Differences between koryu and seitei

[Ric Flinn]

What are the differences between koryu and seitei jo? Take kihon, for instance. Seitei jo has the same set of kihon that koryu uses, does it not? I've been told they're done differently (at least some of them) between koryu and seitei, many of the details of the differences I don't really remember and I don't need to know them all anyway, of course, but I'm wrestling with the idea that they're different in the first place. Here's one, for kuritsuke, in seitei we catch the sword on the tsuka between the hands. Does koryu catch under the wrists? I know in a real fight that's the way it's gonna happen, but is it practiced that way? What about other kihon?

I'm not asking for the deep dark secrets of koryu jo, since obviously I'm not a member of the ryu, but mostly I'm trying to figure out why seitei jo exists in the first place (though I'm pretty sure I've figured that one out).

[RDeppe]

order, timimg & pace, small technical differences. The seitei were created for kendo players to do a little side study with jo is my understanding.

[Andy Watson]

...is now however much closer to the original koryu since the revision of the ZNKR Jodo Manual in 2002/2003ish.

Gone are the square on kendo stances.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by Ric Flinn
[B]Here's one, for kuritsuke, in seitei we catch the sword on the tsuka between the hands. Does koryu catch under the wrists? I know in a real fight that's the way it's gonna happen, but is it practiced that way?[B]

Why don't you try SMR jo out? Then you can see for yourself!!

-Russ

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by Ric Flinn
[B]Here's one, for kuritsuke, in seitei we catch the sword on the tsuka between the hands. Does koryu catch under the wrists? I know in a real fight that's the way it's gonna happen, but is it practiced that way?[B]

Why don't you try SMR jo out? Then you can see for yourself!!

-Russ

[Ric Flinn]

In a perfect world, I'd walk right down the street and take the free introductory course to SMR jo, in a heartbeat. But, alas, I live in the middle of Midwest, USA, where I consider myself lucky to have what training I have in seitei jo. So out of curiosity I thought I'd post my question here, thinking maybe somebody would want to stick their neck out and talk a little bit about it. Since it's been pretty slow around here last couple years.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by Ric Flinn
In a perfect world, I'd walk right down the street and take the free introductory course to SMR jo, in a heartbeat. But, alas, I live in the middle of Midwest, USA, where I consider myself lucky to have what training I have in seitei jo. So out of curiosity I thought I'd post my question here, thinking maybe somebody would want to stick their neck out and talk a little bit about it. Since it's been pretty slow around here last couple years.

You have to go for kengaku, usually up to three times, before you can begin to try it. Dave Lowry is south of you in Missouri, perhaps you could contact him and arrange a visit sometime?

To be honest, *if it isn't worth going see, it really isn't that important a question* is the attitude you are going to run into.

Always,

[Jack B]

Originally posted by Ric Flinn
So out of curiosity I thought I'd post my question here, thinking maybe somebody would want to stick their neck out and talk a little bit about it. Since it's been pretty slow around here last couple years. Guess we're all too busy training.... :cool:

[Kim Taylor]

Warning: Annoyed Kim here, you may want to skip this post.

I've been checking through some of the threads here in the jo section and I'm amazed to see the same guys saying the same things for the past 2-3 years.

To the "koryu" guys (or better yet, those who don't practice jo at all) who pronounce on seitei but aren't in the ZNKR and have never practiced seitei... What in the world are you thinking?

Vast differences between koryu and seitei? If you say it often enough it becomes true? We've had 4 menkyo kaiden here in Guelph over the last 2 years, 2 from Fukuoka and 2 from Tokyo, all teaching Zen Ken Ren jo. What I've noticed with my own beady little eyes is that the difference between Fukuoka and Tokyo koryu is greater than the difference between seitei and koryu. But by all means, continue to speak with authority out of the firm knowledge that you read it in Black Belt or here on the net.

From October 7 to 10 we'll have a couple of Menkyo Kaiden - Hachidan jodo instructors in Toronto (Furukawa and Ari sensei from Tokyo). Anybody who wants to come and investigate the differences between seitei and koryu for themselves is welcome to come and do so.

Does anyone here truly believe that a menkyo/hachidan is going to radically change their approach to jo depending on whether or not they're teaching koryu or seitei? Why would they?

To Jack who said seitei is marketing... it's not, the ZNKR is non-commercial, there's little reason to market. Note my comments about differences in koryu above... the IKF is a large organization with many hachidan and many menkyo members, all with their own lines of "koryu" jo. Seitei is intended to provide a common standard worldwide so that we can all speak from the same page during gradings or tournaments. Note that in the ZNKR seitei is NOT a watered down "introductory" set to see if you pass the test for koryu instruction, nor is it for the kendo guys to "dabble" in jo every second Saturday afternoon. It's jodo done in a common way so that everyone can get together to train without adjusting your kata every time someone new stands up in front of the room. Anyone in the ZNKR can see this.

Now if we want to talk marketing... how about "those who do the martial arts in that big organization over there are doing a watered down version that isn't really as good as what we do over here in this one-man operation with our secret handshake". I've been reading about how this or that art is "better than" the ZNKR/IKF version for 20 years now, guys if it's better than good for you but yammering away about it simply sounds like comparison marketing to me.

Come on guys, open your eyes a little and look beyond the computer in front of you for your information. You're all welcome to Toronto in October for jodo and Guelph next May where we'll be hosting the Hyoho Niten Ichiryu koryu guys as well as the menkyo/hachidan jodo guys all at the same time. The May seminar is open to anyone from any organization, as it has been for the last 14 years. You want to know if seitei is different than koryu? Come find out. Please, no more "well I heard that seitei was created for...".

Kim.

[Kenji Fujiwara]

Mr. Taylor,

With all due respect, Seitei and Koryu are different -- seigan for an example is radically different. In Hissage, uchidachi uses a different weapon. I found other aspects such as timing, distancing, and rhythm also quite different. Perhaps the differences are a function of my training.

Regards,

[Jack B]

Kim, I didn't mean it was marketing for ZNKR. I meant it was marketing for Shindo Muso Ryu! How else does a Kyushu koryu with an offbeat weapon get 10,000 members in half a dozen ryuha? The ZNKR is a feeder system as far as SMR guys are concerned.

ZNKR of course would have a totally different outlook. Thanks for bringing us your perspective.

[Diane Skoss]

Hi all,

I've taken gradings in Zen Ken in Japan and I hold a license in Shinto Muso-ryu. They are the same, but different. As in many things Japanese, it is "casu by casu." I remember training for my sandan (hm--it was a fair few number of years ago now). I had to get together a couple times with a woman from another dojo, and we had to go through a list (provided by her sensei) of important technical differences and make sure that we remembered to do it "correctly" according to seitei jo.

In some lines, seitei sequence is used, but the techniques are identical to those in omote, chudan, and ranai (except seigan and hissage). In other places, a clear distinction is maintained (sword handling, timing, and distancing are quite different). Some places, only the koryu sequences are practiced; in yet others, only seiteigata is taught. I've also experienced first-hand in Japan a situation where MORE THAN ONE menkyo kaiden (in fact, I believe it was five or six) taught the seiteigata in a way that was quite different from the way they taught the koryu. No one thought it was strange to maintain the differences--it only created difficulties when one of the less-experienced students, who had been doing more koryu than seiteigata, went to a grading.

One of my aikido teachers was also a senior student (a nanadan) of Yoneno Sensei. He commented to me that in general the maai in the seiteigata was supposed to provide for an additional margin of error, and that he had noticed, at my gradings, that I tended to cut those margins in a very "koryu-teki" way.

The seiteigata was created to teach the cops, many of whom had kendo experience. It is a selection from the koryu, with certain modifications (presumably to make larger group instruction of kendoka more viable, but I don't know that for an absolute certainty--I have heard it from senior folks, both Japanese and not, who were around when the seiteigata was developed, and there are certain technical clues that indicate this might have been the case, so I'm inclined to go with it). Today, it functions more as a lingua franca, but only in a limited sense, as there are so many different interpretations of it.

Many things that come from Japan are not black and white. As Relnick Sensei likes to say, everything is in shades of grey, and two seemingly (at least to the Western mind) contradictory things can be true at the same time (I seem to remember writing about this in my first book, some seven or eight years ago). Shinto Muso-ryu and the ZNKR seiteigata are the same and different; most Japanese I know don't have a problem with that. Can we all agree to think Japanese here, and accept the contradiction, and let the matter rest? Thanks!

Cheers!

Diane Skoss

[Diane Skoss]

Hi all,

My esteemed spouse questions the state of my gray matter these days, with good reason. Please emend the statment above regarding seiteigata being developed specifically for the cops. It t'aint so. The kata was developed for kendoka to be able to learn some jo; many cops were kendoka, so one would assume that they were among those who trained in the seiteigata.

Cheers!

Diane Skoss

P.S. This entire discussion has been focused on the techniques of Muso-ryu and seiteigata; ZNKR and menkyo-lines of Muso-ryu are organizationally and administratively quite distinct and not the same, but different.

[Eric Montes]

Kim,
in your words:

We've had 4 menkyo kaiden here in Guelph over the last 2 years, 2 from Fukuoka and 2 from Tokyo, all teaching Zen Ken Ren jo.

The teachers have been teaching ZNKR jo, not SMR. It is my understanding that your event is a ZNKR event, with ZNKR grading. So the teachers would be representing ZNKR (regardless of their SMR standing...)

Has this subject of difference ever been broached with the teachers?


Regards,

Eric

[gmlc123]

Eric

I can't see a problem with what Kim has said, and in fact the only ambiguity lies in the following;


the difference between Fukuoka and Tokyo koryu is greater than the difference between seitei and koryu

That is, which koryu. Besides Kim is entitled to his opinions as much as the next person. Diane also succinctly explained;


Some places, only the koryu sequences are practiced; in yet others, only seiteigata is taught. I've also experienced first-hand in Japan a situation where MORE THAN ONE menkyo kaiden (in fact, I believe it was five or six) taught the seiteigata in a way that was quite different from the way they taught the koryu. No one thought it was strange to maintain the differences

So why can't we just agree that from a waza viewpoint they're cousins (including the various menkyo lines) within the same family.. and that the key or main difference is in the number of kata practiced between seiteigata and koryu.

The differences, actually variations, really don't matter and the rest is just semantics for the arm chair critics or ryu-ha zealots. We should all just leave it there as Diane has admonished IMO.

Regards

[Andy Watson]

...can we put this one to bed and agree that they are "cousins" without getting into a debate as to if they are second cousins or once removed or whatever.

[Eric Montes]

Kim, Diane, Greg, (and anyone else)
My apologies if I seem to have overstepped bounds here. My intent was not to comment on the differences in waza. Those issues should be discussed between student and teacher.

The intent of my post was to emphasize the organizational distinction which Diane mentioned.

Best.

Eric

[Andy Watson]

I would also be interested in what, if any, organisational structure exists in SMR Jo.

Apart from the large scattering of individual dojos who are not part of any grander scheme, do the rest of the menkyo kaiden, mokuroku etc sit in a structure?

[SMJodo]

Eric,

It's easy to get distracted by all the nuances of the art, especially since information is relatively scarse and contradictory at times. I spend a good deal of time banging my head agaiinst the wall trying to figure a lot of this out (as Diane can attest) and I have come to the conclusion that DOING Jodo is far an away the best method of learning Jodo. The organizational side is an easy distraction, and time is better spent trying to find a good teacher (seitei or koryu) and just doing it. You can always build on what you have done, but it's all based on experienceing it for yourself.

[Diane Skoss]

Greg,

Just to clarify... Eric Montes trained for a number of years one-on-one with, and received okuiri-sho from Ishiko Sensei, who received his menkyo kaiden from Nishioka Tsuneo. I believe that Eric was concerned that his post hadn't clearly communicated his intentions. He experience with the koryu is about as koryu as you can get!

As for Andy's question: Muso-ryu descends in menkyo kaiden lines. Some menkyo kaiden work together (usually those who received their menkyo from the same person, at about the same time); others work in isolation. In some cases, there are more-or-less formal organzations (the Seiryukai comes to mind), in others, it is an informal collegiate-type relationship. It varies; that's the way of the koryu. Each group is a distinct and fairly self-contained social entity. Many aspects of the relationships are not spelled out; it is assumed that a member understands how to behave in a given situation. The ZNKR is much more the sort of organization that we'd recognize in the West: a governing body for a martial art, with tournaments, ranks, regulations, and dues.

One system is not better than another; they are different. But a koryu is virtually (though this is no longer completely true across the board for all koryu) defined by the nature of its social structure (i.e. menkyo kaiden/soke in charge). It is my opinion that transforming the social structure changes the nature of the art. A classical art administered in a modern fashion has a different flavor than a classical art that exists in a more traditional form. For some folks, one form will work better than another--it really depends on what the student is after.

Hope this helps!

Diane Skoss

[Eric Montes]

Diane,
Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Granted I don't have a lot of experience with ZNKR events, but I was extrapolating from my experience with Naginata.

Many of the senior teachers in the Zen Nihon Naginata Renmei are teachers of either Jikishinkage Ryu or Tendo Ryu. When there is a ZNNR event, it is just that. There is no instruction in Koryu. Same is true if teachers are sent overseas for an International Naginata Federation event.

What I was trying to say (apparently without much luck..) is that it is possible that if the instructors come over as representatives of the ZNKR, they are probably functioning in that capacity rather than as representatives of their respective lines of SMR.

Not having met them, nor having spoken with Kim directly, my thoughts on this remain only speculation.

apologies for keeping this thread alive.

Best

Eric

[FastEd]

Originally posted by Eric Montes

What I was trying to say (apparently without much luck..) is that it is possible that if the instructors come over as representatives of the ZNKR, they are probably functioning in that capacity rather than as representatives of their respective lines of SMR.

Not having met them, nor having spoken with Kim directly, my thoughts on this remain only speculation.

apologies for keeping this thread alive.

Best

Eric

I am not attempting to answer for Kim, but I have been in attendence at the Guelph CKF seminars, and much like CKF Iai, Seitei dominates but Koryu is also taught as it forms part of the requirements for higher rank.

As far as I understand it, the instructors are brought over as ZNKR representatives.

[Andy Watson]

Thanks Diane.

Regards

[SMJodo]

My appologies Eric. My comment was intended for Ric. Thanks for pointing this out Diane.

[fogarty]

The answer to the question, do they pin the wrists in koryu is sometimes. What is actually happening, as I'm sure everyone has been taught at one time or another, is that the sword side is blocking. In some kata they can't.

The major differences in seitei, IIRC, are in Suigetsu and Shamen which are two of three kata developed for training cops. The others, such as using the long sword rather than a short one for Hissage, are variations in koryu. Seigan was also simplified. On top of that there seem to be minor differences in footwork, positioning, whether you grab the jyoh or not, that kind of thing.

As for ZNKR jyohdohka not learning koryuh, that is often the case until yondan with some exceptions. At ZNKR taikai that is often all they practise, which is what makes them so boring after you've lost count of the number you've attended. ZNKR people are slow to learn, I think. Me too.

Anyon hi kashipsheyo. . .

[Jack B]

Originally posted by fogarty
there seem to be minor differences in footwork, positioning, whether you grab the jyoh or not, that kind of thing.The issue tends to be whether those differences are "minor", or not.


As for ZNKR jyohdohka not learning koryuh,
Gakk! That romanization is like chewing aluminum foil!

Thanks anyway!

[fogarty]

I consider that minor because at that point I would say in the kata the major issue is ma-ai. I use funny romanizations because that's how it sounds to me. Tu sounds like tsu, si sounds like shi, and jo sounds like jyoh. In fact I get made fun of if I pronounce it joh in certain circles. Sorry. I just had to say something, I guess...

[Ric Flinn]

Thanks all, for the responses so far. My intent was absolutely not to start yet another koryu vs. seitei debate, honest it wasn't, but I suppose I should have known better to try it in the first place. Really all I want is to increase my understanding.

Fact is, I've seen SMR jo a number of times. I go to Kim's seminars, and I love 'em, but it'll be years and years before anybody there's gonna teach me koryu jo. I'm not complaining; why would they? It's a seitei seminar. But there's always a demonstration or two that includes SMR jo that I pay close attention to. And in fact I have gone to see Mr. Lowry demonstrate SMR jo as well (he's a mere 8 hours away). So I've been exposed, however slightly, to real live koryu jo.

Time and time again, all I ever hear is how seitei jodo is "sanitized for the masses" and watered-down, and koryu jo is the "real" jodo. Usually immediately following is a cover-your-assests type statement insisting that the speaker/writer is not saying seitei jo is watered-down, etc., but the impression remains the same. Everybody says it, and then claims they're not saying it. (The seitei camp says it too: "I mean, how can you start learning koryu jo unless you're at least a 4th dan??? Koryu jodo is far too complicated for anybody with less rank...")

So why I asked about the differences, simply put, is because from what I've seen, there just isn't that many. Differences in the kata, yes, but in the techniques, I don't see much. Minor details I certainly see (and I know, the details do make a difference), but after seeing it, I always wonder, am I missing something? (That's rhetorical, folks.)

There's some smart people here, people with lots of experience in both forms of jo, people whose opinions I've come to respect; seemed like a good place to ask.

Then there's the people with over 500 posts, telling me everybody's too busy training to enter the discussion.... sheesh. :)

[Kim Taylor]

Hey Rick

Long answer short, look for yourself (which is why I invited all the koryu only folks to come to the seitei seminar next month in Toronto). If you want to see differences, if difference is important to you, you'll see differences.

We do mainly seitei here in Guelph because I've actively, and somewhat successfully, resisted doing koryu jodo since I started practicing it many years ago. I've got two koryu already, MJER iai and Niten Ichiryu, and I've got decades of time in on both but am happy with my skills in neither... eventually I'll end up with the third koryu (jodo) but at the moment there's plenty to practice in seitei jo and I'm happy doing that.

To give you an example of "different" vs "no difference" I trained for several years in MJER and learned that there were dozens and dozens of little differences in form, as well as major differences in timing and attitude between Omori, Eishin and Oku iai. I can demonstrate them. I then met and practiced with a senior western instructor in a different line of MJER in a different organization and asked him what the differences were between the three levels and his reply was "there aren't any". Both ideas are entirely correct and you've likely heard me explaining that at some point or other.

Differences can depend on experience (have you actually got the experience in the two things compared, to have an opinion that is worth giving), point of view (if you consider hitting one target or another an inch away a difference than it's different, if you figure you can hit either at will, it's not), age in the art (a beginner "KNOWS" what's what, his sensei will have some sort of vague idea that maybe it goes this way but can think of a dozen reasons why it could go the other way), marketing (to be blunt, the ZNKR is huge, koryu organizations are usually tiny, so how do you get the students...), and which way the wind is blowing (sensei may teach differences one day, similarities the next).

Ultimately, it's not the art, or the style or the subset that's important, it's how you practice. I do Niten Ichiryu and for everyone who seems so interested in it (where were you all last August when Colin and Soke were here?) I can assure you that you could learn the entire school in two days (I know, I've taught it in two days and the students actually knew the steps at the end). It's no big hardship to learn the steps... but that's NOT the point. It's not the technique it's the method of practice and that, my friend, is the key. The secret isn't in the way you slide to the side it's in what happens in your brain when you practice sasen a certain way, with a certain attitude.

Or Mae, or Shohatto, or Tsuki Zue, or Tachi Otoshi.

And that's why you'll see the old farts practicing the kihon over and over and over and over. It's not that they're hiding the "good stuff" from you, it's that they're SHOWING IT TO YOU RIGHT NOW, the secret stuff is something you do once or twice a year just so you don't forget the dance steps. It's not a reward handed out for good conduct and long practice, it's something you hand over to someone so that they can worry about remembering the damned stupid stuff that got handed down somehow and clutters up your head while you're trying to figure out how to do the basic kata you learned your first week in the dojo. The important one.

Less is more.

Kim.

[Douglas Wylie]

Here here Kim!

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by fogarty
...I use funny romanizations because that's how it sounds to me. Tu sounds like tsu, si sounds like shi, and jo sounds like jyoh...
Please excuse me. This probably should be in the Language forum, but since it came up here I'll post briefly.

As far as I know, "tsu" and "shi" are standard romanizations, but "jyoh" isn't. Standard would be "jo" or "jou," the latter for a long vowel when typed without benefit of diacritical marks.

[J. L. Badgley]

Actually, 'jyoh' is a form of standard romanization, but not one that I (or many people I've talked to) recommend. Using the 'oh' for 'ou' or 'oo' becomes problematic when you follow it with another vowel, so that 'ohi'--would that be 'ou-i', 'oo-i', or 'o-hi'?

However, you're right that this kind of stuff belongs in the language forum if anyone wants to go into it it too far.

[Mekugi]

The classic Heburn "j¨_" is more popular. If you wanted to throw all bets off, you could just use "ÕÈ" :). Personally, I like "Hey Joe....where you going with that stick in your hand..."

-Russ


Originally posted by J. L. Badgley
Actually, 'jyoh' is a form of standard romanization, but not one that I (or many people I've talked to) recommend. Using the 'oh' for 'ou' or 'oo' becomes problematic when you follow it with another vowel, so that 'ohi'--would that be 'ou-i', 'oo-i', or 'o-hi'?

However, you're right that this kind of stuff belongs in the language forum if anyone wants to go into it it too far.

[nicojo]

Personally, I like "Hey Joe....where you going with that stick in your hand..."


Hah ha :) :D

Sorry to interrupt, but that was funny. You may have your forum back now.

[fogarty]

Yeah, what they said. I don't advocate anyone follow me. The only reason one would want to use the -h romanizations which are old-fashioned but still in some textbooks is when speaking to specifically English speakers who think oo and ou sound like the ew in dew. The Japanese style is zyou. Dr. Hepburn was a U.S. missionary and M.D., so it might be the same whiney accent that produces, "You're from Cyanada, aren't you?" If you were to romanize Japanese like Irish Gaelic, which romanization predates that of English, it would definitely be jio/ rather than jo/ which is the sound I meant. Sue-me-musn't. I'll avoid silly, phonetic renderings from now on.

[Jack B]

Sean,

I thought the Gaelic transliteration for "jo" was "ghywyeodgh"...

;)

[ulvulv]

Originally posted by Jack B
Sean,

I thought the Gaelic transliteration for "jo" was "ghywyeodgh"...

;) :laugh:

[J. L. Badgley]

Originally posted by fogarty
Sue-me-musn't.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Hadn't seen that one before. Goes up with the 'Don't-touch-my-mustache'.

:)

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by J. L. Badgley
...Goes up with the 'Don't-touch-my-mustache'.

My favorite is "Eat Mighty Mouse."

[Kim Taylor]

Well we had a nice seminar with Furukawa and Arai sensei, about 35-40 people attended over the 4 days and we went through seitei pretty carefully, concentrating on the new key points that are intended to bring it under control (they're getting rid of variations, if it's "seitei" it should be standard).

We used Kimeda sensei's Yoshinkai dojo for Thursday and Friday evening, and noticed a brand new man-sized hole in the wall appear on Friday, the noon-hour aikido class apparently. On the weekend we used the new dojo space in the Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre and were serenaded by a taiko workshop while we practiced on Saturday, and by about 50 kendo kids on Sunday. Apparently the kendo class was pretty small due to the holiday. It was more quiet in the afternoon with the iaido and naginata classes using one of the smaller dojo and judo and aikido using the other I believe. The JCCC had jodo, taiko, kendo, karate, judo, aikido, iaido and naginata classes over the weekend, and that's just what I noticed as I walked around.

We had 8 folks test on Sunday, 6 got ikkyu and 2 got nikyu. Then it was off to the Japanese restaurant for my fourth Japanese meal in two days. I'm off sushi for a couple of weeks, it's nice but us old guys need our fibre.

The sensei are now at the cottage doing some fishing and hoping not to catch anything (too much work they say).

Next jodo seminar with sensei from Japan is planned for Guelph in May (20-23) with Shiiya sensei and another sensei named Kurogo Genji (and before folks ask, he's a menkyo kaiden and a hachidan, also from Tokyo). Then we'll have met all 4 of the sensei that Namitome sensei asked to take care of Canada. The May seminar will be about 10 days long in total as we try to schedule Iaido, Jodo and Niten Ichiryu so that the complete idiots that do all 3 (ie most of the seniors in Sei Do Kai) will be able to attend all the classes.

As I've mentioned before, these seminars are open to anyone who wishes to come.

Kim.

[Mekugi]

Shouldn't this be in the seminar announcements area?


Originally posted by Kim Taylor
Well we had a nice seminar with Furukawa and Arai sensei....

[Jack B]

Well, this is more of a review than an announcement... and I never look at the Announcements forum...

[rethihunor]

Dear All,

It's my first post, and please forgive me for misstakes, my english isn't perfect. I put my question in this topic because of I don't want to open a new topic for it.

My question is, that is there any difference between Nishioka sensei's Seiryukai Jodo practised in European Jodo Federation and the Shimizu line Koryu Jodo taught in ZNKR? I practise Seitei Jodo but I learned 3 months Seiryukai and in some kihon there were big differences. First I thought that is only the difference between Seitei and Koryu. But then is saw a video with Shimizu sensei, and he did for example the hikiotoshi the same way as I had known, and not the way as it was taught in Seiryukai. Then I got an older edition of the book of Pascal Krieger sensei and realized, that he either described the hikiotoshi the way as I learned in ZNKR.

It's interesting because I thought that there is no difference between Seiryukai and Tokyo line Koryu Jodo, but now it seems, that there is! But Nishioka sensei was Shimizu sensei's student, so I don't realy understand how could it be?

Thanks for your reply,

[Fred27]

I think you might some answers on the official Sei Ryu Kai website. http://www.jodojo.com/.

What I was told was that Nishioka Sensei teaches an older style of jo, pressumably from around 1938(when Nishioka first started) to the 1960's when the Seiteigata was created. Not better or worse Jo, just older. :) The koryu Jo in ZNKR may in that case be a 1960's/70's version of Shimizu Takajis Jo since thats when he developed the Seiteigata.

Though I admit I'm a bit out of my league here..anyone else care to comment? Mekugi? :)

[t.matsutaka]

Nishioka Sensei teaches an older style of jo
So then who was the teacher that taught him this older style?

[Mekugi]

So then who was the teacher that taught him this older style?

Shimizu sensei.

[Mekugi]

Though I admit I'm a bit out of my league here..anyone else care to comment? Mekugi? :)

I think that is about right :) !! It's really hard to tell what was being done at what time as there were many different "types" of teachings going around and to different people. Everything seemed "case by case" or in some situations, group by group. I suspect that you're on the right track, but I can neither refute nor verify it.

[Fred27]

So then who was the teacher that taught him this older style?

Yes Shimizu Sensei like Mekugi said.

Maybe "style" wasn't the best way to describe it as most of us associate "style" as something more radical and implies a different -ha alltogether. Perhaps simply "older form of jo" is more accurate. Kinda like how Aikido evolved. Same sensei, but different periods of his life which perhaps reflected in his teachings to the students that started jo in those different periods. Yes that is the version I've heard often; That Nishioka Sensei wished to go back and teach an older form of jo that Shimizu Sensei taught him and he created Sei Ryu Kai as a "veichle" for that form. I haven't heard anyone say it's a better or worse form, but simply an older form, though obviously Nishioka Sensei has a personal preference for the old form. Kaminoda Sensei has his Nihon Jodokai org, Matsui Kenji has his org too but the name eludes me.

And as Mekugi said: individual training, not everyone got the same "text-book" version training. I remember hearing a story how, for instance, Shimizu Sensei spent more time teaching Hojojutsu (ropetying) to people involved with the Tokyo police than anyone else he taught in the late period due perhaps to the practical usage of hojo. This was not an unusual way of teaching as I understood it though Kaminoda Sensei would be the best man to ask about that.

[rethihunor]

Dear All,

first of all, thanks for your answers.

I did not wanted to say that Seiryukai is better or worse than ZenKen, or other styles of SMR Koryu. My question only was (and it was realy a question) that are there differrences between Nishioka sensei's Seiryukai and Koryu taught by other Menkyo Kaidens of Shimizu line? This is very interresting to me, and I just wanted to know if I'm right. And if I'm right, what is the reason of this differences, why started Nishioka sensei teaching jodo in an other way? Or the original Koryu Jodo is what Nishioka sensei is teaching, just Shimizu sensei taught it an other way for his other Menkyo Kaidens? Questions, and questions... But realy just questions, not judgements...

Best regards,
Hunor

[Fred27]

Ah dont worry, I know you weren't judging the styles. :)


are there differrences between Nishioka sensei's Seiryukai and Koryu taught by other Menkyo Kaidens of Shimizu line?

Short answer: Yes there are differences between what Sei Ryu Kai teaches and what, for instance, Kaminoda Sensei teaches :). But there are also differences between what Pascal Krieger teaches and what Phil Relnick teaches, and they both are Menkyo, both belong to the International Jodo Federation and they both recieve instruction from Nishioka Sensei. The differences are subtle, but still there nonetheless. Other groups have more visible differences, but it is still SMR-Jo. I dont know of any Menkyo that has gone so far from SMR-Jo as to be labelled a "New Style".

Long answer: It is a bit of a pickle to answer this question actually. There simply exists no single regulatory organisation or single headmaster to dictate what is "standard" Jo and what should be taught. ZNKR is the closest thing to a uniform Jo-system as of right now.

Katori Shinto-ryu has a Soke and a headinstructor. What they say is law. Every Menkyo of KSR in the world that adhere to the Soke and Headinstructor are bound to follow his teachings. If they do not follow their teachings they are not practicing Katori Shinto-ryu.

In the Shinto Muso-ryu system it is different. Every Menkyo holder is technically his/her own master and every Menkyo Kaiden has his/her own individual way of doing Jo. So even if Nishioka Sensei's Sei Ryu Kai did not exist, there would still be differences between the various Menkyo holders due to lack of a single authority. And those differences are too many to name here on a forum.


Dear All,

first of all, thanks for your answers.

I did not wanted to say that Seiryukai is better or worse than ZenKen, or other styles of SMR Koryu. My question only was (and it was realy a question) that are there differrences between Nishioka sensei's Seiryukai and Koryu taught by other Menkyo Kaidens of Shimizu line? This is very interresting to me, and I just wanted to know if I'm right. And if I'm right, what is the reason of this differences, why started Nishioka sensei teaching jodo in an other way? Or the original Koryu Jodo is what Nishioka sensei is teaching, just Shimizu sensei taught it an other way for his other Menkyo Kaidens? Questions, and questions... But realy just questions, not judgements...

Best regards,
Hunor

[rethihunor]

Thanks! :)

[Mekugi]

In the Shinto Muso-ryu system it is different. Every Menkyo holder is technically his/her own master and every Menkyo Kaiden has his/her own individual way of doing Jo. So even if Nishioka Sensei's Sei Ryu Kai did not exist, there would still be differences between the various Menkyo holders due to lack of a single authority. And those differences are too many to name here on a forum.

Great answer Fred. Kudos!

[Fred27]

Great answer Fred. Kudos!

Thank you, thank you <bows> I aim to please. :D

[Kim Taylor]

On the latest topic for this thread: Fred has the right idea. The martial arts are living, breathing things. Instructors teach different things at different times in their careers. They teach different things to different students and at different times in the career of the same student.

Beginners don't see any of that. They only know "this is the way we do it and that's not the way they do it" or if they're not quite as bright as that... "this is the right way to do it".

If you see one menkyo kaiden doing a kata one way, it may be the way he was taught, it may be that he has changed what he does, or it may be that he's showing something specific. It's only through years of looking at a teacher that you know what his "default" mode is.

The art is alive, it changes, and "koryu" can change very very fast since, as it's usually defined here, it can't be separated from the instructor. Therefore if teacher decides one day that everything is different, it's all different. You don't like it, hit the road.

More generally, I'm always tickled to hear students say "why is X different than Y" X and Y may be koryu and seitei, or it may be Joe-ha vs Fred-ha or it may even be Al-ryu vs Mike-ryu.

The question assumes that there is a difference when the real question ought to be "Is there a difference between... " This is especially true for lines within an art and even more true between two instructors in the same line.

To answer that question you need to define "difference".

Beginners can see things like.... well no. Beginners are told things like "the sword finishes in front of the shoulder with the hip angled", or "the sword finishes outside the shoulder with the hips square to the front". With those two different instructions in their heads they then extrapolate that there is a "difference".

OK think of that difference in terms of driving down a highway, you can stop for the night at town A or go on a few more Kilometres to town B. Your passenger may say "what's the difference between A and B" and in response you might say "there isn't any difference, we just stop sooner or we drive longer but intrinsically, A and B are the same, just towns along the road. The've both got the same damned hotel chains and the same damned restaurants so just pick one!"

Stay in the arts for long enough, spend enough time on the road, and you'll start to realize that only newbies think the fast food in one town tastes different than the fast food in another.

Now I corrected myself up there when I said that beginners "see". Beginners don't actually see the arts at all, they can't, they need much more experience before they start to "see". The difference between the performance of the same kata done two different times by a beginner can be greater than the discussed difference between two lines of practice.

For a beginner whose standard of error is greater than the "differences" between two lines, to discuss the difference between X and Y lines is meaningless. The question is meaningless... or rather the question is only academic, it's only rational. When the student can finally perform the difference between X and Y than he can start to "see" the difference. And at that time he may not see any such difference at all. It's in the body, not the rational mind that one understands the martial arts. There ARE things that you understand are different between one line and another, but you only understand that through the body and not by hearing someone else tell it to you. Those differences have nothing to do with where you finish a swing or where you grip the stick, they're much more basic.

Year after year I read students (and, let's face it, instructors, which is where the students get it) writing "koryu is different than seitei". Year after year it depresses me since most of the students haven't a clue what they're talking about, and in many cases the instructors should know better. The students are at least arguing from ignorance, but while some instructors may also be talking about things they know not (all those who are not "seitei" practicing members of the ZNKR for instance), some should know better. Of those who should, and who say there is a difference, you will usually find that there is a reason for them to say such things. Like for instance they are trying to prove the superiority of their practice to Joe down the street. Without a difference in the art they're teaching they are thrown back on their skills as teachers to differentiate themselves. Ouch, much better to have a secret art that's better than the common as dirt art down the street.

But we're not talking about those very few instructors, we're talking about the great numbers of students who are convinced there are differences. Let's stick with koryu vs seitei.

"Koryu jodo is different from Seitei jodo"... Ask yourself how? What differences are there?

If you can't answer, you are simply assuming there are differences because that's what somebody told you. Appeal to authority and argument from ignorance. Stop repeating it.

If you find yourself saying "well the target for koryu is the part of the bone that sticks up and the target for seitei is the bone beside the part that sticks up" you should then ask yourself if you can consistently hit either one of those targets on demand. When you can, you may very well say "hmm, these aren't really different, just two different targets for the same technique". Two towns on the same road.

If you find yourself saying "well the combative intent of koryu is fundamentally different from the sportive aspects of seitei" or some such, you should honestly ask yourself if you're qualified to make such a statement. Have you spent 40 years doing both? Have those who HAVE spent 40 years doing both told you such a thing? Every one of them or perhaps just one fellow who is saying such a thing to make a point rather than to make an absolute distinction? Second-hand statements and hearsay don't count. Translations don't count!

Budo is about being self-aware and brutally self-examining. It's fun to be an internet expert but really, is repeating "something you heard somewhere" very useful to either yourself or to those you are talking with?

Again, as I have had to do so many times in the past, I remind everyone that I'm talking generally, I am not speaking to anyone specifically. My purpose is to remind everyone that there is Yes, No, but also Mu.

"Will you tell me the difference between koryu and seitei?"

"Mu." (For those too young to remember mu, it roughly means "the question has no meaning, the assumptions or definitions are false").

Kim Taylor

[Diane Skoss]

There is a difference between the ZNKR seiteigata and Shinto Muso-ryu jo (however you spell it). The seiteigata consists of 12 techniques excerpted from the curriculum of Shinto Muso-ryu, which consists of 64 techniques in 7 sets more-or-less (there are a number of ways of counting). Seems pretty simple to me.

Some teachers have students perform the seiteigata techniques in exactly the same way as they do the koryu techniques (and quite possibly the other way around too), while others endeavor to have students perform the seiteigata techniques the way the current powers-that-be in the ZNKR prefer them. Are these differences major? No. But at one point in time (and I know because I did it), it was necessary for those I was training with (who were Nishioka Sensei's direct students or students of various of his menkyo kaiden) to remember that when taking a grading (in Japan), you needed to perform specific versions of a couple of the kata, that were indeed subtlely different in angling, distancing, timing, footwork, or what-have-you. And there is an enormous difference between a straight vertical cut from a fully frontal jodan, and a cut from hasso--there was a time when the former was in favor at ZNKR gradings (although I'm fairly certain that's evolved since I was active there).

As Fred points out, it is each menkyo kaiden's perogative to teach his/her interpretation of Shinto Muso-ryu. Those who have their students actively involved in going for ZNKR gradings need to keep the current standards in mind. Those that do not, don't.

Finally, I believe that seiteigata jo, by it's very definition, is the jo that is practiced under the auspices of the Zen Nihon Kendo Renmei, a modern budo organization. Shinto Muso-ryu is practiced under the auspices of one of a number of independent (though many have informal associations with one another) menkyo kaiden. Any given group may being working under both, or one or the other.

Hope this helps!

Diane Skoss

[Earl Hartman]

Diane beat me to it, but anyway:

It seems to me that seitei is quite different from koryu jo, for a number of very simple reasons:

1. Seitei jo exists under the auspices of the ZNKR. It is organizationally distinct from koryu jo

2. It teaches a different curriculum in a different order.

3. It holds its own tests and confers its own dan-kyu ranks which have no counterpart in koryu jo

4. AFAIK, how its techniques should be executed is determined by a committee, as in modern kendo, rather than by a single teacher as in koryu jo

[Diane Skoss]

Thanks, Earl.

More succinct and complete.

Cheers!

Diane

[Douglas Wylie]

"koryu is different than seitei"... Of those... who say there is a difference, you will usually find that there is a reason for them to say such things. Like for instance they are trying to prove the superiority of their practice to Joe down the street.

Interesting, what if that logic is turned around...

Paraphrasing you- Of those... who say there is no difference, you will usually find that there is a reason for them to say such things.

Like maybe... they are not doing the entire system but want to be counted as equals to those who are.

As pointed out, there are 64 techniques in SMR and only 12 in seiteigata. (Not including but not discounting the kenjutsu/kusarigama/ etc... that some SMR folks do)

[fogarty]

Whatever is the argument here? It seemed to be a difference in technique between seiteigata and what it was derived from, or rather two different derivations of the latter, and we have just had that seiteigata technique is determined by a committee whereas by the original system it was determined by one menkyo kaiden holder of which now there are many indeed. There is quite a difference between comprehensiveness and exhaustiveness. While seiteigata is not exhaustive when it ceases being comprehensive it truly is useless. It almost seems as if it was meant to be a line of communication to help preserve the original technique which now has many variations. The creation of the kihon datotsu seems to have been an attempt at distilling essential elements.

Said too much, but of the few things I was taught (from memory and hence paraphrased), "If you can do one technique well, you can do them all. The most important thing is that you learn to do the technique properly."

While different masters may use techniques which seem slightly different, if they are worth their salt the essential elements are there. Paradoxically, the differences themselves may be revealing of the technique to a developing technician, cursed though such may be.

Moo, moo or Moe, Moe -- whatever toots your horn,

Sean the gone

[rethihunor]

Now I try to summarize, what I understood:
-There are differences between Seitei and Koryu in timming, distance and in the interpretion of the Katas, but due to changes made in ZNKR Jodo in 2003 there are no significant technical differences.
-There can be differences between Koryu and Koryu, depending on from who do you learn (I mean here differences in way of doing some technics like hikiotoshi, makiotoshi or taihazushi uchi), but all of them teach Shindo Muso Ryu. That was new for me!
-If I watch together the two above statements it means for me that there are some Menkyo Kaidens who teach Koryu in a style what is closer to the ZNKR style of Jodo, and there are Menkyo Kaidens who teach an older style of Jodo, what uses quite different technics and style of moving than ZNKR (for example Seiryukai). For me it seems to be something like in karate, where the same technics, for example gedan barai is done differently in Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu or in Shotokan in the same kata. But both of them are karate.

Please correct me, if I'm wrong...

[Diane Skoss]

One more point....

In the ZNKR, one doesn't have to hold a menkyo kaiden to be a teacher; the organization has it's own set of teaching designations--renshi, kyoshi, hanshi (unless something has changed recently).

So you can learn ZNKR seiteigata from someone who is not menkyo kaiden. Shinto Muso-ryu jo, the koryu, should be passed on via a menkyo kaiden and his/her designated representatives (i.e. those who have received classical licenses and teaching permission).

Please note that you can have terrific ZNKR practitioner/teachers who hold no classical license (I know any number of such individuals in Japan); and you can have fairly goofy interpretations of the koryu taught by authorized/licensed members of Shinto Muso-ryu lines. One is not inherently better than the other. However, if you want to train in the koryu (as opposed to the seiteigata), I'd strongly recommend training under the supervision of a legitimate menkyo kaiden, or his/her directly licensed representatives. In fact, that's the position I've held for many years for any practice of the koryu. If you aren't training with a legitimate/authorized/licensed instructor, then you aren't really participating in the koryu.

Cheers!

Diane Skoss

P.S. "Training with" can exist in many forms--what I mean is "regular" (which can mean 3 times a week, or twice a year, depending) supervision by and relationship to/with an authorized instructor.

P.P.S. You can tell I've just sent a book off to the printer--I really must get to productive work on something new!

[Fred27]

Now I try to summarize, what I understood:
-There are differences between Seitei and Koryu in timming, distance and in the interpretion of the Katas, but due to changes made in ZNKR Jodo in 2003 there are no significant technical differences.

-There can be differences between Koryu and Koryu, depending on from who do you learn (I mean here differences in way of doing some technics like hikiotoshi, makiotoshi or taihazushi uchi), but all of them teach Shindo Muso Ryu. That was new for me!

-If I watch together the two above statements it means for me that there are some Menkyo Kaidens who teach Koryu in a style what is closer to the ZNKR style of Jodo, and there are Menkyo Kaidens who teach an older style of Jodo, what uses quite different technics and style of moving than ZNKR (for example Seiryukai). For me it seems to be something like in karate, where the same technics, for example gedan barai is done differently in Wado Ryu, Goju Ryu or in Shotokan in the same kata. But both of them are karate.

Please correct me, if I'm wrong...

I daresay you have got the right idea there...I dont know how much they have started to change the Seitei system though, but dont expect an instant tranformation into Shinto Muso-ryu type Jodo. Besides they don't need to. :)

[Kim Taylor]

I daresay you have got the right idea there...I dont know how much they have started to change the Seitei system though, but dont expect an instant tranformation into Shinto Muso-ryu type Jodo. Besides they don't need to.

The changes that have happened recently were more to get rid of the variations in practice between the seitei of different "lines" than to bring it into line with koryu Fred. Some little things that were "Tokyo" were retained, some given up. Some things that were "Fukuoka" were retained and some given up. Those that were teacher specific which conflicted with both those versions are, I presume, dropped.

The changes weren't large and for anyone who has worked with several different instructors, they are welcome.

If one takes specific kata one will find that there may be more variation between what people call "Tokyo" and "Fukuoka" style than between, say, Tokyu and Seitei. Not surprising really considering Tokyo's position with regard to the ZNKR, despite the members of the jodo committee including senior folks from Fukuoka.

Kim.

[Kim Taylor]

One more point....

In the ZNKR, one doesn't have to hold a menkyo kaiden to be a teacher; the organization has it's own set of teaching designations--renshi, kyoshi, hanshi (unless something has changed recently).

So you can learn ZNKR seiteigata from someone who is not menkyo kaiden. Shinto Muso-ryu jo, the koryu, should be passed on via a menkyo kaiden and his/her designated representatives (i.e. those who have received classical licenses and teaching permission).

Please note that you can have terrific ZNKR practitioner/teachers who hold no classical license (I know any number of such individuals in Japan); and you can have fairly goofy interpretations of the koryu taught by authorized/licensed members of Shinto Muso-ryu lines. One is not inherently better than the other. However, if you want to train in the koryu (as opposed to the seiteigata), I'd strongly recommend training under the supervision of a legitimate menkyo kaiden, or his/her directly licensed representatives. In fact, that's the position I've held for many years for any practice of the koryu. If you aren't training with a legitimate/authorized/licensed instructor, then you aren't really participating in the koryu.

All of which seems fairly obvious Diane, and conversely one should be learning seitei from someone qualified to teach it as well. Also obvious and not in need of pointing out I would think.

By the way, if anyone would like to meet one of these exotic creatures called Menkyo Kaiden we will have three of them here in Guelph on May 18-21.

But stating that seitei has so many kata while koryu has more and they're taught in different order etc. etc. is not what I meant when I said that there was a problem with beginners discussing differences between lines, ryu or seitei vs koryu.

I've got no axes grinding here folks, and you're missing my point... well Sean isn't.

Kim Taylor

[charlesl]

wrt the ZNKR 12 kata curriculum and such, I once, as a tourist, attended this big huge thing that was going on where they were having a lot of kendo, what I was told was grading for iaido (and possibly an iaido competition as well), and what I was told was a grading for ZNKR jodo. I watched the jodo for quite a while.

I don't really know much about ZNKR at all, or jodo in general by any means, but it didn't seem to me like the guys going through the grading were just doing the ZNKR seitei kata set, it seemed like they were doing a lot more.

Assuming I was told the correct thing, and understood correctly that it was some grading function or similar thing for ZNKR jodo, and that I understood even in a vague way what I was looking at, what was up with that? (sorry, a lot of assumptions, any and all could be faulty)

-Charles

[Earl Hartman]

No, I don't think we're missing your point, but you seem to be missing ours.

The question was "what is the difference between seitei jo and koryu?". Diane and I pointed out these differences.

If the question is "what are the TECHNICAL differences between specific techniques/kata", then that is something completely different.

No one said that setei people do not have access to menkyo kaidens. And while you obviously meant it sarcastically ("See? We've got menkyo kaidens too!"), they are not particularly exotic. However, the number of menkyo kaidens at your seminar is irrelevant to the question at hand. No one is questioning their skill or the skill of the students they teach. (As strange as it may sound, there are plenty of handless clowns in koryu, too.) But I assume they are teaching setei jo, not koryu. And you yourself just explained how the techniques have been altered to get rid of regional variations or differences between the various teachers.

That is precisely what makes it seitei. Seitei （制定）　means to standardize and control. The entire purpose is to create a "one-size-fits-all" art that can be taught in a standarized way to large groups of people.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this. It does not make something necessarily good or bad.

But it is the antithesis of the entire koryu approach to just about, well, everything.

I agree with you about beginners bloviating about things of which they know nothing, however. That's whay I'm not going to talk about the "right" way of doing a hikiotoshi. I try to do it the way Relnick Sensei teaches me. That's it. I assume you do the same.

[Kim Taylor]

They were likely doing koryu as well Charles. For both iaido and jodo the kendo federation requires that koryu kata be used along with the seitei for the gradings after a certain rank. In Jodo in Japan you must show a koryu kata at 4dan in Fukuoka and at 6dan in Tokyo.

The requirement was created to encourage all iaido and jodo students to study a koryu as well.

Kim Taylor




wrt the ZNKR 12 kata curriculum and such, I once, as a tourist, attended this big huge thing that was going on where they were having a lot of kendo, what I was told was grading for iaido (and possibly an iaido competition as well), and what I was told was a grading for ZNKR jodo. I watched the jodo for quite a while.

I don't really know much about ZNKR at all, or jodo in general by any means, but it didn't seem to me like the guys going through the grading were just doing the ZNKR seitei kata set, it seemed like they were doing a lot more.

Assuming I was told the correct thing, and understood correctly that it was some grading function or similar thing for ZNKR jodo, and that I understood even in a vague way what I was looking at, what was up with that? (sorry, a lot of assumptions, any and all could be faulty)

-Charles

[fogarty]

I'm obviously (I hope) not an expert, and while I'd love to be training koryu, I've only seen peeks of it and even feel guilty for being allowed that. But not just concerning sticks here -- it could even go for the language we're writing -- it stands to reason or logic that both side have points here:

An older style would have more variations even WITHIN the style. I've seen this with an older menkyo kaiden who very unfortunately passed away very soon afterwards. In the older styles, things can get VERY COMPLICATED.

Seitei is a standardization. That the techniques are standardized alone makes it newer, more than saying they changed. It's quibbling over terms. What's easier to teach is easier to misinterpret anyway without the rest.

The only possible safeguard is to practice with a teacher who has had the time, opportunity, and sheer shuunen (obsession) to tackle their stuff. For most of us, that is not an option. If you meet one of these, you can tell immediately by the difficulty, um, despair that sets in unless they deal with know-nothings on a regular basis which rarely happens in arcane arts at least within Japan, even these rather widespread ones, comparatively speaking.

A poor teacher can frustrate you; a gifted teacher can give you false confidence. Pursue what's worthwhile there and then, and hope we can keep at it, else try something different and use whatever crosses over.

For what it's worth or at least to get it off my mind,

Sean

(Walk in and see students with no resemblance to each other working on completely different things with only the master able to cross over, and you'll know you're in the technician's dream dojo with something that's real.

My fault we lost him? If so, what a waste! Too many deaths close to me of late drives me crazy. . . Still haven't learned to hide in my corner though. . .

[will]

I'm confused (as usual). Some folks have come right out and said that seitei and koryu are different. It sorta sounds like others have a different point of view, but aren't saying that seitei and koryu are not different. I must be missing the point -- can anyone clarify? In simple words that a beginner like myself can understand?

For the purposes of full disclosure, I've only practiced koryu SMR. My only exposure to ZNKR seitei jo is viewing the video and some other demos online and looking at the pictures in some books (all of which, it sounds, is outdated).

[Jack B]

It is true and not true at the same time.

[Aden]

Just depends on whose seitei and whose koryu..... my views change on this as time goes by....

Attending a Seiryukai gasshuku last month I had made abundantly clear to me the technical differences in the kihon (which since you repeat them so often informs your reflexes) from seitei as we practice it here in Australia, but nothing that you cannot compartmentalize - its seitei today, bang the sword out to my right in dobarai, koryu today leave the sword where it finished and rotate my upper body left - just variations.

Aden

[Earl Hartman]

its seitei today, bang the sword out to my right in dobarai, koryu today leave the sword where it finished and rotate my upper body left - just variations.

Say what again?

[rethihunor]

It was interesting the Jodo seminar in Villingen with Yano sensei and Tomoko sensei. They did some thing in way I thought you can do in koryu only. And when somebody asked them about one of these things Yano sensei answered that in some cases both variations are correct if it is done the way it has to be. I spent very usefull two days and I learned a lot. :)