This speculation is very interesting and along the way Johnson makes some very good points, but ultimately his books read more like elaborate 'How to...' manuals, as in 'How to use Sanchin for pushing hands' (Zen Shaolin Karate), 'How to use Sanchin as a Buddhist meditation method' (Barefoot Zen) and 'How to use Sanchin as a sai weapon kata' (The Great Karate Myth). To again repeat the point I made in the introduction to Zen Shaolin Karate, these ideas are not without merit and are interesting in and of themselves. I believe that karateka with a few years experience who are starting to tire of the repetition of the same-old, same-old, could do far worse than consult these books for inspiration and guidance in opening up a new area of training. I just continue to have reservations about the claims made to these approaches as being historically valid.
Barefoot Zen is text heavy and although it does include photographs to help explain the points being made, these are not as good in quality as those found in Zen Shaolin Karate. They do the job, but that's all. The book is 237 pages long, and that's A5 size paper, giving a higher word count per page. In addition to this is a page summarizing the irregularities in orthodox Shorin ryu kata followed by a good glossary, selected bibliography and an index. Barefoot Zen is divided into three sections and fourteen chapters.
The preface begins by introducing the main theory under discussion; that the various pushes, pulls and restraints (Note: not strikes) found within Southern Chinese kung fu styles and original Okinawan karate are to physically illustrate Buddhist notions of harmony and nonviolence. This 'physical Buddhism' was, according to Nathan Johnson, a development of Zen's 'wordless gesture'.
These observations then set the tone for Barefoot Zen.
Chapter One - Kung Fu and Karate: Modern Progeny of an Ancient Art
Chapter One of Barefoot Zen gets off to a good start by examining the wider context in which we practice our arts and the yet-to-be-proven theory that the arts grew up in a spiritualized atmosphere. An early point that is made here pretty much sums up my take on Johnson's work as a whole. He makes the very valid point that to a large extent the martial arts have been taken over by urban combat specialists who promote an air of violence, even if it is in direct response to violence perpetrated towards you. From there Johnson goes on to raise the question of what if the arts were not intended for fighting (as currently portrayed in much of the martial arts media)?
Here lies the dichotomy that I detect running throughout his work. Johnson makes a very good point that is highly relevant to contemporary society, and one that I agree with. I concur that much of the available media is about fighting (and often tooth-and-nail fighting at that). However, to me, this point stands alone as one well made and one to be aware of. Whether or not the arts were originally intended to be peace seeking pursuits doesn't matter to me and I do not feel the original inspiration for the fighting arts needs to impact our contemporary views. Johnson, I repeatedly feel, tries too hard to prove that his contemporary views are authentic (whether considering the Buddhist origins of the arts, or seeing Sanchin as a weapons kata and so on) when I feel there is no need to do so. I think he makes a series of excellent points that stand alone and remain thought provoking; it is when he goes about trying to prove his theories using historical evidence that he runs into trouble (because there is no historical evidence).
The first chapter of Barefoot Zen continues by introducing Zen Buddhism, noting that it is based on universal compassion and concluding that this is incompatible with 'Warrior Zen'. His theories are in direct opposition to my own here and my own teaching of Warrior Zen. This isn't really the place for me to express my own views to overshadow those of an author, except for me to say that while it is true I do not espouse Buddhism as such, it is equally true that I have not ensconced myself in a temple in order to stay 'enlightened'. I am far more influenced by a man like Yamaoka Tesshu than I am by the Buddha. My primary interest (in this particular area at least) is if, and how, karate (and other arts, not necessarily martial) can effect a change in cerebral dominance from the left hemisphere to the right hemisphere. I am interested in the 'spiritual' aspects of the arts more from a neurological perspective than from an historical one. This isn't to say any such historical discussion is of no interest to me, only that it is of secondary interest.
Essentially Johnson takes the view put forward by Patrick McCarthy who argues that while fighting arts no doubt existed in China prior to the establishment of the Shaolin Temple, it was in the temple that the fighting arts were merged with spiritual characteristics and a moral philosophy.
This conclusion forms the background for much of the work that will come.
Chapter Two - Wisdom, not Warfare
This chapter of Barefoot Zen begins by examining the Chinese kung fu roots of karate and makes a series of fair points; namely that Chinese teachers influenced the known development of karate on Okinawa and the the 'militarized' version of karate that we see today was not how it was originally taught or practiced. Japanese militarism developed hand-in-hand with nationalism and Johnson examines the appropriateness of Funakoshi sensei changing the kanji used to write karate from 'China Hand' to 'Empty Hand'. I have written about my views on this in the history and development of karate. Essentially I see the development of karate in a somewhat different light and do not hold the opinion that it - taken in its entirety - is the exclusive result of Chinese kung fu influences (though the original kata themselves are).
Johnson is critical of Funakoshi sensei in Barefoot Zen at this point for his writing in Karate Do Kyohan that to continue to call karate 'China Hand' was both inappropriate and degrading. I feel the situation was somewhat more complex than that however. First, the name change was first advocated by Hanashiro Chomo in 1905. Second, by 1936 (when Karate Do Kyohan was first published) Japan and China had already fought one war (1894-1895), Japan had expanded into Manchukuo / Manchuria and war was looming once again and would break out the following year over the Marco Polo Bridge Incident. Japanese militarists share most, if not all, the blame for these events, and Funakoshi sensei was caught up in a distinctly anti-Chinese climate. In these circumstances I can see why the term 'inappropriate' was used and can understand also why the term 'degrading' was also originally used. Less forgivable is that in the subsequent post-war edition the term 'degrading' was not removed (though I continue to see a case to be made for keeping the term 'inappropriate').
Johnson next deals successively with different misconceptions regarding the development of karate and makes a series of good points in Barefoot Zen. He discounts the idea that the art was intended for battlefield use to thwart Shimazu invaders, or that the art had any connection at all with the samurai class. He also points out that while changes were made by Okinawans in Okinawa, many of the changes have occurred during export from Okinawa itself to mainland Japan and other parts of the world. Johnson, in Barefoot Zen, sees these cultural shifts as taking karate successively further and further away from its Shaolin roots. This observation led Johnson to begin investigating the original source kata far more critically and in comparison to Chinese kung fu forms. He set up small research groups first at Southampton University and later at Oxford and Portsmouth.
I mention this - as the author does in Barefoot Zen - because later he will claim that his work is the result of 'research at Oxford University' which implies that it is academic in nature (and of the highest academic standard at that if we consider it to have taken place at Oxford University). What Nathan Johnson should perhaps state more accurately is that he set up training groups (as in makeshift dojo practice) at these universities (he was the senior instructor at Oxford University for seven years); these groups appear to have been of the variety you would find at the YMCA or in a local sports center; non-full time dojo that happened to run classes out of universities. There is nothing to suggest that his work (in any of his books) is the result of qualified academic research and in fact at no time in any of his books does he actually quote any academic texts (whether journals or books). I draw attention to this point because it seems to me that Johnson is attempting to plant the idea in the mind of the reader that his theories in Barefoot Zen are more substantial than they in fact are.
Johnson continued his research by specializing in three kata which he regards as being the core of Okinawan karate (as did Master Chojun Miyagi); these are Sanchin, Tensho / Rokusho and Naifunchin / Naihanchi / Tekki. The premise he presents in Barefoot Zen is that these forms evolved from the Shaolin Temple and that they are, first and foremost, a type of Zen 'wordless gesture'. His task then is to demonstrate an historical link between these kata and the Shaolin Temple. Shortly after this declaration he tells us that '[Naifuanchin] stands as a record that has preserved immutable truths for centuries....I do not think it valid for people to change one of history's messages because they've failed to understand its language'. How he knows that this form contains these immutable truths is not revealed; nor does he describe how he knows the form itself has remained unchanged (at least until recent times). Despite this lack of evidence, Barefoot Zen declares that these forms (and attendant training methods) were devised to produce a spiritual warrior rather than a super-fighter.
Chapter Three - The Sacred Science
In this chapter of Barefoot Zen Johnson introduces the idea of a Sacred Science. He uses this term to describe the collection of interconnected spiritual systems that have contributed to the formulation of Zen. He argues that such a science is both timeless and universal and serves the purpose of raining human consciousness to its highest level.
Here I do of course disagree with such a notion. Influenced as I am by the work of Dr Julian Jaynes and Tony Wright I do not see human consciousness as being fixed, but rather as something dynamic and something that continues to change (whether it is evolving is debatable) today. This also continues to explain in part why I am less concerned with the historical origins of karate vis a vis its purported Shaolin origins (whether those put forward in Barefoot Zen or otherwise). Basically if the theory put forward by Jaynes and Wright is correct then our consciousness has shifted since the time of Shaolin at a neurological level (for the most part with humanity becoming more and more left cerebral hemisphere dominant at the expense of right hemisphere contact). As a result the methods we need to use to restore contact with our right cerebral hemisphere will be in certain respects at least, different. Buddha for example encouraged the pursuance of a 'middle way' and rejected ascetic practices. While this may have worked for him, I have attempted to demonstrate that some 500 years later Jesus was forced to retreat into the desert and undergo a harsh period of meditation to establish full contact with his right cerebral hemisphere. Several hundred years later Mohammed followed a similar course as Jesus. I would argue that the need for more extreme, ascetic methods is a reflection of the continued shift to left brain hemisphere dominance which, as it becomes more total makes it harder for us to recontact our right brain hemisphere, thereby necessitating evermore extreme methods. In short, I reject that there is, in a pure sense, any such thing as a timeless spiritual teaching (though I do not deny that such teachings will have many things in common).
Johnson describes the teachings of the Sacred Sciences as being designed to erase, or reduce, the fear and doubt associated the the futility of life and an inevitable death. He continues in Barefoot Zen that practitioners are able to master negative instinctual behavior and one method for doing so is through the practice of Shaolin-inspired karate.
Nathan Johnson now goes into more detail with regard to why he believes karate kata were developed. He continues in Barefoot Zen stating that the original motivation for the Shaolin masters was not to develop a combative methodology but to 'simply' teach a monk how to deal with a physical force without resorting to aggression and without allowing that force to hurt you in some way. Johnson believes that through this practice of harmonizing with an incoming force the practitioner is able to enter the Tao, which he describes as 'the way of things'.
Seen from this perspective Johnson is frank in Barefoot Zen and states simply that if one's objective in training is to be able to fight then Shaolin-based arts are inappropriate as they will fail to provide a suitable answer. With this different purpose for the kata in mind the author believes that someone new or uninitiated can suffer confusion when practicing the forms for combat. Of course they don't make sense in a fight..they were never supposed to!! is the simple conclusion. As harming another is seen to go against the basic precepts of Buddhism Johnson feels that there can never be such a thing as a Buddhist art designed to mete out punishment against attackers.
At this point Johnson introduces some speculative evidence to support his idea that Sanchin is a non-violent form with its origins in the Shaolin Temple. In the video you can see Master Morio Higaonna performing a technique called mawashi uke at 01:36 - 01:44. First of all, consider the hand positions prior to the arms being thrust forward. One hand has the fingers pointed upward; the other has the fingers pointed down. These are, according to Johnson, representations of classical Indian mudras, specifically the Abhaya mudra (fingers up) and the Varada mudra (fingers down). As the arms are turned (performing what most people believe to be a block), Johnson argues that this circular movement is symbolically representing a Tibetan Buddhist ritual gesture known as 'turning the dharma wheel'. No specific evidence is provided, except that, to Johnson, it looks that way. Johnson believes that these gestures and postures help the practitioner to experience the 'Zen mind', which he describes in Barefoot Zen as the one seeing the interconnectedness of things and the oneness of it all (essentially describing the right cerebral hemisphere). Personally I found this very interesting, but as I have said before, only as an interesting point and not as an established fact.
The next section of Barefoot Zen is of particular interest to me as it continues the investigation of Zen and satori from the point of view of the two brain hemispheres.
Johnson begins by differentiating man from animal; while we share certain characteristics, humans - unlike animals - possess the unique ability to reflect on their experiences and actions. We are able to consider multiple options rather than follow a simple 'flight or fight' reaction (in most cases anyway, there may well be desperate situations where we are unable to consciously override our reptilian brain). Resulting from this we as a species hold our free will close to our hearts.
The ability to reflect is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand we can reflect on the fact that we are alive and take joy in the moment; on the other hand further reflection leads us to conclude that one day we will die and, in some way, something will be lost. This can lead to anxiousness, helplessness and even fear. It is this duality, according to experts and endorsed by Johnson in Barefoot Zen that give rise to the spiritual impulse and, at a crude level, the desire to feel good about death.
According to Asian mystics this - feeling good about death - can be achieved through the harmonization of different aspects of our brains. On the one hand we have our two cerebral hemispheres which have somewhat different functions but which are nevertheless connected in different ways. We also have our lower, mid and upper level brains; the medulla oblongata (reptilian brain), the mid-brain (mammalian brain) and the cerebrum (the upper brain comprising of two hemispheres). Again, using a crude image, the aim of the mystics was to achieve harmony across the whole brain (left and right cerebral hemispheres) and up and down (from the reptilian brain up through the mammalian brain and onto the cerebrum).
The first technology to appear known to have attempted to solve this problem was (and is) yoga. Johson declares in Barefoot Zen that the Shaolin 'fighting' styles are a direct lineal descent from this ancient method of personal development.
Chapter Five - Trimarga: the Triple Path to Zen
Johnson states immediately that yoga, Buddhism and the Tao all contributed to the development of Zen. Yoga, he maintains, was the progenitor of the practices at the Shaolin Temple, while Taoism mingled with Mahayana Buddhism to create Chan (Zen) Buddhism.
Johnson explains in Barefoot Zen that the term yoga has its root in the word yuj which means to unite or join; referring to the unification of the four parts of the brain (reptilian, mammalian and the two cerebral hemispheres). Once achieved, the practitioner is able to enter into a union with God, or the eternal.
However, it should be noted that yoga is heavily tied to Hinduism, rather than Buddhism and this is another aspect of Barefoot Zen that I found unsatisfactory. Johnson admits that there are doctrinal differences between Hinduism and Buddhism, such as whether or not there is a permanent self, but notes that such a discussion is outside the scope of his book. Fair enough, this is potentially a convoluted discussion but, it has to be said, it is also the most fundamental point that distinguishes Hinduism from Buddhism. The aims of meditation of any type for a Hindu and a Buddhist are ultimately different and, followers of the two respective religions will argue, the actual practice of meditation will produce different results. Hindu posits that ultimately there is a universal observer; Buddhism that there is no one to observe and no thing to observe. My personal opinion, related to my research, is that these discoveries, occurring as they did in different times of our history, point to differences in consciousness through time and indicate that consciousness is not fixed or permanent.
Moving on though, Johnson continues in Barefoot Zen by examining Buddhism, and here he makes an important point that will be of relevance later when I examine The Great Karate Myth. Johnson states simply that Buddhism would not accept the use of any kind of weapon. This in itself is too simplistic a view. While doctrinal Buddhism certainly rejects violence of any kind a reading of Buddhism in history indicates that Buddhists - monks and lay persons alike - have resorted to violence and bloodshed in different parts of the world. More pertinent though to Johnson's line of argument is that in Barefoot Zem he is arguing that Sanchin is a Buddhist kata designed to promote enlightenment and is, by necessity, weaponless. He overturns his own argument in The Great Karate Myth though when he attempts to prove (with an equal lack of evidence) that Sanchin is a weapon form (albeit using a 'safe' sai). Buddhism ultimately rejects violence because of its rejection of self and other (contrary therefore to Hinduism). Compassion for oneself is to have compassion for others and vice versa.
This chapter of Barefoot Zen continues b looking at other factors that influenced Buddhism and through Buddhism, Zen, along with Chinese Taoism. Johnson offers an interesting definition of the Taoist idea of wu wei, which is normally understood as non-action or non-resistance. Johnson defines it as 'unmotivated action', meaning a total lack of premeditation or intention. Taoism, we learn in Barefoot Zen, is about discovering the interdependence of all things and the 'divine' (nameless) inspiration behind all of existence. This is discovered in the moment and by harmonizing with the timeless moment the Taoist becomes immortal.
