PDA

View Full Version : Synergy effects: Iaido and Jodo



A. Bakken
6th September 2003, 19:38
I've been practising Iaido for a little over one year, and recently started with Jodo.

According to my Sensei -- and I have no reason to doubt his opinion -- there is no "compability issues" between Iaido and Jodo in terms of footwork, Kamae, etc. (Whereas, between Kendo and Iaido, there are notable differences, or so I'm told.)

Does anyone practise both arts (Iaido-Jodo), and if so, what conclusions have you arrived at in this regard? Do you feel that your Jodo work has improved your Iai (and/or vice-versa)?

For the sake of clarity, I'm referring primarily to the ZNKR curriculum of both arts.

Brian Owens
6th September 2003, 20:23
I'm not familiar with the ZNKR curricula, so can't comment specifically, but I do practice both sword and staff of a different kind, so I can offer a general opinion.

I think you can benefit from Jodo, if for no other reason than balance; sword techniques are very right-side dominant while jo techniques are bilateral.

There is also something to be said about a well-rounded education, "jack-of-all-trades/master-of-none" not withstanding.

R A Sosnowski
6th September 2003, 23:09
Iaido --> Jodo:
Basic swordsmanship techniques; wielding a metal blade which transfers to the Bokuto; the knowledge that Uchi-tachi's Bokuto is a virtual 2.5' "straight-razor" and the Jo is a mere 2 palm-spans longer.

Jodo --> Iaido:
ability to engage Teki (virtual Uchi-Tachi) because you have experience doing pair-practice [the same thing is evident in Iaido-ka who also do Kendo].

FWIW.

Meik Skoss
7th September 2003, 04:28
Jodo, done in the manner of the ZenKenRen seiteigata is quite similar to ZenKenRen seitei iaido. There's not very much difference between the seitei forms for kendo, iaido, and jodo in that they're heavily influenced by kendo's technical rationale. That isn't a bad thing as such, but these seiteigata should be understood for what they are: an attempt to standardize methods of using a sword *for* kendoists. They are not stand-alone arts. Rather, the seiteigata were/are intended to provide exponents of shinai kendo, whose main practice is with "mock" swords made of bamboo (and with VERY different characteristics from a live blade) a way of "expanding" their understanding of what, for the sake of discussion, I'll call Japanese "swordsmanship" (and I do use that term loosely).

Koryu, be it iai or jo, is completely different. There's been lots of discussion about the different lines of Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu and Muso Shinden-ryu (the two styles with the largest following, both in and out of Japan) and how these lines differ in their interpretations of technique, as a whole and in terms of their minutiae. The same is true of Shinto (or Shindo, if you prefer) Muso-ryu, upon which the ZenKenRen jodo seiteigata is based. There are some big differences in how one does mae (or sho hatto), depending on the teacher. There are similar differences in, say monomi and midaredome, depending upon the teacher with whom one has trained.

Is it "necessary" to do jodo along with iaido, or vice versa? Nope. I think it is a moot point as to whether or not it will help or hinder one, however. In the Shinto Muso-ryu line of transmission to which I belong, there's a system of batto (or iai) that is wholly consistent with both the rationale and the movements of the jojutsu waza. There is also a complete system of tanken. They're not "official" parts of the curriculum, but they are there. Personally, I think doing Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu/Shinden-ryu just gets in the way. Why? They're not the same system, there's a different rationale and "flavor" to what they do. Advice: stay within the system and remain consistent.

Likewise, in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu, there's an associated jojutsu system (that *is* part of the curriculum). It is derived from and resembles the waza of the parent kenjutsu. Doing one just enhances the other.

Other koryu that include jo or bo as part of a larger system include Takenouchi-ryu, Tatsumi-ryu, Tendo-ryu, and Toda-ha Buko-ryu, Yagyu Shingan-ryu (hmmm... I seem to be into the Ts tonight). All of these schools have jo and bo waza that meld seamlessly with the main part of their curricula, and there's no disconnect between, say, the ken and jo or bo techniques.

Although we do battojutsu in the Yagyukai and Seiryukai, it's not the main purpose of study. Frankly, I've always thought that iai was, at most, merely a secondary art. Good for some aspects of training, but not all that important when it comes to learning how to deal with an actual human being acting as one's opponent. As a matter of fact, the Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu/Shinden-ryu recognize this with tachiuchi no kurai and kuraizume techniques that involve a partner.

So, does iai improve jo or ken? Naaaaaahhhh... not that much. Does it help in some ways? Sure, especially with hassuji. But for to spend a majority of one's time with an imaginary aite is, errrr... uhhhh... I will try to be polite... not so helpful. Partners are necessary for a reasonable practice. Check the curricula of most koryu to verify this fact -- they don't spend a lot of time playing with themselves.

Hope this helps.

renfield_kuroda
8th September 2003, 06:59
As Niina-gosoke holds Menkyo-kaiden in both Mugairyu Iaihyodo and the style of Shindomusoryu jo that we practice, he encourages us all to try both: the jo-ers have a better grasp of maai and timing from so much partner work, the mugairyu-ers know how to actually wield a sword and cut effectively.

Regards,
r e n

Mekugi
8th September 2003, 08:10
Originally posted by Meik Skoss
Check the curricula of most koryu to verify this fact -- they don't spend a lot of time playing with themselves.

Hope this helps.

Classic Meik Skoss. Kudos. I cracked a rib try to keep myself from chortling too loud.

Doesn't the stick in fact help the sword in the case of SMR, and may I be so bold to assume (uh-oh) that this is the same for the Kendo Renmei?
-R