drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,943
- Reaction score
- 8,690
The fight has already started anyway.
Who strikes first
- Thread starter Bruce7
- Start date
The fight has already started anyway.
But now as I think back on it, the guy didn't actually strike first did he?
He only swung first. So....never mind.
That's the thing, really. When doing the security/bouncer thing BITD I never swung first, as it's bad business (as i was carefully instructed by both my Owner and the much more seasoned guy who hired/trained me). But... I almost always struck first.
I spent about ten years doing the bouncer thing. Had a great crew, great memories. But thinking back on it now, there was lots of tussling, carrying guys and literally throwing them out of doors into the parking lot....but I don't believe I ever actually threw a punch. I find that so odd.
punisher73
Senior Master
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,959
- Reaction score
- 1,062
Japanese Karate had 3 main concepts in regards to their striking
Gichin Funakoshi would and did teach those concepts in his karate. The phrase "there is no first attack in karate" comes from "The 20 Precepts" that Funakoshi wrote. The frist one was that karate begins and ends with courtesy (why the bows at the beginning and ending of katas). Next, was that there was no first attack in karate. Third, he wrote that karate is an aid to justice. Number 4 was to control yourself before attempting to control others.
If we look at the context of what/when and how Funakoshi set up the karate that became Shotokan it gives some insight into his comment. Japan was preparing for war and was looking to train the young men for military service. Funakoshi set up the karate training to mimic military training. You had to address your instructor a certain way, you had to line up according to rank, you had to count off and perform all together when practicing. Looking at the first four, we see that he was attempting to get young men to learn to control their own emotions and not go out and use karate to become bullies or misuse it.
Going back to the three concepts of attack. Sen sen no sen, was more of an emotional spiritual concept that you saw the attack forming in the opponent before there was any physical signs. You saw the opponent's intent and acted before he could initiate any physical attack. What Funakoshi was saying is that you are not to be the catalyst for the fight. You should not be starting the fight.
- Go no sen - After the attack. Block and counter
- Sen no sen - Attack the attack. Be faster than your opponent
- Sen sen no sen - Take initiative. Attack before the attack.
Gichin Funakoshi would and did teach those concepts in his karate. The phrase "there is no first attack in karate" comes from "The 20 Precepts" that Funakoshi wrote. The frist one was that karate begins and ends with courtesy (why the bows at the beginning and ending of katas). Next, was that there was no first attack in karate. Third, he wrote that karate is an aid to justice. Number 4 was to control yourself before attempting to control others.
If we look at the context of what/when and how Funakoshi set up the karate that became Shotokan it gives some insight into his comment. Japan was preparing for war and was looking to train the young men for military service. Funakoshi set up the karate training to mimic military training. You had to address your instructor a certain way, you had to line up according to rank, you had to count off and perform all together when practicing. Looking at the first four, we see that he was attempting to get young men to learn to control their own emotions and not go out and use karate to become bullies or misuse it.
Going back to the three concepts of attack. Sen sen no sen, was more of an emotional spiritual concept that you saw the attack forming in the opponent before there was any physical signs. You saw the opponent's intent and acted before he could initiate any physical attack. What Funakoshi was saying is that you are not to be the catalyst for the fight. You should not be starting the fight.
This is a swerve (WHAT??? A swerve on MartialTalk?!?), but it's something I've been pondering lately. What was the typical training environment prior to this introduction of military influence? I see Okinawan-based styles that seem to be as rank-focused as Japanese schools are, but that could be some retrograde influence from Japanese Karate.
punisher73
Senior Master
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,959
- Reaction score
- 1,062
From my understanding and reading accounts of training, it was very informal. Very small classes and the instructor taught on an individual basis and taught kata slightly different to each student based on his needs/physical build etc. After karate was exported to Japan, it underwent the changes I had mentioned, then was kind of "re-imported" to Okinawa with the rank structure, large classes and the uniformity we see today. After WW2, these changes became more widespread because the US military paid VERY well to karate instructors to teach the serviceman and would contract with them to instruct. This further cemented the changes brought about by the Japanese.
For example, In Uechi-Ryu the first "black belt tests" were not done until 1958 and Chojun Miyagi of Goju-Ryu died in 1953 without promoting anyone to a black belt (or any other rank). Chotoku Kyan held no dan ranking at the time of his passing in 1945. The style of Isshin-Ryu started in 1956 and the founder, Tatsuo Shimabuku, designed the curriculum around the average length of stay for most of the serviceman. It should also be noted that during WW2, most records agree that there was no karate training going on in Okinawa, or at least none recorded and passed on by the main instructors of the time.
Funakoshi modeled much of his karate after Japanese Judo and Kendo. After Jigoro Kano added the belt ranks to Judo in the 1920's, Funakoshi adopted the idea and added in belts sometime in the 1930's. Funakoshi was still a traditionalist in many ways and would not allow the "sport style sparring" that was very popular in Japan. This continued until his death in 1957, when the JKA put on the first All Japan Karate Championship, that has been held ever since.
dvcochran
Grandmaster
Do you have any knowledge on how/why the Judo belt system started?
My understanding is that it was initially just to help pair up practitioners for contests.
Thanks for that. That makes a ton of sense, and explains the progression I'd partly pieced together. It also supports my thought that smaller schools have less use for belt ranks. I'll probably always use them, because it provides an organization to the curriculum that I'm familiar with, but I don't find them as useful for my small program as they were in my instructor's larger (but still mid-sized, at best) school.
punisher73
Senior Master
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,959
- Reaction score
- 1,062
As gpseymour pointed out, it was to help pair students of fairly equal rank with each other. Kano got the ranking idea from the Japanese game of "Go" and incorporated it into his system. Originally, there were still only two belt color ranks: white and black. Students were either "unranked" as a white belt or "ranked" as a black belt. The black belt was taken from swimming where good swimmers would wear a black ribbon. It had nothing to do with the white belt getting dirtier over time and turning black.
Very quickly, a brown belt was added in as well and then other colors to further differentiate ranks. It was also discovered that the various colored belts were good motivators for students and more colors were added to show their progress. Suddenly, the "black belt" became the end goal instead of it's original meaning of low rank. Many kung fu styles also started to add colored sashes to their systems to show rank as well.
Before Kano instituted the ranking system, teachers would only give a student a license (menkyo) giving them permission to teach the art and this indicated their skill/knowledge level.
When someone makes me believe that they are about to attack me, they have already 'struck first' and in a very real sense in many jurisdictions. It's 'assault' even if they haven't taken a swing at me. No law makes me wait to be hit before defending myself.
It might look as if I struck first. In reality, I defended myself after being assaulted, even if I was not actually hit.
No first strike is correct. It only seems to some that I hit first.
It might look as if I struck first. In reality, I defended myself after being assaulted, even if I was not actually hit.
No first strike is correct. It only seems to some that I hit first.
Similar threads
