Themes in bridge kata?

[Bill Glasheen]

Now you're talking, Rich!

I checked my P.G. O'Neill's Essential Kanji. It's a quick reference with "only" 2000 characters. O'Neill shows 14 different kanji for the sound "dai."

Even the "dai" you are speaking of has shades of meaning. O'Neill's two meanings are

1) grade

2) preference (for ordinal numbers)

Those are two quite different meanings, no?

Anzen daiichi means "safety first" (the second shade of the meanings above). So daini could mean "lesser", as in secondary preference. But dai ni could mean second grade or second level. Very, very different meaning.

Thus Daini Seisan and Sakugawa dai ni could be two quite different meanings for the two characters - even if we believe this is the right one of the 14 "dai" kanji.

Make sense?

"Little" doesn't quite do it. "Lesser" seems like a better meaning.

- Bill

[MikeK]

In Shotokan there is Bassai Dai (greater) and Bassai Sho (lesser). One more version of dai.

[Bill Glasheen]

Yes... This is a different character for the sound "dai"

In this case, "Sho" looks like a stick figure with arms pressed to the sides of the body. "Dai" in turn looks like a stick figure with arms outstretched, as if saying I caught a fish THIS big...

- Bill

[Stryke]

Aaaahhhhh..... Those folks who argue with me about Sanchin nukite thrusts being metaphor, well I've got you here. I have a very nice, plausible explanation of them in the context of the kick, knee thrust, and three shokens just before them. But it's easier shown that spoken. Hint - think barroom brawl.

Hey Bill , please dont think your gonna get away without questions on this one , please explain for the folks that cant jump on a plane and fly a Zillion miles for it , Any chance of a clip ? , I`ll be glad to arrange hosting it .

[Bill Glasheen]

It's actually pretty simple, if you use your imagination. And it reminds me a bit of Mendleson's challenge to look beyond the problem. In order to understand the three nukites, you need to look beyond the three nukites. In order to win the fight, you need constantly to be aware that SSR (survival stress response) is capable of getting you into deep trouble with symptoms such as narrowing of visual field, narrowing of depth of field, and auditory exclusion.

As I see it, once you turn before doing the circle and kick, you are either surrounded, or thinking that you could be surrounded. So...the WAY you need to do the techniques before you do the three sanchin thrusts is predicated on the fact that you know you can't consider just one bad guy in the room. Actually I count as many as five.

There's debate about what the circle and kick are w.r.t. the subsequent knee thrust. I say it's all the same person. Fuzhou Suparinpei has a similar sequence that really confirms this. When you circle and kick, you're essentially doubling the person over. The knee strike (smash the face) and shoken (to back of neck) are then finishing techniques.

This is where it is important. So many people will look to the ground here. No, no, no!!!!!! The person must make an extra special effort to keep tabs on the surroundings while finishing off this bad guy. Three shokens to the back of the neck? Nope... Again, the Fuzhou Suparinpei has a neat twist on this (literally) where one looks like he is doing four shokens to two different places. But if you look at the back, you realize that the elbows are going to a single spot. Indeed while you were bent forward doing the coup de gras, someone just jumped your back. The subsequent two shokens (forwards) instead are elbow thrusts (backwards with the "chambering" arm) to get the person off your back. Maybe more...

The three following nukites could be addressing three more attackers. Or...it could be that our protagonist is now consciously and deliberately scanning the horizon with his limited range of view (because of SSR) to make sure nobody else is going to surprise him. Picture someone in a movie turning in circles with gun pointing forwards, making sure the coast is clear.

So the nukites could be three attacks (of ANY kind) to three more bad guys. Or they could be nothing more than a quick horizon scan. Whatever shows up in your limited field of view, you are ready to deliver.

Make sense?

Again...a very similar sequence in Suparinpei that gets even more fancy seems to validate my point of view here. When you get two forms doing similar things with similar techniques, it makes you realize that this isn't a random sequence. It is a coherent technique cluster with an important message.

- Bill

[Stryke]

Thanks Bill

[Seanchin]

It’s amazing how much the Fuzhou Suparinpei has to offer. It is also interesting how this kata has movements that a bridge kata has but not movements that one of the three main kata has.

For example, the side kicks from Kanshiwa; not in the big three but sure is in the Fuzhou Suparinpei. That is just one of a longer list of techniques. Also interesting how Kanshiwa has an additional feature that the big three do not and neither does the Fuzhou Suparinpei kata. The three front punches or seikens(sp??) from Kanshiwa.

I was told once, perhaps more than one that the three front punches in Kanshiwa teach you how to punch. Was anyone else told this or read it somewhere? I was under the impression that it was Sanchin that taught that (how to punch). Yes I know, we have open hands unlike Goju Ryu and other styles. What I’m saying is that the idea how to punch is etched in Sanchin, its right there for you to see it. The whole extend and turn at the last second (its not even that simple to put, there’s more to it but you get the general idea). It is all there; it’s very basic but yet very powerful. As to why we have seikens; I don’t know. Does anyone know if it was always seikens when the kata was originally created, the kata might have been something else maybe? Shokens perhaps? Just a thought.

The Fuzhou Suparinpei also has other movements which other bridge katas have and some of the main katas have but were already noted by Bill Glasheen. Another interesting fact about the Fuzhou Suparinpei is the similar moves appear to be advanced in this kata. For example your shuto, crane beak strike and wrist blocks/strikes are all in here but at different level. The Fuzhoua Suparinpei kata is a wonderful kata to explore (as are all the other katas as well) but it is not easy to learn at all. If you have the patience to learn it and you are willing to do so, do it and enjoy it (I’m still trying to learn this kata). It makes for discussions on movements from bridge katas and the main katas even more interesting.

Just another thought… Let’s say Kanbun did in fact learn some form of Suparinpei (for pretending sake, let’s say he knew the one Bill Glasheen learned and performs) and elected to teach it; would there be additional bridge katas? We’ll never truly know but it is something to ponder.

[Bill Glasheen]

Hi, Sean!

A few comments...

First, there are no seiken thrusts in the Fuzhou Suparinpei that I learned from Simon Lailey and teach. If you're looking at the tape, you may miss that all those thrusting techniques are shokens. In my mind, that reinforces the idea that this comes from the same neighborhood as the three kata that Kanbun taught, if not "the" suparinpei that Kanbun allegedly saw (source - Uechi Kanei's Kyohon).

But yes, there are many techniques in that form (the sokuto geri, the wrist movements, etc.) that make one wonder what source (direct or indirect) the choreographers of the additional 5 forms used for their non-big-three techniques.

That being said...

The seiken fist (in Kanshiwa) very much is an Okinawa thing. It's similar to me choreographing a kicking form for my own dojo because I lived in Jhoon Rhee land and I wanted my students to understand the techniques that "the competition" used. It's partly a "know thy enemy" thing, and partly a matter of just letting them taste a sampler of other stuff out there to round out the curriculum.

What is also more interesting to me though is the progression from sanchin to seisan to sanseiryu to Fuzhou suparinpei. If we consider that it may have been (or was meant to be) a complete package, then we see a progression to greater and greater "elasticity" of movement from white belt sanchin to functional suparinpei. And please, please note how carefully I stated that. As they say, "all is in sanchin." What this means to me is that you take a form like Fuzhou suparinpei, see what it demands of your body to perform it well, and then go back and see if you can infuse those elements into your sanchin. When I see people like Dana Sheets doing her Nakamatsu-inspired whipping sanchin thrusts, I see that elasticity of movement that my suparinpei demands. I have known people to look at what Dana does and say things like "That's not sanchin!" or even walk away in mid performance after asking Dana to show them how she trains to do her whipping thrust. All I can say is that these folks' minds reflect the white belt rigidity seen in their sanchin performance. Their loss in my book!

Just another thought… Let’s say Kanbun did in fact learn some form of Suparinpei (for pretending sake, let’s say he knew the one Bill Glasheen learned and performs) and elected to teach it; would there be additional bridge katas?

That's a damn good question. And I don't have a firm answer.

The bridge katas' greatest asset is that it jumbles the sequences and shows the practitioner that the new sequences work as well. That shows some of the possibilities with kata grammar. But then a creative instructor can take a form like seisan, pull pieces and parts out, re-shuffle some of these pieces, and then drill the class with them. Kata then becomes less religion/storyline and more reference-book/tool. And more is expected of the instructor.

It's also worth mentioning that Kanbun said it took 2 or 3 decades to master the suparinpei he saw in China (source; Gordi Breyette - either from Toyoma sensei or Uechi Kanei's kyohon). With the suparinpei I practice (which may or may not be "the" suparinpei Kanbun saw), I would concur that it takes time. Some of that could be done up front with cross-training in other systems, or drilling bridge kata. That would then impart some talent and ability on the part of the student that they could bring to suparinpei which might help them assimilate and appreciate it faster.

Or...you could just dump all the bridge kata and go straight from sanseiryu to more time on suparinpei.

We don't really know why Kanbun never taught a fourth kata when he allegedly saw one and associated it with "the system" that he was learning and/or synthesizing. As I've said before, he only studied for 10 years, and HE HIMSELF said suparinpei took as long as 3 decades to learn. Maybe with the time he spent in China, he thought he couldn't do it justice. Or maybe he thought it just wasn't necessary, and was comfortable with the 3 forms he knew and taught.

We'll never know for sure.

- Bill

[Rick Wilson]

I suppose if we are going to talk about Uechi Kanbun Sensei and Suparinpei we might as well throw all the “stories” on the table:

1. Some Uechi sources – The man who founded our style was incapable of learning the Kata.

2. Other Uechi sources – That Uechi Sensei did not have time to learn it.

3. Other Uechi sources – Uechi Sensei looked at it and thought it is just Sanchin and Sanseirui mixed together so why bother.

4. Other Uechi sources -- There was no Suparinpei in the style Uechi Sensei learned.

5. Other styles sources -- Uechi Sensei was not senior enough to be taught it.

So who knows, eh?

[Dana Sheets]

As for the opening of Kanshiwa - that open is all about footwork to me. It gives you three solid ways to move your body off the line. It's like the tenshin exercsies - just more broken down.

For what it's worth - when I visited the the Nago Dojo in April it was pointed out to me to watch how they do the tenshin series. They start facing north, and then their stepping moves them between West and East. NOT NW & NE the way it is done in most other dojo. {The explanation was that everyone used to go West to East - but once too many people filled up the dojo, Kanei Uechi changed it to NW & NE so people wouldn't run into each other}

The opening of Kanshiwa looks an awful lot like the tenshin exercises at the Nago dojo. Good solid methods of building rudimentary tai sabaki (body shifting) movements through footwork.

Dana

[gmattson]

Kanshiwa (Conchabu) was originally performed using Shoken.

[Bill Glasheen]

Rick

Excellent points. Note how carefully I speak, and attempt to reference my comments. We'll never know the truth.

However my feelings about whether or not there actually was a 4th kata that Kanbun at least saw have been strengthened some by Gordi's comments on Toyama sensei's teachings as well as from some preliminary translations of Uechi Kanei's kyohon that I've become privy to. All speak of a Suparinpei. We're beginning to get multiple points of validation about the existence of "something" worth talking about.

Stay tuned.

Dana

Good points. I never thought about Kanshiwa opening being tai sabaki like the hojoundo tenshin exercises, but that makes sense.

Being an aikido shodan, I see hojoundo tenshin as a very loose concept, and not something married to a specific angle change. I'm quite comfortable executing it as a 45, a 90, a 180, and even a 360 degree turn (shift) from the original point. I sometimes work that in class to get students to broaden their understanding of what "it" is.

Even the NFL and NBA execute the concept. Same for bull fighters.

- Bill

[Stryke]

Kanshiwa (Conchabu) was originally performed using Shoken.

thanks George always wondered about this , makes more sense this way

perhaps the sports influence on Uechi , anyone have a rough time frame when this happened ? , I`m assuming the bridging kata themselves are not that old ?

[Glenn]

Two comments:

First, the small group that broke away from Uechi Ryu in 1979 (headed by Seiki Itokazu and Takashi Kinjo) apparently did so at a time when Kanshu was still referred to as Daini Seisan, as the styles that have descended from that separation (Pangainoon Ryu, Konan Ryu, Kobu Ryu) still use the name Daini Seisan for that kata. They have incorporated some minor variations in the kata, for example somewhere along the way they changed the opening moves of Kanshu/Daini-Seisan up to the point of the back fist, but in essence they still practice the same 8 kata as Uechi Ryu.

Second, regarding Kanbun Uechi learning Suparinpei, I think it important to note that according to the canonical history of Uechi Ryu Kanbun left China sooner than expected. I read somewhere (maybe Alan Dollar's book) that after he began teaching in China he made regular visits to Shushiwa to continue his training. It could be that learning Suparinpei was to come out of that further training. Being compelled to leave China, for whatever reason, may have cut short his learning of anything beyond Seisan, but he may have still been at least introduced to the next kata (Suparinpei) by that time. An interesting consideration as well is that Suparinpei may not have necessarily been the final kata in Shushiwa's syllabus. There could have been others.

[Glenn]

Kanshiwa (Conchabu) was originally performed using Shoken.

thanks George always wondered about this , makes more sense this way

perhaps the sports influence on Uechi , anyone have a rough time frame when this happened ? , I`m assuming the bridging kata themselves are not that old ?

1950s, maybe on into the early 1960s, was when the five bridging kata were developed.