Monday, October 29, 2012

The Sensei

I'm a coach. No... Wait... You already know that. I'm a teacher. THAT'S what I meant to say. Not a teacher at the front of a classroom, but a teacher at the front of a Dojo filled with karateka. More often than not, very tired, sweaty karateka.

I am called "Sensei". Have I earned that title yet? I guess that depends on who you ask. People are calling me Sensei, and if I didn't want to be referred to be that title, I don't feel that it would be right to tell people not to call me that as they mean it out of respect.  I remember reading a post on a forum not that long ago asking "When are you considered a Sensei?", and there were a lot of responses stating that people should not be considered a Sensei until they are at least Sandan, but unfortunately, no one had any really good examples or arguments to back that up except for the typical "My Sensei says..." or "No one has the experience or skills necessary until they have been in Karate / Tae Kwon Do / Ameri-Do-Te for at least 15 years". I'm pretty sure that last one is bullsh*t. Anyway, I equate this argument with the "Kids under 14 shouldn't get a black belt" argument, which has it's own group of nay-sayers.

The term "Sensei" literally translates to "born before", and is generally used to refer to someone who has knowledge and experience in a topic, whether it is a martial art, or accounting, or useless TV trivia. Do a Google Image Search of the term "sensei" and you will find tons of pictures of old Japanese dudes (and non-Japanese dudes) sitting around and being wise, or throwing kicks, or helping others throw a kick. When did these old dudes (and some not-so-old dudes) become a sensei? Did they wait until they received sandan? For many of them, the Dan system wasn't even invented, and the belt was just something to hold your jacket closed. They were called Sensei because they taught their art, and their students and community respected them.

I instruct students on how to perform basic techniques. I am asked a question and I either respond with the answer, or I ask the student to stretch their thinking and discover the answer on their own. I help students prepare for their next belt test. I help students work on their technique. I help students set their own goals and push them to achieve them, as well as hold them accountable when they don't reach them. I do ALL of this, and I love it.

The argument of when someone can be called a Sensei is pointless. Students will go to a person they respect for answers and guidance, whether they are a sandan or a shodan.  Too many people are too concerned with semantics, and they are losing sight of the big picture.

Now, about those 14 year old black belts :)
Posted by Unknown at 9:14 PM 0 comments
Labels: ,

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Seisan

This article was a long time in the making. It started with a bit of research, which led to more and more reading, but I now have a much better understanding of a few things, which will undoubtedly come in handy. If you are interested in the results of my "more and more reading", you can view the on-going work  here.

I was recently told that Seisan is called Seisan because of Seisan Dachi. I'm pretty sure that this is not the case. I'm wondering if the person who said this was just a bit mixed up when they said it. If your sensei says this, just smile and nod.

Seisan is one of my favourite katas of all time!  When I studied Chito-ryu a few years ago (*cough*20*cough*), Seisan was taught at 2nd kyu. Now, Seisan is taught at 4th kyu. It was moved to a lower kyu belt as it puts emphasis on the basic forward stance that is so prevalent throughout Chito-ryu. It is also a great introduction to some more complex techniques, such as sabaki, proper transition from one stance to another, and more emphasis on the concept of ichi gan, ni suku, san tan, shi riki. As students progress through the ranks, they are expected to demonstrate a better understanding of Seisan. I know Shodans who still struggle with this kata because they are too focused on delivering the technique, and not paying enough attention to everything else that needs to occur before the technique. That's why I love this kata. It is easy to learn yet hard to master.

There is some discrepancy as to which kata O Sensei learned first. Some say Seisen, while others say Sanchin. I could quote Wikipedia, but the wiki article references O Sensei's book anyways, so let's just reference that, shall we? O Sensei learned Sanchin as his first kata, from Arikake Seisho sensei, who taught him Seisan as well, but that was after studying Sanchin for seven years.

What's that? You don't own a copy of O Sensei's book? Well here you go. Tell them Terry sent you. No, that won't get you a discount on the book. Just a blank stare or silence on the other end of the phone.

Seisan has two root versions in modern Karatedo: Naha-te and Shuri-te. The two versions are obviously derived from the same kata, as they have a large amount of similar patterns.

Naha (Practiced in Goju-ryu & Shito-ryu)


Shuri (Practiced in Issin-ryu, Chito-ryu and Shurin-ryu based styles, and is the inspiration for Shotokan Hangetsu)


SO, why the similarities and differences?  The two versions have very different paths through the Karate history, but the similarities hint at a common ancestor.  Let's work our way back.

Arikake Seisho was the teacher of Chitose Tsuyoshi, Funokoshi Gichin and Higaonna Kanryo (among others).



You can see the obvious similarities to the Shuri line of Seisan, but that signature ending is the same as the Naha version.

What about the Matsumura version?


That has a LOT of similarities to the version we practice in Chito-ryu, so we can see where O Sensei adapted his version of Seisan from.  There are similarities to the Arikake Seisan, but Arikake and Matsumura do not share any similar teachers, although both were considered Tote Masters (The 2nd and the 5th to be exact).

So where do the two versions originate from? I think it's safe to say that the ancestor of Okinawan Seisan is in White Crane Gung-fu somewhere. It is even theorized that Seisan originated from a style of White Crane called Yong Chun Bai He Quan (Yong Chun White Crane Boxing). I see no form from this style that looks obviously similar (not to say that I did an exhaustive search), but I did find a form called Shr San (Thirteen Treasures or Thirteen Defences).


The basic flow is there; three steps up, three steps back, some stuff happens and then it's over. But look at the "stuff happens" part at around 0:22, with the swooping blocks as the performer is moving backwards. Look familiar?  Look at the very end of the kata at 0:43. Is that a two-handed grasping block and a pull? Interesting. If you take this form and add a few turns, you have the basics of Seisan.

So if this form is where Okinawan Seisan originated from, how did it get to Matsumura? We know that Arikake Seisho learned Bai He Quan from Ryu Ryu Ko, and I found reference to the fact that Matsumura Sokon had learned Bai He Quan, but I'm not exactly sure where or when. Was it when he studied under Ason and / or Iwah in Fuzhou? Or maybe it was when he learned Chinto?

I have been completely immersed in searching for the roots of this kata for quite some time, and I have absolutely enjoyed the path this has taken me down. I can't wait to discover even more about this kata but in the mean time, I'll be learning the versions that I have outlined above, and looking deeper into the meaning and purposes of the steps. The one thing I can say for sure is that the research I have done for this article has helped bring me even further towards becoming a true Karate Nerd (TM).


Some resources:

Posted by Unknown at 12:54 PM 1 comments
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)