Web Dojo

an online service of the Nippon Karate-do/Kobudo Seishin-Kan

"Righteousness is simply doing  what  is right."

How do we know what is right?

Without an absolute standard of morality,
might makes right

Only a perfect, all-knowing, and holy Supreme Being is qualified to establish morality

Righteousness

The Seishin-Kan Dojo Kun states:  "Exemplify righteousness." A very short phrase, but certainly an important one.  But, what exactly is righteousness?  And how can it be exemplified?

Most dictionaries define righteousness as "the quality or state of being righteous."  That's not much help, is it?  But, when we look up "righteous" we find something like:  "(1) characterized by uprightness or morality, (2) morally right or justifiable, (3) acting in an upright, moral way, or (4) virtuous."  That's a little better.  Now we know that righteousness is behaving in a moral or virtuous way.  And, when explain our Dojo Kun to a children's class, we tell them:  "Righteousness is simply doing what is right."

But that's where the problem begins, isn't it?  At least for adults, doing what's right isn't always simple.  How do we know what is right in this complicated, convoluted, and morally contradictory world?  By what standard or authority can anyone determine what is right in a particular situation?  Is it simply obeying the law?  Laws are different in different places.  Is it merely a matter of following my own conscience?  Then I may act differently that other people under identical circumstances -- but how can two different actions both be right?  To exemplify righteousness forces us to examine the very nature and existence of right and wrong, good and evil -- morality.

We can only do what is right, if "right" is something that is possible to determine with reasonable certainty.  Let's examine that issue at its most fundamental level.  Morality must either be something that people created for themselves or something that exists regardless of what people think or do.  In other words, it is either an absolute truth or a social construct.

If it is a social construct, then morality is simply a matter of power.  It is either who has the power, or to whom we are willing to give the power, that governs our behavior.  In a democratic society, the majority decides what is right and wrong.  In a collective society, right and wrong are decided by compromise and mutual agreement.  And in a hierarchical society, the monarch, chief, or dictator decides what is right and wrong.  In all cases, however, "might makes right" if morality is a social construct.  And right and wrong change with the whims of society or those in power.

On the other hand, if morality is an absolute truth, then right is right, regardless of who is in power or what people decide among themselves.  And certain behaviors are wrong, even if they are socially acceptable.

Social morality is problematic for the martial artist, since the martial artist's skills provide the ultimate power:  the power of life and death.  With this power, the martial artist has the potential to alter the social order and thereby alter -- or even create -- morality.  It also renders meaningless the concept of seiken ("righteous fist" or "righteous sword").  Therefore, the power of the martial artist must be tempered by a morality that is based upon absolute truth, rather than the power structure of society.  And this leads to the ultimate question:  if there is an absolute standard of morality, what is its source?

The answer must lie either in a Supreme Being or in nature.

If the source of morality lies in nature, apart from any Supreme Being, then perpetuation of life would be its foundation.  At first glance, this might seem a workable premise for a moral system, but not if one is a keen observer of nature.  Perpetuation of life is expressed through survival of the fittest, and this runs contrary to much of the conduct we now consider moral.  Survival of the fittest mandates extermination of the weak to prevent pollution of the gene pool.  So, if we take nature as our source of morality, then helping the aged, the sick, and the downtrodden, is immoral.  The Law of Nature is that the strong prey on the weaker to ensure the survival of future generations.  And once again, we are faced with power as the foundation of morality.

This leads to the final alternative:  that morality is derived from an absolute standard imposed by a Supreme Being.  Only a perfect, all-knowing, and holy Supreme Being would be truly qualified to distinguish between right and wrong as absolute truth.  So, in theory, at least, this is the most workable moral standard for the martial artist.  The problem is, it must be true in order to have validity and value.  If it is merely wishful thinking, then it leaves us where we started:  with power as the foundation for morality!

It is therefore incumbent on the martial artist to determine if there is, in fact, a Supreme Being who has established an absolute standard of righteous conduct.  If so, then it is the martial artist's responsibility -- as the only true constraint on his or her power -- to follow that standard of conduct and thereby "exemplify righteousness."

Back to Dojo Kun

Please give us your comments in our Karate Discussion Forum.

Home  |  Membership |  Privacy Policy  |  Webmaster  |  Contact Us  |  Guest Book  |  JKI Home  |  Store 

© 2003   Leonard J. Pellman