When people don’t understand things, they often find it easier to create their own explanations. We see this all the time, in every part of society.
.
To psychologists, this behavior is known as ‘rationalization’. If something doesn’t make sense, then make it make sense. Karate is no exception. And salutations in kata is an example of this.
.
My belief is that the kata are a record of the combative techniques, principles and concepts of an individual. Created from two-person drills to provide self-defense mnemonic templates against a civilian populace that had no combative experience.
.
For me, there are no opening “salutations” in kata. Each and every move is designed to have a combative function.
.
Therefore if the kata were created to have a combative function wouldn’t it be logical, or common sense, to ensure each move or technique within the kata had a function or principle that would protect you from harm?
.
It has been suggested that there is a Chinese secret gesture hidden within kata. Let me pursue a counter argument to this.
.
“China hand” (tou-de) was changed to “Empty hand” (karate) during 1936 because Sino-Japanese relations were not very good. The Chinese origins of karate were considered politically incorrect, and the Japanese wanted to promote “karate” as Japanese. Therefore, wouldn’t a symbolic salutation, or a Chinese (not so secret) gesture, be removed from “karate” at that time?
.
As an example, it is assumed that the kata Jiin, Jion and Jitte, “all begin with the Chinese greeting of friendship (the secret gesture)”. If this is true, and with the above in mind, why would it have remained in the kata which was transported to Japan, during this time with such high anti-Chinese sentiment?
.
We know that kata were originally two-person drills combined into a solo representation as a mnemonic tool (a very simple explanation).
.
We also know that the creators of the kata were martial artists, protecting themselves from “villains or ruffians” (Funakoshi) or civilian attacks. Therefore common sense would dictate, wouldn’t it, that there would be no superfluous, non-combative gestures contained within the kata?
.
If we were creating kata today to use as a self-defense template for the modern world, would we incorporate empty gestures or secret hidden symbols? It would be foolhardy wouldn’t it?
.
And of course, the interpretation of salutations or secret gestures, opens a can of worms for many other “gestures” to be part of other kata.
.
“There are no ‘salutation’, religious or empty movements in kata. All movements in the kata have meaning.”- Toguchi Seikichi (1917-1998) 10th dan Goju Ryu
.
In October 1908, Itosu Anko wrote a letter, “Ten Precepts (Tode Jukun) of Karate,” to draw the attention of the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of War in Japan. The beginning of the translation of that letter reads: “Karate did not develop from Buddhism or Confucianism”…. This to me makes it clear that karate is not based on Buddhist or Confucian principles. Itosu obviously felt it important to establish from the beginning that the art he practiced was not an offshoot of these religions / philosophies.
.
Many people believe you can hang a label on anything if you look hard enough. They attach labels to concepts which then become fact..… and that is a problem with much of karate today.
.
When we give something a label our interest can end in exploring a connection with anything other than that label. Labels end up conveying something absolute. That’s difficult to navigate away from once it’s decided.
.
For me you have to challenge the labels: What do they mean? Why? How did the circumstances lead to that label? At a fundamental level, labels are incredibly simplistic, and they hold us back. You have to discuss assumptions to eradicate misunderstanding.
.
My logical, common sense position, is that a combative kata is made up of combative motions and principles, and not empty gestures. What do you believe?
.
.