Is Ninjutsu mainly a Weapons Art?

[smacktap]

Ninjutsu seems to have such an amazing array of weapons and skills but the unarmed aspect seems lacking compared to modern styles.

Should ninjutsu be taught weapons first and cross train if students wish to learn unarmed fighting?

[imarubber]

All the weapons training is based on taijutsu, the empty-hand techniques and ways of movement. Taijutsu comes first, then come the training tools.

Weapons are assigned five categories:
1) Rigid (rokushakubo, hanbo, etc.)
2) Flexible (kusarifundo, etc.)
3) Bladed (tanto, katana, etc.)
4) Projectile (shuriken, teppo, etc.)
5) Combination (kyoketsu shoge, kusari gama, etc.)

From this perspective, what may seem like a huge variety of weapons can be easily categorized and relatively easily mastered. Still, true mastery takes a lifetime. No shortcuts here.

[smacktap]

so you are saying the unarmed defines the weapons training .. that seems a little weird. I would have thought that unarmed combat would be an after thought

[ElfTengu]

Going back a few hundred years when everyone carried a sword and every battle was a close quarter battle yes you would be quite right but we must move with the times.

I don't know if the opposite supposition applied back then though i.e. did the best swordsmen go on to become the best yawaraka.

[Dale Seago]

I think it would be more appropriate to call what we do "weapons-based arts" rather than "weapons arts", in the sense that weapons (actual or potential, both yours and the other party's) are always being considered whether you happen to be using them or not.

One thing I see as a key characteristic of all historic true combat arts -- from any culture -- is that they both use and integrate empty-hand and weapons skills. By "integrate" I mean that the ways of using the weapons, and the empty-hand methods, follow the same tactical principles and the same general ways of moving. They'll also typically include transitions back and forth between empty-hand and weapons use.

And I do mean "any culture". In addition to feudal-era Japanese arts, culturally-Malaysian arts like silat or kali, etc., you'll find the same factors at work if you study surviving Medieval-to-Renaissance era European and English combat training manuals.

For example, just read this partial translation of a fechtbuch ("fight-book" or combat training manual) by Johannes Liechtenauer, a German who lived in the 1300s:

http://www.schielhau.org/liechtenauer-armoured2.html

The page contains links to illustrations as well. The very first one shows an armored application of what we would call a gyakuzeoi-nage.

[Dangerman]

Many of the techniques that I have been taught empty handed apply directly to the use of different tools/weapons. Once you have learned the effective ways to use the different kamae and striking and grappling techniques, which are fairly simple and straightforward anyhow, it is easy to make slight changes to those techniques to allow the use of a weapon.

Omote-gyaku-ken-sabaki (a basic defense and counter that is taught at lower kyu levels) with a rope or chain held in hand is executed 99% the same as empty-handed. It is really your intent and attitude (kamae) which define the effectiveness of the technique. This is one of my favorite aspects of ninjutsu, actually, the idea that the base techniques convey a concept that can be applied in manifold ways. My teacher refers to the different strikes, kicks, and throws as paintbrushes that you can take out and use at any time. You may never use a certain strike or grapple, but you have it in your collection to take out when you need it. And, to take the analogy further, it doesn't matter what color you use with what brush. You do not learn entirely different punches for each of the possible targets, why would you? A fudo-ken punch to the head is executed very much the same as one to the mid-section. Put a tanto in your hand and strike. They are still very similar. The base attitude does not change. True, you may not use a sword EXACTLY as you would a han-bo (who wants to cut their own fingers off?), but many of the weapon techniques for the staff and sword overlap, and there are many circumstances where they are the same.

Whether you are using a weapon or not, it is moving your body that makes your techniques effective. Without proper posture and balance and footwork, neither your empty-hand or your armed techniques are going to be very good.

To directly answer your first question, smacktap, if your empty hand techniques are good and solid, it is easy to transfer the movements to the use of weapons. Also, you may be surprised at how little the empty hand techniques of ninjutsu are "lacking". There is a great deal of subtlety that is often overlooked in these techniques.

I may have added too much here and muddled the water, but I know what I'm getting at.... :)

Ben Jenkins-Provost

[bvelto]

Many of the techniques that I have been taught empty handed apply directly to the use of different tools/weapons. Once you have learned the effective ways to use the different kamae and striking and grappling techniques, which are fairly simple and straightforward anyhow, it is easy to make slight changes to those techniques to allow the use of a weapon.

Omote-gyaku-ken-sabaki (a basic defense and counter that is taught at lower kyu levels) with a rope or chain held in hand is executed 99% the same as empty-handed. It is really your intent and attitude (kamae) which define the effectiveness of the technique. This is one of my favorite aspects of ninjutsu, actually, the idea that the base techniques convey a concept that can be applied in manifold ways. My teacher refers to the different strikes, kicks, and throws as paintbrushes that you can take out and use at any time. You may never use a certain strike or grapple, but you have it in your collection to take out when you need it. And, to take the analogy further, it doesn't matter what color you use with what brush. You do not learn entirely different punches for each of the possible targets, why would you? A fudo-ken punch to the head is executed very much the same as one to the mid-section. Put a tanto in your hand and strike. They are still very similar. The base attitude does not change. True, you may not use a sword EXACTLY as you would a han-bo (who wants to cut their own fingers off?), but many of the weapon techniques for the staff and sword overlap, and there are many circumstances where they are the same.

Whether you are using a weapon or not, it is moving your body that makes your techniques effective. Without proper posture and balance and footwork, neither your empty-hand or your armed techniques are going to be very good.

To directly answer your first question, smacktap, if your empty hand techniques are good and solid, it is easy to transfer the movements to the use of weapons. Also, you may be surprised at how little the empty hand techniques of ninjutsu are "lacking". There is a great deal of subtlety that is often overlooked in these techniques.

I may have added too much here and muddled the water, but I know what I'm getting at.... :)

Ben Jenkins-Provost
Well said.