11 posts / 0 new
Last post
shoshinkanuk
shoshinkanuk's picture
Are Pinan 1 & 2 Fundamentally Different from Pinan 3,4 and 5 kata?

Ok,

Following on from recent threads I thought it might be interesting to see what people think on this one. Lets keep it very relevant strategic, technical elements of the kata (as opposed to Channan theories, symbolism etc).

I haven't been able to spend much time on this but if we take the kata embusen as the following link describes-

http://www.readingforkicks.org/kata.html

You will see Pinan 1 and 2 have a different embusen from 3,4 and 5.

Granted 3 and 5 have the same embusen, so based on this alone the evidence to my theory is weak.

Without going into real detail, as I haven't prepared that the techniques executed generally in Pinan 1 and 2, in my mind are very simple- Jodan Uke, Gedan Uke, Soto Uke, Uchi Uke, Shuto Uke, Gyaku Tsuki, Nukite (with Osae Uke granted), Mae Geri, 1 hip stack, Otoshi Uchi, Oi Tsuki, Moroto Gedan Shuto Uke etc.

Pinan 3,4 and 5 deliver more complex techniques.

Again based on this alone, my theory is still weak.

My final component is our oral history states Hohan Soken did not get Pinan 3,4 and 5 from his teacher Nabe Matsumura (Kise Sensei bought these into the public system with Hohan Sokens blessing sometime in the 1960's).

I think that is about it for now, i do realise the version of Pinan 1 and 2 I practice is a little different from the later developed Japanese systems, but generally it's the same. For instance we do not have Neko Ashi Dachi, Kokutsu Dachi etc.

My gut feeling is Pinan 1 and 2 did not originally have a significant overall application strategy, but were the basic delivery system of a Chinese Long Fist system- if you like Kihon in a kata. (Sure they can be applied and very well).

Heres an article by Joe Swift Sensei relevant to Itosu Sensei, Pinan and Channan-

http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=127

I have not been to Okinawa, but my Sensei has, many times and the family system doesn't bother with Pinan 1 and 2 after a while, it's all about Naihanchi and the following kata.

And Iain the CAPTCHA system is very tough to get right...............LOL

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

The embusen you reference are not accurate based on Shito-Ryu.

I really think using Shotokan is a poor choice as a base for this.

Its common knowledge that Shotokan practioners after Funakoshi Gichin drastically changed the katas, from complex to what they are now.  If you want to see what Itosu was teaching you have to look more at Shito-Ryu or even Wado-Ryu, Ohtsuka learned the kata from Funakoshi and was booted before the Shotokanization occured.

Some Shorin-Ryu flavors are probably good to look at as well, but probably not yours Jim, only from the fact you state its more of a private family line.

Just my thoughts.  Feel free to agree or disagree.

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

I also feel trying to leave Kosokun Dai out of any explaination of Pinan is pointless.  Unless you are junior enough to have not learned Kosokun Dai.

Once you have, its essential in the discussion, as all the techniques in all 5  Pinan kata prepare you for Kosokun Dai.

Once again, my opinion.

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Hi Dale,

Dale Parker wrote:
The embusen you reference are not accurate based on Shito-Ryu.

Neither are they based on Shotokan.

Dale Parker wrote:
Its common knowledge that Shotokan practioners after Funakoshi Gichin drastically changed the katas, from complex to what they are now.  If you want to see what Itosu was teaching you have to look more at Shito-Ryu or even Wado-Ryu, Ohtsuka learned the kata from Funakoshi and was booted before the Shotokanization occured.

Is that so? Take a look at Funakoshis books e.g. his 1922 book. There you can see how he practiced them. Compare them to modern Shotokan forms. I can't see anything more or less complex than they are now.

If you want to see what Itosu was teaching you have to travel back in time. The Shito Ryu and Wado Ryu versions are modern versions too. Take a look at Mabunis Karate Do Nyumon (1938) and compare that to your Shito versions and be aware that 1938 is 23 years after Itosus demise.

Please don't throw around with platitudes even when it might be common knowledge.

Regards Holger

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

I don't think it was a platitude.  I'm just going by what I've been taught. I ment no slight or offense.

I probably do come across as strongly opinionated.

Soke Mabuni said he taught kata as his father instructed him, and I do the Pinan kata as he taught me.

I will concede on the Funakoshi book.  Most people I know have the revised second edition, where the photos were changed to match more closely to modern Shotokan.

All that aside, I think most people use the Nakayama books for kata, and while I haven't looked in many years, I think they best represent what Shotokan kata is like today.

Although you make my same point.  Nothing more or less complex than now.

I have had many Shotokan students come to me and completely astounded by how much more complex the Pinan kata are in Shito-Ryu vs. the Shotokan Heian kata.

I will also concede I am no expert on Shotokan.

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

Also I do not own a copy of Mabuni's Karate Do Nyumon, I have seen originals, Soke Kenzo Mabuni's in fact, and also Hanshi Miki's, but I do not have one. 

I do recall the kata being the same as we do now, with the difference of stances have become more defined and "lower".

shoshinkanuk
shoshinkanuk's picture

Guys,

The embusen link posted was out of sheer ease, i.e I found it quickly and it is avalaible in an electronic format to present here- feel free to post/link to something better, and if your after Itosu Sensei's 'closest' versions of the Pinan's then I would advise Kobayashi Shorin Ryu via Chibanna Sensei.

Also as a sub issue, I haven't drawn my opinion based on books (but granted theres a reasonable source of relevant info in some of them), I have worked historically Pinan 1,2,3,4 and 5 from Shito Ryu (Kusano Sensei line) and Matsubayashi Shorin Ryu, and of course Pinan 1 and 2 from Seito Matsumura.

I have most of the books mentioned but never thought to compare whole kata in this way, and if i did it wouldn't be the Pinan as I simply don't focus on them outside of Pinan 1 and 2 for begineers and our fundamental Long Fist method practice, their simplicity really facilitate the focus on smaller details etc. (Granted that mind set may well feed my opinions significantly).

I have never been able to retain kata from different Ryu, im to busy focusing on the current ones!

clouviere
clouviere's picture

In order to see what Itosu taught, you have to go further than that.  Recently I have had the honor of seeing Sensei Pat Nakata's kata, he was a direct studen to Chibana Sensei, who was a direct student of Itosu.  His Pinan's are different in the small details.  But the overall techniques are the same.  As they are with all styles.  As Iain is fond of saying, they are close enough to call it the same general technique.

That being said, if you enter this discussion and comparison with a single "assumption", that Itosu created the Pinan's to created a foundation for school children and beginners, it is easy to see what was done.  Take the core Okinawan kata of his time and you'll see his intention.  Kusanku is the primary source kata.  But within Passai, Jion, Wansu, Chinto, Seisan and Naihanchi are core techniques found through Okinawa.  Those are in the Pinan as well.

So, to answer the fundamental question...the answer is no.  Are they different?  Yes.  As different as the source kata.  But they are part of a complete plan.

IMO, Pinan Shodan is Kusanku and Seisan with a touch of Tomari.  Pinan Nidan is a simplified Jion with touch of Passi/Kusanku (depending of version).  Pinan Sandan is Jion with a some common techniques found in Wansu/Naihanchi, etc, with some odd techniques thrown in.  Pinan Yodan is all Kusanku and Passai.  Pinan Godan is more Wansu/Naihanchi elements with some revisited common themes from Kusanku and Seisan.

So, fundamentally no, I do not think they are different.  They are only different because they pull from different kata.  Different because you look at them as individuals.  But viewed as a whole, they are not...they are fundamentally the same.  The underlying foundation pulls them together.  The fundamental connection is there.  The Pinans represent the heart of Okinawan Karate as seen through Itosu's eyes.  The core kata, with comman techniques.

We can argue whether Itosu should have made them.  We can even arque if he damaged the deeper lessons of the original kata.  But I think his fundamental goal was sound.  They are the gateway kata to Okinawan Karate.  You learn them if you are young or inexperienced.  You are taught fundamental techniques of karate, some shared applications.  And then you move on to the original kata.

I for one see so much more in kata like Seisan and Naihanchi because of the Pinan kata.  No, I think they are not different.  They are only different if you try to compare them within themselves.  If you look at them as a whole program...they are not different at all.

Chris

DaveB
DaveB's picture

My personal theory on kata groups like the pinan is that the first form is the core of the system. This is slightly different to Iains view of a logical progression of increasing complexity/technical level, in that the first form is IMO the most complex of the set as it contains the whole of the system. The subsequent kata are the detailed expansion on the lessons held in the first kata. 

I bring this up because both this idea and Iain's require the Pinan kata to have been built together, or at least they need a different split than 1&2, 3-5. I can't find any logical reason to create pinan 1&2 together; the first form complex the second simple. P1-3 would have made sense, then a separate source expanding on the 3 kata set follows quite easily, but without a deliberate plan to expand on the lessons of P1, P2 doesn't make sense. 

To my mind at least, a single creator of the set OR a creator of P Shodan followed by a separate creator of the rest of the set, OR, P1 and P2 had no original relationship but were grouped together after P1's invention (maybe nidan is older and inspired shodan). These are the possibilities that make sense to me. 

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Hi Dale,

apologies if I have offended you with my little rant. I find that people often take the common knowledge and don't try to find their own conclusions after studying for themselves.

What I wanted to say is, that there is no single Shotokan Ryu in the world. Like there is no single Shito Ryu. So we always have to ask for the teachers who taught. When I compared my Shotokan Heian to the Pinan of a Shito Ryu adept I couldn't find anything more or less complex in them. I had problems with the different ways of muscle contraction as had the Shito guy with the Heian-Gata. But thats it.

Dale Parker wrote:
I will also concede I am no expert on Shotokan.

Neither am I in any kind of way in regards to Shito Ryu. That are just my observations That Shito dude was a black belt from Venezuela if I remember correctly. Its been a few years since I did the comparison.

I am generalizing now and would say that they are also modernized for competition these days, like the Shotokan Kata.

When you learned them under Mabunis son the way his father taught him, thats great and maybe your Kata are not suffering from the competition changes. But I guess you have participated in Competitions sometimes in your time being a Karateka and I doubt that Mabuni passed them on exactly as Itosu did them and that he did not change them. Same goes for his sons. If he says otherwise you can either believe that or doubt that. I doubt that.

Even the Pinan by Chibana are not unchanged in my eyes. But they may be very close as Jim suggested.

For that Funakoshi book I would recommend John Teramotos translation of Funakoshis 1925 book, Karate Jutsu: The Original Teachings of Master Funakoshi and the translation of Funakoshis 1935 book translated and published by Neptunes Publication, Karate Do Kyohan.

Regards Holger

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

I have to agree with clouviere's analysis.  

I think my approach would be to say Pinan Shodan(Heian Nidan), and Pinan Yondan, definately consist of techniques from Kosokun Dai.  Pinan Nidan(Heian Shodan) has some Kosokun Dai.  

Pinan Sandan and Pinan Godan, while they have parts from Kosokun Dai, are the least similar to Kosokun Dai.

The parts of all these kata that do not fall into Kosokun Dai are drawn from other Itosu lineage kata.

The other thing I failed to mention when I stated Mabuni Kenwa and Kenzo said Itosu created the Pinan kata from an analysis of Kosokun Dai, was the purpose.  His purpose was to make learning of Karate techniques easier.  I think he specifically targeted school children.

And I must agree, in most of my students, having a strong foundation in all 5 Pinan kata, they learn Kosokun Dai fairly easily, as well as most of the other Itosu style kata.

So I would answer Jim's root question, with a "No", but I think 3 and 5 are less like 1, 2, and 4.