Hanashiros Jion and the Evolution of Kata

You raise some interesting areas of discussion with this post, Iain. I have to say, I take issue (in general, not just here) with the references to shorin kata as "older" versions. I've never seen any evidence for this assumption.

Most shorin ryu were founded long after funakoshi had started teaching in japan and nearly all by people younger than him, none that I'm aware of by people older (barring Matsumura seito shorinryu which is apparently an unchanged family system, though it became a named ryu under a much younger man). Hanashiro was the same age as funakoshi, which means they trained at the same time. Why then are Funakoshi's kata called modern? Even if we consider the shotokanized versions, nearly all of the changes are entirely superficial. What makes more sense to me is that the kata are simply different as they come from different masters. Variations across shorin schools are happily accepted as such, but when japanese ryu are spoken of, different suddenly becomes modern.

While I'm sure Iain meant no slight by using the term, such terminology is often the first step on the path of style bashing based on ideas of watered down school boy karate.

Personally I think that Funakoshi's forms differ from those common with Itosu's students (for whom differences are just different and not a dilution) because Funakoshi was actually Azato's student. If you read karatedo Numon, GF refers to Azato as "my teacher" and the greatest karateka in Okinawa. I think he trained with Itosu as a result of Azato's friendship with him and the fact that they hung out together, but I think it was secondary to his learning from Azato. I think this is why GF's kata use kokutsudachi instead of neko dachi as well as the other technical differences.

With regard to salutation's I tend to see them as just that, however I do think that some of what are called salutations are just the openning technique's (such as in kankudai). jion's opening I see as a salutation. It is a common chinese posture of greeting and I wouldn't hit anyone with my feet planted together as in that kata movement.

I can see how the application you described for the double block can get wild and turn into Hanashiro's version, but I think the two movements may be emphasising different things. Hanashiro's movement sends his weight back and turns the angle of his body. To me this implies pulling, likely with the upper (and rear) hand, perhaps to take someone down across the lead leg. The Funakoshi (Azato) kata movement keeps the torso square to the opponent which to me implies close quarter striking with some form of simultaneous trap/clearance (since the lack of body movement allows for faster smaller movements and equal employ of both hands).

You see this body angle difference when you look at shorin seisan. Funakoshi's form has a square body while the shorin shift the angle of the torso to generate corresponding movements. That said I have a preference toward percussive application so that might just be my bias.

Hello all,

When trying to understand the function of Kata moves, I have foud useful to examine various versions of the same Kata, as practiced by different styles, to look for their "common denominator", assuming that the external form will have evolved while keeping the original intent (which means I assume the orginal intent was known by those changing the external form ...). The picture provided here by Iain is very interesting in that it offers me a yet unknown version of this Jion move.

I have knowledge of only a few versions of Jion, which are those of Shotokan, Wado and Shito, and the  version practiced by the okinawaian Kobayashi-Ryu of Choshin Chibana. The latter is said to have studied under Itosu for 15 years untit his master's death, and then to have founded his own Ryu. In his Koshiki no Kata book, R. Habersetzer provides a set of drawings describing the Kobayashi-Ryu Jion : the same move as on the picture is performed in "old style" Ko-Kutsu (an inverted Zen-Kutsu), with simultaneous right age-uke and left gedan-barai. This is rather close to Chomo Hanashiro's picture, but more engaged rearwards, and with a definite turn of the upper body to the left and rear.

I am not very satisfied so far with my applications for this move : I tend to see it as a primary all-functional defense, which would suit the beginning of a Kata. This is just like DaveB describes it : send the weight back, turn the body, and sweep up and down to deflect or open the attack (whether it is medium or close range). Interestingly enough, very few Shotokan Kata begin with a step to the rear : unless I am wrong, these would be only the Jion-Jiin-Jitte family, in addition to Nijushiho.

...And gankaku.

DaveB wrote:

...And gankaku.

Very true. Shame on me for forgetting that one.

I found this video of Jion, presented as Kobayashi-Ryu, featuring what seems to be the Chomo Hanashiro picture move.

Regarding the beginning of the Kata, this other one shows what I referred to (inverted zen kutsu and age-uke) : 

Hanashiro and Chibana were both direct students of Itosu, and Kobayashi-Ryu is indeed an okinawan-based style, but I have no means to assert this could be an "original" form of the move, compared to the current Shotokan/Wado form. Not that it would give it any kind of superior value, but it may help understanding the original intent of the kata creator.

Regarding kata evolution, and the same Jion kata, the first charge with alternating age-uke and tsuki is also very interesting, in that it varies significantly from style to style : gyaku-shuto-age-uke / age-uke / gyaku-tsuki in Shotokan, gyaku age-uke / age-uke / oi tsuki in Wado, age-uke / oi-tsuki in Kobayashi. I suspect (my own guess here) that this sequence is also related to the age-uke and oi-tsuki series in Heian Shodan :  in my opinion, the structure of Heian shodan is very reminiscent of the Jion-Jiin kata group.

Do you know any other variations of these Jion sequences ?

I have looked at many different Ryu kata, inc trying to 'see' Chinese Quan sources and influences and whilst there can be 'progressional elements', I have come to the conclusion that the development of kata was VERY indualistically led.

Granted if you want an example of Itosu karate (modern Shorin Ryu IMO) then the Kobayashi Ryu is a great place to look at, and they do very nice karate IMO.

Keep in mind, in our Ryu as an example 'form' is considered VERY important up to say Sandan level, but then as ones karate becomes more personal and relaxed you can see examples of a guy training and looking rather 'sloppy' (by modern karate standards), in our system everyone does absolutly not train 'the same', it's difficult to get your head around for sure.

I really like Hanashiro Sensei form.

Hi DaveB,

DaveB wrote:

You raise some interesting areas of discussion with this post, Iain. I have to say, I take issue (in general, not just here) with the references to shorin kata as "older" versions. I've never seen any evidence for this assumption.

I intended no offence or slight. I simply meant “older” as in coming from older sources. The photo comes from a book that predates anything showing the Shotokan, Wado, etc versions as practised today. And by “modern” I simply meant as practised in the modern day.

DaveB wrote:

Hanashiro was the same age as Funakoshi, which means they trained at the same time. Why then are Funakoshi's kata called modern?

“Funakoshi’s kata” are not modern; but the ones practised in Shotokan today are. It’s worth remembering that the kata Funakoshi shows in his early works are different from the ones shown in modern Shotokan texts (which have been influenced by those who came after Funakoshi); or even one’s shown by Funakoshi later on in his life. This does not make them inferior though. As Funakoshi himself said:

“Time change, the world changes, and obviously the martial arts must change too. The karate that high school students practise today is not the same karate that was practised even as recently as ten years ago, and it is a long way indeed from the karate I learned as a child in Okinawa.

Inasmuch as there are not now, and never have been, any hard and fast rules regarding the various kata, it is hardly surprising to find that they change not only with the times but also from instructor to instructor”. – Gichin Funakoshi, Karate-Do: My Way of Life.

Therefore we know the Jion of present day Shotokan (and Wado) are not as old as the one Hanashiro shows. However, there will be “older Shotokan” versions that are as old.

DaveB wrote:

While I'm sure Iain meant no slight by using the term, such terminology is often the first step on the path of style bashing based on ideas of watered down school boy karate.

You are right that no slight was intended whatsoever. I don’t believe that “older” means “better” or that “modern” means “worse”. Old is old and good is good.

I feel that modern Shotokan’s kata are totally applicable.The version of Jion that I practise is very close to the Shotokan one. It works just fine and I have no desire to change it.

“School boy karate” can be done with any version of any kata. Regardless of how old or modern a given version is, if it is practised purely for physical art and development, and no thought is given to function, then it is “school boy karate”. If people are using the information in the kata combatively, then all is good in my view. No one style has the monopoly on good kata. It’s not the minor variations in kata that count, but the major issue of how those kata are approached.

DaveB wrote:

Even if we consider the shotokanized versions, nearly all of the changes are entirely superficial.

Absolutely. The changes don’t dilute the core concepts and combative function at all. It’s the same message written in different handwriting if you will.

I feel there is much value in comparing differing versions of kata across the modern styles and through time; not to show which one is “right”, but to see the same thing presented in a different way. This looking at the same thing from different angles gives us a better understanding of it I find.

So while you may see different functions for different versions (from the examples given in your post), I see the same function done in different ways. The relatively minor changes we see in “traditional kata” does not change the message or underlying combative concepts any more than my changing the font of this writing would change what I have written. The message remains the same.

Whether we use an old font or modern font, the message remains the same … and it only becomes “school boy karate” when the font becomes more important than the message.

I hope that helps clarify that I was in no way suggesting Hanashiro’s version was inherently superior to Shotokan, or Wado, or any other version of Jion? If I had given that impression, I hope this clarifies? I was simply saying that it is interesting to compare one of the older recordings of Jion with the ones practised today in order to gain insights into the kata overall; regardless of which version we make use of in personal practise.

All the best,

Iain 

No offence taken Iain, I saw what you meant, but the kind of thing I mentioned is fast becoming a modern dogma in the karate world. One I think should be challenged.

Incidentally I've heard that both GF and CH's (and by extension Itosu's) Jion were modernised at least a little because the age uke wasn't always present. Aparently it was originally a technique for releasing a top-knot grab. I've seen versions of the kata where the rising block is a more circular movement, like a hook punch but aimed over the head, which I assume was the pre-modified technique. This technique was replaced after the Meiji Restoration when top-knots were banned as it was no longer applicable to the time.

Been a long time since I have heard the top knot version .Would you really want to be messing with the hair do of a guy armed with a 3 foot razor.

Imagine an enemy with a sword or baseball bat raising it above his head to bash in your skull .Your right hand grasps his left elbow and pushes it to his right over his head while your left hand pulls his right arm down and in to his left pivot throw on to his back RUN LIKE HELL LOL

VIC

The idea was someone was grabbing ones own top-knot, i.e and escape froma hair grab.

Against the man with the 3ft razor running like hell would be my first option. If I were close enough to jam his elbow and fast enough to do it while the sword was still rising then punch to the face or knee to the knackers would be second. I doubt I would manage any kind of successful throw without being cut and possibly peeing myself.

Whilst I do not know Jion kata this thread does raise a point of 'cultural and historical' relevant Bunkai in the practice of karate.

Things like the defence of ones top knot, the concealment of ones money up the Kimono sleeve, or several other items, the reality of law enforcement of the day and hey the reality of bodyguard/security forces, back in the day, on the island.

This stuff is one of the reasons I love our karate, whilst it's a bit odd in places these things have their place IMO. Much of this stuff was lost over time (inc handformations and many, very pragmatic combat principles and strategies IMO) due to the modernisation of karate by Itosu and Miyagi Sensei, I have yet to meet a Senior Okinawan Karate teacher say different, and I have met a fair few now.

Of course thats just my interest, alongside pragmatic function for self protection. I do understand if others simply arn't interested - to be fair if I haddn't have found my Sensei and the Ryu I belong to then I proberly wouldn't care about such things so much.