PDA

View Full Version : The Modern Bushi and"Martial Arts"



Gareth Del Monte
25th January 2014, 05:41
When referring to Firearms deployment,it obviously is categorized into civilian carry,Law Enforcement and Military.
When asked the question "Are Firearms a Martial Art",then people begin to quarrel over the term"Martial"and "Art".
The Samurai obviously had their own skills and terminology for the use of firearms of their time etc.
When talking about firearms we are talking about contemporary firearms usage.Right?
So is it a Martial Art.
Well,it is a skill that takes many hours of repetitive training in different and challenging environments and stressful situations etc.in order for one to become somewhat proficient in this "Combat Skill"
In the Military context,International Tier 1 Units such as Delta,SEAL Team 6,GROM,GSG9,etc. spend countless hours,ammunition and training routines in order to perfect this skill in order to secure a positive outcome in Hostage Rescue based situations etc.,just like the Bushi of old spent countless hours on Iajutsu,Kenjutsu etc.
These "Modern Day Bushi"spend as many hours on many other skills.The use of all types of firearms(Handgun,Shotgun,Rifle,SMG etc)
They practice the same combative "Arts"or skills of old,such as combat swimming,unarmed combat,CQB,infiltration and ex filtration into hostile terrain etc.
So basically,yes Firearms are in fact a smaller part of the bigger picture that makes a Warrior of today more adept at success in their mission.
Is it a Martial Art?
Well it is an art based on survival,skill,training and commitment.So yes.
If your idea of a Martial Art are flutes playing and walking on rice paper,then I guess you might find this a bit too contemporary for you to see it as the "Martial Art"that is found in the pretentious snobbery of elitist "Martial Artists"
Thank you,
Gareth.

Hissho
25th January 2014, 12:56
http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?42136-Firearms-Is-it-Truly-a-Martial-Art

Gareth Del Monte
25th January 2014, 13:11
Thank you.
I was trying to expand on the linked thread that you provided.
Keep well
Gareth.

tgace
5th June 2014, 19:46
http://tgace.com/2012/11/26/the-mystical-and-the-mundane/

I've often wondered how people (especially martial artists) can consider this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfEEpU3wILM

an Art with all the benefits we ascribe to martial arts (discipline, mental clarity, improved concentration, moving meditation...etc.).

While they dismiss this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbC5mEc6ipE&feature=player_embedded

As simply "shooting"...a hobby enjoyed by "gun nuts", right wing extremists, rednecks and "preppers".

Not that Iaido is NOT an "Art" or that it doesn't have those benefits mind you, but the physical mechanics of drawing a sword are not "mystical". The discipline of a trained firearms user is little different IMO. I laugh at the idea that a sub 2 second failure drill is somehow "less" than a clean sword cut.

Don't confuse people out shooting at tin cans with skilled shooters. There are plenty of people out swinging martial arts weapons in their back yards with no training (as we all know)...they do not seem to taint the entire pool of martial artists though.

Hissho
6th June 2014, 11:24
Do they really dismiss it?

Some maybe, but not sure they speak for all.

Over the years practicing budo (iai and jujutsu), and modern tactical firearms, frankly in terms of "heiho" and overall approach modern handgunning at an advanced level is little different from iai. Since iai doesn't specifically refer to a sword I'd say it IS iai.

If you think about it, iai and jujutsu would have ended up being the most practical and useful training for the Japanese warrior's personal protection and counter ambush needs, though perhaps not the battlefield or dueling.

While in technical and practical terms doing classical iai and jujutsu may not be the most effective practice for personal protection today, I have definitely found that the mental stance and approach are a worthwhile path of inquiry. If someone were to tell me they carry a gun for self defense and practice iai for the strategic and mental training I'd say more power to 'em.

Dan Harden
13th January 2015, 11:57
Just saw this.
I think martial is a word that gets thrown around to the point that it has become arbitrary and all but meaningless.

Using it in the context of sword, particularly Japanese sword in comparison to modern handgun combatives is peculiarly ironic considering that neither had much use in a combative theater.
In any era, proximity mattered. As Vetititus opined (and is echoed in other books of strategy) distance ruled and was displayed in the choice of training men:
One hundred days for bow
One thousand days for spear
Ten thousand days for sword
It's no wonder that bow and spear ruled.
As many studies have revealed (Karl Friday was part of the significant research) The sword on a Japanese battlefield was the equivalent of carrying a 45 side arm in a modern theater; a last ditch weapon. On a Japanese battlefield we had; thrown rocks, (yes, rocks) arrows and spears that did most of the damage.

And that said, Iai is to sword, what student driver training is to formula 1 racing. I take my hat off to men who can place a shot where it counts while they are being shot... at, while under extreme duress. .

And for us hobbyists?
I thought the comparison of the two videos; Iai to modern handgun and the question of acceptance should be addressed in the koryu/martial / hobbyist community as well. It seems rather ironic that we study a koryu -that for the most part were anacronisms in their own era- and think we are training in battlefield arts. I think at the very least we need to put on some armor and go at it full speed with someone who knows how to use weapons. At least in some point in our careers.

The martial arts have given us a preponderence of presumed experts who many times never really got their boots wet. Being expert in a collection of kata and weapons handling, or being a crack shot at the shooting range was not and is not battle training of grunts and tactics of armed forces on a battlefield.

Does it help? Depends on the training.

Dan Harden
13th January 2015, 16:56
I also wanted to add that the idea of a modern bushi has no relevance in the discussion. The conditions that produced bushi will probably (and thankfully) never be repeated, the romantic versions never actually existed, and were most any healthy person returned to that era, I suspect they would, in a very short time, agree with an oft quoted bushi phrase: "What is hell? Being reborn.... a bushi."

Dan Harden
13th January 2015, 22:35
Thanks guys....cough!
The former reference was to Vegetius. I have to stop typing on my phone and pay more attention..gulp.

StephenBaker
13th January 2015, 22:45
Mr. Harden,

At least we got to get a little smile.

Stephen

DCS
14th January 2015, 13:18
As Vetititus* opined (and is echoed in other books of strategy) distance ruled and was displayed in the choice of training men:
One hundred days for bow
One thousand days for spear
Ten thousand days for sword
Nowhere in Vegetius' Epitoma Rei Militaris is that said.


And for us hobbyists?
I thought the comparison of the two videos; Iai to modern handgun and the question of acceptance should be addressed in the koryu/martial / hobbyist community as well. It seems rather ironic that we study a koryu -that for the most part were anacronisms in their own era- and think we are training in battlefield arts. I think at the very least we need to put on some armor and go at it full speed with someone who knows how to use weapons. At least in some point in our careers.
Totally agree.


The martial arts have given us a preponderence of presumed experts who many times never really got their boots wet.
Like Vegetius himself, but in his case, would be caligae instead of boots for he never served in the Roman military of his time which, by the way, wasn't the war machine once was.




*I see you mean Vegetius

Hissho
14th January 2015, 17:25
Combat and the battlefield are two different things. When someone is attempting to seriously injury and/or kill you, its combat. I'd refer to Kyle Lamb's (former CAG) "If you are getting shot at, its combat." One can be in a battle and never see combat, and one can experience combat without ever being in a battle.

Iai has a great deal of commonality with civilian, self defensive, handgun carry and yes, personal combat. In terms of rationale and theory, that is. Hard to see, perhaps.

Battlefield? Not so much, except in the rare transition drill. Old ways woulda been shortsword or knife. A similar element might be transition to blade in a weapon retention situation: several instances have occurred overseas on battlefields and here at home in the law enforcement context when long guns/hand guns are being grabbed.

Probably among the only instances where koryu has any modern relevance in a practical combative context. Takes some adaptation but its viable to be sure.

Hissho
15th January 2015, 05:06
Thinking on this further today and by way of expanding on the initial thought:

I do NOT mean to say that the modern martial art practice of iai, "the art of drawing the sword," no matter the provenance, is a training method for personal combat or handgun skills. Clearly common sense indicates this is not the case.

Rather, iai in the idea of "being constantly prepared to meet (match/harmonize) with an adversary in whatever situation/position one is." That has nothing to do with drawing a sword. The rationale attendant to this: the deployment of a weapon from various postures and positions, navigating different environmental circumstances, in often asymmetric encounters (multiples, surprising an opponent, being surprised by an opponent, and the use/integration of the weapon in combination with hand to hand skills at very close quarters), has a lot in common with the use of the modern sidearm in those situations wherein the latter is useful/a primary tool; that is, personal defense with a concealed or openly carried handgun, getting the drop on an enemy with a concealed firearm, responding to a weapon retention situation or extreme close quarters weapons deployment situation.

Whereas doing so with a sword in the way that the martial art of iai is practiced can be and often is a flight of fancy, duly intimated above, the understanding that this is likely how personal combat will go down in civil life is not at all.

I was really surprised years ago to read one of the koryu writers decrying iai as not combatively practical (even in its context) for this and that and the other thing, most of which was entirely relevant in an off-battlefield encounter, mainly because it did not fit his idea of what a battlefield hundreds of years ago was like. The fallacy, the ignorance, and the presumption of this writing did not hit me until much later. On the other hand, Karl Friday, writing from a scholarly historical perspective and common sense, hit the nail on the head, in a few sentences.

So...don't go running out and taking up iai because you think its a good self defense discipline. But if you have enough experience with a handgun, carry most or all of the time, maybe have even used it a time or two, been behind the curve in one or more actual firearms encounters - let alone training iterations - and paid enough attention to the various kinds of things that happen in such encounters with police and civilians, the commonality of rationale is obvious.

What happens in practice is a whole different matter.

Kendoguy9
15th January 2015, 13:02
Kit,

Thank you for a very thought provoking post. I feel that you could easily replace "iai" with the word kata (in a classical sense) and your points would be equally valid.
Chris

Hissho
16th January 2015, 00:22
Chris- if you think about it everything we do, from arrest and control to high risk traffic stops to building clears is kata.

Everything on the range is kata.

ECQ combatives is kata....

Hissho
16th January 2015, 07:20
This is a harrowing example of the kind of thing I am talking about. No sport training addresses this. Not saying that koryu done as it usually is (at least the way it is demonstrated) does either, and in fact is most often worse in many cases. But this is exactly the kind of ambush attack, at hand to hand combat range, with weapons that kills too many officers:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2015/01/13/records-flagstaff-officer-shot-searched-suspect/21526819/

A start is not necessarily to "follow in the footsteps of the men of old"....but to "seek what they sought" - and a platform for inquiry is readily found in things in kogusoku, in iai, in some jujutsu, etc. Gotta be practiced with a progressive force on force element though - breaking of kata, continuing the kata after initial engagement, valid and real attempts at countering the defender's responses and bringing the weapon to bear, etc.

And a good start to begin to develop the understanding to even know if you are asking the right questions is to introduce weapons in the things you do. I've shared with a few senior budo practitioners here that the "old school" comes out in live randori when you make the encounters asymmetric, add a blade to one or both sides in various configurations, and alter the desired end state to outcomes more suitable to the dynamics of real encounters in the WBE (weapons based environment - like the link above) than to one on one consensually engaged grappling or weapons dueling. The latter certainly build a body and develop technique but have little to do with combat like the situation with the Flagstaff copper.

May he rest in peace.

Josh Reyer
16th January 2015, 08:47
Do they really dismiss it?

Some maybe, but not sure they speak for all.

Speaking only personally, I'm not particularly impressed with the video of fast Glock shooting above. By which I mean, obviously he has a high level of technical skill, but it doesn't really speak to me. It's like watching someone juggle knives or torches. But I can say the same thing of a whole lotta iai I've seen! Fast draws, spiritless cuts, and pointlessly high-speed noto. Isao Machida cutting BBs does nothing for me, and I'm not inclined to call what he does "budo".

On the other hand, I've seen iaido that was breathtaking. Its component elements nothing special: draw not especially fast, a single cut, and a simple, modest noto. But the physical and mental presence of the practitioner could be felt from across the room (or through the computer monitor). The cut simple and unadorned -- not lightning fast, no tachikaze, and yet it was the cut of man seeking unattainable perfection. And there's nothing here that cannot be transferred to shooting. If not many people do so, or rather, if not many people have experience with shooting done in that way, then I see that as more of a cultural thing, where transformative experiences through the lifelong pursuit of unattainable perfection is just not something that has as much cachet in the U.S. compared to Japan.

Dan Harden
16th January 2015, 16:14
Very well said, Josh. And not said often enough. It is what makes movement, an art.

May I offer that the same can be said for escalating levels of martial movement of all types? Whether it be more or less martially effective; the pursuit of perfection in a movement may still apply. Granted it is far, far more difficult to execute and complete a kata with visualized danger over real danger, say; Kits Iai alone in a room compared cuffing someone with zanshin in a bad environment. Or executing a perfect set up to a triangle choke with some one who has never has been in one, over trying that on an experienced grappler. Couldn't both, executed well...be art?
Effective practice (Martial is not really applicable) within movement is only a choice when you know the difference. It doesn't matter what the practice; there is uneffective or defective movement in anything, like arresting, frisking and cuffing someone with your back turned to a group of his friends. I watched that unfold and was blown away. Thankfully the LEO wasn't. Regrettably, facing potential threats without back-up and NOT turning your back was not part of his kata.

The inverse is when we have very capable men (soldiers, grapplers, etc) who choose aikido as a nonviolent way to connect with people... in an art form. I had a former wrestler/ MT guy who said " I could take everyone apart in this room, including my teacher. I'm not doing this for that. I enjoy the buttons this is NOT pushing in me. Who ever thought I would enjoy the art of it all." That's pretty close to a direct quote of what he said. I have heard much the same from many spec ops guys involved in the martial arts.
Anyway back to my main point. None of which makes anyone a modern bushi. We are all better off, at least cleaner, to let go of these romantisized and misinformed sword swinging samurai comparisons. It actually does the bushi class an injustice as well.

Hissho
16th January 2015, 20:55
Josh - yes well said. The art for its own sake is not my bias and one that I tend to forget or gloss over. Even the art for performance in the lab of competition, etc. Its a different thing to my mind. However, when it comes to the elements of movement and performance Dan notes: there is a reason that the best special operators in the world bring in the best shooters regardless of whether its "combative" or not. Its about movement and art that can be applied to their needs. I've also had similar conversations with people into budo as a way to connect, with themselves and others, "not doing this for that," and think its enviable and may be a healthier way to go about doing martial practice. At times I regret having the skew I do because I don't enjoy some things I should.




Granted it is far, far more difficult to execute and complete a kata with visualized danger over real danger, say; Kits Iai alone in a room compared cuffing someone with zanshin in a bad environment. ...

Crucial point. Some Force Science Research suggests that training without even the simulated stressors is actually training for a different kind of performance altogether. Things get really different the minute you start injecting uncertainty, decision making, competitive initative, etc. and performance drops when it has not been honed under like conditions. One reason progressive force on force is so important, and why being able to learn from experience is critical. If the goal is effective martial performance (Id add Mind to Movement), having an experienced teacher who can create stress and elicit proper behaviors is also very important.






Anyway back to my main point. None of which makes anyone a modern bushi. We are all better off, at least cleaner, to let go of these romantisized and misinformed sword swinging samurai comparisons. It actually does the bushi class an injustice as well.

Of course I'd have to mostly concede this point from a cultural and historical perspective. I think you are I are only on different parts of the spectrum, maybe. Mainly I am intrigued with the concept because I have found that the martial tradition (remember more about a specific warrior ethos than fighting skills, even from the beginning), offers some alternative approach in an area in which - to borrow an IHS term - Use of Force Professionals are floundering. From "Guardians versus Warriors" and the decrying of "Police Militarization," identifying a balance between civil servant and warrior protector is elusive. (Hell, look what it did to the bushi class!!)

We live in a day and age when "Officer Friendly" is the standard and yet at any minute a police officer can go from handling a domestic or other disturbance or mental health event that requires an almost parental guiding hand or compassionate tone, to being ambushed with deadly effect at coffee, or responding as a counter terrorist officer to an active shooter with multiple casualties. We have mentally ill people who are sick, and yet who in that sickness arm themselves and present a danger to the public, and the police are called and respond to a man with a gun; Prioritize the compassion for the illness or your own and other's lives? We have Ferguson and New York juxtaposed with Lakewood and Flagstaff and Paris....where is that balance struck?

To me, on some level, the Japanese warrior ethos evoked by men such as Bokuden have something to offer. May be a dead end, but what we are doing now is far too much of a mixed message and the public and the legal system simply do not understand how their own officers operate.

I am somewhat heartened by the fact that balance seems to be coming back in after the Ferguson and New York demonstrations; the video of the Flagstaff event, the video posted in the other thread where the anti-police activist went through force on force training are very illustrative as to the competing mindsets and interests of an officer going through such events.