PDA

View Full Version : Qualifying Koryu?



Paul Steadman
9th October 2000, 10:34
Hi Again All,

While in the process of etsblishing a koryu budo/bujutsu federation in Australia, the question arised (from many Ozzie branch koryu sensei & monjin) as to whether recent (ie. post 1868) combat arts such as Toyama-ryu Batto-jutsu and Daito-ryu Aiki-jujutsu etc should be considered for membership. What do you think?

Personally I see no problem with Toyama-ryu and Daito-ryu being qualified as koryu (even they do not pre-date the Meiji-era). Kodokan Judo, Shotokan/Goju/Shito-ryu Karate-do, Kendo/ZNKR Iaido and Aikido, would not qualify (obviously!). Nor would certain Jujutsu & Aikijutsu groups who use Japanese sounding ryu-names (but do not have a Soke or Shihan HQ'd in Japan), for obvious reasons.

I am interested in everyones comments. All the best. Take care.

Regards,

Paul Steadman

Yamantaka
10th October 2000, 00:00
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul Steadman
[B]Hi Again All,
While in the process of etsblishing a koryu budo/bujutsu federation in Australia, the question arised (from many Ozzie branch koryu sensei & monjin) as to whether recent (ie. post 1868) combat arts such as Toyama-ryu Batto-jutsu and Daito-ryu Aiki-jujutsu etc should be considered for membership. What do you think?

YAMANTAKA : If you are establishing a KORYU Budo/Bujutsu Federation in Australia, GENDAI Bujutsu as the Toyama Ryu and the Daito Ryu are out. Point.
Best regards
Ubaldo.

Daniel Lee
10th October 2000, 02:49
That's a tough issue.

I wonder what stipulations organisations such as the nihon kobudo shinkokai have for accepting a system?

Personally, I see systems like Daito Ryu and can make comparisons with another art from the Aizu-han, Asayama Ichiden Ryu Taijutsu, another historical art. What do you think we should consider when categorising arts as "koryu" or "other than koryu"?

Paul Steadman
10th October 2000, 07:46
Thanks Daniel,

I agree with you there. I think that comtemporary Japanese bujutsu arts that can show a direct link & line of transmission with the classical arts (such as Daito-ryu and Toyama-ryu for example) should be considered for membership. Or the proposed federation could be called just Nippon Bujutsu Federation of Australia or something.

Also, I think Toyama-ryu is a member of the Kobudo Shinkokai (please correct me if I'm wrong), I do know that they perform at Kobudo Shinkokai demos.

Kind regards,

Paul Steadman

MarkF
10th October 2000, 09:04
Originally posted by Paul Steadman:


Personally I see no problem with Toyama-ryu and Daito-ryu being qualified as koryu (even they do not pre-date the Meiji-era). Kodokan Judo, Shotokan/Goju/Shito-ryu Karate-do, Kendo/ZNKR Iaido and Aikido, would not qualify (obviously!). Nor would certain Jujutsu & Aikijutsu groups who use Japanese sounding ryu-names (but do not have a Soke or Shihan HQ'd in Japan), for obvious reasons.


I agree with you there. I think that comtemporary Japanese bujutsu arts that can show a direct link & line of transmission with the classical arts (such as Daito-ryu and Toyama-ryu for example) should be considered for membership. Or the proposed federation could be called just Nippon Bujutsu Federation of Australia or something.



Don't you find it just a bit stuffy to admit Toyama-ryu and daito-ryu into the club, and in the same breath nix Kodokan judo, kendo, iaido, kyudo, and on and on, because there may be a link which goes back much further? Kodokan judo had a Shihan in Japan and always has, as does daito ryu and Toyama ryu, not to mention kyudo/kyujutsu and others you have mentioned. Certainly, there are more than enough questionble organizations necessarily "prohibited" from membership because they are, well, quesionable.

As an example, Judo can be traced back to at least the late eighteenth century and was used much in the same way to describe jujutsu of that time. The Kodokan started as Kodokan jujutsu, and only later was it given the name judo, as a "way" to describe its purpose and not the practice, just as jujutsu was not only fighting arts, but were a way of life, too. I could go into the history of its founder or "shihan" Prof. Kano shihan, as he held menkyo in at least two ryuha of jujutsu, and probaby menjo in a third. Because you disapprove of what judo became, is no reason to nix it and the others from this organizations.

What about "Nippon budo/bujutsu Association of Australia or possibly Dai Nippon bugei kai kan of Australia? Oh, and one more thing. Who is the soke in Japan who legitimizes this group?:D

Joseph Svinth
10th October 2000, 13:00
I'd say you need to start by defining terms and then decide what the true discriminators are.

* Is it the ability to dress and use appropriate manners? Then include Bon Odori and Kabuki; what you are trying to encourage is Japanese cultural artifact.

* Is it a dislike for sport (both British and German models, ideas that arose coincident with Meiji)? Then define sport and allow all clubs opposed to sport-for-sport's sake to join.

*Is your goal to have a fellowship of people who practice things done in Japan before 1868? Then, while that excludes karateka because the Ryukyus were not part of Japan before 1868, it should include breast-strokers because the breaststroke was a popular military training event in pre-Meiji Japan.

Etc.

Otherwise prepare for complaints such as the following: Toyama Ryu is more gendai than boxing. After all, Jigoro Kano's cousin was promoting boxing at Kobe as early as 1909 and the Toyama military academy adopted boxing in 1924. So, if Toyama Ryu is included, why isn't boxing, which traces roots to at least the 1680s?

ghp
10th October 2000, 19:54
Paul,

Toyama Ryu is definitely Gendai as it was established in 1925. However, for some reason or another, Toyama Ryu (through Nakamura sensei) is a member of the Nippon Kobudo Shinkokai (if I correctly remember the name), and every year they conduct enbu at Meiji Jingu as part of that organization. I was fortunate enough to participate once.

The Toyama Ryu kata were formed by committee and Nakayama Hakudo has been credited as the "founder." Actually, there was a study group at the Rikugun Toyama Academy looking at ways to teach combat effective kenjutsu to the officers and NCOs. As part of the study group, Lieutenant Morinaga Kiyoshi (a newly minted officer) wrote the letter to Nakayama asking his support. Nakayama had taught at various times at the academy (Omori Ryu) and was the penultimate master of kendo in Japan at the time (his superior was Takano Sasaburo).

Five kata were devised by Nakayama and co. Morinaga taught at the academy during various tours of duty as a lieutenant, captain, and major. As a lieutenant colonel he was the Director of Kenjutsu in 1935 or so. The forward written in the "Kenjutsu Kyohan Shokai" was written by Lt. Col Morinaga, but the camp commander, a general, signed the forward. In about 1935 or so, Maj (or LtC) Morinaga dropped kata #5 and inserted a new #5, plus 6 and 7. Today's kata #8 (Nakamura-ha and Yamaguchi-ha) was actually a test cutting technique taught in the back of the 1939 manual "Gunto no Soho oyobi Tameshigiri." In 1945 Morinaga sensei was a full colonel and assigned to an infantry regiment; he retired as a colonel. Sometimes you see "Colonel Morinaga wrote a letter to Nakayama..." well; that was very confusing because he was a lieutenant at that time, but the Japanese author used Morinaga sensei's retired rank.


Regards,
Guy