PDA

View Full Version : Draeger & MSR/MJER Bashing



Paul Steadman
9th October 2000, 11:27
Hi All,

Yes it's me again! What do all you Muso Shinden Ryu and Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu people think of Donn Draeger's anti-Hayashizaki Jinsuke Line Iaijutsu (and maybe pro-Katori Shinto Ryu) comments (which I don't agree with at all)in his various books? IE: Seiza & Tate-Hiza not combat effective, Wearing sword across body at 45-deg's & danger of Saya-ate, etc. etc. I can't think of his other negative comments at the moment.

I asked a Japanese student of the Komei Juku style of Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu about the above and he gave me some excellent answers. So what do you all think of Drager's comments? All the best.

Regards,

Paul Steadman

Meik Skoss
9th October 2000, 13:43
P. Steadman wrote: "What do all you Muso Shinden-ryu and Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu people think of Donn Draeger's anti-Hayashizaki Jinsuke kine iaijutsu (and maybe pro-Katori Shinto-ryu) comments (which I don't agree with at all) in his various books? I.e.: seiza and tatehiza not combat effective, wearing a sword across one's body at a 45-degree angle and the danger of saya-ate, etc., etc. I can't think of his other negative comments at the moment."

What do I think? He was right about the fact that neither a seiza or tatehiza position allows for very rapid, efficient movement in drawing a sword. He demonstrated this to me by having me sit in front of him and draw on him (I was doing Eishin-ryu at the time). He let me get almost all the way out of the scabbard before leaping to his right and cutting in one continuous moment (I can't recall if that's saken or uken). In any case he proved his point. I've since done the same with other people, although Yagyu Seigo-ryu's iaigoshi is a bit different from that of Shinto-ryu, it's still much (MUCH) more effective than seiza.

Similarly with the method of sashikata. By having the sword sticking out at a 45-degree angle, one has to go through an inefficient sequence of movements to acquire the target and begin the cut. Saya-ate notwithstanding (I don't think that a sword is de rigeur as business dress for the modern road warrior), it's more efficient to wear/carry one's sword so the daito more or less straight on in the direction that one is walking. In fact, it's necessary to wear it that way if one is wearing daisho (which *was* the norm, after all).

Try wearing a shoto the next time you do iai and you'll see that Draeger was right: with two swords in one's sash, it's not possible to wear a daito at the standard "iaido" angle. I know that most of the guys in my dojo do it that way, but Yagyu Sensei has *never* said anything about my wearing the long sword with it in line with my side. Indeed, he said it was a little more realistic and that's the way *he* does it when he's practising battojutsu. That's good enough for me.

Finally, you have to understand why Draeger was saying what he did about modern iaido. I won't go into all of that now, except to say that he was trying to point out that there is a lot of stuff being taught that has been changed by people of post-WWII vintage who've never used a sword in reality and that a certain degree of verity is being lost thereby.

It doesn't matter that these teachers have wonderful waza and/or are terrific people -- THEY JUST DON'T KNOW. There's only one way to ensure that the essential nature of koryu is transmitted: don't mess with it. Sure, it's okay to have a sort of individual style, but when people start messing with the rationale to suit themselves, one is really doing himself and the art a disservice. That's what's happening with the ZenKenRen iaido seiteigata and it really shows how wrong it is. Talk about inane technique! Versions 1.0~12.6 (or wherever it's at now) have little to commend themselves in any meaningful way.

So don't be slamming Draeger. At least he knew what he was talking about, more'n people want to admit. Sure, he was a bit crotchety about it, but *he* was entitled to be.

Gordon Smith
9th October 2000, 14:38
I'll start by admitting my general inexperience and youth...

Anyway, as it was explained to me, long time back, iaido kata come from a variety of sources. My understanding of the core of iai is perfection of technique. You are all wrapped up in your zen appreciation of life and beauty when you are called upon to unleash a killing will channeled through your sword. It is this instantaneous shift (among other things) that makes perfect technique difficult.

I feel that this is part of the underlying lesson in iai (heck, I also find in in my karate) kata. Work the forms as perfectly and precisely as possible, so that in reality (when everything goes to pot), the 10% that comes out is continually improving. Performing good technique out of seiza or tatehiza is difficult, but if you can do it, surely you're standing techniques will improve.

I find that kata are often the "artistic" side of martial arts. They often are a bit more fluid and "pretty." The sword position falls under this category. There is a nice balance in "start in the center-end in the center" positioning of the tsuka. Yes, it may not be "positionally realistic", but there is grace and beauty to be considered as well. I also think that there is some advantage in the fact that with the tsuka in the center, it is easier to grasp the tsuka quickly.

I realize that this may seem self-contradicting, but I anxiously await other opinions.

As for seitei, I have been reminded that it is a series of compromises to be able to allow groups from different ryu to get together and train, sort of. What is considered important changes depending on who is in charge, and as such, it is prone to being altered (again and again and again). After wrestling with the pros and cons of this, I finally just decided to train as I have been taught, and use seminars and the seitei they show whichever year as a n opportunity to learn flexibility.

-G-

Rennis
9th October 2000, 16:10
I agree that MSR/MJER take alot of abuse and I can see your view point in saying Draeger is biased, but it is also important to understand his viewpoint to see if his bias is justified or not and as Meik explained above, from the point of view efficiency of technique he was taking, it is perfectly understandable.

Now as far as seiza and such being used with in Eishin Ryu, probably my favorite story on this topic happened about a year ago. I was doing the guest thing at the police dojo in Kusatsu city in Shiga prefecture and training with Omori Masao sensei, a 90 year old, "very" long time Eishin ryu exponent who was teaching a group of new students the Omori ryu kata. He suddenly stops everyone and says "Now these are all done in seiza, but don't *ever* think that this is how you would actually do them. It is for training purposes only and no warrior would even actually use these techniques in seiza".

I'd also agree with the sword in a straight line bit as well. While talking to a group of Zen Ken Ren practitioners of a given ryu, they stressed to me that the sword should be at the Seitei standard 45 degreeangle across the front. I later visited an old non-affiliated menkyo kaiden of the same ryu and the very first thing he says to me while demostrating some basic draws is "It should be in a line here. That centered in the front thing is completely wrong and due to the damn seitei kata messing up everyone's iai." He then proceeded to pull out some old densho explaining this point (I couldn't really read it, but...).

As Meik said, listen to the old guys, they know what they're talking about...

Best Regards,
Rennis Buchner

Erik Tracy
9th October 2000, 16:47
Here we go again.

Right and wrong. Who the heck is really going to be the definitive source here? It's like arguing who is more powerful, Godzilla or the Michelin Tire man?

I whole heartedly agree on the comment of the Omori-ryu Shoden Seiza Waza. They were *never* meant or conceived or intended to be interpreted as "combat effective" - a popular misconception for those snipping at MJER.

As for the "proper angle" thang.

Why on earth wear the tsuka pointing straight ahead - it increases the distance/time your right hand has to travel to draw the sword and unnecessarily exposes the right hand and wrist to being cut by your opponent (not too many one handed samurai) [tongue in cheek]

Well, at least that's the way I've been taught by my sensei and shown by the head of our ryu-ha of MJER iai-jutsu - he's an old guy too!

Neither have problems wearing daisho at the "angle" thing either. I've seen both perform koryu techniques quite efficiently with daisho. Hmmmmmm.

What I object to are these absolute interpretations: who the heck is going to "prove" them out? We can say that there are differences of opinions based on what we are taught in our respective traditions - and that being based on differences in philosophies of application. "Right" or "Wrong"??? Come on.

Erik Tracy
MJER Iai-jutsu
Jikishin-Kai

Dennis Hooker
9th October 2000, 17:32
Suppose you had this guy that was a Grandmaster of iaijutsu, and suppose the guy loved the tea ceremony. Suppose he thought so highly of both that merged the two so his followers could benefit form both at some level of their study. Now suppose this old dude died and his students, or some of them anyway misunderstood the meaning of this practice. Or suppose they only studied the new merged forms. What might happen?

What might one current grandmaster do to establish some balance and reasonableness to his art? I always got more questions than answers.

Dennis Hooker
http://www.shindai.com

Paul Steadman
10th October 2000, 02:13
Hi Guys,

Thanks for your comments. Mr Skoss I wasn,t slammin Draeger, and Rennis I do respect and listen to the old guys! Anyway I thought you two were the ones pushing the "Draeger Shouldn't be Deified & Wasn't Always Right," band-wagon.

I asked a member of the Komei Juku his opinion on the subject of Draeger's negative MSR/MJER comments and I was offered the following:

1- Seiza is not a combat posture. It's used to engender formality and etiquette. The shoden series teaches basic sword handling & etiquette and as an intro to moving and using the sword. And the techniques don't have to be performed from seiza!

2- Tate-hiza was a sitting posture utilised by the bushi while he was at rest (maybe while wearing armour), as you can't (& shouldn't) sit in seiza in armour. Actually I was told that one would actually sit taylor-fashion (anza, or crossed-legged) and if under threat or danger was imminent one moved into tate-hiza from anza in prep for action.

3- Wearing the sword at 45-deg's across the body is very important. When someone grabs you in a bear-hug from the front, you can still draw your sword (daito or shoto), and the Komei Juku student did demonstrate wearing daisho at 45-deg's with no problems at all. Also, having the sword at 45-deg's protects you from exposing your wrist from kote-uchi when you grip your sword. Wearing the tsuka straight out in front at 90=deg's exposes your wrist to being cut.

4- Avoiding saya-ate with the sword at 45-deg's is easily done by moving your sword+scabbard and body when you have to pass by another bushi (Yagyu Shinga Ryu Heiho-jutsu has a number of stepping techniques designed for this).

Mr Skoss wrote "....neither a seiza or tatehiza position allows for very rapid, efficient movement in drawing a sword. He demonstrated this to me by having me sit in front of him and draw on him (I was doing Eishin-ryu at the time). He let me get almost all the way out of the scabbard before leaping to his right and cutting in one continuous moment (I can't recall if that's saken or uken)."

The same would be true if the situation were reversed ie: A MJER practitioner has a Shinto-ryu parctitioner sit in front of him and draw on him with Uken/Saken/Tobi-gote etc. The MJER parctioner could respond in kind with any technique. It doesn't prove anything (by the way not all MSR/MJER styles have that stupid slow 3-hour nukitsuke routine while trying to become one with the universe or defeating the enemy within crap).

Mr Skoss also wrote "By having the sword sticking out at a 45-degree angle, one has to go through an inefficient sequence of movements to acquire the target and begin the cut. Saya-ate notwithstanding (I don't think that a sword is de rigeur as business dress for the modern road warrior), it's more efficient to wear/carry one's sword so the daito more or less straight on in the direction that one is walking. In fact, it's necessary to wear it that way if one is wearing daisho (which *was* the norm, after all)." and "Try wearing a shoto the next time you do iai and you'll see that Draeger was right: with two swords in one's sash, it's not possible to wear a daito at the standard "iaido" angle.

I don't agree, and in addition to point 3 above, I can't see any 'inefficient sequence of movements,' in MSR/MJER techniques (ZNKR Iaido Seitei Gata on the other hand...need I say more!). Most MSR/MJER techniques have the tsuka-gashira heading in the direction of the target, and when the blade is clear of the scabbard it is already on its way to the target. One could say that the Katori Shinto Ryu movement of inverting the open hand (palm-up) momentarily above the tsuka (so the kimono sleeve doesn't get caught on the tsuka...according to some British iaidoka) before drawing the blade, is inefficient and telgraphs the bushi's intention (but I know a bushi trained in KSR wouldn't perform that pre-draw ritual in actual combat). A bit like non-budoka who say korody (read karate) is stupid and won't work outside the dojo because the aggressor can slam the korody guy while he is performing the pre-fight bow! And again I have been shown how to wear the daisho, with the daito at 45-deg's with no problems at all.

Rennis wrote "Now as far as seiza and such being used with in Eishin Ryu, probably my favorite story on this topic happened about a year ago. I was doing the guest thing at the police dojo in Kusatsu city in Shiga prefecture and training with Omori Masao sensei, a 90 year old, "very" long time Eishin ryu exponent who was teaching a group of new students the Omori ryu kata. He suddenly stops everyone and says "Now these are all done in seiza, but don't *ever* think that this is how you would actually do them. It is for training purposes only and no warrior would even actually use these techniques in seiza".

I agree, actually no waza within any bujutsu kata system (kenjutsu, jujutsu etc.) has to be done as it is in the kata in actual combat application, that would be defeating the purpose of kata training. And instructors who insist on telling their students that it has to be like this and no other way except as it is in the kata, are giving kata based bujutsu a bad rep.

In closing I think that there are a lot of genaralisations and mis-information about MJER (a lot of that stems from ZNKR iaido people claiming the old 'Seitei Gata is made up of MSR, MJER & other koryu waza...,' as well) and everyone mistaking MSR/MJER with ZNKR Iaido Seite Gata, which is definetly not the same at all, there's no comparison in my book.

Also I bear no dis-respect to Don Draeger, I was studying his books in 1984 before it was vogue to do so in Australia, when most so-called martial artists in Australia thought that the Bushi trained in Shotokan Karate-do and wore white gi and kuroi-obi and caught shinken in there bare-hands when defending against a kiri-oroshi. In reference to the "Deification of Don Draeger," article, he was the first to study, train and open the doors for others, and his writings are fantastic (if it wasn't for his books I'd still be training in Kendo and Karate-do) but maybe some of his information is becomming dated and some of his info was biased. But I definetly agree with what he said about post WWII budo.

Thanks for your comments. All the best.

Regards,

Paul Steadman

[Edited by Paul Steadman on 10-09-2000 at 08:19 PM]

hyaku
10th October 2000, 05:29
Hello everyone, I would just like to add that Oe Masamichi reintroduced the Seiza Nobu to educate people to use their hips in cutting. You could say its the Seitei(fundamentals) of MJER (not Seitei Kata)

Also Tate-hiza has two methods. The toes on the back foot being turned up or down. To differentiate between these methods I think we should simply ask ourselves, Are we doing a techniques that were used inside or outside? Is the opponent sitting or standing. Bringing either the left or right leg forward quickly and raising the body adds impetous to kiriage techniques at an already standing opponent. Unfortunately Iai gives us little freedom of choice. Do these iai forms work in Tameshigiri?

Do we sit in Seiza outside? Quite a repetitive dilemma for Japanese Iai people that again repeated itself two days ago when I asked a group of Jikiden people Hono Embu at a Shrine. If its mostly Iai, some people usually bring a groundsheet which they put down after I finish my Embu.
Wearing the sword at 45 degrees with the Tsukagashira centered or the tsuba centered is debatable. If someone grabs you in a bearhug from the front what do you do?

I have to agree with Mr Skoss on the positioning of swords.

Wearing two swords is a study within itself. Much like starting all over again with a Shinken. The angle they are worn at. The Obi layer they are put in.The method of tying the sageo. Sayabiki? The Sayas have a sort of locking effect where they fit in together but do not hinder in the drawing of either. If there is a mistake in even wearing them they cannot be drawn quickly and efficiently and will cause injury to the initiator rather than the opponent. Also although Noto is not part of a technique it can not be done effectively. If the Daito is at 45 degrees where are you wearing the shortsword when that bearhug comes?

I dont want to knock ZNKR Seiteigata, but when it was initially introduced at the first World Kendo Taikai it was clearly stated that it was an introduction to Iai for Kendoka. And that anyone wishing to take up Iai seriously should join a Ryu. It is now well out of hand. This mixing problem is having very serious effects in Japan. Now it is not just a student problem. When asking about the failure and low level of a Taikai it seems that it is not the students that are at fault but the Judges in not being able to recognize what is what!

As Mr Buchner says it is only the senior Sensei that are capable of clearly differentiating what is Seitei Kata and Iai Waza. With MJER So-Makuri and Nukiuchi being added to Seitai next year, where will it all end? I see no point in bastardizing techniques that already exist in a recognized Ryu. A 7th dan Iai teacher of a recognised Ryu having to do Seitei for his 8th Dan in front of a group of teachers from other Ryu does not go down very well either.

In Iai and Koryu there are very subtle differences in the use or non use of Kikentai Uchi/Ichi, Hakuryoku, Stance, Kiai etc. Differences that must remain seperate if we are to examine and practice these arts to a high degree and teach them to future generations.

http://www.bunbun.ne.jp/~sword (Iai Seiza Nobu and Kage Ryu Batto Pics updated.

Hyakutake Colin (Mista Colin!)

Paul Steadman
10th October 2000, 08:05
Hi Colin,

You wrote "Wearing the sword at 45 degrees with the Tsukagashira centered or the tsuba centered is debatable. If someone grabs you in a bearhug from the front what do you do?"

Well at least you can still draw your sword for immediate use.

Colin also wrote "If the Daito is at 45 degrees where are you wearing the shortsword when that bearhug comes?"

The MJER guy I refer to wore the daito at 45-deg's and the shoto was snug across the belly (180-deg's maybe). He showed me this without any of the hassles evryone hsa complained about. Also I have often heard it said that the bushi of old actually wore a daito and a tanto (not necessarily a wakizashi)!

Colin writes "Do these iai forms work in Tameshigiri?"

I hope so. We train tameshigiri from every posture!

I'm surprised that not may people experiment with or try to apply their respective koryu kata & waza in novel situations that are not usually alluded to in the kata or don't apply their waza against actual targets. Maybe the majority modern swordsman or iai practitioners don't consider the 'what-ifs,' or 'what would happen,' or 'how would one...' etc.

Thanks again for your feed-back.

Regards,

Paul Steadman

Meik Skoss
10th October 2000, 14:56
Colin, you're bang on with your comments re: seiteigata and koryu. The same thing is happening in jodo. Seeing that one can be graded to godan and only have studied the techniques in seiteigata (rokudan is the first time that one is either allowed or supposed to do koryu waza), it begs the question as to whether or not people who practise the seiteigata are doing an art (if one can, indeed, properly call it "art") that has meaning other than to perpetuate a hierarchy or an organization that really has little or nothing to do with a classical martial art.

As you mentioned, iaido seiteigata were originally created so that kendo people, who are very skilled with the bamboo shinai, would be able to glimpse a little of what it means to use a *real* sword. The same is true of jodo seiteigata: they were introduced, in part, to give kendo folk a taste of what it is like to really train with impact weapons like bokuto and jo.

Much as I like the Nihon Kendo Kata (I do it with a few of my students " [mostly aikido and karatedo people] as a sort of "generic toho" or "swordsmanship for dummies/non-weapons specialists"), I have to say that watching most kendoka do those techniques is as exciting as watching paint dry. They seem to do it in a pro-forma manner, with all sorts of very odd contortions (the hasso no kamae and weird transition to jodan in the aiuchi in yonhonme comes first to mind) and an awful funny way of using ma-ai and hyoshi -- as though it's the aesthetic performance that counts rather than whether or not the technique "works" -- what's the point? If one is doing swordsmanship, albeit as a means of personal training rather than for practical purposes, one loses all semblance of reality and/or understanding of the lessons to be learnt if one does not practise in the manner and with the feeling that originally permeated the art. It becomes a performance or a type of dance.

That's what happened with aikido since the Old Man died and only a few of his immediate student're trying to maintain the original vitality of the art. Were something similar to happen to kendo and iaido (or their classical antecedents), it would impossible to recover the original vitality or the severe truth and beauty that those arts contain.

Mr. Steadman, you missed the point regarding my comments on how one wears a sword. Sure, one can wear the daito at an angle of 45-degrees and the shoto directly across the body. As I mentioned in my previous post, however, that causes a major contortion in the body when drawing and bringing the weapon to bear on target. Here's a simple test: look at the old photographs of the 1800s and examine how the bushi wore *their* swords -- it is pretty obvious that they did so as I've described. Since they were (presumably) concerned with functionality, rather than playing "weekend warrior" one can assume they had some good reasons for doing so. I mean, DUUUUHHHH...

Finally, to respond to your comment (or was it a question?) about me being a leader of the DFD Anti-Deification League: no, that is NOT true. I have a couple of acquaintances who think Draeger Sensei was inerrant about any/everything budo and I certainly don't believe that. But I both studied and trained with him for years (in hoplology and and budo) and went on to spend twenty-five years in Japan, and I know an awful lot more about what Draeger thought than you do. I'm also speaking from a level of experience that you simply do not have. If you're going to argue the point, you need to do a bit more homework.

Carl Long
10th October 2000, 16:52
Wow...guys...great thread! I truly enjoy the friendly banter that goes on between folks of like minds. I think Paul posed a valid question. And then Meik tried to clarify the subject from his point of view based on his own background (trying to help Paul). Very commendable.

Then Seitei Iai comes into the picture a few posts later and walah! we have an entirley new thread. Only this time with everyone basing their opinions on MJER according to Seitei guidelines, Huh? That just doesn't make sense. Unless it's easier to argue the point based on something you have more familiarity with, like Seitei Iai.

As a side note, I was taught that the "reasons" the sword was worn at the 45 Degree angle in MJER are as follows:

1. Protection for the right wrist in the initial approach to the tsuka.

2. When stepping forward with the right foot in Nukitsuke the Tsukagashira points directly at the opponent. (BTW that doesn't happen when you're starting nukitsuke from seiza in a static position. Except in Tsukekomi, where the nukitsuke is performed after the swordsman is in Kiza, and then steps forward to draw the sword forward and downward.Which puts the Kashira directly facing teki. In Tsukikage the tsukagashira is already facing teki at a 45 degree angle due to the angle of attack. (BTW, what does the swordsman who wears his sword straight forward do if the attacker is to any other angle than facing front? Does he always expect an attack from froward? That seems a bit naive doesn't it?)

3. When stepping backward with the left foot the tsukagashira points directly at the opponent.(This doesn't happen in Seiza no bu either)

4. Both hands are equal-distance from the tsuka.

5. When peforming Nukitsuke the initial motion is a downward pressing motion with the left hand in order for the right hand to clear the kodachi from underneath. This also straightens the right arm for a proper nukitsuke. Nukitsuke should be a pushing motion in MJER not a pulling motion across the body.

It is true that in a static position (Such as Seiza)the 45 degree angle seems inappropriate. Especially if you keep your hips and shoulders forward during nukitsuke. Then you must change the direction of the tsukagashira during nukitsuke to the left. However if the technique is done from a standing posture, the first thing a swordsman would do IMHO(and the teachers I have studied with) is to either step forward or step back. And during that process the tsukagashira will point directly at teki. If the sword were worn facing straight forward, when you take the initial step forward or back, the sword turns outward away from teki to the swordsmans left side and no longer at teki. That is "if" the timing remains the same for the intial Koiguchi no kirikata in both instances.Try it and let me know what your results are.

When examining the Oku Iai Tachi waza of MJER, every waza starts with the swordsman stepping forward with his right foot. This puts the the foot in a better position to continue forward into a nukitsuke if necessary. The fact that the cut is usually done on the third or fifth step with the right foot forward in every instance should indicate the styles predilection for this heiho. In those instances where the tsukagashira is not pointing toward the teki, the swordsman's strategy changes to one of baiting the opponent into taking the initiative. The strategy here being that of Go no Sen rather than Sen no Sen or Sen Sen no Sen. The initial part of the nukitsuke in these cases puts the sword in a position to counter with proper Tai Sabaki and a continuous fluid counter attack.

It would appear that the MJER waza teach Heiho as much as they teach how to properly perform Seiza waza. I must admit, I am only a begining to understand these Heiho and not as accomplished as some of the gentlemen who post here.

But I must agree with the statement that Meik made "I'm also speaking from a level of experience that you simply do not have. If you're going to argue the point, you need to do a bit more homework." Unless you've studied MJER iai longer than the folks who have taught me my art, and you're going to argue the point, you better do more homework.(25 years doesn't compare!)

Thanks Guys,

Carl

[Edited by Carl Long on 10-10-2000 at 11:04 AM]

Daniel Pokorny
10th October 2000, 17:56
Mr. Skoss,

I have been away from this forum for some time because I hate sifting through all the flamers trying to get some real info. Someone informed me about this thread so I'm back-sliding here a bit and I must say this IS quite interesting. I'm especially suprised with YOUR comments.

"Finally, to respond to your comment (or was it a question?) about me being a leader of the DFD Anti-Deification League: no, that is NOT true. I have a couple of acquaintances who think Draeger Sensei was inerrant about any/everything budo and I certainly don't believe that. But I both studied and trained with him for years (in hoplology and and budo) and went on to spend twenty-five years in Japan, and I know an awful lot more about what Draeger thought than you do. I'm also speaking from a level of experience that you simply do not have. If you're going to argue the point, you need to do a bit more homework. [/B][/QUOTE]"

What surprised me the most here is that you seem so committed to your "way" which is based on your what, 25+ years of experience?

Now, as with Mr. Steadman I certianly do not possess your "level of experience" either, however I have been taught MJER from Miura Takeyuki Hanshi (brief at best), and Masayuki Shimabukuro sensei, Dennis Hooker sensei and Carl Long sensei, which I believe, and please correct me if I'm wrong here, have maybe just a "few more hours" training than you do in an art that is "just a little" older than your 1800's picture of people wearing swords? (by the way, do you know the people in the picture are?)

Given these facts, while I certainly can not speak for anyone else, logic and a little common sense here says if givin a choice between practicing the arts the way you describe, (or Mr. Draeger) (with all your experience) and practicing the arts the way Miura sensei and the rest of these fine gentelmen describe (with all their experience), well, I guess I'd have to go with.....ah...hmmmm.... Miura sensei and company.

Perhaps we all need to do some more "homework" neh?

Earl Hartman
10th October 2000, 18:56
Many of the points I wanted to make to this thread have already been made by others, but I thought I would add mine anyway:

My teacher, the late Masaoka S., was heavily involved in the creation of the ZNKR iai seitei-gata. He did this under great duress, resisting the pressure of the pro-seitei faction within the ZNKR for 3 years before he had to give in. At the time, he warned that doing this would send real iai the way of the schools that had contributed to the ZNKR kendo kata. A few kata were preserved, but the schools that contributed those kata are all gone, for the most part, and no one seems to know what the kata really mean anymore. However, he realized that kendo people needed some rudimentary training in how to handle a real sword. That's all the kata were for. So he gritted his teeth and made the best of a bad situation. Now, as someone else pointed out, things have gotten out of hand.

The Seiza waza in MJER are not, and never have been, considered "real" techniques. They are done slowly in seiza strictly for training purposes, to ground the practitoner in proper mechanics and to train the legs and hips. By the time you get to the tachiwaza things are done much faster (no 3 hour nukitsuke in tachiwaza, as I recall). In additon to that, in seiza in particular, certain "standard" interpretations of "representative" techniques are done, primarily to illustrate a certain general principle. However, Masaoka S. discussed many possible variations to these techniques, depending on the situation. A good example is Yaegaki, which has henka to deal with the enemy's counterattack, whether it be to the outside of the leading leg (the normal interpretation), the right or left shoulder, or the sword hand. Most people would see these as completely different waza, but they are just variations on a theme. Ukenagashi and Tsukikage have different henka as well.

The mechanics of the draw is a really interesting discussion, and I would really like to get together and compare notes. Masaoka S. said the draw was done as he taught it for the following main reasons (among others):

1) To protect the swordhand (someone else has mentioned this).
2) By leading with the tsukagashira and not rotating the blade until the last moment, the swordsman does not telegraph the target of the cut. In addition, leading with the tsukagashira towards the enemy's eyes helps to threaten him and, it is to be hoped, induce a certain hesitation (much like leading with the point in kendo).

Regarding iai done with only the daito, in his book Masaoka S. relates how he was asked if the shoto would get in the way of the draw. He said that he tried it and was not hampered in any way. FWIW.

I only met Mr. Draeger a couple of times, and so I make the following tentative hypothesis regarding his attitude(this is really more of a question to Meik): Having read his books, spent not a few years in Japan, and spoken with numerous people about this, it seems to me that Mr. Draeger was primarily concerned with the dilution of combative efficacy in modern interpretations of the bugei, and so he directed his criticism against those arts that he felt were most infected with that particular virus. In addition, as an exponent of TSKSR, he quite reasonably wanted to make the case that iaijutsu existed in TSKSR before the appearance of Hayashizaki Jinsuke. This probably explains what appears to be the vitriol directed at MJER and MSR. I am sure this is quite obvious to almost anyone who has read his books. In general, he decried the trend towards the "spiritualization" of the bugei and the trend towards separating the "spiritual" from the "physical". This trend reached its zenith (or its nadir, depending on one's point of view), with twaddle like "Zen in the Art of Archery", the single book, outside of Suzuki's "Zen and Japanese Culture", which has done the most to confuse Westerners as to the real nature of budo/bugei. I am sure that Mr. Draeger intended his books, at least to a certain extent, as a blow against that trend.

All I can say is that Masaoka S. did not tell me to strive to "be at one with the universe" or anything like that. Reigi, towards one's art, one's weapon, the place in which one was practicing, and towards one's practice partners, was just normal behavior. It wasn't fetsihized as being, in and of itself, some "Way" towards "enlightenment" or anything like that. It is just how you acted. He told me to "imagine an enemy in my heart" (mune no naka ni teki wo tsukuru) and learn to draw the sword so that I would be able to cut this enemy.

Parenthetically, I have a video which features Iwata S. demonstrating all of the solo kata of MJER. In this video, he demonstrates certain waza as they are done today, and often makes the point that these changes were instituted to make the waza more "modern" (huh?) and so that JUDGES IN TOURNAMENTS WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THE MOTIONS CLEARLY AND THUS JUDGE WHO HAD EXECTUED THE TECHNIQUES MORE CLEANLY. How's THAT for concessions to modernity, sports fans? He would then say "this is how they used to do it" and demonstrate the "old" way. Almost without exception, the "old" way is what Masaoka S. taught me.

Now, whether one particular system was/is more effective than some other system is a good question. My guess is that this comes down to the exponent as much as the art, and nowadays there is probably no good (read: non-lethal) way to "prove" it. Still, it's damned interestin'.

Earl

Paul Steadman
11th October 2000, 00:49
G'day Meik, Everyone,

Looks like I bit off more than I could chew. Sorry Meik, I didn't mean any disrespect, I actually look upto guys like you (koryu.com & related books is required reading by us!), and Don Dreager is my hero not only within Bujutsu in the western world but also hoplology. I did't mean to anger anyone. And I'm definetly not in the same league as guys like yourself, G. Powers, D. Lee, W. Muramoto, D. Lowry etc. But certain questions need to be asked, whether I have 25 years experience or not. I've only been engaged in psuedo-koryu activity for the past 7 years (not very long at all). I'm not going to take Dreager's word for it that all Jinsuke-line Iaijutsu ryu are in-effective, poorly taught, inefficient and concentrate on a modern interpretation of classical koryu budo ideas, without further research by myself.

The research that I've carried out and the questions that I've asked of senior students of Sekiguchi Komei-Sensei (Komei Juku) and other MJER/MSR practitioners, has proven that what Drager said about Junsuke-line Iai is not entirely 100% accurate (although what he stated is true of a lot of MSR/MJER & ZNKR Seitei Gata practitioners {BUT NOT ALL})!

Anyway everyones comments have been really helpful. Thanks again all. Take care.

Regards,

Paul Steadman

Nathan Scott
11th October 2000, 01:27
Hello all,

FWIW, I have very little knowledge of Iaido, but I have cut quite a bit and practice wearing daito/wakizashi and daito/tanto occaisonally in my regular training. I do have experience in other sword arts, though.

While I understand wearing katana and tanto together was done by some, I believe the habit carried over from the earlier practice of wearing tachi and tanto and that wakizashi may have been the "companion" sword of choice in the later periods at least.

Wakizashi have larger tsubas (among other differences) than tanto, which for me is the main difference when wearing two blades and drawing/resheathing the daito.

In regards to the angle at which the katana was worn (generally), my experience and instuction has been as Mr. Skoss has mentioned for a few reasons:

1) the tsuba of the wakizashi is usually at your center or close to it under the belly button. To move the postition of the katana closer to 45 degrees would cause the tsubas and tsukas of the two blades to conflict. It is actually possible to send your wakizashi flying across the room while drawing the katana if you are not careful!

Resheathing is also quite challenging in this position, having the wakizashi tsuka directly in the way.

2) when drawing using techniques like nukitsuke, we are of the habit of generating full power directly in front of us (where the opponent is assumed to be) rather than some place to the right of our body. It has been my experience that this is important for testcutting.

3) this positioning is simply comfortable against your hip bone and side when worn for any period of time, or walking. Wearing a kaku-obi in this regard makes a big difference (as opposed to the Judo-style obi).

Anyway, I'd be curious to learn more about how Iaido draws and cuts using this 45 degree method. My comments are drawn from my own experience and research, and are not intended to inflame the Iaidoka here that follow this method.

I'm planning on visiting Shimabukuro Sensei's dojo soon, so perhaps I'll have a chance to discuss it further with someone there.

[Edited by Nathan Scott on 10-10-2000 at 07:29 PM]

Gil Gillespie
11th October 2000, 05:25
If I were at this table I'd just pour sake for y'all and listen. Fine thread.

Earl I have a question. I started to send it as a private e but then reconsidered that it may have more worth for the lads to respond to. I have always treasured Suzuki's "Zen and Japnese Culture" yet you referred to it as a confusing book. Could you share with us what you hold in low esteem about that work?

Ellis Amdur
11th October 2000, 06:45
One thing that has not been brought up in this thread is what everyone is doing on the ground in the first place. It is fascinating to me that Iaijutsu has such a prominent place in so many ryu, yet if we were to imagine that it is a simulation of being suddenly taken by surprise while sitting (a scenario often imagined by iaido practitioners), it is very unlikely.
Among the problems with this scenario are the usual suspects: if inside, one will have placed the odachi on a rack and will be drawing the kodachi. If outside (the apocraphal battlefield, what possible situations would occur which would have enemies in seiza, tatehiza, whatever, at such close range that they suddenly are required to draw and cut - other than negotiations in a field? I'm sure that one can imagine scenarios, but it really doesn't explain why such an unlikely occurence has such prominence.
So let me offer a few. From Otake: it's practice in stealth - infiltration in the dark, in tall grass, etc. One is suddenly required, while crawling (movements utterly congruent with KaShRyu iaigoshi) to suddenly draw and cut.
Also from Otake: home invasion - grabbing the sword and fighting in a low ceiling room, in the dark, etc.
From Araki Ryu, which uses "iidori" - on knees and balls of feet. One is in a melee and is knocked down, perhaps a long weapon is broken, or simply tackled - you continue the fight from the ground. This is borne out in Araki Ryu because the sequence of kata that follows bakken (iai) are two person sets called Rogusoku - kodachi against odachi, on knees, in grappling range, while drawing the weapons - sometimes the short and sometimes the long wins, depending on the kata.
Honestly, I think these is the roots of "sitting iai" - The "problem" is that the Japanese, unlike the Chinese, who try to simulate reality in their forms by a theatrical replay, formalize things. Thus, instead of creating a kata where the man is knocked sprawling, on knees and one hand in a twisted posture, they start from a dignified upright stance. The problem is that when times change, and the kata are no longer prepraration for immediate reality, AND the oral teachings that explain that are lost, all that is left is the form. And Japanese lose the knowledge and imagine their own reality just as we non-Japanese do. Simply put, I think that when the sword was no longer used in the fashion I describe above, the forms remained and people passed them on and developed them in new ryu - and created explanations for the new forms - sometimes one's that fit the reality of the situations where THEY would be using the sword and others, fantasy. And iaido kata, I believe, often exemplify this fantasy approach. I am not being insulting here - it is simply that as the purpose of the use of the sword changed, and kata continued to be developed and also refined in successive generations, then an explanation was appended to the movements.
AS for the explanation of seiza as used to develop the hips, - it certainly does. The next question would be- if one's goal happens to be the effective use of the sword in combat, what combative situations is the posture preparing you for. (BTW - I am not even going to get into the different ways to grip the tsuka or cut). I'm not the arbitrer - I've never done iaido, only watched it, but there is a line in which the movements become so different from the reality that it cross the line that is analogous to that between effective shadow boxing and waving one's arms in boxing like patterns.
Lest we degenerate in that other favorite debate of the elitism of koryu practitioners, let me add that koryu iai also can be subject to the same process. It can easily and is often contaminated by other ryu, particularly iai and kendo which changes the movements in fundamental essence, and often the REASON one does the movements is lost or forgotten - in this case, there is no will imbuing the movements with integrity.
And this is the fundamental question - is the movement done as the practitioner intends, for the purpose he intends and is it complete in itself. I recall an iai embu, four hours long, and I was bored to a constant yawn, and then this ninth dan comes out and does MJER, I think, and he had a wrist watch on and they wanted to be taking his photo, and in the middle of the form, !!!! an official from the iai federation sidled up on stage and approached him from the side and whispered that he should take off his watch - the old man was in the middle of an impeccable chiburi, his gaze "inward," and at the approach of the idiot, he stopped all movement (he didn't freeze, he just STOPPED) and glanced at the man, and everyone in the audience could see that that chiburi could alter instantly into somehting that cleaved the guy in two, and he stopped too (and this guy FROZE) and he backed three steps back and scuttled off the stage. The old man simply began moving again, with no hitch or hesitation. Iaido. Perfect swordwork.

Ellis Amdur

Erik Tracy
11th October 2000, 06:59
Ummm....the discussion started on the ground as I recall?

MJER has standing "waza", their called Okuden Tachiwaza - 10 from the "evolved" upright bipedal posture ;-)

We're still working on the next step up the evolutionary chain - flying waza, unless some other art has already developed those?

hyaku
11th October 2000, 11:06
What surprised me the most here is that you seem so committed to your "way" which is based on your what, 25+ years of experience?
........................................

I think you missed the point Mr Pokorny. Our experience is based on what we are taught by our teachers and their teachers. To this we add our own experience.

Visiting as a guest as opposed to living in Japan and having a personal relationship with these teachers in their language is somewhat different. Very few people have had this particular experience and it should not be taken lightly. The whole Japanese experience is based on many things. Practice and study are one thing, but without a good command of the language our learning is limited.


Re Iwata Sensei:

Iwata Sensei, perhaps one of Japans most respected teachers of MJER does not have a high opinion of Tameshigiri and does not believe trying Iai out for combat situations. If I asked a question related to it he would think I had flipped. Since the war he has devoted his life to Iai as an art form that can be done in a non-combative situation.

I do batto demonstrations at his Seminars. He does Iai demonstrations at Battodo Taikai but it's all Kenkyu. Nobody is thinking of mixing them.

Likewise I wouldn't say to Hayashi Kunishiro "Why don't you wear you sword a bit more to the centre, you know like they do in Iai?. Or shall we sit down outside from now on?

I think comparing them is bit like mixing target shooting with quick drawing although the objective is the same, the approach to it is totally different.

I try to be impartial by saying "what if?" to politley infer that it doesn't work. But I get answers like "cuts to kote uchi?" That's what I teach at Kendo.

"Novel situations" I don't think there is anything novel about a sword being drawn at speed cutting up beween your legs or down to slice your carotid by an opponent who has already ran to angle outside your narrow indoor stance.

They are different! and thats it. Mr Steadman have you ever faced an exponent of the Jigen Ryu or Niten Ichiryu. Beleive me when I tell you it's a different ballgame.

Respectfully yours Hyakutake Colin

Daniel Pokorny
11th October 2000, 13:34
Originally posted by hyaku

What surprised me the most here is that you seem so committed to your "way" which is based on your what, 25+ years of experience?
........................................

I think you missed the point Mr Pokorny. Our experience is based on what we are taught by our teachers and their teachers. To this we add our own experience.


Hyaku,

I do not think I missed the point at all, but perhaps I should have stated this differently. I have nothing but "big time" respect for Mr. Skoss and all these fine sword practitioners. However, I was surprised that a person that obviously has done the amount of research Mr. Skoss has, would hold so close "one" particular style's "methods" and dismiss other "ways" as incorrect or ineffective.

Surly it must be acknowledged that the various "styles" that have survived the true test, that of war, lends credit to the various styles efficiency. To dismiss or discredit a particular style simply because we do not practice (ie. fully understand) it's methods is IMHO rather narrow minded for a researcher of the sword arts.

Personally, I do not view any style as better or worse or inferior. I just see them as different..........

Still doing my homework......

Carl Long
11th October 2000, 16:09
I was going to bring this up in my earlier post but, I figured we all already knew it. Unfortunately, most folks out there don't know it or have forgotten. So now you have to suffer through it... or just skip down to the next guys rant.

MJER is descendant ryu from Hayashizaki Jinsuke Shigenobu. According to the legend of the ryu, he was a young lad when his father was killed. As a young man he vowed to avenge his fathers death by seeking out and "Murdering" his father's killer. Being a young lad, he was well aware of the difficulty in enacting revenge on a talented, experienced, combat savy veteran. It would sure be to his advantage to develop a stealthy method of killing his opponent without letting him know it was coming. Gee, how can a guy do that? Well, maybe if he can get his sword out of the scabbard faster than his "Unsuspecting rival" he might have a chance. So according to legend, Hayashizaki was inspired to create and develop techniques of drawing and cutting in a single movement. Read: Assassination!

We don't know for sure,but if we examine the waza of the ryu, we find that there are 4 waza that deal with this directly, Nukiuchi, Makko, Itomagoi Ichi,ni,san. These waza, particularly the Itomagoi series are stressed in every phase of MJER. The basics of the waza are learned in Shoden as Nukiuchi. The waza is further developed in the chuden series as Makko (a little faster and more Kihaku). And finally the true strategy is revealed in the Okuden. Here the intent is obviously to slay an enemy as quickly as possible without his prior knowledge.

If we examine the okuden suwari waza,we find that the swordsman is seated in a hiding position many times waiting for the enemy. When the enemy appears, the swordsman quickly draws his sword and rushes forward to cut him down. Can we say assassination?

Let's look at the Okuden tachiwaza. As we approach or are escorted by the enemy we suddenly draw the sword and cut them down. Uh...I don't recall anyone saying that the enemy had started to draw first.

In some of the scenarios it would appear that Hayashizaki or one of the later Soke, decided it might be a good idea to create a few waza that dealt with our plans for assassination being discovered. Putting the swordsman in a bit of a bind. In each scenario, the swordsman must gain the advantage by pushing the enemy away to gain time, hiding the draw, baiting the attack, or using environmental barricades to assist him in defeating the enemy.

Gosh guys, does this sound like the Iai I've heard described here in other posts? Why can't the sword community see the original intent of the tradition and respect the teachings of it's founder? OK, so today assassination isn't exactly politically correct (depending of course on your politics). But what has developed over the last four and a half centuries is a method of quickly drawing the sword and cutting down the enemy in a variety of everyday situations.

BTW, Omori Sensei ( credited with introducing the Ogasawara reiho into Battojutsu) was apparently not in favor with Hasegawa Eishin Sensei (7th generation soke) in his later years. Hayashi Rokudayu Sensei (9th generation Soke) re-introduced the standing waza as Omori Ryu (Seated waza), back into the Hasegawa Eishin Ryu after Eishin Sensei had passed on. Seiza waza (Omori Ryu) "was not" a part of this ryu prior to the 9th generation grandmaster.

Someone also decided that in order to have a more well rounded sword style it might be a good idea to practice against an armed opponent. Gee whizz, do ya think? So...we have Tachiuchi no kurai, which deals with an armed opponent and various READ: KENJUTSU kata that deal with a READ: ARMED TEKI. That's right,we draw the sword and actually do KENJUTSU like those other guys. And yes, it's one third of our practice.Then we have the Tsumeai no Kurai that deal with close quarters combat with, yep you guessed it...an armed opponent. BTW..we even get into grappling here folks. Can you say sogo budo? Then there are the kodachi techniques. Sorry I can't comment on them because I have not been introduced to them yet. But I've been assured that they do exist and are taught. It would appear that not all of the MJER practitioners in the past were so stupid that they forgot about real combat situations and when and where they were allowed to wear the right sword! BTW, we wear a yoroidoshi not a wakizashi. And yes, we practice iai with them. NO BIG TSUBA to get in the way of our right hand.

For what it's worth, I'm a big fan of Draeger. Kaminoda Sensei called him "The American Miyamoto Musashi." I'll take his word for it. He doesn't compliment that many folks.

Gosh...this has been a long post. I have to go practice now. If I don't, Sensei will never teach me those kodachi techniques.

Carl

Trying to keep the old ryu alive

[Edited by Carl Long on 10-11-2000 at 03:26 PM]

Daniel Pokorny
11th October 2000, 17:36
Long sensei,

Great post! We have much to discuss!

snip < "Read: Assasination!" >

Darn, I knew there was something missing from my practice. Now, where are all those politicians when you really need them.........?

Earl Hartman
11th October 2000, 18:09
Just to round out the discussion a bit, I should point out that MJER originally had bojutsu, torinawa, and taijutsu/kogusoku/koshi-no-mawari type techniques as part of its curriculum. The paired sword kata (tachiuchi no kurai, tsumeai no kurai, etc.), which include grappling, leg sweeps, throws, and punches, in addition to a certain amount of kenjutsu-like cut-and-riposte sequences after the sword is drawn, actually outnumber the solo kata.

It must also be pointed out, however, that this is not the normal curriculum for a lot of modern seitei-ized practitioners. Since it is an advanced part of the curriculum, it takes a while to get there, and a lot of people don't know about it. Masaoka S. learned all of these kata in his study with Oe S. and demonstrates all of them in his book. So far as I know, the bojutsu, torinawa, and taijutsu parts of the curriculum are lost.

This is all a repeat of the same basic discussion we always seem to have:

1) What is "real" and what is not?
2) From what point in history do you start decrying the influence of "non-combative" ideas on the curriculum? After the end of the Sengoku Jidai or after Meiji (or after the introduction of firearms, or after the.....etc., etc.)
3) Which system is "better"?
4) Why are we actually doing any of this anyway?

Personally, practicing any kind of bugei as an exercise in aesthetics does not interest me too much. I am not a violent person by nature (at least I hope not), and I can appreciate beauty as much as the next guy (I hope) but I think that being impressed with the performance of kata AS AN EXERCISE IN AESTHETICS is missing the point.

This is an especially sensitive point with me because of my practice of kyudo. Most people who don't know anything about kyudo seem to think that it is a kind of "tea ceremony" archery, where aesthetic refinement is the goal. It is OK for a neophyte to be impressed with that aspect of kyudo, or any bugei, which does, of course, exist. However, the real aesthetic beauty of the bugei, as opposed to the surface prettiness, is completely a result of the performance being true to the real nature of the art. That is, the real beauty comes from the inner nature of the art, it does NOT mean that the art is beautiful because it conforms to some arbitrary idea of manners, elegance, or refinement. Form is NOT content. Content determines form. Or, to stand Marshall McLuhan on his head, the medium is NOT the message. The medium is only that, the medium. The real message is elsewhere.

That is the reason why Mr. Amdur's story of the iai man is so apropos. THAT is real iai.

Earl

Earl Hartman
11th October 2000, 18:55
Gil:

I didn't mean that Suzuki's book was confusing in the sense that I couldn't understand what he was saying. What I meant was that it misled (and probably continues to mislead) a lot of people about what the bugei actually are.

To the best of my knowledge, Suzuki never practiced any martial arts at all. Nor, as far as I know, was he a serious practitioner of Zen. He was a professor of religion who used European models to try to explain Japanese religious ideas to Western audiences. If Professor Bodiford is lurking on this thread, he can throw more light on this subject. Also, if Joe Svinth is lurking, I am sure that he can direct all of us to any number of resources about Suzuki.

Suzuki's case, as I understand it, is that the inner nature of the bugei and Zen are at bottom the same. I am not a Zen man, so I can't say if this is true or not, but since Zen seems to be such a nebulous concept, it is probably quite easy to make the case for a certain similarity. If, as most people seem to say, Zen means nothing more or less than understanding the "as-it-isness" of things (their true nature) and living "in the moment" without worries about the past or future, one can easily see how a state of mind like this is vital to facing the life-and-death struggle inherent in the bugei, at least in their original conception. If this is the wrong idea of Zen, please feel free to disabuse me of my mistaken notion.

However, I believe that attaining this state of mind, or something like it, is part and parcel of the bugei themselves and has nothing necessarily to do with Zen in any religious sense. That is, I doubt very seriously that Zen priests were the first people to realize this and that they then passed their ideas on to the warriors who then said "Aha! Let's reconfigure our martial arts so that they can be used as ways to spiritual enlightenment!" The language of Zen may have given people a vocabulary and a framework to express these ideas, but the ideas were always there, for the very simple reason that you cannot be successful in the bugei without attaining a frame of mind that people, not versed in the bugei, might mistake for the "Zen" frame of mind, whatever that is.

This idea, that Zen and the bugei are essentially the same thing and that the bugei are nothing more than Ways to Zen enlightenement, seems to be primarily the result of books like Suzuki's "Zen and Japanese Culture" and Herrigel's "Zen in the Art of Archery", which was itself heavily influenced by Suzuki's ideas.

This has lead to the deplorable situation where people look at the bugei essentially as tools or means to attain some "higher" goal (Zen-type enlightenment). That is, they use them for selfish purposes which have nothing to do with the bugei themselves. It shows great disrespect to the bugei, in my opinion, to use them just as a means to an end which is seen as being outside of, and on a higher plane than, the bugei themselves. The bugei are not stepladders that you use to reach something on a higher shelf, nor are they just metaphors for life or real experience. They ARE life and real experience. Any "enlightenment" to be gained through the practice of the bugei, if such a thing there is, can only come from practicing the bugei for themselves, where the practitoner molds himself to the demands of the bugei, not the other way around.

Also, Suzuki's book is full of subtle and not-so-subtle examples of Japanese cultural chauvinism, anti-Westernism, and hoity-toity self-congratualtory "aren't we Japanese evolved" type of nonsense. After practicing various kinds of budo for almost 30 years now, living in Japan for 11 of those years, and meeting a lot of people who really knew what they were doing, and who didn't talk down to me, but just wanted me to understand, I got sick and tired of being patronized by armchair enthusiasts with a cultural agenda. Suzuki may very well have been quite knowledgeable about religion, but he had no personal, first-hand, or deep knowledge of the bugei so far as I know. I should listen to him just because he is a Japanese professor with a reputation? I am SOOO over the "he's Japanese, he must know more about it than I do" stuff. Anybody who presumes to lecture me about something that I know first hand had better be better at it than I am.

Brickbats, rotten eggs, and cream pies welcome.

That Cantankerous Old Curmudgeon,
Earl

[Edited by Earl Hartman on 10-12-2000 at 01:33 PM]

Carl Long
11th October 2000, 19:10
Once upon a time...

Interviewer: Mr Shinto Muso Ryu Guy...Why do you sit in the seiza posture with a jo positioned at your right side?

Mr SMR Guy: Well we call this kata Neya no Uchi.

Interviewer: Oh you call this Neya no Uchi. I didn't think you would be sitting in a posture like that outside.

Mr. SMR Guy: Well whatever do you mean?

Interviewer: Especially since the guy coming at you has a KATANA in his hand! And everyone KNOWS that you don't use a Katana Inside and that you don't sit in seiza outside. Wazzup with that?

MR. SMR Guy: Duuuhhh...

Interviewer: Ok I can see where maybe that was an unfair question. Suppose you explain to our audience why you sit in a seiza like position with a katana as the Uchitachi when you do Tsukidashi.

MR. SMR Guy: Duuuhhh...

Interviewer: I'm sorry, I missed your reply. Another question? Perhaps this question will be more clear.Why does a SMR guy sit in a seiza inspired position with a katana while playing the part of uchitachi in Uchitsuke and Kotedome. I thought you told me that seiza was not a posture that a swordsman would sit in with a katana. And you have an entire series of HIGH LEVEL kata that deal with that scenario...wazzup with that?

Mr.SMR Guy:

*We're still waiting for his response*

Moral of the story: If you live in a glass house...awww you know the rest...this is stupid isn't it.

Carl Long
Also a serious SMR guy...

[Edited by Carl Long on 10-11-2000 at 01:56 PM]

Ellis Amdur
12th October 2000, 06:42
Mr. Long -

Upon reading your comments on SMR (another ryu I don't do), I contacted a menkyo kaiden of the school. Oddly enough, his reply was not "Duh." He stated that those kata are, in fact, simulations of the situation when in one's home or another room, at night perhaps, facing a surprise attack and grabbing one's jo to fight. "Seiza,(and in his branch, one is on the balls of the feet and toes, not the instep as in real seiza) is, and I quote, "just a purely arbitary way to formalize being on the ground." Which illustrates the points in my post above.
By the way, SMR exemplifies a ryu contaminated by modern budo in which some teachers use, for example, kendo or iaido footwork and then make up explanations for which they calaim antiquity for their "innovations."

Best

Ellis Amdur

MarkF
12th October 2000, 06:56
Please excuse me. I do not normally post in this forum but I do follow it, especially when a thread such as this breaks out into a "compilation" of experience behind it.

Originally posted by Earl Hartman:


MJER as Sogo Bugei
Just to round out the discussion a bit, I should point out that MJER originally had bojutsu, torinawa, and taijutsu/kogusoku/koshi-no-mawari type techniques as part of its curriculum. The paired sword kata (tachiuchi no kurai, tsumeai no kurai, etc.), which include grappling, leg sweeps, throws, and punches, in addition to a certain amount of kenjutsu-like cut-and-riposte sequences after the sword is drawn, actually outnumber the solo kata.




Ellis' post made a very good point, as well as a fun read, but Earl's post was the one which had the "finality," if you will, of doing as he said it would do, I believe "Rounding out" the discussion. But I really was hoping that a discussion of bojutsu and taijutsu would have been discussed, at the very least, because, with my limited knowledge, I knew that MJER and others, must have contained the jutsu of bo and particularly, taijutsu. Is there really any art, no matter the age, which does not have this history (BTW: That wasn't a rhetorical question)? What part did taijutsu, etc., play in any art of iai and/or ken?

I may be a judoist, but I also have seen remnants of unsheathing, defensively, to various cuts made, obviously taking defense one step further, to cutting, all which are contained, even today, by the judo syllabus. I don't mind if you wish to connect this to iaiDO, KenDO, etc., as Kano Jigoro made no effort in differentiating these kata to one way or the other, as the sword techniques done in the past were certainly not a sport in any way, as all cutting was discussed as any, or most sword technique was done with the aim of dismemberment, or whatever the appropriate cuts were intended to due. Most of the arguments centering on the weapons ban in the 1860s (or 1868, in particular) were just that: it was gainst the "anti-samurai" law(s) (I cannot remember what it was called at the moment, but I do have it in fairly easy reach so I will lool after this post is finished).

Another question would be (and this is stricly a "what if" quesion), how would the lack of these laws have played out in the devlopment of any koryu or any other type school? Do you think judo, kendo, iaido, and this for Earl, Kyudo may not have evolved to what they are now, or would time, since it moves ahead with no quarter given, have left what there is now, and left it in Japan?

Thanks in advance for any answer. Admittedly, this is out of curiousity, but the cat does not always die at the end.

Mark



Is there anyone who has insight to this impertinent question? I once asked Obata-sensei (shinkendo) about this but apparently dismissed the idea of defense of the sword as "impossible."

Any comment?

Mark

Joseph Svinth
12th October 2000, 07:15
Sorry, Earl, you have me here because my gag reflex invariably kicks in whenever I pick up Suzuki. Indeed, his only serious competitors for writing nonsense would be Allen Watts and Warren G. Harding's speechwriters. J.C. Cleary is who I read on those rare occasions I need a Zen fix. (Remember: the sound of one hand clapping is Jon Bluming's shotei against your head. And if I'm in the sack with your wife and you're not there to see it, was I ever there? By koan logic, no. Whew, I guess that means we can still be friends.)

But if you insist, you can read about the Swedenborgian influences on Suzuki's thought at this site: http://www.martialartsca.com/interview.html (To appeal to Western audiences, it does help to couch things in Christian terms whenever possible. It's anachronistic, sure, but the gaijin will never notice.)

For a Zennist's view -- (summarized, anyone who understands Zen would have a much smaller ego than Suzuki): http://www.martialartsca.com/interview.html

For a typically muddy analysis, see http://www.kisho.co.jp/Books/book/chapter3.html

Various post-modern artists and musicians liked Suzuki a lot. They probably enjoyed heavy usage of recreational drugs, too, if that's any recommendation. Meanwhile, his students used to have their own URL but I guess they grew too enlightened to pay the $8 a month. A still-useful site for all manner of such folks is http://www.globalserve.net/~sarlo/RatingsRS.htm

Carl Long
12th October 2000, 15:53
<<MR Amdur wrote:

Upon reading your comments on SMR (another ryu I don't do), I contacted a menkyo kaiden of the school. Oddly enough, his reply was not "Duh.">>

My point, Mr Amdur is that it has now been almost a full day since I've written that post and NO SMR practitioner has responded with an answer. In that time Over one hundred, ooops make that two hundred people have read the post. To me that would appear to be a big "DUH!" on the part of the SMR folks that read it. Not that the techniques aren't valid...it's just that you can't make a stupid statement about an art and then assume that because noone steps up to the plate that there isn't a good reason for doing something. Just like the blanket statements made about MJER/MSR and others. The fact that any given student or instructor doesn't have all the answers about his art does not mean that the art is deficient or the practitioner isn't capable. Heck, you had to go to a Menkyo Kaiden to get an answer. I wonder if Any of the folks that read my post had that answer.

<< He stated that those kata are, in fact, simulations of the situation when in one's home or another room, at night perhaps, facing a surprise attack and grabbing one's jo to fight.>>

I too understand simulations. Most bujutsu kata are just that, simulations aren't they. But if you take them out of context, for the way you see them performed as strictly kata, you miss the point don't you? Like Oh say, Omori Ryu seiza waza in MJER Shoden.

<<"Seiza,(and in his branch, one is on the balls of the feet and toes, not the instep as in real seiza) is, and I quote, "just a purely arbitary way to formalize being on the ground." Which illustrates the points in my post above.>>

In the SMR that I practice we do it from a "Live" position also. But that's just a simulation right? We're really not supposed to be in that position if it were real combat. Right? Perhaps other arts have taken this same approach? What do you think? I've read your previous post and I can only assume that you agree.

<By the way, SMR exemplifies a ryu contaminated by modern budo in which some teachers use, for example, kendo or iaido footwork and then make up explanations for which they calaim antiquity for their "innovations.">

I'm just curious sir. Is that your opinion or that of the Menkyo Kaiden you spoke to. Is his branch of SMR one of those that has been contaminated by modern budo? Did he say that? I think it would take a real strong constitution to make that claim about your own ryu.( I admire that kind of honesty) Especially since the Kenjutsu instruction in the SMR is supposed to be Shinto Ryu Kenjutsu. I can only quess that "IF" it was the Menkyo Kaiden that said it, he was probably referring to someone elses ryu/ha.(Gee, go figure)

And if it wasn't he who said it then I hope you didn't imply that it was someone who does not study Shinto Muso Ryu at all. That kind of statement would then obviously carry no weight what so ever given the fact that they don't have a clue about what may or may not be simulated here. Don't you think? What do the other SMR folks out there think? Mr. Amdur, I thank you ever so much for helping me make my point.

Best regards,
Carl Long

BTW, who was the menkyo kaiden? Any names you might want to drop?

[Edited by Carl Long on 10-12-2000 at 10:23 AM]

RDeppe
12th October 2000, 17:08
I practice SMR (no rank, so technically I should keep my mouth shut) and have heard the explaination for seiza as given above from a menkyo kaiden (probably the same one), but I have also heard from some of his peers (but not menkyo kaiden) that this is a modern contamination and that the omote technique 'in the bedroom' has nothing to do with being in a bedroom.

My two cents.

Gordon Smith
12th October 2000, 19:44
Let us also not forget that "views" are not necessarily the same thing as "people". As I understand it, every time I load this page to check on the progression of the topic, and to see if I need to straghten up the room, the counter increases. On that basis, let's see now, I've checked each time a new thread is added, a few times of refresh, once I pulled a duplicate thread...

...Call it 5?

-G-

Paul Steadman
12th October 2000, 23:49
Hi Again,

Looks like I hit on a really emotive topic. Everyone has submitted some excellent replies.

My original post was "What do all you Muso Shinden Ryu and Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu people think of Donn Draeger's anti-Hayashizaki Jinsuke Line Iaijutsu (and maybe pro-Katori Shinto Ryu)comments (which I don't agree with at all)in his various books? IE: Seiza & Tate-Hiza not combat effective, Wearing sword across body at 45-deg's & danger of Saya-ate, etc. etc.

As I have previously mentioned there are appropriate and relavent reasons why MSJER Iai-jutsu does the techniques the way they do, and not withstanding the Shoden series of waza/kata, does have combat application (which should be the main principle.

Some posts have replied with well D. Draeger was right MSR/MJER is wrong because they do it 'that way' and we do it more realistically and are more combat effective because we do it 'this way'!

This is like saying, "The British army was wrong/stupid because they taught their soldiers to carry the SLR cradled in the arms with the barrel pointing towards the ground (and they used a 7.62mm calibre round ie: less ammo in the mag), this is not combat effective. The US army soldier on the other hand uses a more realistic and combat effective barrel up, rifle at the ready, carry position with the M-16 (which used a 5.56mm calibre round ie: more ammo to waste)!"

Which method is correct? I propose both methods are correct and have been utilised to great effect in the Falklands and the Gulf (among other campaigns). If you want in-efficient, non-combat effective and stupid military ideas take a look at the Australian Military!

Anyway I still say that D. Draeger's negative comments about MSR/MJER were not 100% accurate (Did he study/research any length of time with any MSJER Iai-jutsu dojo? I do't know!), his comments sounded a little one sided to me and maybe his negative comments should have been directed more towards the ZNKR Seitei Gata (which the I'd be in total agreement with D. Draeger).

Thanks again all. All the best, take care.

Regards,

Paul Steadman

Nathan Scott
13th October 2000, 00:14
Hello,

I don't know about anyone else, but I for one am honestly curious to discuss this subject calmly and politely.

I submit that if it is not going to happen (which it's not right now), and all we are going to do is take shots at each other, then we might as well just move on and call it a day.

If everyone *is* willing to look into this further, and those that are experienced Iaidoka are willing to be patient with our line of questioning, I'd love to learn something from this. :)


BTW, we wear a yoroidoshi not a wakizashi. And yes, we practice iai with them. NO BIG TSUBA to get in the way of our right hand.

That is very interesting. Is wearing yoroidoshi (a armor-piercing dagger about 1/2 to 2/3rds the length of a tanto) with katana the tradition of MJER in general, or just within your org/group?

Can I assume that you wear the yoroidoshi across your front (stomach) from your description?

The wakizashi/shoto sure seems to have been the companion preference with katana over all judging from prints and literature. How do Iaido groups (if any) that practice wearing daisho in a katana/wakizashi configuration perform this 45 degree angle positioning?

I can understand the desire to not leave the right wrist open for attack. In our style this kind of liability is considered through using careful distance, timing and taisabaki (if necessary) - or simply performing a different draw.

In Shinkendo we tend to draw slightly to the outside of our target area (in this case directly to our front position) so that we may generate full extension, enkei tosen and power before entering the target. Nukitsuke is not the strongest of one handed cuts, so we use every advantage we can to counter this problem.

Is this still possible (or considered) from the position of wearing the daito at a 45 degree angle across the body?

One problem I see with discussing this whole subject is that one type of Iaidoka practices primarily for the spiritual/mental benefits, and as such is not overly concerned with discussing real application and history. The other type of Iaidoka *is* concerned with effectiveness and historical matters. Both have posted on this thread (and others) and it makes discussing the subject very difficult.

Is Iaido a martial art still? If so, then it could be said that there must be a primary concern with the "martial-ness" of the practice somewhere. If we are going to discuss these kinds of things, then we must assume that those contributing are of a style that is still practicing Iaido as a martial art. Those that are not need not loose any sleep over what is discussed here technically, as it would not affect their objective to training.

On a final point, as an observer it has been interesting to read over the last 5-10 years a plethora of explanations offered by Iaidoka for doing Iai from a seated position, some of which are surely valid points and may in fact be historically correct.

I mention this because Mr. Power has written and posted translations of an article by Nakamura Taizaburo Sensei (an Iaidoka himself) in which Mr. Nakamura says that he took the rare opportunity once to ask a large room full of many highly ranked Iaido instructors why they performed Iaido from Seiza. The answers apparently ranged from "I don't know" to "that's how I was taught". At that time, nobody present was able to offer any of the common theories heard so commonly today.

Can anyone offer any historical references in which one can read some of these common theories? They must have come from some place. This topic comes up quite a bit, and if some references can be discussed, perhaps this topic won't pop up as often! I'd honestly be interested in finding out more about this. Some Aikidoka say that performing Aikido from Seiza is good for developing hip power and balance. This is a benefit often repeated in Iaido circles as well.

Interestingly, I understand Nakamura Sensei was actually scorned for performing a seated Iaido kata from a standing position one time when asked to demonstrate on a dirt floor.

Mark-san, sorry you weren't able to pull a better answer out of Obata Sensei. It might interest you to know that we have sword retention techniques both from drawn and sheathed, as well as shoto control and/or counter attacks to seated positions.

I sincerely hope my questions have not offended anyone.

Regards,

Earl Hartman
13th October 2000, 00:22
I have heard a lot of people use the words "weapon retention" or "sword retention" recently; I even had someone e-mail me asking whether I taught kyujutsu and if we offered instruction in "weapon retention". I confess to having no idea what this is supposed to mean.

I assume that it refers to something other than just keeping your hands on your weapon, that is, not dropping it or allowing it to fly out of your hand when you swing it. Can someone enlighten me?

Earl

Nathan Scott
13th October 2000, 00:32
Hi Earl-san,

In our case it is a convenient term I borrowed to describe two basic types of scenarios (I can't speak for other styles):

1) From a standing position, the sword is worn and sheathed and shidachi stands in shizentai. The aggressor lunges forward to prevent shidachi from drawing their sword by grabbing for

a. Shidachi's right hand so they cannot draw.
b. Shidachi's sword so they can prevent the draw or unsheath it themselves to use against you.
c. Shidachi's sword so that they may leverage shidachi to the ground with the wearer's own sword (jujutsu).

We have a series of body movement tactics and counter attacks that correspond to these situations.

2) From a standing postition, after having performed an attack or cut. Uchidachi attempts to grab one or both wrists while unarmed in an attempt to disarm you (not likely, but we have reversals anyway). A series of taisabaki movements may be used to break the grip or counter the attempt. Shidachi can then strike the uchidachi down in way that either "saves them or doesn't save them".

Hope that helps. I haven't heard other's use this term very much.

Regards,


[Edited by Nathan Scott on 10-12-2000 at 06:45 PM]

Earl Hartman
13th October 2000, 00:59
Nathan:

Okely dokely.

Yours,
Ned Flanders

Ellis Amdur
13th October 2000, 03:04
Mr. Long wrote:

"I'm just curious sir. Is that your opinion or that of the Menkyo Kaiden you spoke to. Is his branch of SMR one of those
that has been contaminated by modern budo? Did he say that? I think it would take a real strong constitution to make
that claim about your own ryu.( I admire that kind of honesty) Especially since the Kenjutsu instruction in the SMR issupposed to be Shinto Ryu Kenjutsu. I can only quess that "IF" it was the Menkyo Kaiden that said it, he was probably
referring to someone elses ryu/ha.(Gee, go figure)"

In answer: Sorry if my syntax wasn't clear. It is MY opinion that Shinto Muso Ryu has had a tremendous amount of contamination from modern budo. Although Draeger said the same thing to me, as have several other SMR practitioners, I am taking responsibility for it here. It was remarkable to me to watch the "development" that was taking place, in the easily 100 demos I watched SMR, even though Shimizu Sensei was still alive. This is caused by the association with the kendo renmei, etc. How do I know. I used to watch Shimizu Sensei, and his back foot was flat on the floor. Many shihan today use iai/kendo footwork on the ball of the foot, a narrow stance, etc. They have changed the cutting with the sword to an arching cut that one often sees in iaido, but not in effective kenjutsu.

There ARE SMR practitioners who have hewn to a koryu "line" - they target differently, they move differently. I'm am thinking specifically of the Kyushu folks (at least when I was in Japan in the 70's and 80's) and Nishioka Tsueo.

So the remark about the kata on the knees - came from the menkyo kaiden - who hasn't chosen to participate in internet budo, so I'm not mentioning names, and the opinion regarding contamination is my own. (and to be absolutely clear, I do not mean every branch of SMR, but frankly, I do mean most that I saw in Japan).

I think this contamination is endemic in many koryu schools . . what I mean by contamination, by the way, is any augmentation which deviates from the stated aims of the school. For example, if you claim to fight on any terrain, and you change the footwork in a way that only works indoors (not only kendo, but sliding footwork which will tie your toes in tussocks of grass) I can think of other "augmentation" which is for the purpose of accomplishing the aims of the school. (Example would be Kashima Shinto Ryu reviving it's iaijutsu forms, abandoned for a generation. The one thing that they didn't have was chiburi and they chose to consult with Katori Shinto Ryu, based on long historical association and used their Chiburi.

Mr. Long wrote:
Mr. Amdur, I thank you ever so much for helping me make my point.

I'm not sure that we are making the same point. Mine is that a tremendous amount of ryu in Japan are the product of 400 years of peace, and in many ryu, among them iaido schools in particular, the meaning and I believe the form of the kata changed - and as it did, so did interpretations of the kata. It is a good assumption that this happened more with some schools than others, and is most likely among those that have had the longest alliance with modern kendo/iaido schools - naginata schools, now assoc. with the competitive shin naginata are facing the same situation. I, personally, see this as unfortunate. You may not.

If I have a point re MJER, it is that the original school was most likely very different than what is practiced now. There was a man who practiced ARaki Ryu with me in Japan, who was pretty high ranking in MJER, and he joined, he said, because his school had lost the grappling curriculum and he didnt' feel his sword would be strong or "true" without understanding grappling with weapons. AFter he achieved some skill, he told me that he faced a real dilemma in considering how he had learned to use the sword in MJER to date, believing, he said that in losing the grappling component, his ryu had also changed the way one used and held the sword and the body.

I believe, (you may not) that the reason for drawing a sword from a kneeling or iaigoshi position are, I believe, as I said previously, and if a school shifted to seiza or tatehiza, or a new school was created in which they deliberately used seiza or tatehiza, then they are congruent with the use of the sword only in so far as the sword had become an indoor practice instrument for all the myriad of purposes that Iaido claims. For anyone whose weapons work also includes grappling, seiza is a pretty lousy stance to start grappling as well.

Ellis Amdur

Carl Long
13th October 2000, 03:09
Hello Mr Scott,

Q. That is very interesting. Is wearing yoroidoshi (a armor-piercing dagger about 1/2 to 2/3rds the length of a tanto) with katana the tradition of MJER in general, or just within your org/group?

Actually, I have not seen many other MJER groups practice while wearing a wakizashi or tanto. So I don't believe it's that popular of a practice. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, it only means that I'm not worldly enough to offer you a definitive answer. The story of my life I'm afraid ;)

Q. Can I assume that you wear the yoroidoshi across your front (stomach) from your description?

Yes, in MJER Iaijutsu that we practice that is how we wear it.


Q. How do Iaido groups (if any) that practice wearing daisho in a katana/wakizashi configuration perform this 45 degree angle positioning?

I' can't answer that question for others and I would love to hear from others as to their preferences too.

I can tell you that when we perform several of our cuts, that we "open" the hip area by turning the rear knee outward. This is also something that is not reflected in the seitei styles that I've seen. According to Shimabukuro Sensei and Miura Sensei this is an older method of cutting that reflects more of an iaijutsu background. This method of cutting allows the cut to travel further through the target when cutting. The hips and sword can drop further during Kirioroshi and it makes for a very wide cut during nukitsuke. It's difficult to explain here I'm sorry. It is not taught this way during the Shoden teaching. It is not introduced until the Okuden level. This is because if it is taught too soon the student has a tendency to open the hip too soon and perform a poor hasugi. So in the beginning we teach the student to cut with the feet and knees turned forward facing the target.It's a progression in our training curriculum. This straight forward hip (to us shoden method) is as most MJER/MSR groups that I have seen.

The curriculum we use is considered a stepped method of instruction leading the student through several phases of training. The fact that we perform a given technique from tatehiza does not mean that that is how the swordsman is expected to use it in battle. The fact that the technique may be taught in the Chuden level(that happens to be mainly tatehiza posture) does not mean that he shouldn't perform the same from standing, from seiza with a short sword, or any other position that may afford attack or counter. It is simply introduced at that level while the student is assimiliating other principles learned from moving in tatehiza. Each waza is a piece of the overall puzzle that eventually comes together to make a swordsman that responds to a situation instinctively. The techniques, understanding and mobility gained from the practice of the waza and kumitachi all come together as a group of tools the swordsman can draw from. Reading this, it all sounds way too obvious but then I'm not sure it's practiced this way by other groups. I'd sure like to know...

To answer your question regarding grabbing the kote, we do have several waza that deal with just that situation. The problem as I see it is how you asked the question. Yes we have those techniques but NO they are not confined to being done from a standing position or a seated position. They are meant to be asssimilated and used from every position if confronted while assuming such. That is why I mentioned the progression of training above.

Within the curriculum there are techniques of grabbing the enemys kote after we have initiated an attack. These techniques are explored in the kumitachi sets that we practice. There are also scenarios where as we grab the enemys kote he grabs ours. In such a case (just as one example), we actually release the sword and perform a kotegaeshi or leg sweep and follow up atemi to teki (could also be done with the yoroidoshi). Each of these kumitachi have henka waza at almost every cut, parry or taisabaki. Some of the henka waza from the shoden, chuden, and okuden iai sets are not revealed until the student is later exposed to them in the kumitachi sets. Yaegaki is an example of this. There are studies of controling the center point of the battle and responding with the proper techniques according to where the enemys pressure is focused. Each of these variations is correct depending upon what the enemy does. So you can see, the way we practice our MJER is very dynamic. The kihon (waza)are done in a prescribed manner, but the study of their use is very dynamic.

In closing..

I am sorry if any of my previous posts may have seemed confrontational. I had only hoped to illustrate that misconceptions and biases could be unjustly leveled toward every art and practice. I'm not one to do that myself (I don't think?). I hope one day to meet all the fine gentlemen here on this list and have a beer and a few laughs to boot. (How do I make one of those little emoticons that tip a brew and wink?) Looking forward to your responses...

Best regards,

Carl Long

Warwick
13th October 2000, 03:27
My point, Mr Amdur is that it has now been almost a full day since I've written that post and NO SMR practitioner has responded with an answer. In that time Over one hundred, ooops make that two hundred people have read the post. To me that would appear to be a big "DUH!" on the part of the SMR folks that read it.

Mr Long;

I am a SMR practitioner; I have been training for 14 years (ie not very long, but not a total beginner either), a few of those years in Japan. The reasons I didn't respond to your post were (1) Mr Amdur's answer seemed perfectly adequate and (2) your post seemed so purile that answering it seemed like a waste of time. I'm sure many other people felt the same way.

Heck, you had to go to a Menkyo Kaiden to get an answer. I wonder if Any of the folks that read my post had that answer.

I suspect that a large number of people could have answered those questions but couldn't be bothered. (See above.) In any case, if the answer Mr Amdur posted was not from a Menkyo Kaiden holder, you would have questioned the authority of the answer, wouldn't you? I suspect that Mr Amdur already knew the answer, but needed to get it confirmed by someone whose word would carry more weight in SMR related matters.

Warwick Hooke

Warwick
13th October 2000, 03:31
Damn,

how do you get quotes from other posts to be indented and bold? I hit the "quote" button at the bottom of the post, which I thought would work.

Warwick Hooke

Carl Long
13th October 2000, 04:14
Greetings Mr. Hooke,

I hope you have read my posts the way they were meant. I don't question the way SMR is done. I don't even question whether or not anyone has the answers. Sheesh..I'm not even the first person to post here and use the proverbial "Duuuhhh". Actually I had hoped to point out the rudeness of that comment by over exagerating it in my original off the cuff post. Perhaps you can go back through the thread and see what I mean.

This is exactly why things are so misconstrued within the budo world. What's good for the goose in budo is never good for the gander is it? I really like most of the personalities I've come to recognize here on e-budo. I just didn't like the way some folks were seemingly talking down to others. But hey I've got broad shoulders so you can let the comments fly if you like. But I'll tell you that I won't take it personally.

I also hope that you uderstand that my point was that anyone can ask a less than considerate question and then turn the response or lack of it into whatever he chooses. It doesn't make the conclusion the truth does it.

I also think it's important to respect everyones opinion and treat them that way. I too often see some folks here able to express their opinion in any way they please with no repurcusions or flames at all because of their recognized last name. I personally think thats improper. I'm actually a really nice guy. You'd obviously be surprised. And I consider myself fortunate to be able to call many of the folks that post here good friends. They constantly urge us lurkers to add to the posts. Then when one of us does. BAM!! if it doesn't fit their idea of what is right they tend to get indignant. I understand and that is why most of the 1200 or so folks that read the threads don't reply. Your point is well taken believe me.

Thanks for replying to my less than appreciated posts. I hope to read more of your opinions in the future. I don't think you'll be reading many of mine. But that's ok. Be well and enjoy the rest of the thread.

Carl Long

Dan Harden
13th October 2000, 05:02
Hi Nathan and Earl

Earl you write

I have heard a lot of people use the words "weapon retention" or "sword retention" recently; I even had someone e-mail me asking whether I taught kyujutsu and if we offered instruction in "weapon retention". I confess to having no idea what this is supposed to mean.
I assume that it refers to something other than just keeping your hands on your weapon, that is, not dropping it or allowing it to fly out of your hand when you swing it. Can someone enlighten me?

****************************

Although I was only taught the term "weapon retention" in regards to modern combatives, I was taught the *concept* in regards to classical weapons through several distinct "reasons" for doing certain things and carying the swords certain ways, that have everything to do with the concept. To me, weapon retention goes farthur then the act of holding on to it or preventing others from taking it by performing locks and counters to potential grabbers. (although all of the aformentioned are legitimate theories)
Weapon retention as concept, applies to saya position, hip placement, maai, the angular use of a single handed cut as well as the postion of the hand during certain cuts or draws.
Although I have not seen as many Iaidoka as ya'all, the little I have seen, and the five I have played with, had incredible difficulty holding on to their blades against a commited attack.
So, in that regard, I think the totality of; the grip, in conjunction with the placement of the hips before and most importantly during the cut...and the angle of the blade (hasuji) in relation to the imaginary cut are of paramount importance. This is neccesary not only for effective cutting but in actual defence of holding on to the damn thing in the first place and retaining a servicable grip in the second place.
In the years I have spent playing with these silly pointy things, I have witnessed Kata by different men. Some good. Others, So-So.
I had a godan in some form of Iai (I Didn't know enough to ask which school at the time) run me through some of the most convoluted and simply "wierd" positions with off hand comments like:
"This is when you are in an alley,with walls on both sides,
This is when you are under an overhang,
this is when you are attacked with a wall on your left and the opponent on your right,
this is when a guy is seated on your left and another is coming at you".......
Some how this all culminated in him showing me some wierd "sword laying across your shoulder thingy," I was left with the impression that alot of this must have been simply "made up" by this guy.
(But years later I have met others who were doing and explaining all the same things including the sword "across your shoulder thingy" I have seen a friend do just recently)

Anyway....
then we tried it.
With him showing me first..........
"Place your hips here"
"Open up during the cut to a postion "here"
Angle your wrist to a certain fixed position "there"
Finish the cut "here"
It all felt like the perfectly *WRONG* thing to do for effective cutting and transitional movement for me. Bad hip placement, poor extension, lousy hasuji. I couldn't make it work. I wanted to "Fix" everything.

Then we had him "show me how it was done" :)
with him performing the techniques against "me" the attacker
Bam , bam, bam,
his bokuto on the floor.


So, Ok, Why the anectodatal? It's all many of us have. We are not going to get in a sword fight anyday soon. Everyone goes around quoting this sensei here, that menkyo there. How many have gotten dirty going at it? Not accepting the statis quo, and challenging the techniques rationale?(technique not people) I think its great to stay in and have fun and listen to all the stories. At what point do you start to prove it out?
2 years in?
ten?
twenty?
When?
If you are interested in the pragmatic, sooner or later you are going to have to start experimenting.

Anyway back to weapon retention
To that end, I think the transitional movements; hip turn, sword use as a deflection (even before the full draw out of the scabbard), maai, close in vertical saya and body turning leading to the draw, again, the hip placement during the cut, and the cut angles all play a significant role in weapon retention.

*************************

Wearing of the Daisho
Wearing the saya verticaly may inhibit noto somewhat BUT!
That is of no importance anyway. The draw should be of primary importance. In fact, all the fooforall over noto and the koiguchi and the technique designed specifically around it can be said to be somewhat superflous. Other than protecting your fingers, which is very easy to do when done slowly, its use is perfunctory. The opponent is theoretically dead and you desperately need to clean your blade. Blood etches horribly. :)
The ideas of drawing closer to the body also afford the body to turn the hips in a tighter "closed" spiral. This in turn enables very subtle deflections and angular safety zones while concurrently enabling the hips to generate a massive amount of power in the cut. It is not limited however to a Kiri-oroshi draw and cut though. The turning of the hips creates a body posture that enables a very simple draw for a rising cut horizontal cut etc......

anyway

Two friends of mine who train in Iai sort of made fun of me for showing the sword worn "up" and close to the body with a tanto across. It was obviously an unsual "visual" for them. I tried to explain that the two can be worn this way and you can draw in several positions. Also, how this "works" in the sense that you can draw while wearing Daisho, without conflict. In the midst of their good humour and smurking I had them try to draw with a tanto placed in the Obi. They had much difficulty. :rolleyes:
This is always nice, since half the time I swear they look at me like I am off the deep end. They keep telling me that much of what I show them simply isn't done. Or, at the very least is opposite from what they do. I get the joy of being constantly remineded of my ignorance of their Iai arts.

Granted I am limited in my own experiences with the Iai people I have met and played with, and yes I know that! But, The more I read of others in the classical arts, The more I see comparative (though not completely, identical) views.
In the long run who cares anyway. Its certainly not worth getting all revved up over. No one is going to care what others outside their art, think of their art anyway.
But! If you are going to play with pointy things........
Getting edgy :) and experimenting can be fun.
I am sure that others in the Iai community are making their use of the blade effective through shugyo, trail, and the challenging of technique through experimentation.


Dan

[Edited by Dan Harden on 10-13-2000 at 09:40 AM]

Erik Tracy
13th October 2000, 16:07
I'm still new to this MJER art, having only practiced 7 years. And to be quite honest, never really bothered trying wearing daishio - being more concerned with doing the basics of nukitsuke - one of the most difficult things I have tried to become proficient at.

This thread really made me curious as to how difficult the angle "thang" is. From the posts I was prepared for the worst - fumbling hands and dropped swords.

Purely by coincidence (or was it?) I had just picked up a very cheap wood wakizashi and plastic tsuba for when we practice MSR kenjutsu in our dojo (not enough for my thirst - but time is always a premium these days).

The other night I tried practicing with daisho for the first time, katana worn as usual at the 45 degree angle and the wood wak (with butt ugly plastic tsuba attached) tucked closer - more across the belly.

And gee whiz, all that training made perfect sense. Aside from the 'newness' factor, I was doing nukitsuke and noto and all the other stuff inbetween just as usual in about 10 minutes.

Hmmm....maybe those old guys who made up MJER kinda knew what they were doing ;-)

Erik Tracy
MJER
Jikishin-Kai, USA

Earl Hartman
13th October 2000, 18:19
Dan:

Re weapon retention, my guess is that people who do only iai, and have never crosed swords with another person, either in a kendo match or in paired kata, are not going to have any idea how to hold onto their swords. That is only reasonable. Since most iai is practiced as a solo exercise, no one will have the necessary experience. You have to mix it up to get a feel for what it is like when somebody really wants to make you lose your weapon.

Anecdote #1: when I was in Japan training with the cops, there was this guy named Gomibuchi who was built like a linebacker and had forearms like Popeye. He had the wickedest makiotoshi I have ever come across and if he wanted to knock the sword out of my hand, there was nothing I could do about it.

Obvious moral: if the Force is not available, rely on speed, timing, technique and power. If you're big and strong and have been training all of your life with really good teachers, you can probably beat up a lot of guys.

Anecdote #2 when I came back to the States, I found that I could easily knock people's shinais out of their hands in kendo practice. I even did it to my teacher a few times (and got my ass kicked for my trouble, of course). Why? Because no one expected it, since kendo in the US is a little more "polite" than it is in Japan. But it only works at the right time. It is simply a matter of expectation. In Japan, a good kendo man will never relax, even in practice. In the US, some of the people I fenced with had a habit of dropping their guards when they broke from the tsubazeriai position (where the fencers are toe-to-toe with their shinais pressing against each other). In a match, its hard to get a point that close, so lazy people will kind of relax and back off to get a better position. This is really bad form, since this position is one of the most dangerous, and a good kendo man can nail you off the break faster than you can blink. Anyway, if they do that, a quick swat over the top of their blades will usually send it crashing to the floor.

Obvious moral: a technique will only work if the timing is right. Like Yamamoto Kansuke said: "If your enemy is negligent, strike him". No shit, Sherlock.

Anyway, this is always the dilemma of kata vs. sparring. Personally, if the kata are done correctly, that is, with real intent (instead of concentrating on the aesthetics) these lessons can be learned, I think. However, it is difficult practicing alone.

Earl

Earl Hartman
13th October 2000, 18:40
Ellis:

I have a question and a couple of comments.

Can you describe the "arching cut" that you say is used in iai but not in "effective kenjutsu"? Why is it ineffective and what is the proper way to cut? I realize that it will be difficult if not impossible to explain via e-mail, but I would like to get a sense of what you mean.

Regarding the true naure of the original MJER, Masaoka S. states pretty bluntly in his book that the original iai of Hayashizaki was undoubtedly "primitive" (his words, FWIW). It must have been very different indeed, for the simple reason that at the time that Hayashizaki developed it, the sword was worn tachi style, slung on a belt with the edge down. Masaoka S. speculates that this original iai must have been based on a kiriage-type draw. Hyakutake san's comments regarding the extensive use of this sort of draw in the iai of the Kage Ryu might bear this out. Also, it is speculated by some that Nakayama Hakudo changed the noto in MSR to what he believed was the older method that was used in Hayashizaki's time with a tachi (this begs the question, of course, as to why he adapted that to a katana worn in the obi with the edge up).

Your comments regarding the "contamination" of SMR jo by modern kendo ideas all concern the seitei jo under the ZNKR. I am sure that you are aware of this, but I just thought that I would specifically mention it for the benefit of others who might not be clear on the difference. Although I am very new to jo, we do not use the narrow-stance, balls-of-the-feet kendo footwork or the straight-on body position in our group.

The larger point is that this kind of cross contamination/fertilization has been going on for centuries, and what is going on now with ZNKR seitei iai/jo/naginata is a modern continuation of that. However, it can at least be assumed that, up to a certain point in time, this cross-talk had no detrimental effect on the combative efficacy of the bugei for the simple reason that during the time these were real fighting arts, no one would adopt a change unless it had a combative rationale. That is not longer true, and it hasn't been for some time. Again, the question is: when did it stop being that way? There is probably no way to really know. However, the only way to get a sense of it is to try to practice a real classical tradition as opposed to a modern "bugei by committee" style.

Earl

Ellis Amdur
13th October 2000, 21:04
Re Earl Hartman's questions:

!) The arching cut I refer to usually has locked elbows, and is typified by one or both of the following: Leading with the tip of the blade or "pushing out" with the hands. Antoher example can be seen in some individuals (not all - I'm not interested in "maybe you say that, but I don't" replies) who focus on tameshigiri done in a way that is, in truth, the most effective way to cut stationary objects - a drwing cut in which the person is not protected if they miss or are deflected or don't succeed in killing/immobilizing when they cut. Many iaido schools also cut with their hands together - creates more velocity at the tip, making the whistling sound more likely, but provides very poor stability/leverate if you actually contact something rigid.

In short, an effective cut (and different schools do it different ways) most be an efficient way to cut flesh and/or bone, or in some systems, through thick fabric or even armor, all on a moving enemy - and is done in such a way that the person is protective, able to continue with another attack, or withdraw if the attack fails.

2) REgarding "orgianl MJER" and Masaoka S., that you for providing a substantiation for what, on my part, was logical (so I believe, anyway, inference). I do wonder if Hayashizaki may have worn his sword handachi style (basically, a tachi with some fittings removed, thrust blade up in the belt), as that was common at the time of his life. In any event, those considering MJER, Draeger/Skoss/my own and other's opinions would be justified in regarding the changes in MJER either progressive evolution or degeneration. Based on my own tastes, in which I believe that spiritual development best occurs when using something practical (I prefer tea bowls that actually hold water to those which are lovely but leak), I would consider the changes to be a loss. However, some of the estimable men who practice the "modern" style of MJER or other iaido would certainly provide a counter argument, at least in regards to character development. Nonetheless, I could(personal taste again) never imagine spending a minute doing any modern iaido form, but were someone to surface who could reliably be regarded to practice something close to the original style, I'd leap at a chance to study.

3) Re SMR - I am not referring to the seitei jo per se. The contimination has spread like mold into the older forms of many of the senior teachers, in a way that I believe has done tremendous damage to the subtle treasures of knowledge contained in the ryu I am well-aware that the group you practice with does not use the kendo ashi-sabaki, kamae etc. Note above that I specifically highlighted those practicing with Kyushu and Nishioka Tsuneo as groups which exemplify the older, in my opinion, less or uncontaminated approach.

Best

Ellis Amdur

Earl Hartman
13th October 2000, 22:02
Originally posted by Ellis Amdur
I believe that spiritual development best occurs when using something practical

Ellis:

Thanks for putting my own thoughts so succinctly. Over time, I have come to feel the same way, that is, that in order to understand the spirit of whatever it is that you are doing, you must develop a reasonable skill at it. This presupposes that there is some practical effect that can be measured and objectively evaluated. This, in its turn, presupposes that the art that you practice is technically sound enough to yield that practical effect. Of course, in this day and age, there are no battles, so these things cannot be proven on a battlefield. Two solutions have been adopted, each limited in their own way: sparring with rules or kata practice.

Interestingly enough, I believe that in its own way, kyudo offers a good way to easily judge practicality and technical correctness: you have to hit the target, and the arrow must fly straight and true. This is objective proof that the technique has been executed correctly, which in turn presupposes that the spirit driving it is correct. People who have been taken in by Herrigel think that hitting the target is unimportant, but they are wrong, wrong, wrong.

I realize, of course, that the kyudo of today has no practical battlefield effect or application to self-defense or any kind of fighting and that its techniques are no longer "practical" in that sense, so perhaps it is of no interest to you. However, even in its attenuated modern incarnation it can, if correctly understood, give a person great insight into the real relationship of spirit (Do) and technique (jutsu).

I think that you will like the following quote, from the late Saito Chobo, a very high-ranking Ogasawara Ryu stylist and a respected kyudo historian who trained under Ogasawara Kiyoaki, the 29th headmaster of the Ogasawara Ryu:

"Among those who practice kyudo, there are those who say that in yumi it is not necessary to hit the target, or that all that is necessary is that your form is good; indeed, there are even those who go so far as to say that form doesn't matter, that spirit is the most important thing.

Of course, those who have a twisted spirit are a pain in the neck no matter what they do; and practicing yumi with bad form is not good. However, to have good form (shooting technique) and to not hit the target is against nature. Do not be misled by nonsense. If your shooting form is good, accuracy will surely follow. I want you to not forget that missing the target means that something is wrong.

If you practice yumi diligently, you will gain some kind of spiritual benefit. However, kyujutsu is by its nature a physical activity, so if you want to engage in spiritual training, you will get faster results if you do something like zazen rather than archery."

Truer words have rarely been spoken.

Earl

JohnRay
13th October 2000, 23:37
To this august group,
First, I don't know about other Eishin-ryu teachers, but mine has from the beginning hammered in intricacies of the system based on it's effectiveness.
Second, the purpose of iaido is to first and foremost develop the technique and skill necessary to support a nearly instantaneous attack on an enemy either in the process of physical attack, or with deadly intent. This attack commences from a sheathed sword.
This technique and skill includes, but is not limited to rote moves within the systems waza. In fact, the deciding factor in technique is the swordsman's general control of the sword based on fundamental principals inherent throughout the waza.
It is not primarily concerned with training involving static cuts, nor 2-man prearranged kata using bokuto, although they are often utilized. These training devices are deemed inferior to the primary task in iaido, control of a katana within an open-ended number of life threatening situations. It is not assasination, nor is it battlefield technique.
Concerning the postures used, everything used within a training hall is considered training.
Character development is/should be important for any art with the taking of another human being's life central to it's core, whatever it may be labeled..... this is also necessary for functioning in a situation producing the highest levels of fear and excitement.... This aspect was neither talked about nor specifically trained in my dojo. It is within the people who came before me and was handed down throughout years by their example.
Finally, it seems painfully obvious to me that many of the posters on this forum are sorely lacking in the most basic of higher human characteristics: sensitivity, humility, and open-mindedness.
John Ray
Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Seidokai
Zen Nippon Iaido Renmei

ghp
14th October 2000, 00:40
Hi John.

May I disagree?


It is not assasination,....

Gee, John ... maybe it has developed to that point today -- but some waza were based on "assasination." Witness Itomagoi 1~3. Also, Oikaze ... (and maybe even Tanashita and Shinobu). I know today Oikaze is taught that you are facing your enemy and you first break through his retainers -- but I was taught that you break through "innocent bystanders" in a crowd and then strike your target from behind.

Anything can be made into a "DO" so that we may "polish our Self" -- ballet, rifle marksmanship, motorcycle maintenance, etc -- but that doesn't mean the original intent was so.

It's nice to talk about perfecting the self, but I think it is a travesty if we "forget" the original intent: to kill. And remembering the original intend does not mean we glorify it. We just remember.

Regards,
Guy

Cady Goldfield
14th October 2000, 00:57
Originally posted by ghp



It is not assasination,....

Gee, John ... maybe it has developed to that point today -- but some waza were based on "assasination." Witness Itomagoi 1~3. Also, Oikaze ... (and maybe even Tanashita and Shinobu). I know today Oikaze is taught that you are facing your enemy and you first break through his retainers -- but I was taught that you break through "innocent bystanders" in a crowd and then strike your target from behind.

Anything can be made into a "DO" so that we may "polish our Self" -- ballet, rifle marksmanship, motorcycle maintenance, etc -- but that doesn't mean the original intent was so.

It's nice to talk about perfecting the self, but I think it is a travesty if we "forget" the original intent: to kill. And remembering the original intend does not mean we glorify it. We just remember.

Regards,
Guy

It might also be a travesty to lose the soundness of the principles and waza that made it capable of its original task. Without an eye to original intent, the correct method and edginess are the first things to degrade -- usually via faulty transmission -- and disappear.

Robert Reinberger
14th October 2000, 01:17
Originally posted by ghp:

I know today Oikaze is taught that you are facing your enemy and you first break through his retainers -- but I was taught that you break through "innocent bystanders" in a crowd and then strike your target from behind.

In Oikaze one also pursues an enemy. But isn't it Sode Surigaeshi when you first "break through" bystanders?

BTW, I also was taught Iwanami as anything but defensive. I was told that when this Kata was explained to my teacher for the first time, he noticed: "But that means clearly to commit murder!" - "Manchmal muß sein" ("sometimes has to be"), was the answer in broken German.

Regards,
Robert

Robert Reinberger
14th October 2000, 01:56
Regarding Seiza, Tatehiza, 'dead' positions, and not wearing a daito when sitting like that (indoors).

A lot of people - most of them much more knowledgeable than me, I assume - already debated that matter. I just wanted to add one thought, and ask if you had considered that:

While the techniques may have been changed or rearranged also in more modern times, the introduction of Tatehiza and Seiza clearly happened at a time, when people like Hasegawa Eishin and Omori Masamitsu must have known all that things, because they where part of their daily life, but nevertheless included that positions in their training and teachings. Obviously they found some value in using them.

I just wanted to point out, that, while these methods may not origin from Sengoku Jidai, they clearly are not modern inventions added by people that have had no clue about everyday life with the sword.

Regards,
Robert

Ellis Amdur
14th October 2000, 22:37
Mr. Reinberger writes -

"Regarding Seiza, Tatehiza, 'dead' positions, and not wearing a daito when sitting like that (indoors). [SNIP] While the techniques may have been changed or rearranged also in more modern times, the introduction of Tatehiza and Seiza clearly happened at a time, when people like Hasegawa Eishin and Omori Masamitsu musthave known all that things, because they where part of their daily life, but nevertheless included that positions in their training and teachings. Obviously they found some value in using them. I just wanted to point out, that, while these methods may not origin from Sengoku Jidai, they clearly are not modern inventions added by people that have had no clue about everyday life with the sword."

That is the core question! AS my interests circle around the Sengoku period and the use of weapons in that context, I have no idea of the answer. But you are right. Why did these men, some of them incredibly skilled with the weapon, some of them of intellectually high caliber, choose to change things the way they did? Obviously, the changes had social and practical utility in the context of the society within which they lived. And equally obviously, their primary concern was no longer sneaking thru tall grass or dealing with surprise invasions or rolling in the muck and blood in melee situations.

Best

Ellis Amdur

john mark
15th October 2000, 01:28
Originally posted by JohnRay

... It is not assasination....
John Ray
Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Seidokai
Zen Nippon Iaido Renmei

With all due respect, the sotai for Koranto, for an example, is chasing teki and cutting him dowm from behind. NukiUchi is another nasty example.

Best,

hyaku
15th October 2000, 02:25
Originally posted by john mark
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JohnRay
[B]
... It is not assasination....
John Ray
Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Seidokai
Zen Nippon Iaido Renmei

With all due respect, the sotai for Koranto, for an example, is chasing teki and cutting him dowm from behind. NukiUchi is another nasty example.

Best,
.....................
Glad you mentioned that one Mr Ray,

It was brought up at a Roshukai (Iwata) Seminar some years ago. Many people working out the finer points of the waza had assumed that the opponent had turned around at the last minute and thought cutting his back was a bit off. Iwata said, “That’s the way it`s done. These things happen.”

Hyakutake Colin

http://www.bunbun.ne.jp/~sword

Dan Harden
15th October 2000, 02:46
It was brought up at a Roshukai (Iwata) Seminar some years ago. Many people working out the finer points of the waza had assumed that the opponent had turned around at the last minute and thought cutting his back was a bit off. Iwata said, “That’s the way it`s done. These things happen.”

Its seems he is right!
Currently, on the history channel there is a program about the Burma Thailand railroad (the truth of the river Kwai) and the taking of Singapore by the Japanese. On the show are interviews with hundreds of the 130,000 men taken. They are showing the Japanese films of the starvation, beatings, stabbing and so forth of helpless people both sholdier AND!!! citizins.
Included in this are films of Chinese women (citizens)being attacked and stabbed from behind, and then decapitated
So it appears your teacher was right. "These things happen"
and of people in hospitals being stabbed in their beds as well as citizens being stabbed in the street. Overall they murdered 20,000 civilians by gun, bayonet and sword.
Then proceeded to starve, torture, stab, and murder 13,000 prisoners of war, and and unnumbered amount of asian slaves. In fact they frequently stabbed them and left them hanging for days to die slowly in the sun. The men had to suffer as well. It seems they could hear the cries of histeria of the victims at night who were hung up as they slowly drowned in their own blood.
I guess Jukendo works pretty well. And you get to practice on live tied up dummy's. Oh the glory days of Japanese Budo.
I just thought the film of stabbing and beheading from behind might be of interest to those studying such things. As it is apprapo to the discussion at hand.

[Edited by Dan Harden on 12-02-2000 at 11:30 PM]

Goon Jhuen Weng
15th October 2000, 08:38
"Budo? What a joke!"
By Mr Dan Harden

I've been following this post with tremendous interest as I practise MSR Iai myself and I haven't added any comments yet as my knowledge of Iai (or any Japanese martial art) is near to nil. But, seeing the above statment posted by Mr Dan Harden made me quite confused.:confused: Its true that the Japanese soldiers during WWII committed terrible atrocities to allied troops and civilians but I fail to understand the statment that Budo is a joke. No offense Mr Harden but are you trying to say that all of us Budo practitioners are in reality, bloody-thirsty, cruel, monstrous, evil, deceiving, merciless etc, etc, etc.....people? I for one, strongly believe in what I practise. Its true that, on the surface level, we study systematic methods of violence but in the deeper and overall sense, our training in Budo allows us to truly see the good and the ugly side of our lives and the lives around us. If you say that Budo is just violence, I might as well have just signed on and become a regular soldier in the Singapore army after my term of conscription. I don't know. Maybe I'm just a young, idealistic nitwit with my head up in the clouds but like I said, I believe in what I practise and I believe that Budo is NOT a joke. Period.
Anyway, back to the topic of MJER/MSR iaijutsu, I have to agree with Mr. Ellis Amdur that spiritual development best occurs when using something practical. I honestly don't like doing Seitei Iai and would concentrate more on MSR as it is more practical that the former. (I know MSR is not exactly a practical art but it is better than doing Seitei. MSR also has TachiUchi no Kurai, i.e Kenjutsu, which Seitei does not which makes MSR definately more practical in terms of learning distance and timing) Only reason why I do Seitei is because Sensei asks me to do so and that it develops the principles of Iai and (sigh!) for grading purposes.

hyaku
15th October 2000, 11:38
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dan Harden
[B]It was brought up at a Roshukai (Iwata) Seminar some years ago. Many people working out the finer points of the waza had assumed that the opponent had turned around at the last minute and thought cutting his back was a bit off. Iwata said, “That’s the way it`s done. These things happen.”

Budo? what a joke!

Dan

Sorry you feel so badly about it Mr Harden.

Perhaps you might find my other web pages of interest.

http://www2.saganet.ne.jp/sword

Regards Hyakutake Colin

Dan Harden
15th October 2000, 14:43
Hi Colin


I really must apologize. It was late and I was greatly moved by what I saw in the films. Not the least of which were the sword and bayonet attacks on women and helpless prisoners. To this day I cannot watch the Holocost or the Nagasaki/Hiroshima films . I tears me up. So.....
Sorry for emoting. Of course there is some truth to wheigh in with. View points about the various cultures "mindset" at the time to balance things out.


Dan

Nicki Gerstner
15th October 2000, 16:39
Hi all,

although i certainly don´t have at least a half of the experience and knowledge of the other gentlemen around in this forum, there is one point which i still miss in this thread:
Draeger Sensei always wrote in his books about the ineffectiveness of seiza and tatehiza forms (for example in MJER), but as far as i know (which is actually not very much) he never mentioned that first every member of the MJER knows about this ineffectiveness and second everyone there is taught that these Kata sets are taught for strenghtening the hips and learn the basic bodywork of Iai-fashioned swordsmanship. No practitioner of MJER would ever think of Seiza no Bu as effective, for it just is not meant to be effective in combat at all. It is a means to develop certain abilities which are required later for the "effective" forms (in the Tachiwaza sets). This should be clear alone through the fact that no bushi ever sat in seiza wearing a Katana.
This just to join the discussion.
All the best,
Nicki

ghp
15th October 2000, 17:22
Robert,


In Oikaze one also pursues an enemy. But isn't it Sode Surigaeshi when you first "break through" bystanders?

You are absolutely 100% correct -- and I am 200% wrong ["shoulda known better" = 2x wrong].

Thank you for reminding me of sodesurigaeshi. -- Yes, strike from behind after pushing aside the throngs with your arm-sweep.

Oikaze -- "Trailing Wind" pursues the unsuspecting enemy and cuts him down from behind. Like Earl quotes Iwata sensei (paraphrased for modernity) "'Stuff' happens!"

Dan,

Do not confuse "corrupted budo" with budo. I also have seen the photographs. Yes, jukendo works. And "kaishaku" works. What doesn't work is the premise that this is budo. Even my teacher -- who has some reputation -- states that the "kenjutsu of the China war was that of Satsujin-ken."

What you talk about is exactly what happens when bigotry and nationalism are combined and fostered by the state. Witness the lynchings of blacks in the US (not only the South, mind you). See the photographs of the happy white men smiling and pointing to the murdered victim? See the happy white children, being molded by their fathers? Not just Nanjing.

Although bujutsu/budo/bugei techniques were employed in Nanjing, they were *neither* budo nor bushido.

I invite you to come down off your high horse.

Regards,
Guy

ghp
15th October 2000, 17:28
Dan,

I just read your last post. Seeing films such as the ones you describe are important so that we can ensure this never happens again. I make it a point that my shodan-level students go through a collection of photographs showing the misuse of the Japanese sword. Since I do not practice jukendo, I do not include those photos. My goal is not to "sicken" my students -- just show them what *can* happen if you loose your soul.

I apologise for the "high horse" comment.

Regards,
Guy

Dan Harden
16th October 2000, 01:43
Hi Guy
Thanks for the apology. I really don’t think I am on ANY horse. I do not see myself as above or below others. The comments I made were and are apropos for the situation.

To Mr. Weng.

I wasn’t discussing YOUR Budo now. Was I?

The study of Budo goes far deeper than any single man. Observationally, I see it as something being carried out in various movements and then culturally by a people, finally by all peoples. Any cultures "Budo" can be seen in the way they handle the individual, the local groupings, the family group including women and children, the aged, the infirm, and then the way it extends itself for individual standards, rights, and freedoms as applied to its own people. Finally, it reaches out to encompass how it conducts itself in the arts of war, including the conscription of its soldiers and its war ethic. I think you see a corralery in the way a people value the quality of life for their own citizens, and they way they conduct themselves as victors and vanquished.
That said, I believe there were eras in the history of man that reflected certain characteristics of those eras, as well as cultural differences in the way we conduct ourselves in war. That is why I referred to British and Australian "Budo" as a culture ethos, as opposed to the Japanese "Budo" of that Time and place. I do not believe that many of the cultures involved in WWII if placed in the same circumstances would have conducted themselves the way the Germans and the Japanese did. I do not consider the arial invasions in Europe or Pearl harbor, internment camps, or even the Atom bomb drops as incidents of equal measure. And NO! I do not believe it should be any sort of damning comment of an entire people. However, I do believe certain cultural attitudes and national ethos lend themselves to various propensities in any given situation. It is not universal or all encompassing (and I think it would fail miserably in defining individual people of ANY culture). But, it explains many actions the world has witnessed in the past.
Time and place being relative of course, countries as large groups of like minded people or at least people who give over their consent to be ruled, can be defined in how they conduct themselves in human rights, economic focus, industrial output, or military matters.


Dan


[Edited by Dan Harden on 10-15-2000 at 07:54 PM]

Undmark, Ulf
16th October 2000, 13:54
I can't really understand this "My ryu is more combat than yours"-thing. I believe it was Meik who, at some time, put it "What you see is not what you get"...
Still, why do people fall for this scenario-stuff regarding the kata?
It - just - wont - ever - happen - that - way!!

Iai is about learning how to draw and cut with the sword.
No matter what ryu you prefer, no matter what scenario you play...when training inside, seiza or not, you just can't pretend that you're stumbling on wet rocks, or in the ricefields, or in deep snow or water. Forget all about the scenario-bull*. You still have to adapt to the conditions regarding how you move your body (sliding, on the balls of your feet... or whatever) and you cannot prepare for that in the dojo, alone on a polished floor with no enemy in sight.
There *is* no "What if you are wearing two swords, what if you are wearing armour, what if your leg is cut off, what if he's carrying a machinegun, if this happens - you can't do that..." there is simply no way of predicting anything.

In the end, all you can do is learning how to quickly and accurately draw the blade, and cut. That is Iai, nomatter the ryu or the scenario pretended. Learn how to use the tool but please, don't sit down in seiza on the battlefield.Don't pretend to walk in mud with heavy boots when you're not. Iai is iai, some prefer specific scenarios or specific ryu, but in the end it's still only a limited way of training how to draw and cut. And for what it's worth: you won't ever be testing your skills for real...


Ulf Undmark

Dan Harden
16th October 2000, 14:58
Ulf writes

Iai is iai, some prefer specific scenarios or specific ryu, but in the end it's still only a limited way of training how to draw and cut. And for what it's worth: you won't ever be testing your skills for real...

Excellent commentary Ulf. From reading in these forumns and from years of talking in the Dojo I have concluded there are four sides to this issue.

There are two sides of this issue who are unconcerned about altering their training. They are resolved as to the question of "Why they do what they do?"

1. You have the kenjutsu/Koryu side.
They have different methods that may even include the use of the land and foot work for unenevn terrain. They may even train outside. They also have an indepth study of how to accomplish a real draw while maintaining optimum maai in order to gain them proper hasuji wile leaving the opponent "open".......or not :) They may also have their own beleifs about paired kata, batto, etc. and what may or may not constitute a full study of weapons.

2. Then you have the Iai side that does NOT practice for martial integrity at all.
You cannot argue with a person who is using the sword as a vehicle for moving meditation and form. Its like watching those gymnast people who use the hoop, the ball, and the banner. It serves no practical use. It is beauty for beauty's sake alone. It is still quite difficult to do, has a rationale all its own, and when they are in "the zone" doing it, they are happy. They are completetly unconcerned about the martial rationale behind their altered technique.


3. Iai pragmatists.
The third side is the side that is the topic of much conversation. They are the ones who apparently believe these scenarios as taught them. They may also think their Iai training makes them capable with a blade. They are convinced of the martial integrity of their technique as taught them.

4. The Iai side that desire to be pragmatic and do NOT beleive all the things taught them. They research and struggle perhaps on their own to arrive at effective technical skills while staying in their Ryuha.


The last two groups seem to be the ones that much of the conversatons on these many forumns and lists revolve around. Perhaps it is as simple as;
practical VS spiritual only.


I have never seen or heard of it being resolved. The ones who wade into the pool always come out with the same trunks they went in with.


Dan
"Artists! Musicians! gees....Ya gotta love em

Brian Dunham
16th October 2000, 16:59
The 'scenarios' are not to be taken as gospel. Each kata (in any art) is meant to teach certain lessons. In the case of these 'scenarios'(at least in MSR/MJER), one part(but by no means the whole deal) of the lesson is learning to move body and sword through confined and or crowded spaces. Probably the most important part of kata study(at least in regards to aquired skills) is breaking free of the kata (after years of conforming to it). It is ridiculous to say that you could only execute a technique if the attack comes in exactly the prescribed manner. Yes, I'm sure that there are people who never learn to "break free" ( I feel like I'm a long way off ), but you could say the same of people practicing any martial art.
Dan, your '4 sides' comments could also be applied to the practicing population of any MA(perhaps save some very small koryu), even Daito ryu.

Just a couple more quick comments:
1. No one(AFAIK) said Iai constituted a full study of weapons.

2. No one (AFAIK) claimed that the techniques have not been altered.

3. "I have never seen or heard of it being resolved" There is nothing to resolve. If you don't like it, don't do it. It's still a free country.

4. With the exception of knowledgeable and objective comments from people like Meik Skoss and Ellis Amdur, Most of the negative criticism comes from people with no background in this art. Take it for what it's worth-"0".

5. The real conflict is within those who feel that they need to continually tell us that our art is "noncombative", "ineffective", "full of affectation", etc, etc.

If you want to be able to judge the art, go study it earnestly for a decade or so.

Erik Tracy
16th October 2000, 17:11
Here's another ingredient to throw into the "pot" for simmering ;-)

Our organization, the Jiksihin-Kai, recently hosted a gasshuku, in honor of Miura Sensei who came from Japan to help us celebrate.

Part of the gasshuku was enbu of many arts. My small part was a demonstration of MJER iaijutsu with Shimabukuro Sensei.

He was demonstrating several waza in three presentations.
1) Pure Waza - as taught and practiced in the dojo
2) Bunkai - the application of the waza against "real" opponents (in this case human "fodder" - my claim to fame for the enbu ;-)
3) Variation - a more liberal interpretation of the techniques in a more dynamic application.

The waza I am familiar with - having practiced them over and over and over. The bunkai I have also seen and tried (we do this time to time so that we all understand and appreciate the *reasons* for the movements of body and sword.

But the "variations" I had never seen before. I asked sensei where did these come from. His reply was that a real fight is not waza. Bunkai can approximate it, but it is not the same thing either.

His variations took the core technique from the waza which were then applied in a very unstructured manner. Of course for the enbu they were pre-arranged - but it serves to illustrate that you CAN think and use iai outside of the waza "box". You HAVE to - you are delluding yourself if you practice and think that for encounter 1 you use response 1a and so on.

Those that try to confine MJER "iai" to a box similarly fail to understand that as well.

Brian Dunham
16th October 2000, 17:26
" His variations took the core technique from the waza which were then applied in avery unstructured manner. Of course for the enbu they were prearranged-but it serves to illustrate that you CAN think and use Iai outside of the waza "box". You HAVE to- you are deluding yourself if you practice and think that for encounter 1 you use response 1a and so on."

Erik,
This is really the same as what I was alluding to, you just explained it much better. These statements, however, are really true of all kata or waza based arts. The kata or waza illustrate mechanics or principles, and you eventually learn to apply these as a situation may require.

Dan Harden
16th October 2000, 21:39
Brian

Good points all around. It does seem that over the course of this thread, as well as many posts both here and in other places, Exponents of MJR as well as *other* arts keep going over the same issues. Both Iai and Kenjutsu. You and I have discussed this in the past, that aside, it appears that several people in your art and in other arts have the same issues. That is what I meant about the differences and observations being unresolved and my comment about leaving the pool with your same trunks.
Several people of both sides feel that no resolution is required. They are resolved to continue their training with out comments from outsiders. You must agree that questions remain and continue to arise from exponents both within Iai and from without.

You had alluded to my examples being applicable to all other arts. I agree. In fact there is much discussion about this on this very Bulletin Board, and in others.Covering both Koryu and Gendai arts. And I find that exponents of those arts are willing to discuss the questions of martial integrity, affectation, rote *stand up* Kata as a learning tool and the possibility of whether or not those arts were effective in principle (if not technique) and whether or not they can make a transition to modern applications.
The discussions are as detailed and pointed as this one concerning Iai and no one seems to mind. In fact several people you have mentioned have all joined in. They are valid questions that concern (as you have pointed out) all arts of every description. To date the effective applicability of Kyudo, Aikido, Karate, Kobudo, Daito ryu all Koryu jujutsu, Kenjutsu and Kendo, have all been discussed, With much candor and humor.
The fact that you are one of those who is indeed resolved, is admirable. Several others, including your seniors, are not, and have been willing to discuss it openly, with elan. Most of the arguments I have seen here are on point. To dismiss them as worthless or "o" as you put it. For the simple reason they are outside your art is a bit tempestuous. Most artist can watch other arts and come up with valid weakenesses and strengths. The notion of an exponent having to study an art for a decade before they may voice a valid opinion as to some of the techniques they witness is a bit overplayed. Having critisms about some of what they see, doesn't mean any of us throw the baby out with the bath water.
You had noted that you see outside the Kata box. You would :) not everyone does. A quick perusal through these boards bears witness to that.


Dan


[Edited by Dan Harden on 10-16-2000 at 03:55 PM]

Brian Dunham
17th October 2000, 00:45
By no means did I mean to imply that the opinions of the individuals I mentioned should be discounted. The comments of both people were very objective and academic. Both were made from many years of experience in various methods of Japanese swordsmanship, one of them including MJER. I hold both individuals in the highest regard.
My point was that, contrary to your opinion, I strongly believe that you can not evaluate a whole system or art by observing one or even several relatively low level practitioners. This judgement could easily be based on the skill of someone that really hasn't learned that much. You may be able to percieve his weaknesses and openings(or even mine for that matter) but that is only an indication of where that person is in his training, not necessarily the system itself (to evaluate the art itself that way, you would have to assume that person is an expert and is performing the kata with absolute perfect form and timing--I consider myself to be a SLIGHTLY advanced beginner, so I would not want you to judge my art based on my performance alone).


[Edited by Brian Dunham on 10-18-2000 at 07:16 PM]

Earl Hartman
17th October 2000, 01:02
Dan:

Just out of curiosity, if budo is such a crock, has no value in shaping character, and (at least in your opinion, apparently) is just a set of techniques to make people more efficient murderers, what are you doing practicing it, since you seem to despise it so much? Is Daito Ryu so different than all of the other bugei?

I know that you have apologized for "emoting" after a late night, so perhaps this question is moot. Still, your disgust seems so visceral that there must be something else at work here. If you question the basic human morality of an entire nation, as you seem to be doing in your previous posts, does this not call into question the value of anything that culture has produced, in general, and the value of the bugei in particular? (This is sort of like saying that Goethe, Schiller and Beethoven are rendered unclean because of what Hitler did, however.) Are you questioning the uses to which the bugei were put by militaristic fascists, or are you saying that the inner nature of the bugei themselves are to blame for what happened? I am not being an apologist for the Nanking Massacre, as horrible and unforgivable a single incident of gratuitous cruelty as can be imagined, so don't even go there. I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

FWIW, part of Draeger's entire thesis was that the "budo" that the government used to harness the nation to the war machine was itself a corruption of real budo, not just because it was twisted by the government for ends that were foreign to budo but also because farmers and peasants, who had no knowledge of classical bushi culture, were forced into training in something for which they had no preparation. There is a difference between bushi killing each other in a fight and armed men murdering civilians out of hand. And yes, of course, it goes without saying that the "apologies" offered up to now by the Japanese government are far too little, far too late.

Looking forward to your rant against America and its genocide of the Native Americans and enslavement of the Africans, the British subjugation and colonization of India and the forced sale of opium to the Chinese, and the Australian genocide against and continuing oppression of the Aborigines, among other examples of the Western spirit.

Earl


[Edited by Earl Hartman on 10-16-2000 at 08:12 PM]

hyaku
17th October 2000, 03:25
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Erik Tracy
[B]Here's another ingredient to throw into the "pot" for simmering ;-)

He was demonstrating several waza in three presentations.
1) Pure Waza - as taught and practiced in the dojo
2) Bunkai - the application of the waza against "real" opponents (in this case human "fodder" - my claim to fame for the enbu ;-)
3) Variation - a more liberal interpretation of the techniques in a more dynamic application.

........................
Mr Tracy

I understand your point as I have taken part in and translated at many of these Seminars.

However I still find subtle differences. It may partly due to the stealth element that has been mentioned in MJER. Then again there is Jo, Kyo, Ha, in these techniques however fast they are performed. I still need a lot of convincing that Iai and Koryu are now different entities in the sword arts world. But both of them done in peaceful times.

I think Mr Hartman make a very relevant point in saying that the majority of Japanese people are not aware of what happened in Nanjing etc. It has been purposely left out of history textbooks and there are some websites that actually offer an explanation to the fact that it did not happen.

For the older Sensei they know what happened and are determined to show that Budo is a form of activity having educational values

My wife saw a book on the subject for the first time earlier this year. Needless to say the book is not sold in Japan. Her immediate reaction was of course shock, and she said did we really do this? One woman at hospital in Nanjing had said, I wonder what the reaction of Japanese women of Japan would be if they knew what their menfolk were doing?

A lot of Japanese still think they are somewhat better than other races. It was this attitude that stood out in the book as if to say, It doesnt matter, they are not Japanese!

Young people are perhaps more aware. But the full force of the atrocities will never be brought home. Basicaly it means that anyone born after the war (54), or just before is oblivious to what went on.


Hyakutake Colin

[Edited by hyaku on 10-16-2000 at 09:51 PM]

Dan Harden
17th October 2000, 04:14
Earl writes

Dan:

Just out of curiosity, if budo is such a crock, has no value in shaping character, and (at least in your opinion, apparently) is just a set of techniques to make people more efficient murderers, what are you doing practicing it, since you seem to despise it so much?



Without knowing me, I think it is bit difficult to package all of my feelings regarding Budo into one post.
Despise them? Hardly.
Love them? Hardly.
They are what they are. They do not require our love, hate, or indifference. They are there, as part of the totality of man and his culture. To be human, and witness the Beauty of Budo, is to also be human and be moved by the atrocities of Budo. I disagree with the presumption that one can have martial ardor for what one may judge as honorable field actions, while spuriously discounting other actions as BAD Budo. In other words Budo, is Budo.
There are better ways to improve the human condition then the study of war. Yes I know the popular refrain “Budo is about STOPPING the SPEARS or in this case WAR. However, to stop war one must understand the nature of war. The study of war and the nature of war, whether on an individual or corporate level is not a study that necessarily produces a finer character in man. Although I do not disclude the fact that military training does do this. As I said, there are better ways to achieve this.

I do retract my statement that “Budo as a way to refine and build any sort of charactor is a farse.”
Gees Did I say that? Emotions ran high.


***************************************

Earl

Is Daito Ryu so different than all of the other bugei?


I do not presume to speak for Daito Ryu in any manner or form.

*****************************************

Earl
I know that you have apologized for "emoting" after a late night, so perhaps this question is moot.
Still, your disgust seems so visceral that there must be something else at work here. If you question the basic human morality of an entire nation, as you seem to be doing in your previous posts, does this not call into question the value of anything that culture has produced, in general, and the value of the bugei in particular?
(This is sort of like saying that Goethe, Schiller and Beethoven are rendered unclean because of what Hitler did, however.) Are you questioning the uses to which the bugei were put by militaristic fascists, or are you saying that the inner nature of the bugei themselves are to blame for what happened? I am not being an apologist for the Nanking Massacre, as horrible and unforgivable a single incident of gratuitous cruelty as can be imagined, so don't even go there. I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.


Let’s establish some ground rules. Are you truly interested in how I feel about the subject? Or, are you inflamed by what you perceive my opinion to be and are only interested in squabbling? Will it be Ok if we find while trying to understand each other we disagree in whole or in part? Is it ok to do so without judging the entirety of ourselves as men? :)

The documentary was one of the most visual I have seen. I was being overly (and humanly) sensitive to the video of dead citizens along with stories of laughing soldiers. Coupled with the stories of the tied up soldiers being run through and left to die slowly while strung up. It struck a chord in that I was just then reading the post about the MJR back stab and one of the responses. Anyway you get the connection. It is what it is. The actions were done, it bothered me.
My commentary about the Budo of that culture (Japan) at that time was evidenced in the actions of that culture at that time. And no, I do not think the other two cultures I mentioned *of that time*, would have acted the same. You brought up a corollary to the Americas. If you would like to discuss the actions in the America’s from say, mid 15th century to mid 19th century, and the Budo that was expressed by the various cultures of that time, lets do so. Here, I was only discussing the Budo of that culture and time.
You also brought up the notion of judging the actions of individuals in a culture in regards to that cultures Budo and the prospects of damning them for military actions of their governments. I specifically disregarded that in my posts, so on that we agree. To be more specific. Even the individuals involved in execution of some of the worlds most heinous military atrocities are in a way, victims themselves, of their cultures Budo. It does not excuse their actions or indifference. Personally, I believe I would have chosen to face a firing squad instead of lighting the pilot on a single gas oven in Auschwitz. But again they are what they are.People did what they did.

*********************************
earl writes
FWIW, part of Draeger's entire thesis was that the "budo" that the government used to harness the nation to the war machine was itself a corruption of real budo, not just because it was twisted by the government for ends that were foreign to budo but also because farmers and peasants, who had no knowledge of classical bushi culture, were forced into training in something for which they had no preparation. There is a difference between bushi killing each other in a fight and armed men murdering civilians out of hand. And yes, of course, it goes without saying that the "apologies" offered up to now by the Japanese government are far too little, far too late.

Oh great!! I get to speak out and disagree with Mr. Draegers opinions?
Using a governments "Budo" to harness a people to the war machine isn't a corruption of Budo. IT IS BUDO! and its ugly. The study of how to do it is as important as the study of how to keep troops equipped and rotated. How to make an incursion have a supply, have a strategy and an exit plan.
I think it’s a mistake and a bit to idealistic to think of some imaginary "Budo" Ideal somewhere that encompasses only the positive attributes of war or of any given cultures actions in war in a place and time. It would be great to aspire to some sort worldwide martial ethos and call THAT "Budo." But the likelyhood of THAT ever happening is slim. War is hell and people are mean when they get mad. I do not think you can have good Budo A. over here and everytime someone does a No,No, you say
"Ah hah!! they twisted good Budo."
People consent to being led. You can always choose to be free or die. Tacit consent, cowardly consent, or fervent zealousness for a cause, either way, they are all there fighting.
The Budo of a culture at a given time is its “Budo” Period. It may be that it is neither good, nor bad, but both at once.
Several religions would decry Budo all together. But, I believe Ghandi expressed excellent Budo. He won with little comparative bloodshed. Then again, the study of a peoples religious beliefs and their local customs is paramount to good Budo anyway. So is the study of their education system, and the general mindset of the attacking armies "Folks back home."

*******************************************


Looking forward to your rant against America and its genocide of the Native Americans and enslavement of the Africans, the British subjugation and colonization of India and the forced sale of opium to the Chinese, and the Australian genocide against and continuing oppression of the Aborigines, among other examples of the Western spirit.

Earl

gees... Earl. I already apologized :)

All are examples of their cultures Budo in various forms. Several of your examples are not direct military actions. They are police actions, and economic uses of the military. All ugly and all part of their cultures Budo.
Someone should have and probably *did* rant against such atrocities. Others sat back and were tacitly led. The actions do not require our approval or disapproval. They happened.
I would hope someone was emotionally charged and outraged over them as well. In keeping with my opinion it is interesting to study what sort of culture produces such actions. Including the most common ethical considerations of first separating and then de-humizing the potential victims in the eyes of the citizenry.

You sense a cynicism in me regarding many of these martial arts as Budo, due to my opinion that they are, as practiced by most of us……NOT Budo.
War, and military action are a severe study. The taking of human life is a serious matter. On a personal level, to say that you (just a general you Earl, I don’t know individuals) are practicing a personal "Budo" that is capable, on different levels, of pre-empting or stopping an intense murderous action against you and yours is a serious matter. And not to be taken lightly.
It is a simple as this (in my warped mind anyway)

Person A. is living their life. Someone attacks them. They defend themselves, they win..whew! lucky them

Person B. picks up a weapon and says to himself or others “I will learn this weapon.”
They should then,learn its use. To IT’S fullest extent and become expert in its use.
Or Leave it alone and be person A.
Dabbling embarrasses the weapon and others who strive so hard. I feel the same with Unarmed arts as well. Leave them alone or become expert. Everything in the middle isn’t Budo to me. Moreover, Low level people who are giving they’re all, and are on the road to expertise ARE practicing Budo. They may have many seniors in their respective arts who have just hung around a long time who are NOT practicing Budo in any real sense. It is one of the reasons you can enter a Dojo and find so few who are really capable.
Inversely Earl, I know of a few guys with some serious military backgrounds who actually use their Budo to Stop the violence in THEMSELVES. They have NO interest in getting edgy at all. A sort of “Been there. Done that. Mindset.” I don’t know why, But, I have always found that poetic.

Dan



[Edited by Dan Harden on 10-16-2000 at 11:19 PM]

Undmark, Ulf
17th October 2000, 08:54
Is Budo spiritual?? Is it effective? Isn't it just another form of fascism? Is Budo good? Is it bad?

I always thought Budo was what we made of it. For me it all comes up to learning it's lesson and see what good may come with it.

I mentioned the "scenarios". What I meant was that we have to be openminded while training. Is it possible to draw MSR-style if wearing Daisho? We'll, who said any MSR swordsman was wearing Daisho? Yes, ofcourse...the Tokugawa fellow did.
But here we have it again; nomatter what ryu we prefer, we cannot predict what kind of laws will be forced up on us. One day we're only allowed to wear one sword. The next day, we're forced to wear three of them. All of a sudden, like in 1877, we're not allowed to wear any at all!! So, the last time I checked, this Tokugawa guy wasn't ruling my country...nor was he ruling Japan when Hayashizake first formalized his methods. And when Tokugawa minded my ryuha's bussiness, I guess the Kage ryu fellows ended up even worse; they were training with swords they weren't allowed to wear at all. Far too long for Tokugawa taste.

So, if we're now forced to wear'em, should this Tokugawa guy ever knock on your door; pick a short one without tsuba. If Tokugawa isn't satisfied, well, do we have any statistics on how many got arrested for wearing too short kodachi without tsuba? I don't know...But I DO know it AIN'T much big deal moving the sword a few inches to the left...IF we're forced by law to do so!

I also know it aint the same to train in deep snow at night.
It just can't be done the same way. Yes, the "scenario" IS important to understand, but we can't play'em all! Nor can we consult the good old densho for all of our questions...it has to be tried by those who wan't to know. I can draw fast and well from lying, sitting, standing, jumping, running. I can draw with my left hand while wearing the sword at my right hip... AND while wearing two swords. We just have to understand the limitations of Iai as a method for learning swordsmanship. I don't really feel like playing "Now I'm wearing three swords - Now I'm in water - Now, I cant see where you are...". Methods for learning how to handle the weapon, under LIMITED conditions, are taught in every ryu. They're enough for anyone...if only open minded.

So, does this make MJER/MSR a really combative art?
I've always been interested in knowing if my training has given me any feel for the weapon, but limiting the experience to that... would really make training these days meaningless.

Ulf Undmark

[Edited by Undmark, Ulf on 10-17-2000 at 03:16 AM]

MarkF
17th October 2000, 11:17
Originally posted by Brian Dunham


My point was that, contrary to your opinion, I strongly believe that you can not evaluate a whole system or art by observing one or even several relatively low level practitioners. This judgement could easily be based on the skill of someone that really hasn't learned that much. The individual who, I'm pretty sure, is your primary exposure to MSR, is not the person you wan't to watch in order to get an accurate picture of the system. You may be able to percieve his weaknesses and openings(or even mine for that matter) but that is only an indication of where that person is in his training, not necessarily the system itself (to evaluate the art itself that way, you would have to assume that person is an expert and is performing the kata with absolute perfect form and timing--I consider myself to be a SLIGHTLY advanced beginner, so I would not want you to judge my art based on my performance alone).



Hi, Brian,
Do you know a single boxer of great technique or even a bad one write a book on boxing or even a good article? I haven't either. It would seem, in this piece of combative sport, most of the experts are those who have never, or may have done a little of the real thing. While this may or may not be budo to you, a fight is a fight, and the experts are writing about these duels the next day, the next week, or even ten, twenty, even thirty or more years later. You may want to stay tuned in, because the best advice comes from the strangest places, and even those who have never picked up a sword can see what you don't while self-involved in the thing. Keep your ears open. Oh, and your eyes, as well.;)

Mark

Ron Tisdale
17th October 2000, 16:06
Deleted. Sorry.

[Edited by Ron Tisdale on 10-17-2000 at 10:19 AM]

Dojorat
17th October 2000, 17:50
Greetins,

It would seem to boil down to a comparison between...

What Iai is... vs.

What Iai was...

To paraphrase..

Iai am what Iai am.

Cheers,

ghp
17th October 2000, 18:22
Ulf,


Is it possible to draw MSR-style if wearing Daisho? We'll, who said any MSR swordsman was wearing Daisho?

I agree with you 100%. Why are a few teachers now wearing wakizashi/maezashi?

[to others] Please don't tell me it's because the samurai wore daisho as a badge of rank!

Wearing daisho in MJER and MSR is simply an affectation. I've yet to see a photo of Oe sensei, Hakudo sensei or others of that period wearing daisho. But, I've seen a few modern teachers wear a wakizashi --- why? The shoto waza were purged from the current curriculum.

I think it is fine to wear daisho as an experiment to try to puzzle out how things were done prior to the haitorei. But to give the impression that wearing shoto is part of the system is just plain misleading.

Of course, this mini-rant does not apply to koryu who have maintained their tanto/kotachi/shoto/tanken waza.

If you are a reader who currently trains in MJER/MSR (or any or other iai that does not traditionally wear daisho), please tell me why you do.

Curiouser and curiouser,
Guy