Both in the history of philosophy and in everyday understanding, practice is often opposed to theory. My talk raises the questions, what does practice mean if it is not opposed to theory? What alternative notion of practice suggests itself? The theory versus practice distinction has been a powerful tool both in analyzing philosophical problems and in solving everyday ones. But sometimes the distinction gets in our way in seeing things or doing something better. Sometimes seeing—supposedly the theory part—and doing—the practice part—cannot be easily separated. To understand many activities, ranging from everyday actions to social and distinctively religious activities, we need an alternative to the traditional distinction. The alternative I develop supplements, but does not replace, other notions of practice. I inquire into a notion of practice as bodily activity done for its own sake; it is either not goal-oriented at all, or oriented to an internal goal whose fulfillment continues the very same kind of activity. I develop this notion by drawing upon parallels and contrasts with Plato’s and Aristotle’s notions, and referring to several Chinese and Japanese artistic practices.