…Soft Arrow], #4. Qijing [Shichikei…7 Brocades] & #5. Doonquan [Chukyo/Jusanporen]…13 steps).

I believe that it found its way to Okinawa c.1918 by way of Go Genki, and Taiwan in 1922 by way of four He-quan experts; Lin Yigao, Ah Fungshui, Lin Deshun & Zhang Argo.

While there are obvious differences between the way the routine is performed within each of the major Chinese styles of Crane-boxing, so too are there differences in the way it has come to be performed in the Okinawan-based Japanese tradition; this should not be surprising. As soon as the reader understands how stylistic differences influence the performance of technique, and configuration, it become obvious, why the routine/s become “different.”

Troll Basher
1st March 2005, 00:27
Originally posted by Patrick McCarthy
McCarthy here...

The routine [described in the Bubishi] is one and the same albeit altered by interpretation and understanding. Found predominately in Fujian, it is originally one of the five principal routines of old-style He-quan [Crane-fist]; The others being, #2. Ba Bu Lien Er Lu [Happoren/Paipuren…8 Continuous steps], #3. Roujin [Jusen…Soft Arrow], #4. Qijing [Shichikei…7 Brocades] & #5. Doonquan [Chukyo/Jusanporen]…13 steps).

I believe that it found its way to Okinawa c.1918 by way of Go Genki, and Taiwan in 1922 by way of four He-quan experts; Lin Yigao, Ah Fungshui, Lin Deshun & Zhang Argo.

While there are obvious differences between the way the routine is performed within each of the major Chinese styles of Crane-boxing, so too are there differences in the way it has come to be performed in the Okinawan-based Japanese tradition; this should not be surprising. As soon as the reader understands how stylistic differences influence the performance of technique, and configuration, it become obvious, why the routine/s become “different.”

What do you think about rice Ling's comment found here on page 6
http://wulin.proboards31.com/index.cgi?board=Japanese&action=display&num=1107943337





I did record some of my comments pertaining to karate-kas performing “White Crane” somewhere in this forum – hidden in some threads, can’t remember which one.

Was lucky to be given some clips to view and I believe some of these are considered “rare”.

The forms I saw:-

1. Shi-To’s “Nipapo”.
2. 3 other different versions of “Nipapo” by different streams.
3. Happoren or “Babulien”.
4. 2 crane katas from Ryuei –Ryu I think.

• My broad feeling is that all these are done too “hard” at least for “Whooping Crane”. Humbly, of all of the Fuzhou Cranes, I see Whooping and Shaking Cranes as having the most obvious whipping-like energies display – the kind that start from the legs and throwing out with the hands regardless of a fist, crane heads or palms. You just cannot miss this when you watch any forms from these 2 cranes. The body is usually kept in a relaxed, springy manner with as little tightening as possible. I’ve got 2 forms stored in www.goju-ryu.info if you are interested. Putting up more soon. I also got a couple of Shaking Cranes’ that came from Evert (Nataraya in forum). I’ll ask him about sharing these.


• If I must collate Karate to White Crane, I’ll put money on Fujian BaiHe (Martin Watts’ www.fujianbaihe.com) and Taiwan’s Feeding Crane. View these 2’s Sanchin, you just cannot miss the uncanny resemblances. The muscular focus, breathing pattern and even to a big extend, the footwork. Shaking Crane’s Sanchin can be seen at www.zonghe.com.tw - a much softer rendition. I have seen this done many times by one of my White Crane teachers in Singapore. And when he “Fa jin” or “explode energy” you could literally see his whole body vibrates. On one occasion, he was asked to perform this on wooden decking and throughout the entire form, he was bouncing so hard that you could feel the whole deck shakes. And this is exactly how they engage you; make contact and they bounce you away using different techniques. This would be a “friendly” encounter. A less friendly would be hitting you and then bouncing you away. They “open” you out first and hit you is how my teacher put it. Whooping Crane’s Sanchin is another ball game altogether. I have never seen Whooping Crane’s Sanchin done anywhere else! (This is one of the forms I got in www.goju-ryu.info)

• Generally if you look at the various Sanchins (White Crane and the various other Fukien Styles), most would be done with back straight. The “swallowing” is done with most just straight-down collapsing. Martin did a great job in explaining this in one of his discussions with Evert and me. The backbone is the main “power focus” and the rest of the body is more output devices so to speak. So the back is keep “straight and focus” to discharge energies. The breathing in and out is the “triggers”. If I am not mistaken, most Sanchin (Chinese and non-Chinese) are transmitted in this manner. Whooping Crane’s Sanchin (unfamiliar to many apparently) is done with a little turtle back. A little like Tai chi’s “sunken chest and protruding back” concept. This turtle back is the 2nd reservoir of energy.

• Shi-To Nipapo is nothing like Whooping Crane’s NSPS in either substance or form. So whatever Gokenki passed on, it is unlikely to be Whooping Crane’s NSPS. The other renditions of this form are too “Chinese” to be a classical import into Karate. Most of the form is “Chinese” except again for the substance. I see hard hand and footwork that is nothing like how NSPS is taught in Whooping Crane. Humbly, I think they are Karate-ised Whooping Crane – nothing more. Of course by doing this, you miss the point altogether.

Oftentimes, I read that this is how Jap/Oki works. They take something from the Chinese and “modify” them to suit their identities, environments etc etc…

My question is then this; why only Kung Fu or in particular Whooping Crane if indeed this was the style that they were schooled in?

Any other aspects of Jap/Oki cultures, you see much “Chineseness” retained. I was in Japan a few times and I could find my way around – no problem. The amount of Kanji used there is enough for me to move around. I was even quite surprised to find out that the way they worship their deities is so similar to the Chinese.

I could go on and on. The other explanation is of course that the Jap wanted to remove all Chinese aspects of their fighting arts. So why keep the so-Chinese names of their katas? IMHO, some of the Katas’ name makes no sense if you do not tie it to the Chinese and their culture.

Honestly, I think the truth lies elsewhere.

I also read that most Karate researchers basically spent time in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan in their quests.

This to me is odd. The biggest Fuzhou community outside China is Sibu Sarawak. You will find large Hakka communities in Sabah/Sarawak and Kalimantan. In fact in Sibu you must learn to speak Fuzhou if you want to fit in. Mandarin doesn’t get you anywhere in Sibu.

I just came back from Singkawang, Kalimantan and the official languages there are Bahasa Indonesia and Hakka. I don't speak either so I was having big issues communicating with my fellow Chinese countrymen!!! Getting by with the little Bahasa Malaysia that I do know hahahaha what a strange scenario??

Singapore and Malaysia witnessed huge influx of immigrant Chinese in the last 200 years. Many were CKF Masters who are lineage holders of their styles who fled the “cultural revolution” in mainland.

I would even go as far as saying that Singapore/Malaysia/Philippines and Indonesia saw the largest number of White Crane and other Fukien styles arrival besides Taiwan. Let also not forget that many of Taiwan Cranes were “Made in Taiwan”.

Hong Kong is more famed for Canton/Fatsan and Hakka styles. But lately, being personally stationed in Sarawak and moving around in the region, I am discovering the enormous Hakka communities and the CKF they brought with them from mainland.

As a parting shot, Martin Watts the English guy who is now lazing on an off-shore Spanish island somewhere, started his Fujian Baihe journey in downtown Singapore.

In a place called “Yong Chun Hui Kwan”, a clan association built by Fukinese immigrants.

And this is also the place that I saw Wing Chun many years ago. A very “Fukien” flavored Wing Chun.

Never seen it done again anywhere . The Sifu who did this taught only very few students and these folks are not teaching.

I have tried, in vain, to locate them.

IMHHHO, I think they could be the "missing" link between White Crane and Wing Chun.

Back to my Carlsberg.........

Thank you Sir.

Patrick McCarthy
3rd March 2005, 03:15
Sorry for the delay in responding as I am presently victim to a rather unrelenting travel itinerary between Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and the EU.


What do you think about rice Ling's comment found here on page 6

I don’t know the gentleman, but he sounds like an experienced CKF practitioner who has a great English vocabulary (I am assuming he's SE Asian Chinese...and English is not his first language) and seems to be able to articulate his point well. Is he also a karate stylist, too?

I have only taken a cursory look at the thread on his page(s) and could probably write an entire book responding to comments made by both sides. Be that as it may, I have long held that if karateka want to learn more about their quanfa origins seeking out Chinese teachers should be at the top of the list, rather than continuing to argue with each other as to who's got the genuine article. It's nice to see things changing now as it's been my experience that most karateka don’t want to hear about anything that not “their style” (Goju, Shoto, etc) unless it came from their master! This mindset is not limited to Japanese-based styles, either. I've experienced such narrow-mindedness in Chinese styles, too.

My efforts to unearth the identity of those Chinese traditions that formed the eclectic foundation on which karate surfaced have been quite revealing and ongoing. I don't buy into the theory that any one single Chinese *style* was the progenitor of karate but rather believe that Okinawa was a cultural melting pot where several practices (i.e. percussive impact, clinching & grappling, capturing & controlling, & human movement---hsing/kata, for health and fitness) were haphazardly embraced by various people at various times and for various reasons. [Inflexible] Social mindset and [Japanese] cultural landscape have played an unquestionable role influencing the subsequent practice of foreign quanfa traditions since the last century. Moreover, modern rule-bound competitive practices have also forged a new ambience in the way fighting is embraced and hsing/kata are taught & learned [in both China and Japan].

I have a fairly good background in Southern-based quanfa (Lam Jo-based Hung-gar, Hong Sing Choi Li Fut & Do Pai] opened my first mogoon in 1974, was closely associated with the Toronto/Vancouver Chinese kungfu community for many years, crossed-studied in several styles [Dragon boxing, White Eye Brow, Wing Chun, Fujian/Yongchun Crane, SPM, etc] and enjoyed the good fortune of visiting and training in China [Fujian, Shanghai, Shaolin etc.] Taiwan, Hong Kong and SE Asia where I was able to conduct my own hands-on research.

Over the years I have met some well-known Crane Boxers in Fujian thanks to my friendship with Li Yiduan [Fuzhou Wushu Assoc. President]. While I certainly lay no claim to being their student [as I am not] I did meet and enjoy practicing with the late Wan Lai Sheng, Huang Zi Qing, Chen Husen, Ji Zhuo Di, Ruan Dong, Wang Li Zhong, Chen Jin Wen, and Hong Ding Sheng. Although I've played with various Crane Boxers [and many other Fujian-based teachers, too] over the years, my principal crane sources in the past 15 years have been Jin Jinfu & Zheng Shifu of Fuzhou [Crying Crane], Liu Song Shan of Taiwan [Feeding Crane], Xie Pin Guan of Fuzhou [Crying Crane] & his son Xie Wenliang [at the time was residing in Okinawa with Tokashiki Sensei], and Robert Swia Foo of East Malaysia.

Not finding what I wanted, I changed the focus of my atention to two-person drills (not limiting myself to Hequan). It is my opinion, irrespective of the style of Hequan [Yongchun, Zonghe (Ancestral/Jumping), Minghe Quan (Crying/Singing/Whooping), Suhe Quan (Sleeping), Shihe Quan (Feeding/Eating) and or Feihe Quan (Flying)] that each method achieves the same outcomes using identical mechanics [supported by immutable principles] albeit with different characteristics. See my HAPV & two-person drills theory here http://www.koryu-uchinadi.com/patrick.htm

After all is said and done there’s only so much one can do [one-on-one empty-handed self-defence] with & to the body. I think far too much is lent to “style.” Everyone talks about the differences [read advantages] this or that style and yet when push comes to shove mutual confrontation seems to resort to percussive impact, seizing and grappling etc. Far from “unique” I’d say. A classic example can be observed between Taiji boxer Wu Kuni Yi and a younger Crane Boxer named Chen in their 1954 *exhibition* bout in Macoa. See here www.sheenpeak.com/NgvsChan.WMV

As a matter of interest, Matin Watts [Yongchun Crane] is also a friend of mine and recently attended one of my seminars in Holland. He loved what I am doing with my HAPV & 2-person drill theory for karate. In fact, those traditional-based karateka who have taken the time and opportunity to attend hands-on training seminars have all had many, many doors of discovery open to them.

Not sure if this all fits on this thread but I am happy to field any queries.

Patrick