Originally posted by David A. Hall
Dan,
Yes, a number of ryu do this and there is a place for it even in some of the more "positive" schools. (There are other Edo Period schools, however, which have reversed this and concentrate on iai/batto with little or no emphasis on two-man kata.) Many of the early koryu (warring states period) had no iai/batto at all in their early years! Nen Ryu, Shinkage Ryu, even Shinto Ryu to name a few. (Katori Shinto Ryu added batto later on.) A number of the early to mid-Edo period ryu also had no batto...and still contain no iai; I.e. Jigen Ryu, Jikishinkage Ryu, etc. Many of these ryu do train with shinken...but with a partner. Other schools, such as Tatsumi Ryu, have a good mix of both.
That is interesting David, but it didn't answer the question, I asked why and you told me who instead.
As I mentioned, some battlefield-derived ryu have found a place for solo training...but usually as a supplement, not the main curriculum.
Many classical ryu in Japan (I.e. Shinto Ryu, Nen Ryu, Jigen Ryu, Araki Ryu, Shinkage Ryu, Jikishinkage Ryu, etc.) train "as if" they were preparing for battle. They feel that if you don't train with that in mind, you are wasting you time. No, they don't plan to find themselves in another Sekigahara next week, but they train to be prepared for it. That's how they train their "spirit". In many of those koryu--not all of course, but many--a member of the ryu has to be mentally and technically ready to both face and deal out death.
That's not the end all of the training by any means, however, in many of those ryu it is the underlying theme. The first kata taught in Jikishinkage Ryu, for example, is aimed at aiuchikatsu "winning the engagement with a mutual striking down of your opponent and you"!
During my years in Japan I both trained in batto and observed countless others in seemingly endless iai demonstrations. In the 1970s I was, along with some of my koryu colleagues, disdainful of seiteigata iai. Then, one afternoon, I observed Donn Draeger testing a sword for someone by going through the seitei iai kata. Never before or since have I seen it look so deadly....but then, Donn always trained as if he was ready to slice you up!
Dave Hall
David,
I hope nowhere in my text I challenged your experience, or even suggested that because it was different from how I trained that your experience was somehow less "correct" than mine. I've been working with swords now for quite a long time, but only come to JSA relatively recently. In my experience, the reason that solo work is emphasized early on in most (okay, I have no basis for using the word most other than I've seen it in just about every manual I've ever read) systems of sword fighting is that before any sort of two person exercise is attempted, the student must learn to control the sword for the sake of safety if nothing else. A person who cannot put the sword where they want it is a danger to himself and his partner. Essentially I see this as the foundation for the lack of two person exercises in some systems. I still maintain that distance and timing can be learned in solo form, as a matter of fact I believe it is essential that they be learned alone before attempting to work with another.
The term battlefield-derived leads us to another discussion that has been worked to death here. I've never suggested that Iai was something that would be used on the battlefield. Not that it doesn't make a better swordsman all around, but it's utility I think was more concerned with civilian combat than with battlefield encounters. Much like European rapier systems in fact.
Iai traces it's history not to the battlefield but to personal combat. Hyashizaki Shigenobu developed (or was given the gift from the Gods) Iai for the purpose of revenge in personal combat, not for use on a battlefield. Considering the time and place, Iai is a valid combat system regardless of it's extremely limited utility on a battlefield. Personally I believe that swords were at best a secondary weapon on the battlefield anyway, and any system that was indeed battlefied-derived would probably concentrate on pole arms and archery instead of swordsmanship, but that's just my opinion.
As far as facing death is concerned, well we've all read Five Rings and the Hagakure and can probably quote them to each other, so I don't think we can go into this topic in great detail from a historical aspect. Factually, people today are much more removed from death than the samurai of old, and so it is reasonable to assume that it is harder to be prepared for death, especially through what is essentially a hobby rather than techniques for personal survival that swordsmanship once was. This mindset is again something that is part of the individual student, and not, I think, something that can be said "some ryuha do, some don't".
We kind of come to my point about here: All of these things may be taught poorly or well, there may be poor students or good students. We've all seen examples of poor schools and poor students, but when it's a good school with good students, all these things come together to make a swordsman regardless of when or if two man forms are introduced.
As an old rapier guy and fencer, I have a tendency to make my distances too long. I'm used to working with the point not the monouchi and to use larger extensions. I believe that the techniques I'm using now which do not include two man kata yet, are sufficient for me to learn correctly but don't doubt that I will learn more when I am introduced to two man forms.
Dan Beaird
The best time to be a hero is when all the other chaps are dead, God rest 'em, and you can take the credit.
H. Flashman V.C., K.C.B., K.C.I.E.
Likes: 
) and see if you can spot any weaknesses both from the attackers and enemy viewpoints. Just to make sure, check with your instructor in case you are making mistakes.
Reply With Quote
Hee hee
Ha HA HA !!!
