The real meaning of karate

[MatsuShinshii]

This one’s pretty simple. Karate really means “empty hand.”

That's so true. LOL!!!!

[MatsuShinshii]

The video and Alans post leads to an interesting question; if this is the meaning of Karate to you, would you face down a skilled Kenjutsu practitioner with a live blade and not utilize all of the tools that the art has to offer in which to save your life?

A more interesting question is if the founders only wanted us to use defensive techniques then why did they include offensive techniques in their art? If fights begin and end with blocks then why include strikes, kicks, and the like into the art to begin with?

I know what the overwhelming response will be and the philosophy behind it but I still wonder what everyone thinks. Should be interesting to hear all points of view.

[JR 137]

The video and Alans post leads to an interesting question; if this is the meaning of Karate to you, would you face down a skilled Kenjutsu practitioner with a live blade and not utilize all of the tools that the art has to offer in which to save your life?

A more interesting question is if the founders only wanted us to use defensive techniques then why did they include offensive techniques in their art? If fights begin and end with blocks then why include strikes, kicks, and the like into the art to begin with?

I know what the overwhelming response will be and the philosophy behind it but I still wonder what everyone thinks. Should be interesting to hear all points of view.

“There is no first strike in karate” doesn’t literally mean “you should never throw the first punch” (or kick). It means don’t start the fight. If you’re certain there’s no way out of an imminent physical altercation, a pre-emotive strike is quite often the best defense. So long as you’re certain there’s no other resolution. For example...

I was walking to my car late one night after work when I worked in the Bronx. A few feet away, a guy walking towards me asked if I had a light. Once I responded I don’t smoke, it became clear that what he was pulling out of his waistband was a gun. As he was pulling it out, I punched him as fast and as hard as I could in the jaw, dropping him to the ground. I soccer-kicked him a few times while he was on the ground to ensure he wouldn’t get up, then I ran faster than I ever ran in my life (and hopefully will ever have to run again).

Did I violate Funakoshi’s precept? Nope. And if I did, it’s a pretty stupid precept.

Side note: After I settled down and thought about what happened, I thought I did the stupidest thing I could’ve done. I thought I should’ve stopped and did want he wanted. My boss at the time put it all into perspective: I didn’t know what he actually wanted, although it was probably money, and how do I know he wouldn’t have shot me after he got whatever it was that he was after? How do I know he didn’t just want to shoot me for no reason? I’m alive and unharmed, so it wasn’t the stupidest decision. It would’ve been the stupidest decision if I knew for certain he was only after the $8 in my wallet and I got shot over it.

[LLLEARNER]

The video and Alans post leads to an interesting question; if this is the meaning of Karate to you, would you face down a skilled Kenjutsu practitioner with a live blade and not utilize all of the tools that the art has to offer in which to save your life?

A more interesting question is if the founders only wanted us to use defensive techniques then why did they include offensive techniques in their art? If fights begin and end with blocks then why include strikes, kicks, and the like into the art to begin with?

I know what the overwhelming response will be and the philosophy behind it but I still wonder what everyone thinks. Should be interesting to hear all points of view.

“There is no first strike in karate” doesn’t literally mean “you should never throw the first punch” (or kick). It means don’t start the fight. If you’re certain there’s no way out of an imminent physical altercation, a pre-emotive strike is quite often the best defense. So long as you’re certain there’s no other resolution. For example...

I was walking to my car late one night after work when I worked in the Bronx. A few feet away, a guy walking towards me asked if I had a light. Once I responded I don’t smoke, it became clear that what he was pulling out of his waistband was a gun. As he was pulling it out, I punched him as fast and as hard as I could in the jaw, dropping him to the ground. I soccer-kicked him a few times while he was on the ground to ensure he wouldn’t get up, then I ran faster than I ever ran in my life (and hopefully will ever have to run again).

Did I violate Funakoshi’s precept? Nope. And if I did, it’s a pretty stupid precept.

Side note: After I settled down and thought about what happened, I thought I did the stupidest thing I could’ve done. I thought I should’ve stopped and did want he wanted. My boss at the time put it all into perspective: I didn’t know what he actually wanted, although it was probably money, and how do I know he wouldn’t have shot me after he got whatever it was that he was after? How do I know he didn’t just want to shoot me for no reason? I’m alive and unharmed, so it wasn’t the stupidest decision. It would’ve been the stupidest decision if I knew for certain he was only after the $8 in my wallet and I got shot over it.

A pre-emptive strike is a beautiful thing. You did right.

[JR 137]

The video and Alans post leads to an interesting question; if this is the meaning of Karate to you, would you face down a skilled Kenjutsu practitioner with a live blade and not utilize all of the tools that the art has to offer in which to save your life?

A more interesting question is if the founders only wanted us to use defensive techniques then why did they include offensive techniques in their art? If fights begin and end with blocks then why include strikes, kicks, and the like into the art to begin with?

I know what the overwhelming response will be and the philosophy behind it but I still wonder what everyone thinks. Should be interesting to hear all points of view.

“There is no first strike in karate” doesn’t literally mean “you should never throw the first punch” (or kick). It means don’t start the fight. If you’re certain there’s no way out of an imminent physical altercation, a pre-emotive strike is quite often the best defense. So long as you’re certain there’s no other resolution. For example...

I was walking to my car late one night after work when I worked in the Bronx. A few feet away, a guy walking towards me asked if I had a light. Once I responded I don’t smoke, it became clear that what he was pulling out of his waistband was a gun. As he was pulling it out, I punched him as fast and as hard as I could in the jaw, dropping him to the ground. I soccer-kicked him a few times while he was on the ground to ensure he wouldn’t get up, then I ran faster than I ever ran in my life (and hopefully will ever have to run again).

Did I violate Funakoshi’s precept? Nope. And if I did, it’s a pretty stupid precept.

Side note: After I settled down and thought about what happened, I thought I did the stupidest thing I could’ve done. I thought I should’ve stopped and did want he wanted. My boss at the time put it all into perspective: I didn’t know what he actually wanted, although it was probably money, and how do I know he wouldn’t have shot me after he got whatever it was that he was after? How do I know he didn’t just want to shoot me for no reason? I’m alive and unharmed, so it wasn’t the stupidest decision. It would’ve been the stupidest decision if I knew for certain he was only after the $8 in my wallet and I got shot over it.

A pre-emptive strike is a beautiful thing. You did right.

Somehow my iPhone changed “pre-emptive” to “pre-emotive” in my post.

[Wado Heretic]

“Context determines the meaning of things.” – Noam Shpancer

“You must decide if karate is for your health or to aid your duty.” - Itosu Ankō

If one is in an occupation where one can expect an increased chance of physical confrontation; then you will practice your karate with the notion it is to be able to protect yourself. Thus, the meaning of your karate will become pragmatic self-defence.

If karate is but a hobby, or a past-time, then it is for your own sense of indulgence and enjoyment. Essentially, for your health. Thus, your karate is only as meaningful as the effort you put into it.

“Karate ni sente nashi.” - Funakoshi Gichin

Often translated as there being no first strike, or first punch, in karate, however, “sente” more literally means aggressive intent. Thus, I treat it as being like another maxim; If one goes looking for a fight, then you are likely to find a fight.

“When you step outside your own gate, you face a million enemies.” – Funakoshi Gichin

To quote another precept of Funakoshi, which implies that one must be prepared to defend one self. I would argue you could sum up Funakoshi’s philosophy in the precepts as; “Do not go looking for fights, but be aware you may need to defend yourself.”

I tend to treat my karate as a personal journey; a challenge. It is very difficult to lie to one self on the dojo floor if you train earnestly. Hence; I only have one banner I hang up, Makoto, which means sincerity. If you train sincerely, I believe you will find the meaning of your karate.

That is something I enjoyed about Kuro Obi; neither of the primary characters paths were portrayed as fundamentally wrong. Misguided at times, both made mistakes on the paths they took, and the final lesson was that if you live by the sword you should expect to die by the sword. However, on the other side of the coin; that if you have the capacity for violence when it is a justifiable, last recourse, and yet you do not take it, then you are merely condemned to passivity, not choosing pacifism.

[shortyafter]

The video and Alans post leads to an interesting question; if this is the meaning of Karate to you, would you face down a skilled Kenjutsu practitioner with a live blade and not utilize all of the tools that the art has to offer in which to save your life?

A more interesting question is if the founders only wanted us to use defensive techniques then why did they include offensive techniques in their art? If fights begin and end with blocks then why include strikes, kicks, and the like into the art to begin with?

I know what the overwhelming response will be and the philosophy behind it but I still wonder what everyone thinks. Should be interesting to hear all points of view.

“There is no first strike in karate” doesn’t literally mean “you should never throw the first punch” (or kick). It means don’t start the fight. If you’re certain there’s no way out of an imminent physical altercation, a pre-emotive strike is quite often the best defense. So long as you’re certain there’s no other resolution. For example...

I was walking to my car late one night after work when I worked in the Bronx. A few feet away, a guy walking towards me asked if I had a light. Once I responded I don’t smoke, it became clear that what he was pulling out of his waistband was a gun. As he was pulling it out, I punched him as fast and as hard as I could in the jaw, dropping him to the ground. I soccer-kicked him a few times while he was on the ground to ensure he wouldn’t get up, then I ran faster than I ever ran in my life (and hopefully will ever have to run again).

Did I violate Funakoshi’s precept? Nope. And if I did, it’s a pretty stupid precept.

Side note: After I settled down and thought about what happened, I thought I did the stupidest thing I could’ve done. I thought I should’ve stopped and did want he wanted. My boss at the time put it all into perspective: I didn’t know what he actually wanted, although it was probably money, and how do I know he wouldn’t have shot me after he got whatever it was that he was after? How do I know he didn’t just want to shoot me for no reason? I’m alive and unharmed, so it wasn’t the stupidest decision. It would’ve been the stupidest decision if I knew for certain he was only after the $8 in my wallet and I got shot over it.

That's an interesting situation. I agree that you did right. I think you would have violated true karate spirit if what you did to that guy was overkill or intentionally left him more screwed up than he had to be. Yeah, you got the soccer kicks in to make sure he was down. That was a good idea. And hell if in your attempt to make sure he was sufficiently incapacitated you broke an arm or something, that's OK too. As long as you weren't looking to intentionally break an arm or kill the man, what you did was OK.

The dude probably walked away with a bruised face and and maybe a missing tooth. And hey I'm not here to judge but he wasn't exactly a saint or anything. Cool story (although I know it wasn't at the time!), thanks for sharing.

[sensei8]

You know, while the maxim of Funakoshi is a solid believe structure, and I don't take it lightly, I must say this...

I'm going to attack you first before you can attack me if I perceive an attack is imminent; STUDY LONG...STUDY WRONG!! I could care less if my actions, thereafter, are wrong or offensive to someone else. Why? My survival is dependent on ME...not someone else...JUST ME!!

If I'm wrong, the courts will decide my punishment, if necessary, but I'll be alive to ponder my actions.

[MatsuShinshii]

I am of the mind set that if your intent and mannerisms tell me that you are going to get violent then I have no issue taking you out before you get that chance.

I get that the quote has other meanings. However walk into many schools today and they are teaching that there is no first strike, literally, and that the fight should start and end with a block. Many take this literally.

To me the art is to protect yourself, your family and those unable to protect themselves.

First, second or whatever. I strike when I feel that it's justified.

[Spartacus Maximus]

There is a quote somewhere(a translation of a book about the man or by himself) from Motobu Chōki where the notorious karate expert explains the “no first strike in karate maxim”.

The anecdote involves Motobu being repeatedly pestered and threatened by a very aggressive and belligerent man at a social gathering. Motobu ignores him and keeps on partying until the man shows up armed with a large blade. At the point Motobu tells the man to step outside and when he does, Motobu kicks him in the back.

This could sound extreme, but the Motobu’s point specifically states that “no first strike” does not mean that one should wait to be struck before responding. It means that the best defense can be a pre-emptive strike when an attacker’s hostile action is clear and imminent.

This is where a good sense of observation and reading body language plays an important part. The problem is that few ordinary folks learn and train to recognize the signs of an imminent attack.