Original purposes of martial arts

[puunui]

We were going off topic, so I figured I would start a new one.

If you want to research self-defense practices and their need on Okinawa, it might be more instructive to look at the Uechi-ryu and Goju-ryu lines which had much less of an aristocratic heritage to them. Although Miyagi, Chojun came from a wealthy merchant family, Uechi, Kanbun's family were radish farmers.

The lineages of those two styles include people who studied martial arts in China, so that is a little different. Do you consider Higaonna/Higashionna Sensei or Miyagi Sensei as the founder of Goju Ryu? I want to say that Higashionna Sensei did come from Pechin class as well.

I suspect that there is no single answer, that people studied for different reasons. I do think that self defense in the way that we think of self defense was a low priority, even back then. Okinawa is not really a place where people get attacked for no reason, and neither is Korea. In Korea, people get angry at each other, and may act like they want to fight, and may even make motions like they are ready to fight, but when it comes down to it, it rarely happens, even in places like bars. It's just not how people are raised to act.

 

[dancingalone]

The lineages of those two styles include people who studied martial arts in China, so that is a little different. Do you consider Higaonna/Higashionna Sensei or Miyagi Sensei as the founder of Goju Ryu? I want to say that Higashionna Sensei did come from Pechin class as well.

Given that Miyagi Sensei reportedly changed some of the things he learned from Higashionna Sensei, I would consider that Goju-ryu starts with Miyagi. For what it's worth I don't think Higashionna was Pechin. His family sold firewood, I think, and he was illiterate though to be fair many (most?) of the Pechin couldn't read and write either.

I suspect that there is no single answer, that people studied for different reasons. I do think that self defense in the way that we think of self defense was a low priority, even back then. Okinawa is not really a place where people get attacked for no reason, and neither is Korea. In Korea, people get angry at each other, and may act like they want to fight, and may even make motions like they are ready to fight, but when it comes down to it, it rarely happens, even in places like bars. It's just not how people are raised to act.

I think we all occasionally become angry and a few are unable to control themselves such that violence breaks out. Some SD training might come in handy then. I could go along with your idea that Okinawans and Koreans are perhaps more peaceful compared to other cultural groups, but that would be entirely by blind guess. We'd need to compare crime rates and such to know for sure. Two big counterexamples exist to argue otherwise however: WWII where the Okinawans fought along with their Japanese compatriots, even to the point of annihilation when the US invaded the islands, and the Korean War where former countrymen fought each other over (?) idealology. We even have footage of fights breaking out in the Korean Parliament from just a few years ago.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I suspect that there is no single answer, that people studied for different reasons. I do think that self defense in the way that we think of self defense was a low priority, even back then.

May I ask your justification for this position? How would you know what they thought of as self-defense 'back then'?

In his book 'Karate-do Kyohan' Gichin Funakoshi wrote,

"When there are no avenues of escape or one is caught even before any attempt to escape can be made, then for the first time the use of self-defense techniques should be considered. Even at times like these, do not show any intention of attacking, but first let the attacker become careless. At that time attack him concentrating one's whole strength in one blow to a vital point and in the moment of surprise, escape and seek shelter and help."

The original purpose of the martial arts was either for offensive use, such as on the battlefield or defensive use, such as what a private citizen would employ for personal defense of self, others and loved ones. This is why martial arts have movements to defeat an incoming attack i.e. block, interception, deflection and tactical movement. They have a means for counter-attack or pre-emptive offense such as strikes, kicks, throws, locks to inflict pain (or immobility or compliance) etc. The level can be anywhere from a 'stun & run' up the ladder to maiming/killing if the situation necesitates it. If it were not for this original purpose, it would not need these movements which were clearly taught at early stages of development. The movements and training were not limited to a narrow scope of possible outcomes such as gaining points or a submission.

Now a martial art can be altered for the purposes of a sporting contest, but that is the indicator, things need to be altered from the original. For example, wrestling, boxing and judo were designed to be sport from the outset. Karate, Jujutsu etc was not designed, originally for sport. Otherwise we wouldn't have movements designed to maim or kill. Esoteric values can be added, and have been added but it does not alter the original purpose the art was intended for. In the more modern era, an art can be 'founded' with multiple venues in mind. But originally, a martial art was exactly that...martial i.e. meant for something martial be it offensive or defensive in nature. Offense/defense aren't necessarily exclusive in regards to the situation.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Given that Miyagi Sensei reportedly changed some of the things he learned from Higashionna Sensei, I would consider that Goju-ryu starts with Miyagi.

I think it woudl be fair to consider Higashionna as Naha Te and Miyagi as Goju Ryu. Though Miyagi learned much from Higashionna, he also travelled to and studied in China. It would also be fair to consider Higashionna and Itosu as being responsible for all the of major Ryus in Okinawa and Japan, directly or indirectly with the exception of Uechi Ryu which was under Uechi Kanbun. All these gentelmen were impressive!

 

[puunui]

Given that Miyagi Sensei reportedly changed some of the things he learned from Higashionna Sensei, I would consider that Goju-ryu starts with Miyagi. For what it's worth I don't think Higashionna was Pechin. His family sold firewood, I think, and he was illiterate though to be fair many (most?) of the Pechin couldn't read and write either.

I seem to remember Higashionna Sensei went to China to act as a translator and then studied martial arts when he was there. Can't remember exactly and too lazy to do the google thing. Also I believe firewood was an expensive item, sort of like ice used to be back in the day when there were ice boxes.

I think we all occasionally become angry and a few are unable to control themselves such that violence breaks out. Some SD training might come in handy then. I could go along with your idea that Okinawans and Koreans are perhaps more peaceful compared to other cultural groups, but that would be entirely by blind guess. We'd need to compare crime rates and such to know for sure.

I'm sure people got drunk as well, and some of the lower class people had a certain lack of refinement which could lead to physical altercations. But I would say that asian people in general are less violent, less likely to own handguns, and less likely to engage in violent behavior, at least within their own insulated communities. At least that has been my experience, living in a heavily asian part of the country and being to Japan and Korea numerous times. I think that Confucianism plays a large part in that dynamic. I don't think you do it, but there are some out there who may have a tendency to project their own culture, upbringing and personal circumstances when viewing another group, and project their attitudes and feelings onto that other group. I do not believe that sort of mentality leads to much truth seeking or factual understanding.

Two big counterexamples exist to argue otherwise however: WWII where the Okinawans fought along with their Japanese compatriots, even to the point of annihilation when the US invaded the islands, and the Korean War where former countrymen fought each other over (?) idealology. We even have footage of fights breaking out in the Korean Parliament from just a few years ago.

I think defending one's country from invaders is a different situation than picking fights such that a need for self defense is a major concern for the people. As for fights in Korea, the closest I have seen to that type of mob behavior was during student protests. I watched one once and it was very scripted out in my opinion. First the protest is announced well in advance. There are students on one side and police with riot gear on the other. You can see the tension build and then it breaks out. But there is plenty of time for anyone who does not wish to participate to vacate the area. I would say those that are involved in the fighting are there because they want to, in a mutual affray type situation.

But for the normal person in Korea, I do not think that violence or the threat of violence is a daily part of their lives, outside of being smashed into a subway car or having people push pass you, or that type of thing. I walk around anywhere in Korea no matter what time, and I feel no danger, unlike some other places I have been on the US mainland, where the radar goes instantly up.

Same thing in Japan. I once saw a five year old child riding the bullet train by himself without an adult accompanying him. I don't know if they still do that now. This was a long time ago. But I feel absolutely no sense of danger or even the threat of danger in Japan.

 

[oftheherd1]

...

I suspect that there is no single answer, that people studied for different reasons. I do think that self defense in the way that we think of self defense was a low priority, even back then. Okinawa is not really a place where people get attacked for no reason, and neither is Korea. In Korea, people get angry at each other, and may act like they want to fight, and may even make motions like they are ready to fight, but when it comes down to it, it rarely happens, even in places like bars. It's just not how people are raised to act.

Well that may or may not have been true prior to Japanese occupation, but I am not so sure. After that, there was incentive to be prepared for self defense against the occupying Japanese. And that leaves out possible strife with neighbors. The Okinawans were stripped of their weapons by the Japanese. I don't think the Koreans had as many weapons, but you can be sure they confiscated any they found. The Japanese had more success in converting the Okinawans to thinking they were Japanese, than the did with the Koreans. They didn't have as much time in Korea, but used the same tactics. Trying to force the people to speak only Japanese, and take on Japanese names.

You are correct that Koreans can get as much into your face as possible without touching you, and may hope you strike them, but if they are smart, they will not strike the first blow. The one who does that will go to jail. I don't recall seeing Oknawans argue forcefully, much less as if they were about to fight.

Given that Miyagi Sensei reportedly changed some of the things he learned from Higashionna Sensei, I would consider that Goju-ryu starts with Miyagi. For what it's worth I don't think Higashionna was Pechin. His family sold firewood, I think, and he was illiterate though to be fair many (most?) of the Pechin couldn't read and write either. I think we all occasionally become angry and a few are unable to control themselves such that violence breaks out. Some SD training might come in handy then. I could go along with your idea that Okinawans and Koreans are perhaps more peaceful compared to other cultural groups, but that would be entirely by blind guess. We'd need to compare crime rates and such to know for sure. Two big counterexamples exist to argue otherwise however: WWII where the Okinawans fought along with their Japanese compatriots, even to the point of annihilation when the US invaded the islands, and the Korean War where former countrymen fought each other over (?) idealology. We even have footage of fights breaking out in the Korean Parliament from just a few years ago.

As I mention above, the Okinawans had come to think of themselves more as Japanese, like it or not. Okinawa was considered Japanese soil by Japan. In Korea, that had not yet happened. They were oppressed into slave workerss or being soldiers, or "comfort girls." They weren't quite considered human, and could not get citizenship back then. I hear it is the same now for those that chose to remain in Japan after WWII.

 

[Buka]

A Martial Art is, what a Martial Art does. If to you train it for sport, then that's what it is. If you train it for self defense, then it's self defense. If your goal was to get in shape and/or have fun, that's great, that's what it is. If you first took it, and still train it, as a life challenge, that's okay, too.
If it's a way of life, so be it.

When it all first started, where ever the hell that was, and whenever the hell that was - it was in it's infancy. Regardless of the who and the why, like every other good thing that men and women sweat and bleed over, it could only get better. And it has. And every single person here is part of it.

 

[puunui]

Well that may or may not have been true prior to Japanese occupation, but I am not so sure. After that, there was incentive to be prepared for self defense against the occupying Japanese. And that leaves out possible strife with neighbors. The Okinawans were stripped of their weapons by the Japanese. I don't think the Koreans had as many weapons, but you can be sure they confiscated any they found. The Japanese had more success in converting the Okinawans to thinking they were Japanese, than the did with the Koreans. They didn't have as much time in Korea, but used the same tactics. Trying to force the people to speak only Japanese, and take on Japanese names.

I need a book which is at home to properly respond to this, but even if what you say is true, what does that have to do with attitudes today and the need for self defense, today?

You are correct that Koreans can get as much into your face as possible without touching you, and may hope you strike them, but if they are smart, they will not strike the first blow. The one who does that will go to jail. I don't recall seeing Oknawans argue forcefully, much less as if they were about to fight.

Throwing the first punch can determine fault in the US, but not in Korea. In Korea, they don't care who throws the first punch; what they care about is how much injury you caused to the other person. If you injured the other person, then you are responsible, even if the other person threw the first punch. I tried to discuss in some other threads, but we never got to this point, I don't think. It is one of those cultural differences between the US and Korea.

As I mention above, the Okinawans had come to think of themselves more as Japanese, like it or not. Okinawa was considered Japanese soil by Japan. In Korea, that had not yet happened. They were oppressed into slave workerss or being soldiers, or "comfort girls." They weren't quite considered human, and could not get citizenship back then. I hear it is the same now for those that chose to remain in Japan after WWII.

And this relates to the need for self defense today, how?

 

[mastercole]

I have read, and heard that many senior martial artist from old times entered into martial arts training because they were frail as a child and their parents hoped that martial arts would improve their health.

 

[seasoned]

Might be of interest...............

 

[Instructor]

I think that people in history were just as complicated as people are now and they learned martial arts for their own reasons just we do now.

 

[puunui]

Might be of interest...............

Thank you for posting that. Goodin Sensei is a very knowledgeable teacher who got me to commit to donate my martial arts book collection to the UH Manoa library, like he did. Nakata Sensei is a longtime karate senior here and one of my best friends has been studying with him and continues to study with him since the 70's. I am friends with Nishioka Sensei's son, who is mentioned as Nakata Sensei's original teacher. Nishioka Sensei lives less than a mile from me. I thought the presentation, which focused on understanding Okinawan culture through the study of Okinawan karate, was an excellent point. I think that Hawaii practitioners are more in tune with this philosophy perhaps more so that other places because there is such a large asian population base here, who frequently travel to asia for additional training and to further education.

 

[lifespantkd]

Same thing in Japan. I once saw a five year old child riding the bullet train by himself without an adult accompanying him. I don't know if they still do that now. This was a long time ago. But I feel absolutely no sense of danger or even the threat of danger in Japan.

Gender plays a strong role in the actual experience of harm and, hence, in the perception of risk. I recall seeing a TV documentary or news expose' a few years ago on women and female teenagers routinely experiencing sexual assault on commuter trains in Japan. This often occurred when women were trapped in a standing crowd on the train. As I recall, some women reported this to happen just about every time they rode the train which they had to do to get to their place of work. While this article calls it "sexual harassment," being groped clearly meets the US definition of sexual assault (i.e., having any part of the body be touched in a sexual way without consent): http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/17/japan-tokyo-police-commuter-gropers.

Cynthia

 

[puunui]

Gender plays a strong role in the actual experience of harm and, hence, in the perception of risk. I recall seeing a TV documentary or news expose' a few years ago on women and female teenagers routinely experiencing sexual assault on commuter trains in Japan. This often occurred when women were trapped in a standing crowd on the train. As I recall, some women reported this to happen just about every time they rode the train which they had to do to get to their place of work. While this article calls it "sexual harassment," being groped clearly meets the US definition of sexual assault (i.e., having any part of the body be touched in a sexual way without consent): http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/17/japan-tokyo-police-commuter-gropers.

I understand teenaged females wearing catholic school type uniforms are particularly vulnerable to these types of assaults on commuter trains. I've been on super crowded trains in japan and korea, as well as in the us (nyc and sf on the bart), and one's personal space is greatly decreased in those situations, grouping is a whole other matter. I remember I had a long layover in narita coming from seoul, so I took the train to narita city to pass time. My cousin also wanted shoji paper for some reason so I was walking around looking for a hardware store that sold that. I went into a 711 type store and saw some japanese playboy type magazines, which are pretty soft compared to US magazine (crotch area blacked out for example). But many of the models were wearing school girl uniforms. Later, when I was walking back to the train station, I saw a whole bunch of school girls wearing that exact uniform, and I couldn't help but wonder whether any of them got molested on the train before.

 

[puunui]

I think that people in history were just as complicated as people are now and they learned martial arts for their own reasons just we do now.

I think people's motivations way back when were simpler and not as varied as today, where anyone can learn martial arts if they want to. I think in the past, only certain people could learn, or wanted to learn.

 

[Archtkd]

. But I would say that asian people in general are less violent, less likely to own handguns, and less likely to engage in violent behavior, at least within their own insulated communities. At least that has been my experience, living in a heavily asian part of the country and being to Japan and Korea numerous times. I think that Confucianism plays a large part in that dynamic. I don't think you do it, but there are some out there who may have a tendency to project their own culture, upbringing and personal circumstances when viewing another group, and project their attitudes and feelings onto that other group. I do not believe that sort of mentality leads to much truth seeking or factual understanding.

I think this is one of those things that could be argued forever. I've over the years developed an interest in trying to understand why some societies have great capacity for violence, particulalry because many societies that look very peaceful periodically tend to explode in ways that are hard to comprehend. There are usually tons of political, economic and social issues that trigger the bursts of violence, but I have come to believe that those explosions are also fueled by an inherent propensity for violence that lies dormant in many seemingly docile societies.

The atrocities that the Japanese committed against the Chinese in World War II's Rape of Nanking comes to mind. Mao Tse-Tung's slaugher of millions of his own Chinese people, with the support of many of his henchmen is another example. Pol Pot's systematic eliminaton of 25 percent of the Cambodian population in the 1970s, with the help and complicit approval of his Kmer Rouge buddies also is a case in point. Cambodians are generally very nice people.

There are smaller scale atrocities still occuring in Asia today, which show some of her people have a great capacity for violence. That of course can be said of people from all over the world. Think of the suppossedly civilized and educated Germans, who woke up one day and decided to slaugher 6 million of their own Jewish citizens; the generally friendly Hutus in Rwanda, who rose up in 1994 and butchered 700,000 of their Tutsi neigbors in a few weeks, with machetes, bayonets, hammers, and other crude weapons because bullets were too expensive.

 

[Instructor]

I think people's motivations way back when were simpler and not as varied as today, where anyone can learn martial arts if they want to. I think in the past, only certain people could learn, or wanted to learn.

Definitely some truth to your post puunui.

 

[dancingalone]

I think people's motivations way back when were simpler and not as varied as today, where anyone can learn martial arts if they want to. I think in the past, only certain people could learn, or wanted to learn.

Yes and no. Anyone can run out and learn some form of martial arts if they don't have a specific desire for a certain body of information.

There are still some types of martial arts that are elusive to find quality instruction in or if these teachers run public schools, they still reserve the inner information for only some of their students. I'm inclined to believe the motivation of the people who look for this type of knowledge past and present are equally complex.

 

[Chris Parker]

I think people's motivations way back when were simpler and not as varied as today, where anyone can learn martial arts if they want to. I think in the past, only certain people could learn, or wanted to learn.

I don't know that I'd really agree with that at all, honestly. I feel more that motivations are the same across the ages, as they really are just all different expressions of the same basic motivations (food, shelter, protection of self and others, such as family, status within the community, personal interests...). The main reasons that someone couldn't learn martial arts in some form in the past is the same as today... lack of time, money, or interest. That's really it. The whole romantic idea of "only certain people could learn" isn't as correct as many think, and really didn't apply to all martial arts, nor across all cultures.

 

[puunui]

Anyone can run out and learn some form of martial arts if they don't have a specific desire for a certain body of information.

Which covers 99.9% of the practicing martial artists out there. Most people fall into whatever style they are studying out of convenience or circumstance.

There are still some types of martial arts that are elusive to find quality instruction in or if these teachers run public schools, they still reserve the inner information for only some of their students. I'm inclined to believe the motivation of the people who look for this type of knowledge past and present are equally complex.

Why would such intent make their motivations complex?