37 posts / 0 new
Last post
OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture
Why is the Do suffix still used by practical minded karate practioners?

This is something I really don't understand. To my understanding from reading Karate-do Kyohan, and various books on Zen, Do or Dao has religious conatations. The Do marking the distinctions between inner development (Do) and practical technique (jutsu).

To me, it's like an atheist carrying around a bottle of holy water.

Any thoughts?

Leigh Simms
Leigh Simms's picture

Whilst I am in no means a Japanese scholar the word “do” itself translates to “path, way, method, channel etc..”. Over the years it has been given various metaphysical and religions meanings that do not necessarily need to be included in the interpretation one uses.

Karate-do can simply mean the “way/method of the Chinese or empty hand”. Just by using the term “do” it in no mean needs to have any religious or self-development connotations. Therefore I see no issue with anyone teaching karate-do as a practical fighting method without any emphasis inner development .

Secondly, I also think that we can have personal development without religious connotations, Religions do not have a monopoly of self-development and personal growth.  I personally use the term “do” in my club and training on purpose to reflect a “pathway of self-development”. The chances of me using any fighting skills in real life is slim to none due to the fairly safe life I live. Whereas the self-development and personal growth I believe my karate teaches and develops, is something I can use on a day-to-day basis to improve my life. In my view, It is the practical training over many years, that when guided with certain self-development principles, will create well rounded and positive members of society. 

Andrzej J
Andrzej J's picture

OnlySeisan, I think you're confusing the basic word "do" or "dou" (meaning "road", "way" or "path" - including a moral path - in Japanese) with one specific use of the same kanji in the name of the Chinese philosohpy/religion of "Taoism"/"Daoism". The Japanese word for Daoism is pronounced "Doukyou" - "the doctrine of the way". I believe the use of "do" in "karate do" is separate from that. (The same kanji appears, for example, in the words "doro"/"road", "dogu"/"tool" and "dotoku"/"morality". It's pretty common and most of its uses have nothing to do with religion.)

I don't really see why acknowledging that karate is a practical fighting art should rule out the idea that you can also dedicate yourself to it as a way of life (which is what I've always understood by "karate do"). If you're a fighter and a thinker, then there are ethical and philosohpical questions which you have to address if you're going to be able to act decisively and with a clear head in a combat situation. To my way of thinking, there's nothing religious about that, unless you choose to make it so (and many warriors of the past have used religion to bolster their morale in combat - that's a personal choice).

I know there's been some discussion here recently about how karate did not arise from Buddhism or Confucianism, but I personally believe that - for some people at least - Zen-style meditation can help develop focus and level-headedness which are extremely useful in any crisis situation, including combat. It helps you tackle fear and anger, which are emotions that can get you into a lot of trouble. And what's impractical about that?

Marc
Marc's picture

Hi, this question has the potential to provoke a huge discussion. :)

OnlySeisan wrote:
Why is the Do suffix still used by practical minded karate practioners?

Well, first I think, we should establish whether this is actually the case. Can you name some who do use it?

OnlySeisan wrote:
To my understanding from reading Karate-do Kyohan, and various books on Zen, Do or Dao has religious conatations.

It certainly can have that connotation.

According to the wonderful tangorin.com japanese dictionary, 道 "do" means "road-way; street; district; journey; course; moral; teachings". Without any prefixes it can mean "taoism" oder "Buddhist teachings" in particular. But with a prefix it seems to lose that religious aspect and attaches its meaning to the context of its prefix. Like in 武士道 "bushido", which translates as "samurai code of chivalry". That chivalry might or might not be influenced by Zen ideas, but it doesn't seem to be defined by it.

Anko Itosu wrote "Karate is not a thing which originates from confucianism or the Buddha way."

OnlySeisan wrote:
The Do marking the distinctions between inner development (Do) and practical technique (jutsu).

For me the distinction or connection between personal and technical development is described best in Jigoro Kano's, "Mind Over Muscle: Writings from the Founder of Judo", ISBN 978-1568364971. Karate-Do has been inspired by Kano's Ju-Do. Funakoshi used several of Kano's ideas when he introduced Karate to Japan mainland, partly because it was required by the state or the martial arts associations, if he wanted Karate to be recognised as a martial art, and partly because it resonated with his understanding of Karate, I suppose.

From the chapter on engagement matches (kumite) and his description of self defense in Kyohan, I understand that Funakoshi was in fact a practical minded karate practitioner.

OnlySeisan wrote:
To me, it's like an atheist carrying around a bottle of holy water.

If we assume for a moment, that "Do" is meant to be religious, then I would say that it is like choir singing and christianity. Singing in a choir is a Jutsu, a skill. Christianity is a religious belief system, a Do. You can sing in a secular choir. You can also be a christian without singing in a choir. Those two things don't have to be mutually exclusive though, because they do not contradict each other. And many people do even combine the two by singing in a church choir. One can make use of the other, but they can also be two separate things.

Personally I don't use the expression "Karate-Do" very often. But when I do, I usually use it to mean a lifestyle or value system that is inspired by

a) the training of karate, which requires commitment, carefulness, focus, discipline, imagination, creativity, humour at times, humility and much more,

b) the knowledge that violence is to be avoided, because it is always painful for everbody involved.

Five of Funakoshi's twenty precepts come to my mind when I think of Karate as a Way of life:

1) Do not forget that Karate-Do begins and ends with Rei.

3) Karate is a helper of justice.

7) Calamity springs from carelessness.

12) Do not think of winning. Rather think of not losing.

20) Always work on thinking and being creative.

To me this is not in itself religous. But it probably resonates with many religious systems.

Take care

Marc

Leigh Simms
Leigh Simms's picture

Hi Marc!

Great post and I really liked your example of the church choir! 

One interesting point is that you said:

Marc wrote:
According to the wonderful tangorin.com japanese dictionary, 道 "do" means "road-way; street; district; journey; course; moral; teachings". Without any prefixes it can mean "taoism" oder "Buddhist teachings" in particular. But with a prefix it seems to lose that religious aspect and attaches its meaning to the contect of its prefix. Like in 武士道 "bushido", which translates as "samurai code of chivalry". That chivalry might or might not be influenced by Zen ideas, but it doesn't seem to be defined by it.

Now, I am not wishing to claim to know more than an online dictionary, but having a Chinese partner and a Japanese friend, I have presented them with the Kanji for "Do" and asked them what it means. Both told me that it means way, method, street and this on its own it has no religious meaning. In fact they both independently told me that it is only when used in addition to specific suffixes that it means Taoism or "Teachings of the Way". Obviously this is antedotal and biased by them both learning their language in its modern forms, but maybe interesting nonetheless.

Marc
Marc's picture

Leigh Simms wrote:

having a Chinese partner and a Japanese friend, I have presented them with the Kanji for "Do" and asked them what it means. Both told me that it means way, method, street and this on its own it has no religious meaning. In fact they both independently told me that it is only when used in addition to specific suffixes that it means Taoism or "Teachings of the Way". Obviously this is antedotal and biased by them both learning their language in its modern forms, but maybe interesting nonetheless.

Quite interesting, and it makes the observation even stronger that the meaning of "Do" depends on its context.

Maybe it's a bit like the word "testament", for example. It means "declared will" or "statement", and this on its own has no religious meaning. But if your cultural context is christianity it means a part of the bible (usually with the prefix "old" or "new"). If you are a solicitor, it means "last will".

What I want to say is this: If you are into Zen and talk to other Zen guys, then "Do" is probably understood as The Zen Way without prefix or suffix because the context is set by their common cultural background. This seems to be common enough for the dictionary to include this meaning as a special case for the Kanji "Do" which basically just means "road, path, journey" for everybody else.

Take care

Marc

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

Why then is there a distinction? Jutsu was used and then it was switched to Do. If you are all saying that they are really synonyms than why the distinction?

Leigh Simms
Leigh Simms's picture

I am fairly certain that Funakoshi added the "Do" aspect either because he saw the Zen-like practices as a valuable addition to karate or because he had to to get Karate into the Japanese school system. From there karate, as we know, took a drastic change in its teachings and became something very different than its original form. "Do" tends to reflect this kind of karate training.

Those that wish to practice Karate in a more realistic (and original) way, tend to call what they do Jutsu to indicate practical fighting methods Justu as far as I am aware means "the Art or Science of...". 

The distinction occurs I believe when practioners wish to make a clear distinction on what they focus their training on. However, I do not think that they need to be mutually exclusive and as I mentioned above to your original question: - 

Practical Karate-ka can use the term "do" in its literal sense without any spiritual meaning or personal development.

They can also use the term to in note the "personal development" aspect of Karate (and as I explained above, I see no reason why both the practical fighting and personal development cannot go side by side).

Andrzej J
Andrzej J's picture

I think there's quite a clear distinction between "jutsu" and "do" ("technique"/"method" and "way"/"path") - one is a subset of the other. It's possible to learn "justu" without following "do", but it is not possible to truly follow "do" without learning "jutsu". Because "jutsu" only teaches how to fight, whereas "do" covers how, when, why and whether to fight, as well as how to apply the lessons of your training to other aspects of your life.

In addition to what Leigh wrote, there may also have been a marketing element to Funakoshi's decision to adopt "karate do". Because he was trying to get the art accepted in schools, and he saw how Jigoro Kano had already successfully reinvented jujutsu - which was a dying art in the late 19th century - as judo.

I agree with Leigh that the terms are not mutually exclusive - "do" is "jutsu" applied more broadly, as a way of life. And that doesn't necessarily imply anything religious.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Marc wrote:
Well, first I think, we should establish whether this is actually the case. Can you name some who do use it?

Me :-)

Leigh Simms wrote:
I am fairly certain that Funakoshi added the "Do" aspect either because he saw the Zen-like practices as a valuable addition to karate or because he had to get Karate into the Japanese school system.

I think Funakoshi added the suffix because that’s what Judo and Kendo had done and they were enjoying great popularity.  He wanted karate to be as popular. Basically – along with the gis, belts, etc – this was part of aping Judo in order to seek popularity.

As has been discussed already, the comparison with religion is a false one. I also think the modern dichotomy between “jutsu” and “do” is also false.

In October 1936 the good and the great of Okinawan Karate – Chomo Hanashiro, Chotoku Kyan, Choki Motobu, Chojun Miyagi, Juhatsu Kyoda, Choshin Chibana, Shinpan Shiroma, Chotei Oroku, Genwa Nakasone – met in Naha to discuss how karate was developing in mainland Japan and what name should be used for the art (http://seinenkai.com/articles/sanzinsoo/1936.html)

While there was much discussion about whether “kara” should be written as “Chinese” (唐) or “empty” (空), this was the totality of the discussion on the addition of “do”.

Shimabukuro: Mr. Nakasone, I hear nowadays people call "Karate-Do" for karate. Does this mean people added the word "Do" to the name "Karate" for emphasizing the importance of spiritual training like Judo and Kendo?

Nakasone: They use the word "Karate-Do" in the meaning of cultivation of the mind.”

That’s it! No huge discussion about what that meant for karate and whether “do” or “jutsu” was the better label. They all just effectively went, “OK, mind training, fair enough”.

As is very clear, there was no big split or controversy at the adoption of “do”. The connotations we sometimes attach to the label were not present at the time it was adopted. Prior to the addition of the do suffix, karate still had the notion of mind training and development of character. It was nothing new. Just a new fashionable way of expressing that fact.

Here is an extract from a very old article of mine on this topic:

“In recent times, the term 'Karate-Do' has become associated with ineffective karate that makes little or no attempt to utilise the highly effective methods recorded within the karate katas. In fact, practitioners of Karate-Do are now often belittled as deluded individuals practising an ineffective children's art. On the other side of the argument, those who tag themselves as practitioners of Karate-Jutsu are often viewed as dangerous psychotics who revel in violence. I find this trend most worrying, as I believe that both views are extremely limited and damaging to karate as a whole. It is my view that true karate should be both 'Jutsu' and 'Do'. I also believe that the two approaches are in no way mutually exclusive and do in fact depend upon each other!”

This is what Hironori Otsuka (founder of Wado-Ryu) had to say on the topic (my highlights):

“In the past, kenjutsu, jujutsu, archery etc. were called justu (“technique”) during the Meiji era, the late Jigoro Kano began to call jujutsu “judo” and kenjutsu “kendo” and so on; incorporating “way” into the name instead of “technique”.

… How then is Do (way) and Jutsu (technique) different? Looking at the characters for both, they intend some kind of logic.

Do and Jutsu intend the same objective. There is no difference in using either term. During the Meiji era, it may seem to have sounded more prideful or “established” to use Do rather than Justu. This may be so because Do seems to emphasise the mental aspect more than just the technique itself …

… To take the view that physical skill is inferior to the mind in importance would be utterly pointless and futile. In order to address both skill and the mind, it should not matter whether Do or Jutsu is used. If Do sounds more correct, then that’s fine; however, no bias should be placed against “Jutsu”.

I totally agree. A good approach to martial arts will seek to train both mind and body; not just for combative effectiveness, but also to enhance everyday life. You can use either term because ultimately, “Do and Jutsu intend the same objective. There is no difference in using either term.”

I get that some now view “Do” as a dirty word and synonyms with ineffective martial arts. I don’t take that view though. And neither did Kano who was the leading light in the Do movement.

Kano said that there were three levels to Judo (my paraphrasing):

Lower level judo: Judo as an effective form of fighting (the “jutsu” side of things).

Middle level judo: developing oneself mentally and physically through the austere training found in the lower level.

Upper level judo: utilising the improvements in mind and body gained in the middle level to serve others and to contribute in a positive way to community and society.

A similar sentiment was echoed by Shigeru Kimura when he was asked if his karate was Jutsu or Do. Kimura simply replied, “Jutsu becomes Do”.

Gichin Funakoshi echoes a similar idea in Karate-Do Nyumon:

"One whose spirit and mental strength have been strengthened by sparring with a never-say-die attitude should find no challenge too great to handle. One who has undergone long years of physical pain and mental agony to learn one punch, one kick, should be able to face any task, no matter how difficult, and carry it through to the end. A person like this can truly be said to have learned karate."

Even more recently we have the following from Henri Plee (a pioneer of karate in Europe) in his book 'Karate: Beginner to Black Belt':

"One must not lose sight of the fact that Karate is "all-in" fighting. Everything is allowed … This is why Karate is based on blows delivered with the hand, the foot, the head or the knee. Equally permissible are strangulations, throwing techniques and locks. This is one of the fascinating things about Karate; this sensation of mastery over effective techniques brings an inner peace and calm…"

As we can see, there was never the definitive split that some assume today. Practical training and mental training went hand in hand. We can also see that “Do” was simply a suffix used, partly as marketing, and partly to emphasise the already present mind training aspect.

It was not inferring some great shift away from function and toward any kind of “spiritualty in training” (indeed Shimabukuro asked that question and Nakasone clarified it was “mind training” that Do represented). There is also nothing in Kano’s writing to infer his “do concept” had any religious foundation.

We discussed this a lot recently in this thread:

http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/zen-and-martial-arts-why-it-bs

I get that what was labelled as “do” came to be a poor photocopy of the efficient and practical system that came before. But I think it would be wrong to retrospectively redefine what the term “do” inferred at the time it came into widespread use.

There was no big uproar from the karateka at the time. All it took was a three sentence discussion for everyone to be OK with the Do suffix. Even heavily pragmatically minded karateka such as Motobu – who was at the meeting – made no objection. Here are two quotes from Motobu that would seem to be relevant:

“Nothing is more harmful to the world than a martial art that is not effective in actual self-defence.”

“I assume that you already understand that in karate one's primary goal must be the training of mind and body”

Just like many of his peers, there is on either/or choice being made between “justu” (effectiveness) and “do” (personal development).

I’m with Motobu, Otuska, Funakoshi, Plee, etc and I want my karate to be rounded in this way. I want what I do to be effective and to have value beyond combat.

It’s for this reason that I personally label what I do as “Jissen Karate-Do”. The “jissen” (“actual combat”) captures the reality-based and combat focussed side of what I do; and the “do” suffix captures that we see value in what we do beyond physical conflict.

In quick summation to the original question:

OnlySeisan wrote:
This is something I really don't understand. To my understanding from reading Karate-do Kyohan, and various books on Zen, Do or Dao has religious conatations. The Do marking the distinctions between inner development (Do) and practical technique (jutsu).

To me, it's like an atheist carrying around a bottle of holy water.

The Zen myth is total BS and has no historical basis. Please see this thread: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/zen-and-martial-arts-why-it-bs

The idea that there is a marked distinction between “do” and “jutsu” is a modern one. Any worthwhile approach to martial arts will be both life-preserving and life-enhancing. See what Kano, Otuska, Motobu, etc wrote on this topic.

I do use “do” because it is an accurate label and I don’t see any contradiction between using the term and combative functionality.

These days, I can get why some would prefer to avoid the (historically inaccurate) modern connotations of “do” and would prefer to use “justu” instead. I find the jissen prefix better separates what I do from ineffective modern karate without the need to deny that training has benefits beyond combative skill.

One simple solution employed by others is to avoid either suffix and simply call what they do “karate”.

Whatever the label employed, I think “justu” and “do” are inextricably linked and good karate will include both aspects.

For a more detailed look at my thinking on this topic, this article would be worth a read:

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/jutsu-vs-do

This similar thread also captures many relevant topics:

http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/can-do-and-jutsu-co-exist

All the best,

Iain

Kamil
Kamil's picture

My humble opinion:  the distinction between dou and jutsu is a necessary one, and one that should be addressed continually and explicitly.  As Iain says: karate must have both and they are totally compatible with each other.  But I feel we who insist on making karate relevant and practical should make the distinction clear so that we understand how they reinforce one another.  Obviously I can only speak to my experience - but it seems quite clear to me that there is the physical endevour that we engage in when we go to the dojo - tsuki, geri, gatame, nage and the like - this is the technical and practical repertoire of karate.  Learning these things is not the dou.  Learning to punch and kick and block will not magically bring the introspection to ask when to punch and kick and block.  That is to say, learning how to fight does not necessitate some inner dialogue on what is worth fighting for. Some people make this transition and see the need for these questions.  But many more come to the dojo, try hard, give the effort and sweat and never ask themselves these things.  They never see how pointless it is to practice 1,000 punches on a makiwara without asking what conditions would make it necessary to punch someone in the first place.

To my understanding this underlying consideration and introspection that ties together what your body does (jutsu - the 'how' and 'what' of the physicality of karate) to what your mind must be able to do (the 'why' and 'when' of the mentality of karate): this is the Dou.  This is what carries karate out of the dojo and into our lives.  Karate is meant to be both of these things.  The problem comes when we casually say that we practice karate-dou and learn to punch and kick and then say we are becoming better people.  A professional boxer has a high level of jutsu - combative skill.  But how many boxers are role models or deep thinkers?  As So Doshin puts it; teaching someone to punch and kick without consideration of why and when punching and kicking is necessary doesn't make the world a better place - and it may make it worse.

I have been for some time writing two volumes on these particular distinctions.  If anyone would be interested in excerpts I would be honoured to get feedback.

Gavin J Poffley
Gavin J Poffley's picture

Historically it is important to remember that karate has used neither and both suffixes over it's history. In the earliest days on Okinawa it was simply just "di" (The Okinawan pronunciation of the "te" from karate) and then later "toudi" (again, the Okinawan reading of the "Chinese hand" characters for karate). I think Funakoshi was the first to introduce a suffix at all in his book "Rentan Goshin Toudi Jutsu" and then quite soon afterwards everyone switched to using "do" through mutual agreement as outlined above. Interestingly enough, Oyama deliberately removed the suffix for his Kyokushinkai organisation. 

So basically, this distinction only really matters after karate travelled to mainland Japan and got swept up in the nationalist ethos of the Meiji and Taisho periods.

To the majority of Japanese the dichotomy here is between old and new (or gendai budo and koryu bujutsu if you prefer) rather than practical or esoteric, and the use of "do" simply indicates that karate is a martial system that was codified after 1868. It is fair to say that under this paradigm you should call the karate before that "karate jutsu", but historically that term was never used (as it was purely a local Okinawan tradition and unrelated to the mainstream Japanese martial nomenclature) and is clearly revisionist. 

I personally have never come across anyone in Japan today who calls what they do "karate jutsu". I'm not saying they don't exist but to most it would sound as though they are deliberately pushing the fact that their karate is old rather than that it is practical.

So for the modern non-Japanese context ? Just treat it as a statement of intent and go with whatever you prefer!

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Thanks for the post Gavin. Always interesting to gain the perspective that you bring.

Gavin J Poffley wrote:
So for the modern non-Japanese context ? Just treat it as a statement of intent and go with whatever you prefer!

As Shakespeare wrote, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" :-)

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

Thank you Mr. Poffley for a very well reasoned answer.

I guess I obsess over language, because it's been my proffesional area of study for the last 12 years though I don't write for a living anymore. I understand the etymology of the two words, but I'm not really interested in history, but modern definitions.

To quote another British author.

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” George Orwell

The meaning of any word lies with the reciver. You say something and I interpret it. I give the noises that come out of your mouth meaning. Because of this we need to be very careful of terminology, definition, context and the purpose of what we say.

Do vs. Jutsu or even kara vs. Tou seems to be politically driven, so why use any of this terminology?

It may seem like I'm splitting hairs, but language is very important. If we use language however we want to use it than it loses all meaning. It's why politicians have speach writers.

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

We should probably just kill this thread.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
I understand the etymology of the two words, but I'm not really interested in history, but modern definitions … If we use language however we want to use it than it loses all meaning.

We can’t deny that the words have differing meanings to differing groups though; and that the meaning of words can change over time.

As Gavin mentioned, in Japan the suffix “jutsu” would not carry the same connotations it would in the west. The masters quoted in my post above also don’t use the terminology in the same way you do; but nevertheless many in the west today would.

The “modern definitions” you allude to are just one set of modern definitions. Not everyone thinks “do” = “spiritual and ineffective”. I don’t use the term that way. Neither do many others.

We can’t impose our own understandings or preferences as being the definitive definitions. We have to understand the meaning of the terminology in the context in which it was used. If we don’t do that, we will never be able to understand the point of view of others; and, agree or disagree, that limits learning possibilities.

None of us “own” the terminology and hence we can’t demand everyone uses it as we do. The bottom-line is that we don’t win or lose fights though etymology or consensus in definitions. We do what we do, and it is what it is.

The label we attach is ultimately an irrelevance. So long as given individuals and groups are happy with the terminology used – based on their understanding such that it forms an “in house mission statement” – then we don’t need to enforce conformity.

It’s also worth remembering that even the term “karate” lacks a universally agreed definition. What I do would not be “karate” to some; just as what they do would not be “karate” to me. It’s a shared label for many diverse activities. It’s therefore only to be expected that the various suffixes and prefixes will operate in the same fashion.

OnlySeisan wrote:
We should probably just kill this thread.

I don’t see why. It’s been a good thread that’s brought out some very interesting topics. While always pretty active overall, the forum nevertheless has days with dozens of posts, and days with only one or two. It’s not unusual, especially over the weekend where people are away from the computer, for threads to be idle for a day or two before more is added. As has happened here :-)

All the best,

Iain

Marc
Marc's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:

Why is the Do suffix still used by practical minded karate practioners?

Marc wrote:

Well, first I think, we should establish whether this is actually the case. Can you name some who do use it?

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Me :-)

Hey, thanks Iain. Now, we've established that. :)

And sorry, OnlySeisan. I was just being pedantic there. It's kind of a trained reflex: Whenever somebody presents an argument based on an implied "well known fact", I have a compulsory urge to ask for the data behind it. It's especially fun with statistics and what journalists or politicians make of them. More or Less from BBC Radio 4 is a great show for all like-minded people, by the way. The thread "Karate shortens your lifespan" on this forum is also interesting in this respect.

As I said above, I use the term "Karate-Do" as well from time to time, just not regularly. I usually just say "Karate".

Take care everybody

Marc

Ian H
Ian H's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Nakasone: They use the word "Karate-Do" in the meaning of cultivation of the mind.”

...

Kano said that there were three levels to Judo (my paraphrasing):

Lower level judo: Judo as an effective form of fighting (the “jutsu” side of things).

Middle level judo: developing oneself mentally and physically through the austere training found in the lower level.

Upper level judo: utilising the improvements in mind and body gained in the middle level to serve others and to contribute in a positive way to community and society.

My personal take on this is that the middle and upper levels of Ju-do and Karate-do can only really stand on the lower level, like stories of a building, built one atop the other.  One cannot succeed at practicing "karate-do" without actually practicing ... karate!  

So "do" would be a broader concept than "jutsu", encompasing the moral self-development aspect of realising that "with great power comes great responsibility".  But it also must encompass the actual "art at the heart of the art" for it not to be hollow and meaningless.

Let's say I wanted to learn to be a racing car driver ... I could learn how to drive really fast and win races, and not think one whit about my own personal character and courtesy to other drivers: jutsu.  Toss in the character and courtesy aspect: racecar-do.  But if I buy a racecar, never learn to drive it, park it in my garage and spend two hours every Tuesday and Thursday evening sitting in the racecar in my garage contemplating the mysteries of the universe as they apply to racecar drivers ... well ... that doesn't seem like much of anything.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Marc wrote:
Whenever somebody presents an argument based on an implied "well known fact", I have a compulsory urge to ask for the data behind it.

That’s a very good habit to have!

Marc wrote:
More or Less from BBC Radio 4 is a great show for all like-minded people, by the way.

Great isn’t it! And available as a podcast via iTunes too for those not based in the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nrss1/episodes/downloads

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/more-or-less-behind-the-stats/id267300884

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Ian H wrote:
My personal take on this is that the middle and upper levels of Ju-do and Karate-do can only really stand on the lower level, like stories of a building, built one atop the other.  One cannot succeed at practicing "karate-do" without actually practicing ... karate!

Absolutely! That’s my personal take on it too.

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/jutsu-vs-do

“By engaging in arduous, austere and realistic training, our mental and physical weaknesses are forced to the surface, such that they can be confronted. If you can overcome the fear generated by sparring, then you should be able to override the exact same emotion when it prevents you from pursuing your dreams. If you have the discipline to endure the demands of training, then you should also be able to endure difficult times in your life outside the dojo. If you are able to keep control of your temper during sparring, then you should also be able to control any potential outbursts that could harm your relationships with others. If you can face the most feared opponent in the dojo, then you should also be able to stand up for both yourself and others in the event of an injustice. However, if the training is not stressful enough, it is unlikely to stimulate any developments in character, simply because your character is unlikely to be tested to a sufficient degree.

Realistic training (Jutsu) will force all your weaknesses to the surface. A good Sensei will then help you to overcome those weaknesses, such that you not only become a better fighter, but also a better human being (Do). 'Jutsu' is the foundation upon which 'Do' is built! To simply concern yourself with fighting, and nothing else, will prevent you from progressing to the higher levels of training. To ignore 'jutsu' and attempt to progress to 'Do' is a futile endeavour as you have no foundation upon which to build. How can you progress beyond the combative aspects of training when you have never faced them? It is my belief that true karate is learning the 'Jutsu' to such a level that it progresses to become 'Do'.”

Ian H wrote:
Let's say I wanted to learn to be a racing car driver ... I could learn how to drive really fast and win races, and not think one whit about my own personal character and courtesy to other drivers: jutsu.  Toss in the character and courtesy aspect: racecar-do.  But if I buy a racecar, never learn to drive it, park it in my garage and spend two hours every Tuesday and Thursday evening sitting in the racecar in my garage contemplating the mysteries of the universe as they apply to racecar drivers ... well ... that doesn't seem like much of anything.

That really made me laugh! Coffee sprayingly funny! Love that analogy.

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

I feel like we've come full circle. Do means higher moral teachings, and if it's not that it's just a modern term for jutsu, but it's not jutsu, because Do is built on jutsu, so they can't be synonyms. Ugh, clear as mud.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:
I feel like we've come full circle. Do means higher moral teachings, and if it's not that it's just a modern term for jutsu, but it's not jutsu, because Do is built on jutsu, so they can't be synonyms. Ugh, clear as mud.

As we said, there’s no universally agreed definition ;-)

I think the key point, which many in this thread have expressed, is that Jutsu and Do are not diametrically opposed separate entities with nothing in common. Your original post which started this thread suggested there was a split:

OnlySeisan wrote:
The Do marking the distinctions between inner development (Do) and practical technique (jutsu).

The title you can also suggested a split:

OnlySeisan wrote:
Why is the Do suffix still used by practical minded karate practioners?

The succinct answer to the question would seem to be:

Definitions vary, and many don’t see using the term Do and being practically minded as mutually exclusive.

All the best,

Iain

Marc
Marc's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:

I feel like we've come full circle. Do means higher moral teachings, and if it's not that it's just a modern term for jutsu, but it's not jutsu, because Do is built on jutsu, so they can't be synonyms. Ugh, clear as mud.

Let me try and sum up what I've taken from this discussion:

Jutsu means technique/method. Do means way/teachings. Karate is a martial arts system that teaches a way to use certain methods and techniques to avoid injury. Although focussing on the physical aspects in training, an appropriate life style is just as necessary to avoid violent conflict.

Karate, Karate-Jutsu, Karate-Do may be used interchangeably. You can use each of them to answer this question: "How do I avoid injury should I by any chance be confronted by a villain or a ruffian?"

"You can use Karate to defend yourself or escape the situation."

"You can apply the methods of Karate to defend yourself or escape the situation."

"You can defend yourself or escape the situation the way Karate teaches you to do."

All the best

Marc

Marc
Marc's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

It’s also worth remembering that even the term “karate” lacks a universally agreed definition. What I do would not be “karate” to some; just as what they do would not be “karate” to me. It’s a shared label for many diverse activities.

A while ago I collected a lot of youtube videos to show some different aspects of karate and compare them to other non-karate activities. Obviously I had too much time, but anyway. See Diversity of Karate - a comparative video collection if you're interested.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Marc wrote:
Jutsu means technique/method. Do means way/teachings. Karate is a martial arts system that teaches a way to use certain methods and techniques to avoid injury. Although focussing on the physical aspects in training, an appropriate life style is just as necessary to avoid violent conflict

That’s a good point! I expressed a similar idea in my Martial Map Podcast (as part of zone 4):

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/content/martial-map-free-audio-book

Funakoshi also said, "The correct understanding of Karate and its proper use is Karate-do. One who truly trains in this Do and actually understands Karate-do is never easily drawn into a fight"

Marc wrote:
A while ago I collected a lot of youtube videos to show some different aspects of karate and compare them to other non-karate activities. Obviously I had too much time, but anyway. See Diversity of Karate - a comparative video collection if you're interested.

That’s a great collection of videos! Would you have any objections if I shared that link via Facebook etc?

All the best,

Iain

Marc
Marc's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Marc wrote:
A while ago I collected a lot of youtube videos to show some different aspects of karate and compare them to other non-karate activities. Obviously I had too much time, but anyway. See Diversity of Karate - a comparative video collection if you're interested.

That’s a great collection of videos! Would you have any objections if I shared that link via Facebook etc?

Thanks. Yes, please share it if you like.

The original (German) version is at: http://kata-karate.de/index.php/karate-vielfalt

For the translated (English) version please refer to: http://kata-karate.de/index.php/karate-vielfalt/en

If anybody feels that some interesting aspect of Karate might me missing from the collection, please drop me a line.

Marc

Ian H
Ian H's picture

My moment of clarity this morning:

"-do" means you make sure you and your students all turn out to be sheep dogs.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Ian H wrote:
My moment of clarity this morning:

"-do" means you make sure you and your students all turn out to be sheep dogs.

Just in case people don’t get the reference to “sheep dogs”:

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/sheep-sheepdogs-wolves

Ian is not suggesting some “weresheepdog” transformation :-)

I totally agree with the point though.

All the best,

Iain

OnlySeisan
OnlySeisan's picture

Just found this while doing some reading.

This is an excerpt from the translated minutes of the meeting of the great karate masters in 1936 in Okinawa. It’s been translated by Patrick and Yuriko McCarthy and can be found on his site with the following link. At the meeting are Hanashiro Chomo, Kyan Chotoku, Motobu Choki, Chibana Choshin, Kiyoda Juhatsu, Miyagi Chojun, and Gusukuma Shimpan.

http://irkrs.blogspot.com.au/?view=magazine#!/2013/08/the-1936-meeting-of-okinawan-karate.html

Shimabukuro Zenpatchi: Mr. Nakasone, recently karate has been called karatedo. Does this mean that the cultivation of one's spirit, like that of judo and kendo, will be emphasized? Is that why the "do" was added?

Nakasone Genwa: Yes. Its purpose seems to be the cultivation of the spirit.

They also discuss why they changed the name from toudi to karate and all sorts of other cool stuff. Straight from the horses mouth as it were.

Marc
Marc's picture

OnlySeisan wrote:

Just found this while doing some reading.

This is an excerpt from the translated minutes of the meeting of the great karate masters in 1936 in Okinawa. It’s been translated by Patrick and Yuriko McCarthy and can be found on his site with the following link. At the meeting are Hanashiro Chomo, Kyan Chotoku, Motobu Choki, Chibana Choshin, Kiyoda Juhatsu, Miyagi Chojun, and Gusukuma Shimpan.

http://irkrs.blogspot.com.au/?view=magazine#!/2013/08/the-1936-meeting-of-okinawan-karate.html

Cool, thanks for sharing the link. Lots of insight. A very interesting read.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Well there’s proof that no one reads my posts :)

I refer to the “meeting of the masters” – quoting the exact same section – in my first post in this thread.

http://iainabernethy.co.uk/comment/9527#comment-9527

Iain Abernethy wrote:
In October 1936 the good and the great of Okinawan Karate – Chomo Hanashiro, Chotoku Kyan, Choki Motobu, Chojun Miyagi, Juhatsu Kyoda, Choshin Chibana, Shinpan Shiroma, Chotei Oroku, Genwa Nakasone – met in Naha to discuss how karate was developing in mainland Japan and what name should be used for the art (http://seinenkai.com/articles/sanzinsoo/1936.html)

While there was much discussion about whether “kara” should be written as “Chinese” (唐) or “empty” (空), this was the totality of the discussion on the addition of “do”.

Shimabukuro: Mr. Nakasone, I hear nowadays people call "Karate-Do" for karate. Does this mean people added the word "Do" to the name "Karate" for emphasizing the importance of spiritual training like Judo and Kendo?

Nakasone: They use the word "Karate-Do" in the meaning of cultivation of the mind.”

That’s it! No huge discussion about what that meant for karate and whether “do” or “jutsu” was the better label. They all just effectively went, “OK, mind training, fair enough”.

As is very clear, there was no big split or controversy at the adoption of “do”. The connotations we sometimes attach to the label were not present at the time it was adopted. Prior to the addition of the do suffix, karate still had the notion of mind training and development of character. It was nothing new. Just a new fashionable way of expressing that fact.....

The two translations are different though.

One saying cultivation of “mind” and the other of “spirit”.

I’m guessing that maybe because the character “心” is used? Which can be read as “mind”, “heart, “intent, “spirit”, etc. We’d have to see the Japanese original, but at first glance – based on two differing translation from a common text; both done by very knowledgably people – it would seem that “spirit” is meant in terms of “vigour” and “intent” as opposed to “soul”.

This is always a difficulty when things are moved from one language to another. Sometimes there is not exact matches and hence “word for word” translations are not possible. Other times, words can have multiple meanings and hence confusion of intent is possible.

I remember a long talk with a former workmate of mine who was a lay-preacher. When I remarked that hard training was good for your “spirit”, he corrected me and said the right word would be “will” or “intent”. He was of course completely right because “spirt” can also mean “soul” and I was not suggesting that was the case. However, in English “spirit” does have that double meaning so confusion can easily arise:

1 - The non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul.

2 - The prevailing or typical quality, mood, or attitude of a person, group, or period of time.

All the best,

Iain

Pages