10000 hours over 28000 days
...
http://convocation.ning.com/group/budoconvocation/forum/topics/shushou-hapo-rili
...
A good friend of mine in Shorinji Kenpo discussed with me one of the many principles that his art has.
One of these was the concept of Shu, Ha, Ri, a three step concept.
Shu is to properly learn from your instructor. 1st step
Ha is to Adapt or change your instructor's teachings. 2nd step
Ri is to go past your instructor. 3rd Step
Of course these concepts are more complex than I have simply written.
It could be easily misinterpreted as a license to"do what you want" when you get that itch that you "done all and seen all'". Perhaps this why, not only here in America but in Japan as well, we see many "Grand Masters'" and their new styles.
My friend cautioned that each step requires that they had properly mastered the "techniques" and that it is not something out of a stir fry bowl. Also, in terms of Ri, it is not something outrageous and does not stray from the basic philosophy and teachings of the art.
This discussion was brought upon when a high ranking Shorinji Kenpo instructor broke off and created his own "full contact" style and gained fame through entering major full contact tournaments. He had retained all the traditional techniques of Shorinji Kenpo but it was more of a side dish, The main dish in his style's training had become full contact tournament training. Also, as a note Shorinji Kempo instructors are not allowed to make it their livelihood.
...
I would like to offer this from Pg. 4-5 in Taisen Deshimaru, The Zen Way to the Martial Arts. In this work he states that there are three stages that are commen to Zen and the martial arts...they are "shojin" or the diligent practice under the master which he states will occur in three to five years.....from there one finds" shiho" or concentration without consciouness, to assist the master. Although not stated I can see the word adapt to.. or fit your art to your body type, change or modify??? I am always working to make the technique "right for me". The final stage which he never gives a name he simply calls "true freedom". I get the feeling that we never get this freedom until our master passes from this world. This is a very harsh understanding for me, and not one that many of us as denshi would wish for our masters. I do hope that when and if time gives me this duty, that I will be true to my Sensei and my art.
...
http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2005/10/10/shu-ha-ri-karate-diverging-to-independence/
...
The Japanese saying “SHU, HA, RI” - which is typically translated as “Obedience, Divergence, and Transcendence,” gives a model for maturation within the martial arts.
...
In other words, what we find is that SHU, HA, RI is probably a Japanese military slogan, probably reinterpreted from its original meaning from Japan’s experimentation with imperialistic conquest, which basically tells us to remain forever obedient and that we will eventually come to full understanding of The Way, The Rules, The System, The List, and The Curriculum. Should we fail to obey, we might not ever reach the enlightened state waiting for us at the end of the tunnel of obedience we follow. Not that it would matter, since that enlightened state supposedly results in finally understanding why the only reasonable approach is composed of little more than repeating this cycle of control, obedience, and stagnation within a craft. It doesn’t sound like a very promising road to travel, does it?
But let’s take a second look at how SHU, HA, RI has been translated and what this slogan actually says, because, unbeknownst to anyone without a Japanese dictionary and a working knowledge of the language, this phrase has been, in my opinion, poorly translated from Japanese into English. SHU, HA, RI does not mean “Obedience, Divergence, Transcendence” as is insisted by so many who provide explanations of it.
(osu ???)
...
The first character, SHU, is also read mamoru, and it means to protect or to obey. This is suitably translated as obedience. The second character, HA, is also read as yaburu, and it is more correctly translated as meaning to rip, tear, or break. The last character, RI, is also read as hanareru, and it is more correctly translated to mean separate or leave.
...
SHU, HA, RI is probably better interpreted as , “Obey, begin to separate, and then leave.” This does not describe a dutiful apprentice following in his master’s footsteps for his entire life, eventually replacing him as the master of the same craft himself when I read it. Instead, it seems instead to describe a natural process of maturation and growth in which we go from being dependent upon our teachers to being independent and then finally moving on.
...
student ... art ... may become enlightened.
...
Learning a new skill begins with us doing as we are told. Different cultures place different limits on this obedience and how far it is taken. In older societies where young men were apprentices under master craftsmen, the young men might almost live as slaves while living at the feet of their master and learning the craft. Note the Japanese legends of apprenticed students sweeping the dojo floor for months on end before being allowed to so much as watch a lesson, much less actually practice with others.
...
After obedience, the next stage in this slogan is to break away. In this stage, we are no longer just an apprentice doing everything the master says. We have begun to go our own way, to modify our approach to our craft so that it is unique and personal to us. We see this stage in graduate students in universities, as they work on their dissertations and then present them to a board of senior professors who challenge the ideas but do not insist that the accepted dogma be followed letter for letter. It is natural that as our expertise increases, our uniqueness as human beings will begin to express itself in our work, and our creative process will begin to creep in where before was only blind faith and following.
(individual skills = individual job description ?)
("rips the original authority")
...
You are no longer my student. You are my colleague.”
...
Very romantic, and unfortunately for all, very unrealistic. Were it true that our instructors were all so enlightened as to acknowledge that any martial art is a limited topic, and that at some point our learning curve begins to plateau, and support us as we become more colleague than apprentice !
...
(teacher => student's nr
=> more than student's nr of the teacher)
(= the position in the specialised federation ?)
(style development is an organisation's effort)
...
we are encouraged, by the rules of competition, and by the examination criteria for higher ranks, to continue to stay in the obedience stage for the rest of our karate training experience. Viewing things this way, I have come to see rank promotions beyond a certain level to be little more than rewards offered for compliance and obedience - motivation to toe the party line. Tournament trophies from closed events with strict rules serve the same function - they encourage obedience and preservation of the craft as-is.
and the hierarchy
...
This seems to me to be a suppression of the natural maturation process.
...
Does the natural human tendency toward creativity not begin to express itself at some point when one is expert in the original teachings ?
...
a karate community that sometimes conducts itself more like a historical preservation society than it does a craftsman’s guild. But I would point out that the Okinawans did not approach their karate in this controlling, militaristic fashion of attempting to force obedience from those ready to be creative in their own right. Had they been this way, then we would not practice karate kata at all. We would be doing Chinese quan using Chinese methods. The Japanese were also originally accepting of creativity, as today the very popular Sochin kata was probably created by Funakoshi’s son who based it loosely on the Shito-Ryu Sochin kata. Unsu certainly did not contain a large spinning jump on Okinawa. How did we end up with two Gojushiho kata? Kanku-Dai does not resemble Kushanku of Okinawa exactly. Through obedience all of this happened? These are examples of breaking away and leaving, not of the operation of a historical preservation society.
...
Some researchers into human development might agree that we are not exactly at our most creative when we enter retirement years. Allowing only the very old and aged to be creative does not seem like it will serve the whole population of obedient enthusiasts of karate very well.
Perhaps rather than arbitrary lines which must be crossed by demonstrating full obedience, we should allow maturity to simply express itself in each pupil as they begin to have enough confidence to do so. Through this approach, we could encourage and guide, and remain an influence, rather than a control, in their growth in learning the craft of karate, and perhaps reduce the incredible levels of churn amongst our apprentices.
Maturation is a natural process that happens of its own accord. Stephen Covey’s maturity continuum agrees with this Japanese saying of SHU, HA, RI. He suggests that maturity is a continuum of dependency upon others.
Dependence -> Independence->Interdependence
When we first begin our karate instruction, we are dependent upon our teacher to provide us with all of the answers, and we are expected to perform to his liking and according to his rules. We are dependent upon him for what we practice. He provides - we use. He dictates, and we obey.
Covey suggests that as we mature, we become more independent. We get a job, we get our own income, we become responsible, and we stop leaning on others for our needs. We become able to provide for ourselves and go our own way. This happens in life on a grand scale, and it happens on a smaller scale as we learn new skills and mature within this larger development cycle.
As we continue to mature, Covey suggests that after the requisite stage of learning independence, we begin to become interdependent. That does not mean being dependent on others, but rather to understand fundamentally when it is appropriate to solicit help from others and when it is appropriate to stand on our own two feet. A sense of teamwork, if you will, develops within us if we continue to mature.
...
I note the way many families continually dysfunction as a result of parents who do not encourage independence amongst their children. This seems to be more and more of a problem today. They buy their children cars, they try to cover for their children’s mistakes, and when the children come home with laundry from college, parents dutifully wash the clothes. This coddling keeps kids dependent on parents and perhaps gives the parents an inflated sense of well-being from the illusion of being needed.
This seems a valid analogy to the karate world, since here we see dependency being used perhaps to control others, because ultimately, for such a business, dependency equals money. Don’t think so ? Do you think that your students would continue to send you money if you put them through a training process which had a definite end to it ? What if you told your students that they knew all that they needed from you, and that they were ready ? Would they keep paying you ?
...
I think we can all agree that karate organizations invariably begin to fall apart when the leader dies. I believe this is because karate organizations and the current thinking about proper karate instruction and practice encourage the suppression of independence amongst karateists to such an extent that when the leader of the organization dies, those who remain have never learned to work together as a team while respecting each others’ differences. A healthy sense of individuality and togetherness in the face of unique approaches to karate is supplanted by the desire to work within and have a simple, easy, unifying standard. This dependence on similarity plus a leadership personality to hold a group together ultimately is what undoes so many karate organizations.
And since interdependence is on the continuum of maturity after learning independence, few, if any karate instructors have any notion as to how to work together with one another as a team without creating another model of dependency. We see this at work when so many disaffected karate instructors resign or are dismissed from their karate organizations turn around and found their own karate organizations which use the same dysfunctional suppression of independence among members. The leader is free, the rest simply detach from one group and reattach to another, still obeying their instructions and never assuming responsibility for creating and adding to the system of karate they practice. In other words, they never diverge and transcend. SHU, HA, RI is suppressed.
...
The last karate instruction that Katayama Sensei gave me in Nagoya was to say in his excellent English, “You will go home, and you will do karate your way, not my way. You can do whatever you want. It’s yours. It’s like a gift. I gave it to you. Now you enjoy it, and if you choose, give it to someone else.” I don’t think I really ever understood what he meant by that until recently.
...
Jose de Freitas April 12th, 2007 at 11:15 am Link
I have been practicing karate since 1983. I fell victim to the “heretic” pursuit of other katas because of my chinese teacher. I originally went to him to learn a system of qigong which I enjoyed and Taichichuan. One day I saw him teaching a Praying Mantis form and I was fascinated. At the time, I was no longer actively involved with a karate club (I have since started again), and I have to say I would probably not have started to practice quanfa if I had. Also, I had no illusions of “fighting efficiency” or whatever. I just practiced kata for their own sake, and thought that something as weird looking as Praying Mantis might be fun to learn and practice.
I stayed with this chinese tacher ever since (14 years), and studied a number of curriculums, including Xingyiquan, my favorite to this day. I was struck by the immense gulf existing between karate and wushu as I was taught. I know there are chinese boxing schools that have grades and large organizations etc… But my teacher doesn’t award any ranks except teaching certificates, and these are very specific (as in “can teach basic forms and partner practices of Xingyi, but not advanced two person sets” etc…). But most incredible (to me) was discovering that a good 50% of the forms my teacher teaches were made up by him. And that many (though not all) are better than the classic ones. In karate I always found this huge resistance against creating new kata, especially by 1st to 3rd dans. My teacher created his first form when he was 21 (granted he was already a very good martial artist by then), and he still teaches it, and I still think it’s one of the best he teaches. Most chinese teachers I met positively expect theirt better students to come up with variations or new forms altogether. This is largely how new styles emerge in chinese arts. But karate (and not only Shotokan) has largely fossilized.
Currently, our karate club is quite small, just a small group of people (mostly black belts and brown belts) training with a japanese teacher who accepted our invitation to come to Portugal for a couple of years. For the first time in my life I have found acceptance for some of my weird ideas: why not create a new kata in our club? As long as it obeys certain “rules” (of movement techniques and so on) why shouldn’t it be called karate? My readings of this matter have convinced me that Okinawan karate was practiced largely on the same basis as my chinese teacher does. Kata were created for hundreds of years (allegedly…) and then they simply stopped in the beginning of the 20th century? Why? Yet these questions cannot be asked in regular karate clubs and schools.
It is easy to create kata competition for “free” style katas, or even for Shotokan katas. There is obviously a subjectve element in judging, but so is there in ice-skating or Taiji forms competitions or whatever, and people still hold them. You could require competitors to perform one classical kata (whatever that means) and one new one in any case.
(by the way I practice Shotokai from the lineage of S. Egami, and there’s all sorts of same stuff going on in their organizations)
...
Doug Stein April 19th, 2007 at 8:43 am Link
I used to be a fly - - but I learned quickly. Ok, at least now we have some parameters as to what “humility” means in this context.
The name that immediately came to my head was [ ]. I have come to know him very well over the past decade. On the surface, he does not seem to fit within our “defintion” of “humility.” When he first arrived in the U.S. he peformed shows in Califonia and in Las Vegas, he has been in the movies and on TV, and he has many intructional books and videos on the market, all with his photo on them.
But, having come to know him, I truly believe that the ultimate goal of his self-promotion is not for his own benefit, but for that of martial arts. He has sacrificed any normal family/life style so that he can devote his full time, and I mean his FULL time to his students worldwide. He does not charge a fee to be a member in his organization. He makes at least 25 trips per year to various parts of the world to teach at his member schools and only asks that his expenses be paid. I think that he truly understands that in today’s world, if the success of the martial arts is left to little bald-headed kids waiting for weeks outside the temple gates to be invited in, the martial arts will die. Many people are attracted to the martial arts by what they see on TV and in the movies. He wants to see the martial arts prosper. Bt the way, he runs a VERY traditional dojo in California.
I know you set forth a few examples of what “humility” is just for illustrative purposes, but even those examples exhibit Sensei [ ]’s humility.
Notwithstanding his student’s requests, and the interest others have in his life, he has not written an autobiography.
Yes, his photo is on the cover of most of his books, but that is by the demand of his publisher (I have reviewed his contract). By the way, Sensei [ ] does not make a living, nor could anyone else, from the monies generated from his instruction materials. (Again, I have seen the contract). Word of advise Rob - - stay self-published.
Personally, I choose to call Sensei [ ] “sensei.” I am not sure if he would object to me calling him Mr. [ ], or even [ ]. I was once having breakfast with Sensei [ ] at a conference which was also attended by Joe Lewis. Mr. Lewis was eating alone at another table, so Sensei invited him over. During their greeting and the conversaton about “old times” (very interesting stories about Chuck Norris and Bruce Leee) Mr. Lewis did not refer to Sensei by anything other than [ ] Sensei, is the type of person who commands respect, not demands it. He does not need to require people to address him as “sensei.” People just want to.
I understand what you are saying about humility being exclusive of karate instructors. But, couldn’t the same be said of any profession? I am a lawyer. Am I not humble simply because I think that others should consider me competent to do the job? Is humility in a second grade teacher not possible simply becaue he considers himself competent, and hopes others will too?
I am not so sure that self-confidence and humility are mutually exclusive. I believe that you can be self-confident and humble. To me, self-confidence is the belief that you are qualified to do a task and to do it well. To me, self-confidence does not require an attitude that there is no possibility of failure. One with no sence of humility, however, probably does have that attitute.
For me personally, I try to keep an attitude that there are always others out there from whom I can learn something. Hopefully that keeps me humble - - whatever that may be.
...
Doug, I’ve edited the person’s name out of your comments. Let’s not use a particular person as an example and name them, because then arguing against their humility might be inferred by some as insulting.
I truly believe that the ultimate goal of his self-promotion is not for his own benefit, but for that of martial arts.
To me, this says that he is a good politician and plays the game well. He’s adept at perception management. That makes him expert at self-marketing and politics - not humble, imo.
Let’s boil it down more narrowly. When we look at arrogance, we are talking about our impression of someone. A person is not arrogant, a person is seen as arrogant. They engage in behaviors which may or may not give the impression that they are arrogant.
Humility… is this the same or the opposite? If humility is our perception of someone, then we basically interpret behavior which simply “is” as either humble or not. If this is the case, then the intent of the behavior is irrelevant, it is only my perception that matters.
If it is an internal feeling, then I will never know if he is truly humble or not. I only know what his behaviors are.
Therefore, arrogance and humility are not things that people feel, they are interpretations others have of a combination of their behaviors.
Given that, I don’t care about people’s requests, I don’t care about why he did what he did, and I don’t care how much money he made. He wrote a book, and when you write a book, I interpret that as being evidence you believe yourself to be skilled enough to write one, and that’s not humility.
Humility is from the same word as humiliation. I humble person would be one who does not think highly of themselves - someone with a low self-esteem.
Or, because it is a perception, someone who is very polite about thinking highly of themselves and very political - continually denying they think highly of themselves and acting and behaving surprised when complimented.
So, given all of that, when you write a book, my perception is not humility. When you wear a black belt, my perception is not humility. You might engage in certain behaviors that appear humble to most, such as speaking lowly of yourself, or otherwise acting surprised or dismissive of compliments, but I look past those behaviors and what you say to what you do.
Thus, I draw my conclusions based not on why you say you did something (or your contract which you did not have to sign), but rather based on what it is you did.
Teaching a Karate class is not an act of humility. Neither is writing a book.
Others will have different perceptions of humility. But mine is such that I do not view humility as a positive trait. In fact, I believe that it is those we find arrogant or falsely humble who are actually responsible most of what humanity accomplishes, and those who are truly humble inside probably need a therapist.
Humility is not a trait to aspire to. Humility in a man is only valued by his enemies.
When people talk about humility in the martial arts, I view that as their complaining about being out-performed, out-competed, and basically finding themselves confronted with people who are not willing to behave in a way to give the impression they are humble. Maybe they brag on themselves or speak openly of their successes and others’ failures rather than pretending to feel otherwise and being political.
Basically, our desire for someone else to be humble is, imo, unhealthy. It is essentially an attempt to push someone else down in order to feel better about ourselves or a poorly constructed complaint about someone else’s lack of politeness.
Rob, AHHH! I found the podcast. Thank you for enabling the serendipity. I guess the word “courtesy” is more accurate. I guess that I have decided that instructors and students that do not emphasize and practice “courtesy” are not practicing karate. I think that to be sincerely courteous, we must be humble. That is the ideal to me. I think that some of the early instructors “Assumed a virtue, though they had it not;” Funakoshi did a great job of continuing the tradition. There are many karateka and dojos that appear traditional but lose the courtesy. I feel (some,many, most??) Remember the tale of the man who claimed to strip flesh. The contender nor Funakoshi where being humble, so that was a story about something other than karate, to me. I guess I am still trying to get closer my definition of practice in true karate.
...
I do not think that things commonly regarded as boisterous in terms of strong spirit, voice, or assertiveness, have a negative connotation upon humility. Rather, I feel that they are the fruit that we yield from abiding by the truth and humility.
Abiding by humility? What humility? Humility is only something you feel about another person. It is not something you can do.
Anonymous April 20th, 2007 at 4:50 am Link
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the medieval saint of the same name, see Saint Humility.
Humility is a quality or characteristic ascribed to a person who is considered to be humble. A humble person is generally thought to be unpretentious and modest: someone who does not think that he or she is better or more important than others. The concept of humility in various religions is often much more precise and extensive.
Anonymous,
Therefore humility is something others think about another person, not something the other person actually does. You might consider someone humble, but you have no idea if they are actually humble because we cannot read their minds and know what they think. We can only observe their behavior and draw our conclusions about whether or not they are humble.
When I see someone teaching a Karate class, I draw the conclusion they are not humble. Teaching the class is a behavior that I conclude from that they think themselves better at Karate than others and skilled enough to offer a class without being laughed at.
“Humble Karate Instructor” is oxymoronic.
I do not think that ones actions that which self-promote being loved, understood, or respected are things that make it difficult for me to ascribe the label of “humble.” I feel that they are an integral part of the human condition. I feel that once someone diverges from the truth, self perpetuates and emulates a grandiose and unrealistic facade of importance they can not be humble. (Like James Coolys statement coined “The Looking Glass Self,”)…
“We are not what we think we are. We are not what others think we are. We are what we think others think we are.”
This is why I feel that humility is something we can ascribe to ourselves.
anonmousky April 21st, 2007 at 8:47 am Link
...
I think all of this is subjective. My formal education is in Social Psychology; The problem with this humility boggler, I feel, rests under what is called the Sapir- Whorf Hypothesis.
...
Anonymous April 21st, 2007 at 4:33 pm Link
Yea, I guess it is not something that can be extracted and measured. I guess as a karateka, from the way it was taught to me, I feel a responsibility to keep my ego in check, yet to not not to negate my self-worth. I find it very difficult to wrap my mind around all of this. So you helped clairify what I was trying to say by “history of humility,” and “abide by humilty;” It is very much an internalization of the way that I hope others view me and we cannot expect humility to be a verb, as much as it is an adjective.
...
Anonymous April 21st, 2007 at 7:40 pm Link
Well, I do not do these things enough… My way of keeping my “ego in check” is by asking myself before I speak if what I am saying is trying to make others feel better or sell my “ideal persona” to make myself feel better. I guess it is tied into trying to not be mentally selfish. Like physical karate, after enough practice I hope it becomes more second-nature. Yes that is a hard question, because I often am judge and jury when I feel that someone is being arrogant, however such assertion is inherently arrogant within itself. Even my goals of Lao Tzu like selflessness and non-absolutism is driven by the want for higher wisdom; Something that will make me better in comparison to other people. Actually… For the most part, I am unable to answer your question.
Here’s what I think. When you try to keep your ego in check, you are modifying your behavior so that others will not react unfavorably to you. You can say this is for others, but there is no reason to do it for others except out of enlightened self-interest.
Does anyone do anything for any reason other than enlightened self-interest? I think maybe not. I am not a big believer in altruism. Even the most selfless act has at its core the desire to do something for the self. At the very least, the most generous soul wants to be generous, thus his generosity is truly selfish at its core.
So, basically you are trying to act in a way that others will perceive as humble, not actually “being humble.”
Anonymous April 21st, 2007 at 10:48 pm Link
Hmmmm…? With the hindrance his own self interest, he is quite possibly unable to mandate humility upon himself…. as I fantasize that I can for myself. That is a big bubble to burst Rob! Perhaps reaching for humility is as much mental masturbation as is exceptional arrogance. One thing I noticed about my development in karate as a “youngster” is that when I started to become confident in my skills and pretty battered from training every evening, that I no longer felt the need to prove my prowess with machismo or roughhousing amongst peers. The times that I have failed to maintain my practice I have started to become aggressive. Not weight training, running, nor sex has quelled this tendency nearly as well for me. More than just catharsis, I feel that karate is the only way that I can train hard enough to actually be very hard on myself. I usually, at some point in the evenings’ practices, ask myself, “Why are you doing this to yourself again Alex?”(Out of sheer pain, exhaustion, and sense of futility. Karate has something that is magic for me, it seems purge me of anger, megalomania, and (I think)these are conditions of too much self-importance THE NOT SO HUMBLE. I have practiced karate insanely because I feel that it keeps me sane:) That is my oyster !
