I wanted to expose my below concern more particularly to Iain, but of course everyone feel free to give your advice...
I’m a fervent believer and practitioner of Iain's approach of applied karate and bunkai jutsu. My style is Shotokan but it does not really matter for the question and the somehow “problem” I’m encountering with the progressive approach of the pinan kata series …!
My dilemma comes with the combative principles and techniques that are to be found in the 1st moves (the 1st sequence of 3 moves to be precise) of the first pinan (Heian Nidan in my style).
Indeed, the pinan are progressive katas, going from simple techniques to more elaborate techniques (and principles) as you go through them from the shodan to the godan, with an evolution from simple striking techniques to more elaborate grappling, but …
BUT what about the 1st moves of the Pinan Shodan ? These moves should be the first basis of the basis since they are the 1st one learned to the practitioners, they should represent a straight forward, simple and direct technique. However, all explanations I’ve seen about these, being either an arm lock or an arm control technique followed by (not-so-natural) strikes, are from my point of view quite complex and not achievable for a “beginner”. Controlling the arm of an opponent, in one or the other way, is in itself already a very advanced technique !
Hence my problem: I do not find another simple consistent explanation for that first sequence, and the arm-lock/control view on it -which is logic from a stance and arm movements position- is contradictory to the progressive evolution that we should find in the pinan series.
Can you help me to get out of this dilemma ???
Thanks a lot.