BillKephart

This post was originally published as an article in a dedicated KarateForums.com Articles section, which is no longer online. After the section was closed, this article was most to the most appropriate forum in our community. Zen practice has its roots in the dhyana or meditation school of Buddhist thought, which is, itself, a subdivision of the greater Mahayana Buddhism that has its roots with the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna was a noted critic of logic and cognizant of its limits. It was known to him that the logical world view must always limit the path to truth because of inherent weaknesses in logic. In his book on dialectical logic, known as "Prasanga," he showed that all systems of logic are self contradictory. They affirm what they deny. Material causality, which is the basis for logic, is predicated on the assumption of distinction. In other words, some things are different from others. Nagarjuna followed this proposition to its logical conclusions. Suppose A causes B. There are four possibilities. Either A and B are identical, distinct, both identical and distinct, or neither identical nor distinct. Each is problematic. If A and B are identical, one cannot be distinguished from the other. They are the same. One might as well say nothing changed. If A and B are distinct, one cannot see any hints of one in the other. No causal relationship can be established. If A and B are both, then that is a contradiction. It is assumed by logic that an object cannot simultaneously hold opposite properties. Finally, if A and B are neither, then they are nothing at all. If logic is true, then nothing can exist. Then none of these are possible. Everything is impossible because everything is necessarily contradictory. It is impossible to think of one value without understanding its opposite. Dichotomous thinking is how the human mind operates. Opposites have a necessary link. One cannot know the meaning of hot without also knowing the meaning of cold. They can't be separated. Thus, it is the conclusion of Mahayana Buddhism that the third possibility of causality is the correct one. In the quest for truth, logic must be transcended. Zen follows from this principle of the embrace of contradiction and dichotomous thinking. While it is better than the alternatives, it has a problem of its own for truth. The problem is the human mind. Suppose a person sees a tree. To understand the tree, they associate the tree with the concept of the not tree. This goes back to understanding what things are by what they are not. But, the problem goes further. If the tree is distinct from all things that are not trees, then isn't it true that the idea of the tree in the human mind is distinct from the tree itself? This is a terrible problem for humanity. For when a human sees a tree and associates it with their idea of a tree (which is not the same as the tree), then they are limiting their view of the tree. They cannot understand the tree because their idea of the tree blinds them. This is true in other things. Suppose a man believes he loves a woman. He thinks he understands her. But, what he thinks the woman is gets in the way understanding what the woman really is. Does he know his love? Does he even love his love? This is the prison of thought. This is what Zen seeks to escape. The heart of Zen is meditation. The heart of meditation is mindfulness. The heart of mindfulness is no mind. Zen is the art of cultivating a non categorizing mind or no mind. The Zen mind is the mind that sees the thing in itself without imposing other things on it that might cloud the truth. However, Zen mind is also the everyday mind. The Zen mind may categorize but it realizes and accounts for the fact that it is categorizing. This mind is cultivated chiefly by the practice of seated meditation or zazen. But, this is not the only form of meditation. There is walking meditation, running meditation, working meditation and an infinity of others. The core principle of meditation is mindfulness in task. If one maintains mindfulness, they do not think, but react. They do what is necessary. It is on this path that Zen mind and the sight that sees things in themselves may be achieved. Zen mind is a core principle of the Japanese martial arts. Judo, Kendo, Karate-do, and Akido all have one thing in common: they are budo; a way of war or fighting. Zen is a path. Budo is a path. Zen is contradiction. Budo is also a contradiction. It kills for life. Budo is about achieving no mind in movements. Kihon (basics), kata (forms) and kumite (sparring) are all based on this principle. Through repetition of movements with mindfulness a person can even meditate while practicing the martial arts. Victory in combat is reliant on the lack of hesitation. As in the Zen mind, one does not think but reacts. It is through the cultivation of Zen mind that a person may be able to see situations for what they are. It will assist in knowing when to fight and to strike home when the moment of truth comes.

I agree with other people that is is situational. There is a best technique for a situation but no overall best technique.

I have looked around and it does not seem like anybody else practices the style I study. It was founded by a medical doctor from Okinawa named Chitose Tsuyoshi, we call him O-Sensei. http://www.chito-ryu.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chito_Ryu A lot of our upper level people are DNBK certified. I am fortunate to live near the main honbu in Covington Kentucky. It is also very popular in Canada. I was wondering if anybody else was familiar with it (and what your opinions might be) or if there was anybody else who practices it here.

We use both and I like it.

honestly I will probably buy it just for metal gear solid 4, I am a real fan of that series.

maybe I am out of shape but I have gotten pretty out of breath from doing a bunch of kata in a row without stopping.

In my opinion it is better to be the best white belt than the worst black belt. Chito-ryu really depends. I know of one person to achieve shodan in 2 years (he studied in Japan), but my buddy is 2 kyu away and he has been at it for 5-6 years (but I think he took a break of something). Chito-ryu is all I really know about, boxing does not have belts.

twice a week, Monday and Wednesday nights

Honestly if you are not doing kata, kihon, and kumite I think something is wrong. I could not imagine doing karate without all three. Thats why I love Chito-ryu, we do everything.

I have a buddy who has done both and he just told me he definitely thought he got more out of Wing Chun.

Actually on second thought from a practical standpoint I think the good combinations approach is wrongheaded (that is to say in application to self defense). A street fight probably ought to consist of one move that ends it. If a street fight goes on more than a few seconds I think something is wrong.

Also I would say it is not so much fear as it is a sense of the gravity and seriousness of a situation.

Your zen mind is your everyday mind. Understand that there is no goal removed from you to reach in zen, the journey ends up with you at the end.

In actuality I probably could have simplified it. There are really too possibilities afterlife and no afterlife. If we have an afterlife there must be a god responsible for that afterlife and god must be just so our afterlife must be just. And one does not fear justice (a good thing) hence no fear. We have already established no afterlife merits no fear. I find that losing your fear of death and accepting your inevitable fate is necessary to the practice of martial arts. The mind without fear is the mind without weaknesses. If there is nothing you fear nothing can truly conquer you.

Northern Kentucky University Karate Club Style: Chito-ryu Sensei: Dr. Willie Elliot 4th dan

Human evolution is not a mere mechanistic process but a Will to War, a Will to Power, a Will to Overpower! -Nietzsche

As human beings we are to the best of our knowledge the only creatures who are cognizant of our own mortality. Cats, birds, snakes, ants, and mono cellular organisms do not dread their end. It is man alone who caries the knowledge and fear of death. But consider this, if we fear it do we actually know it? It is common to say one only fears that which they do not understand so does it really make sense to in one breath claim to have knowledge of death and to still fear it? It is my opinion that the fear of death is an unnatural thing. It is a recognizable inevitability no different from any other milestone in life and it profits man none to fear it. In fact it is this fear which holds us back from achieving our full potential. So it would be a good idea to try to overcome this fear. To know a thing is to lose fear of a thing. We cannot know death, not with certainty. But we can know the possibilities and if none of those are to be feared then death is not to be feared. Here are the possibilities 1. There is no afterlife, you merely cease to exist as a conscious thing upon death This is not to be feared for there will not be a you to know you are dead. 2. There is an afterlife, no final judgment, everybody goes to the same place This is not to be feared because as everybody goes there it is an inevitable state and if there is an afterlife that means there must be a god responsible for this afterlife. Since god must be just (note god can mean any unifying immaterial principle of the universe, so this is true for any religion) our afterlife must be just. 3. There is an afterlife and final judgment, people go different places based upon their performance in life. This is not to be feared because if humans were created by god then god endowed us with reason and conscience. It would not make sense for a just god to condemn us for following the very reason and conscience he himself endowed us with therefore if you do your best to follow your reason and conscience you have nothing to fear from the judgment of a just god. Those are the possibilities. None are to be feared, death then is not to be feared. So go and live life without fear of your natural end.

ooooo I think I have a good one. Even if you have a gun you do not always, but you always have your body. Also the discipline, challenge, and sense of achievement martial arts gives you is good for you even if you never use it physically.

In my experience the combinations favored by different styles are the ones that feel the most natural and are easy to execute (as in you could reasonably expect to do them under pressure with minimal chance of mistake). In boxing we always practiced the 1-2-3 (jab, cross, short hook with lead hand) In my Karate experience (and this is true of our kata) an offense move (mostly but not always) consists of a defense move followed by one or two offense moves. For example doing an outside block with one arm and a quick punch to the solar plexus with the other.

In my school we do a good deal of kumite practice (and many times what they do is pair lower level students with faster more skilled higher level students). It is good for both. It helps the upper level people practice self control and gets the lower level students used to attacks coming at them fast. I know it is nothing like the real thing when your life might be in danger but to some degree I feel if is absolutely necessary (my life depended on it) I could defend myself. However I have never been in a street fight in my life. I think one of the lessons of martial arts (and Karate in particular) is how to avoid putting yourself in a position where you will have to fight.