PDA

View Full Version : SMR Succession



JMB
26th February 2006, 13:48
Hi All,

Does anybody know why Shimizu Sensei the headmaster of the Shindo Muso Ryu didn’t appoint a successor? I am interested in the reasons why 25 generations of succession ended.

If this has been dealt with I another thread please point me in the right direction.

This may not be considered a subject to be discussed outside the ryu.

If not then the SMR situation does raise some other questions.

Does the Shindo Muso Ryu still exist without a Headmaster?

Could the 26th headmaster be “appointed” (elected, created, assumed) by any other means than by the previous headmaster? are there any previous incidents in other ryu? How relevant would they be?

If one of Shimizu Sensei’s senior students were to create his own ryu, (insert menkyo kaiden holder)-ha Shindo Muso Ryu, would this be recognised as koryu?

Cheers

Eric Montes
27th February 2006, 17:23
E-Budo forum rules require signing all posts with your real name.

For a discussion of this topic please see this thread:
http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10571&highlight=shihan



Eric

JMB
28th February 2006, 10:12
Hi Eric,

Thanks for the thread link.

My signature shows my full name.

Thanks again.

Eric Montes
28th February 2006, 17:06
My apologies Julian.
I was in a hurry and didn't scroll down far enough when I was composing the reply.

Hope you found the info useful.

e

Diane Skoss
1st March 2006, 00:02
Very quick answer. Technically, Shimizu Sensei was the "head shihan" or senior teacher of Shinto Muso-ryu. He was not headmaster, though his position was similar and outsiders may well have referred to him as such. Shinto Muso-ryu has been handed down in menkyo lines, as opposed to having a headmastership, per se, as far as I know.

It's just that today, instead of there being 3 dojos and/or lines down in Kyushu, there are lines/dojo all over the world.

Hope this helps!

Diane Skoss

JMB
1st March 2006, 20:23
Thank you Diane for the info.

Is SMR a unique koryu in this simultaneous transmission by menkyo lines with one "head shihan"? Do you know how far back this approach reaches in the ryu's history?

If it is, what is it about SMR which allows for this approach?

Cheers

J. L. Badgley
2nd March 2006, 12:25
Is SMR a unique koryu in this simultaneous transmission by menkyo lines with one "head shihan"? Do you know how far back this approach reaches in the ryu's history?

If it is, what is it about SMR which allows for this approach?

How would you say it is 'unique'?

It was my understanding that the 'menkyo kaiden' meant that a student had received 'full transmission'. In other words, they had received (and had shown they understood) the entire curriculum of the art, often mental as well as physical. These license holders could then legitimately go out and teach independent of the main school. In some cases, lines diverged enough, or rivalries erupted, so that a new school would be formed.

There is an interesting article by William Bodiford posted over on the Koryu Forum Message Archive section of the "Koryu: History and Tradition" sub-forum (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4521). It mentions that the modern 'soke' idea seems to be pretty recent (i.e. Meiji era), as far as budo goes.


-Joshua B.

JMB
2nd March 2006, 18:12
Hi Joshua,

It is not the idea of menkyo kaiden holders teaching contemporaneously in different locations which I find surprising. It is the idea that there might be separate lineages of menkyo kaiden holders (ie lineage B: "b3" student of "b2" student of "b1", and lineage C: "c3" student of "c2" student of "c1") which are located in different towns which at any point in time recognise the most senior menkyo kaiden holder (from either dojo) as "head" of SMR. In this example there may not have been a shared teacher since "b1" studied with "c1" under shared teacher "a" prior to achieving menkyo kaiden, moving and starting his own dojo. Also the transmission of seniority in the above may have gone "a" succeeded by "c1"-"b1"-"b2"-"c2"-to the present with "c3" as most senior and "b3" as potential successor.

I'm sure the above reads like a car crash.

The bit which surprises me is (using the "challenged" example above) why didn't "a1" establish his own style, or, once the lineages had split, why didn't "a2" or "a3" (the inheritors of "a1") give their lineage a different name rather than continuing as SMR.

Or am I trying to simplify things grossly?

Cheers

Ellis Amdur
2nd March 2006, 21:15
Let me make it simple. Grab a copy of the Bugei Ryuha Dai Jiten. Open at random. Look at the lineage of the art on the page you find. More often than not, it looks like a tree rather than a line. This idea of one-headmaster giving one line of succession is actually rather new (see Wm. Bodiford's article on Soke). Even some of the most prominent schools that allegedly follow the soke/headmaster system have instituted it relatively recently, and have written their history to make it as if it had always been so. The "rule" used to be - menkyo kaiden was a "drivers" license. You were qualified to go out on the road, and you were on your own. Shihan or "dai" had their own dojos and their own lines. The soke idea is a combination of an administrative structure and, in some cases, a means of political control within the ryu. Soke, as the name implies, indicates that the school is maintained within the family. But, if they taught more than family members, they still had mechanisms to certify outsiders. History bears out that schools that tried to keep a single line got isolated and often insignificant in the larger stage (TSKSR or Maniwa Nen-ryu being two examples).

Best

Kim Taylor
3rd March 2006, 21:48
My head starts to hurt and my eyes cross every time I see someone talking about "lines" and soke. Life just isn't as simple as we'd like it to be and there just aren't such clean definitions to make.

Most of the discussions in the koryu forums seem to be about lineage... although perhaps that's because there really isn't much else to talk about except whether or not we can shoehorn everything into simple definitions.

Why wouldn't the various Menkyo Kaiden start their own "lines" or rename their art something else?

Why would they?

These guys know each other, the world isn't all that big. Some of them doubtless like others more or less well but they do talk to each other, they don't live on different planets.

That most of them are in the ZNKR doubtless helps get them all in the same room together, and gives them an excuse to talk with each other.

Kim Taylor.

Author of bags of books and videos and promoter of seminars that you-all have to look up yourselves. ;-)

yoj
4th March 2006, 00:02
This is more directed at Mr Amdur, (though I appreciate as always Unka Kims pragmatic view ;-)

If I'm reading your response right then many of the arts diverged and became -ha arts, with a particular flavor that could be traced back if you followed the lineage.

In which case, this could be happening now, for example with Daito ryu (hey, and I'm no expert!!! before y'all slay me ;-) if DR is a koryu, and all the indirect lines are -ha (and i ain't saying which!) then some of those -ha vary from the direct line, and therefore are 'new', surely that doesn't make them koryu per se then? And yet, you wouldn't class it as gendai either?

The reason I ask is that the 'koryu' mantle appears so black and white, and yet it seems that a koryu could be formed tomorrow by a 'full transmission' holder, is koryu then a defined by kata (combative techiniques pertinent to dealing with medieval japanese combat), psychology (mindset with regard to dealing with someone whose sole intention was to kill you as opposed to getting some money for their next high), or methodology (sensei as uke to enable efficient transfer of the principles)

oh, in case it looks like a dumb question, it probably is ;-) i have no clue....

J. L. Badgley
4th March 2006, 03:31
I believe you are simplifying it a little too much.

Koryu is an old lineage. If your lineage is there, and you are still teaching that style, then it is koryu. If two menkyo kaiden holders vary on their interpretation of something. E.g. Should nukitsuke be across the eyes, throat, or chest? Should the tanjo be held in the hand or tapped along the floor? Do you strike the hand, and have your motodachi stop before they get hit, or do you strike the weapon, knowing that in a fight you would strike the hands?

Different '-ha' will have different interpretations, but (in my experience) they won't be adding new kata* to the curriculum, or a new weapon, etc. Usually, it seems that different lines will recognize the validity of each other, although they may not agree on the interpretation of the other.

If it gets really bad, you do get political splits. I believe that there has, at least in the past, been some rivalry between Owari Yagyu Shinkage Ryu and Edo Yagyu Shinkage Ryu (I don't know if they denied the validity of the other line at any point).


-Joshua B.

*Although some people may revive old kata that have been lost or forgotten.

Ellis Amdur
4th March 2006, 06:17
Unusual, but they might add new kata or weapons to the curriculum. Some things that outsiders think are very old, are not necessarily so.

As for DR, no thanks regarding the never-ending koryu/gendai discussion. Koryu is an adjective, anyway. There used to be just "ryu." Sort of like college fraternities - have you had a charter since 1848? Are you connected to the headquarters? Do you still do the hazing rituals in time hallowed fashion or have you made some changes, thanks to intervention from the dean of student affairs? This stuff really isn't that hard.

Best

Brian Owens
4th March 2006, 07:35
...I believe that there has, at least in the past, been some rivalry between Owari Yagyu Shinkage Ryu and Edo Yagyu Shinkage Ryu
Yes; to the extent that trying to kill each other on the field of battle might be considered "some rivalry." ;)

Arman
7th March 2006, 15:59
As for DR, no thanks regarding the never-ending koryu/gendai discussion. posted by Ellis

What, you got a problem, Ellis??

;)

Best,
Arman Partamian

bert sijben
21st March 2006, 02:52
Shimuzu sensei, did not appoint a headmaster because it needs two people two practice JoDO. The beautiful point in jodo is when there is rei together. It is easy to hold tachi en jo when you are alone.But for most of the time your partner will not be perfect he will get excited when you hit his suigetsu a little bit hard or to soft.Just look to yourself and at any point in life wether you walk the street or practice jodo you keep your respect for others and this needs practice a lot.There is one important point waza or kata must be the same. timing (Ma) and distance (Maai) allows us to personalize our kata, but in this matter there should be rei. If you carry any form of judgement to your partner old young quick or slow you will learn something different.Grading or Dan in itself means nothing. My sensei 8dan kyoshin has thougt me this language and I am very enjoying myself.

Best regards Bert Sijben

Brian Owens
21st March 2006, 04:01
Shimuzu sensei, did not appoint a headmaster because it needs two people two practice JoDO....
But Jodo (and many other arts) has always required two people. And yet there were headmasters in the past.

bert sijben
21st March 2006, 04:35
Dear Brian,

Thank you for your comment, but why you disagree with shimuzu sensei. He didn t appoint a headmaster for he had his reasons. I am sure we are in the same situation were we can not see his position because i am not headmaster and never have the aspiration to, are you a headmaster?

Brian Owens
21st March 2006, 05:16
...why you disagree with shimuzu sensei.
I didn't disagree with Shimizu Sensei.

I only said that your explaination -- that you can't have a headmaster in an art that requires paired practice -- didn't make sense to me.

bert sijben
21st March 2006, 05:48
Dear Brian

Since you are a moderator, i am a lttle bit careful. The history tells us that shimuzu sensei did not appoint a headmaster. I explain nothing I just want to say something, but there seems some resistance on your part and that maybe also maybe an explanation.

In Jodo world in japan i can not listen shimuzu sensei talk to often but we as foreigners to Japan take very free this discussion. I think for myself if shimuzu sensei would engage me with a tachi I will do my best, if some ikkyu person engage me I also do my best.

Greetings Bert Sijben

Brian Owens
21st March 2006, 06:48
...The history tells us that shimuzu sensei did not appoint a headmaster. I explain nothing I just want to say something...
Well, maybe there is some confusion on my part

When you wrote, "Shimuzu sensei, did not appoint a headmaster because it needs two people two practice JoDO" I thought you were saying that the two-man thing was his reason; and that did not make sense to me.

But if you are now saying that he had a good reason, even if we don't know what that reason is, I agree. I'm sure his reason made sense to him at the time.


...Since you are a moderator, i am a lttle bit careful....
Please; don't let the fact that I'm a moderator stop you from speaking your mind. Everyone here has a viewpoint, and it's good to be exposed to different views. I like to get into discussions on a variety of topics, and I only let my moderator status come into play if someone violates a rule or if something needs to be handled in the fora that I moderate (this isn't one of them).

I've only been a moderator for a short time. You should see some of the arguments...I mean, discussions...I used to have with the "ninja masters" and the 20 year old "soke" guys. It's all in good fun.

Thanks for joining the discussion.

bert sijben
21st March 2006, 08:42
Thank you Brian

I have a question, why is there on e-budo no topic on shodo. It seems that the brush and the sword have a very nice conection. Since I am a shodo master I want to send you a byobu from my hand maybe we can have some talk about that.

Best regards Bert Sijben

Brian Owens
21st March 2006, 13:19
...I have a question, why is there on e-budo no topic on shodo. It seems that the brush and the sword have a very nice conection.
I think Shodo would be an excellent topic for discussion. We have a sub-forum devoted to the game of Go, and one on food; maybe one on Shodo would do well, too.

If you'd like to start a Shodo discussion, start a "New Topic" in the Japanese Culture: History and Traditions forum. I think you'll get lots of responses. It's a great idea.

Diane Skoss
3rd April 2006, 03:02
Just a quick clarification. Shimizu Sensei could not appoint a headmaster because he was not the headmaster. It wasn't a matter of choice. Shinto Muso-ryu doesn't have a headmaster. Otofuji Sensei was the next senior shihan and he was acknowledged as such by most practitioners. Since Otofuji Sensei's death it has been unclear exactly who the seniormost menkyo kaiden is, given the two primary lines, one in Kyusho and one in Kanto.

Cheers!

Diane Skoss

Fred27
3rd April 2006, 06:07
Just a quick clarification. Shimizu Sensei could not appoint a headmaster because he was not the headmaster. It wasn't a matter of choice. Shinto Muso-ryu doesn't have a headmaster. Otofuji Sensei was the next senior shihan and he was acknowledged as such by most practitioners. Since Otofuji Sensei's death it has been unclear exactly who the seniormost menkyo kaiden is, given the two primary lines, one in Kyusho and one in Kanto.

Cheers!

Diane Skoss

Hello..love yer book "Koryu bujutsu", I picked it up after a recommendation by my sensei. :)

I understand that Shimizu couldn't appoint a new headmaster if he never was one, but why didn't Shiriashi Hanjiro appoint a successor? Was there philosophical, practical [reasons] or did he simply pass away before he could make his choice? Or was it an early preview of what you said above: That the existance of two main-lines, Kyusho and Tokyo, made it difficult to come to an agreement?

Eric Montes
3rd April 2006, 20:46
Shimizu Sensei could not appoint a headmaster because he was not the headmaster

Fred,
Same thing goes.

Shiraishi Hanjiro Sensei could not appoint a headmaster because he was not the headmaster. Several divergent lines merged, but the nature of SMR transmission did not change.
Eric

musa
18th April 2006, 06:25
Just a quick clarification. Shimizu Sensei could not appoint a headmaster because he was not the headmaster. It wasn't a matter of choice. Shinto Muso-ryu doesn't have a headmaster. Otofuji Sensei was the next senior shihan and he was acknowledged as such by most practitioners. Since Otofuji Sensei's death it has been unclear exactly who the seniormost menkyo kaiden is, given the two primary lines, one in Kyusho and one in Kanto.

Cheers!

Diane Skoss

Diane,

Thanks for that but could you please provide a reference for this information? Reason being is that it seems to go against the norm as far as Shimizu's position within the lineage of Shindo Muso Ryu

Musa Williams

Ellis Amdur
18th April 2006, 18:58
The vast majority of ryu never had "headmasters." Any number of shihan could be appointed within a single ryu who had full authority to pass down a lineage themselves. They were referred to as "dai" - (18th dai menkyo kaiden, or 16th dai shihan, etc.). Soke - familial descent - was certainly used by some schools - but even that did not confine the school to a "headmaster." Take Yagyu Shinkage-ryu. Not only is there a familial line through the Yagyu family, but there are other lines through various shihan. In modern times, many ryu have an individual who claims to be "soke," even though they have no blood relationship to the generation before - this is more political than anything else. Back in the day, a shihan was certified and got employed somewhere - opening up a dojo in a han - or, opening up a machi-dojo (town school) which he might have to defend from challenges. There was, therefore, a rough kind of quality control, based on both power and/or economics. These days, ryu are really just clubs - they belong to umbrella organizations, that certify who is legit, and it makes political sense to claim to be the "headmaster." Some schools genuinely have passed down the lineage that way, but truthfully, the majority never did. Embarassingly enough, there have been several court cases involving ryu in which several people each claimed to be headmaster - the courts have decided, in each case, that no headmaster ever existed (and implicitly, the plaintiffs were shaming their ancestors). And if you want a textual source, open the Bugei Ryu-ha Dai Jiten. Look at the lineage charts - they resemble spider webs rather than straight lines, more often than not.

And, as for the post above, partner practice has nothing to do with authority. In fact, the uketachi should be (traditionally speaking) always the senior. For example my instructor in Toda-ha Buko-ryu never once took the uketachi side until her teacher was felled by a stroke. She had to "reconstruct" what to do on uketachi's side when the teaching authority fell to her.

Best

Andy Watson
19th April 2006, 10:02
Hi Bert

Where do you practise in Fukuoka and who is your sensei?

I love that part of the country especially the hot spring resorts around Ibusuki (if that's the right way to spell it).

Regards

Fred27
19th April 2006, 10:43
And if you want a textual source, open the Bugei Ryu-ha Dai Jiten. Look at the lineage charts - they resemble spider webs rather than straight lines, more often than not.

Show me where to pick up an english translated version and you got a deal :)