3 posts / 0 new
Last post
mike23
mike23's picture
questions on why kata was created

1) If a kata is just a grouping of selected self-defense techniques used to highlight a specific concept why does that kata have to flow or have a rhythm?  

2) If a kata is a microcosm of a whole system can it possibly hold counters or defenses for every attack and “teach” all techniques of said system? Or does it revert back to just the concepts of a particular master who created it. Example; A kata has a bunkai for a wrist lock but no technique for defending a choke.  But then it may be that the creator wanted to show his use of leverage and made said kata. He has only shown one principle of his style? He would have to create a kata for each concept?

3) If kata were created because of the above view points, How many of those original kata does one need and at what point did the other hundreds of kata created have nothing to do with “hidden techniques of a system, fighting ranges or concepts. Any kata invented by anyone after WW2 would be superficial correct? Any kata created after say 1800? would be just “another kata’? Any kata not created on Okinawa would be a modern kata that merely overlaps an original? If “X” kata teaches close in and turning would that kata just be extra since one of the original ones handed down from China already address that concept? Is this why some do only 6 or 8 kata?

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi Mike,

Great questions! You could write books discussing each point raised, so any replies here are sure to be incomplete due to the wide ranging nature of the questions. There’s also a chance that the thread could be left “hanging” because no one wants to write a thesis in reply, or give an incomplete answer. So to kick things off, I’ll throw in my own incomplete answers as a starter :-)

mike23 wrote:
1)If a kata is just a grouping of selected self-defense techniques used to highlight a specific concept why does that kata have to flow or have a rhythm?

Short answer: It doesn’t.

Kata are made up of numerous and distinct solo representations of combative methods that illustrate the core combative principles upon which a system is based. As time passed these “solo templates” become stylised by the “styles” that have collected them. We therefore have a Shotokan version of the kata, a Shito-Ryu version, a Wado-Ryu version, etc, etc. As part of that stylisation common motions begin to be performed in a common way i.e. each style has a distinct way of performing shuto-uke for example. The stylisation of kata also sees a “way of performance” being set … and this will include a preferred flow and rhythm. These rhythms are the result of an overlaying of style on a pre-existing form.  

Effective combative methods come first … partner drills to communicate and impart these skills are developed … a corresponding solo template (kata) is produced to permit supplementary solo practise and to help ensure the continuity of information through the generations … a given group or individual collects a group of these independently developed solo templates together (STYLISATION BEGINS) … set ways of performing these solo templates are developed; which includes a “style specific” rhythm of performance.

The bottom line is that the modern “rhythm” of a kata comes from later stylisation and not original combative function.

mike23 wrote:
2) If a kata is a microcosm of a whole system can it possibly hold counters or defenses for every attack and “teach” all techniques of said system? Or does it revert back to just the concepts of a particular master who created it. Example; A kata has a bunkai for a wrist lock but no technique for defending a choke.  But then it may be that the creator wanted to show his use of leverage and made said kata. He has only shown one principle of his style? He would have to create a kata for each concept?

I did a podcast on this a few years ago which covers this issue:

How a kata records a style:

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/content/how-kata-records-style

“In this podcast I’d like to explain how an individual kata can record a complete fighting system! There is a common view that individual kata are for specific circumstances, and it is only when all the kata are combined that we have a complete style. I think this is an incorrect and mistaken view; both from a practical and historical perspective. Surely, one kata can’t record a complete fighting system though? Well, in my view it can!

You may be asking how a relatively small number of techniques can ever be considered to be a full system? Well if you are, listen to the podcast and I’ll do my best to explain my thinking to you! Kata are a lot deeper and much wider reaching than many people suppose.

As part of this discussion we will also cover the nature of kata, how kata should be practised in order to realise its full potential, what some of the past masters had to say about kata and its application, and how and why kata were created in the first place.”

mike23 wrote:
3) If kata were created because of the above view points, How many of those original kata does one need and at what point did the other hundreds of kata created have nothing to do with “hidden techniques of a system, fighting ranges or concepts. Any kata invented by anyone after WW2 would be superficial correct? Any kata created after say 1800? would be just “another kata’? Any kata not created on Okinawa would be a modern kata that merely overlaps an original? If “X” kata teaches close in and turning would that kata just be extra since one of the original ones handed down from China already address that concept? Is this why some do only 6 or 8 kata?

I would suggest that the question, “Needed for what?” needs to be asked. Different people will have different answers depending on their objectives.

Needed for civilian self-protection?

I’d have to stick with the time tested answer of just one.

Needed to have a wider understanding of karate / kata generally?

In this case I’d say we are looking at half a dozen or so, such that the common principles and the variety of the ways in which they are expressed can be explored.

Needed to understand the kata that have been collected together into your style of choice?

As many as your style has.

Needed for the enjoyment of exploring kata?

Totally your call.

Needed to make a contribution to the collective understanding of kata?

Many possible variations here! One kata in huge depth? Identifying common concepts across a wide variety of kata? A mix?

Good, deep questions and I look forward to reading the thoughts of others :-)

All the best,

Iain

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Hi Mike,

I just throw in my 2 cents on your questions.

1) Kata isn't just a grouping of selected defense techniques used to highlight specific concepts. It is also a vehicle to teach body mechanics and how to use what muscles in order to achive a certain effect in a certain movement. As Iain I suspect that the flow or rythm we see today in Kata is a modern phenomenon especially made up for astethic reasons and for Kata competitions.

However I feel that it can teach the use of momentum and the difference if no momentum is used with a certain Kata movement.

2) From my point of view the movements in Kata are just that, movements. How those movements are used in a certain situation is up to the person utilizing this movement, depending on further circumstances too. So if you analyse a movement applying it as a throw, you can study the principles of throwing. In another situation you can use that movement as a lock, studying the principles of joint locking. And so on. Once you understand the underlying principles of throwing, locking, punching etc. you can explore other methods of throwing, locking etc. until you can move freely not being restricted by known "techniques". So the goal is to get away from the paradigm of technique to just understanding how the body is moving and to how to use those movements in a martial context.

3) I have to urge people to refrain from the idea of original Kata. There surely was an original version of a Kata compilated by its creator at one point in time, but nowadays there is no such thing as an original Kata left. The old masters never hesitated to change things they have learned in order to fit that into their beliefs and their understanding of the karate world. So of course they changed Kata and taught their version.

When we take a look at the Itosu Passai and the Funakoshi Passai and compare those differences to the Itosu Kushanku and the Funakoshi Kushanku then you should be aware, that the same differences can be seen when comparing the Funakoshi Pinan and the Itosu Pinan via the Mabuni or Chibana versions.

So both of Funakoshis teachers Itosu and Asato learned Kata from Matsumura (e.g. Passai, Kushanku). It is just that Itosu had his way of performing it and Asato had his way of performing it. Both certainly changed things to adapt it to their style. Asato being Funakoshis main teacher taught Passai and Kushanku to Funakoshi. Funakoshi used the way Asato moved and adapted that to the Pinan he learned from Itosu. So Funakoshi changed the Itosu Pinan into a kind of Asato Pinan.

Funakoshi always pointed out that Asato was an adept of Shorin Ryu and Itosu an adept of Shorei Ryu and that it is important to know both ways of moving and therefore he saw the three Naihanchi which he learned from Itosu as the basic training for Shorei Ryu. He changed the Pinan he also learned from Itosu into Asato style Pinan and promoted them as the basic training representing the principles of Shorin Ryu.

The kata that is nowadays known as Matsumura Passai in Chibana Shorin Ryu is to be more correct the Tawada Passai and Tawada representing the Tawada family style and being an expert of the Bo and the Sai changed the Passai he learned from Matsumura according to his understanding of the martial arts. He then taught it to his eldest son who in turn taught that Kata to his younger brother who taught that Kata to his older brothers second son and Chibana. So we have the following constellation:

Matsumura taught Passai to

Asato > Funakoshi

Itosu > Mabuni, Chibana

Tawada > eldest Son > younger Brother > Nephew, Chibana

So what is the original Matsumura Passai?

But I digress.

Do you need Kata for learning how to fight or for self protection? Not at all. But Kata offers a structural way of learning and you don't have to reinvent the wheel everytime. As Iain already pointed out you have to raise the question what your goals are and train accordingly, utilizing Kata or not is up to you. The reason for people to restrict the number of Kata is in my eyes the desire to study deep not superficial. All the old masters wrote that less Kata is better. Even Mabuni did so though his goal was to preserve as many Kata as possible.

Regards Holger