"Let's see you do that with shinken."

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by Charlie Kondek
I wonder if gun enthusiasts have this same kind of discussion about how they'll fare if they ever have to pull the trigger. Anyone spent any amount of time in gun culture, enough to answer that one?

Yes, they do. And the various factions are just as adamant that their method is the best as are many members here.

PPC vs IPSC. 1911 vs Glock. Blah, blah, blah.
Fun debates if you're into that sort of thing, I guess.

[Douglas Wylie]

Originally posted by Charlie Kondek
I wonder if gun enthusiasts have this same kind of discussion about how they'll fare if they ever have to pull the trigger. Anyone spent any amount of time in gun culture, enough to answer that one?

Same BS, different weapon.

Same types of people- none of which practice enough, you know, self important arrogant "experts", intolerant a$$holes who think their way is the only way, loud mouthed practioners, an "in" crowd, an "out" crowd, gear collectors who have all the hottest toys, schmoozers who attend all the hottest training camps, and newbies who believe everything they read. Then there's the masters who just shake their heads at it all and your everyday Joe wondering what all the fuss is about.

[Cady Goldfield]

Reinhold,
Don't confuse the universality of certain teaching principles, with the subject matter itself. The various models of teaching methodology span all disciplines. But that does not mean that the specific practices and exercises of one discipline will cross over to another.

A kendo teacher and a cello teacher might both say, "Do not do practice your kata/scales like a mindless robot...be in each movement/note you make/play," so both students learn to focus. But a music student learning to focus on his musical movements will not necessarily be a better kendo player as a result - or vice versa a kendo player won't be a better cellist. While they are both using a similar principle to learn their skill, they are employing a different set of neural paths and combination of motor and mental processes.

[Bruce Mitchell]

Was re-watching Kurosawa's "Hidden Fortress" yesterday and one of the scenes in the beginning has an armoured samuria running backwards, then four mounted warriors ride up and poke him full of holes with their spears. Probably what a lot of sword fights actually looked like.

As for Jock's puerile post, well I think that Mr. Hartman more than provided a suitable counter arguement in listing his experiences. BTW, I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Hartman once years ago (he wouldn't remember, ,I was just some kid watching his class)and can tell you that he is a true gentleman as well as a scholar and martial artist.

On another note, Jock's literary diarhhea reminded me of a documentary I saw about Akira Kurosawa. When his film won acclaim at a film festival in Europe, the "Japanese" public, ,who had previously yloved it, claimed it was because Kurosawa's films weren't really "Japanese" because if it was, outsiders wouldn't be able to understand it. So much for the opinion of the masses, but then, is it all that uncommon for large groups to be way off base?

[Cady Goldfield]

Go easy on Jock. He's actually a very nice chap, and has written many intelligent posts on E-Budo and other martial arts forums over the years. In fact, this post was quite out of character for him, and I'm surprised. I think he may have been three sheets to the wind, so to speak, when he wrote it.

Jock, write back when you've slept off the hangover, bud.

[Ben Bartlett]

I've only sort of skimmed this thread, so I apologize if this has been mentioned already, but from my (admittedly limited) understanding of Zen, it seems to me that the idea that you can become a great swordsman through tea ceremony (or whatever) misses the point entirely. From my understanding, the idea is that you are equally likely to attain satori from long, hard practice at swordsmanship as long, hard practice at the tea ceremony. For the purpose of enlightenment, which one you devote yourself to doesn't make any difference (of course, there's a lot of zazen to throw in there, and possibly koan, depending on what sect you're in, and I'm overly simplifying things, but you get the idea ). The whole point is that you can gain enlightenment through the repetition of everyday activities. But I don't recall any suggestion that attaining satori through tea ceremony will make you a great swordsman (or that achieving satori through practicing with a sword will make you great at the tea ceremony), just that either could lead you to enlightenment.

Maybe someone who knows more about it than I do will correct me, but from what I've studied of it, that's my impression.

[chrismoses]

Can't we get back to the bitter squabbling about how unrealistic kendo/iaido/kata/kumitachi/shiai really is?

[Earl Hartman]

Not to beat a dead horse, but let's go over what Brian said again:

Originally posted by Brian Owens
Diligent practice of kata, or of tea ceremony or Zen meditation for that matter, prepares one for combat by forging the spirit. Emulating combat is not required for developing Budo Seishin.

Now, let's edit this a bit by removing some subordinate clauses:

Originally posted by Brian Owens
Diligent practice of ...tea ceremony...prepares one for combat (by forging the spirit).

I disagree. Kata, yes, for sure, absolutely necessary. Zen meditaton, perhaps (don't know, never done it except for a couple of times more than 35 years ago). But tea? Why? It may "forge the spirit", but for fighting? I still do not see it.

And this is what I most strongly disagree with:

Originally posted by Brian Owens
Emulating combat is not required for developing Budo Seishin.

Could you please explain how recreating, insofar as is possible, the circumstances of a genuine fight (I presume this is what you mean by "emulating combat", although "simulating combat" might have been a better choice of words) is not necessary for creating "Budo Seishin"?

The undeniable impression left by what you said is that studying tea will help you learn how to fight and that actually practicing fighting (emulating combat) is not needed. If this is not what you meant, fine. But it sure sounded that way.

As I said, I think this rests on what is meant by "Budo Seishin". Once people actually stopped fighting with swords (and this is most especially true in the modern era with modern cognate arts like kendo) the goal ceased to be learning how to develop the mind and spirit required for actual life-and-death fighting and became learning how to develop the mind and spirit required for metaphorical life-and-death fighting. No matter how you slice it ("how you slice it", right? Get it? Hyuk, hyuk, I just kill myself), tea is not a real life-and-death struggle. A fight with swords, on the other hand, is. I do not see how the two can be compared, except in the most general terms; e.g "you must have mushin to do tea/fight with swords/arrange flowers/paint".

Now, if a man who was acquainted with life-and-death struggles took up tea and considered it important, he might find that his experiences allowed him to learn to concentrate on the task at hand as though his life depended on it. However, that is because he already really and truly knows what it is like to put his life on the line. It seems to me that for someone who knows only tea, applying the lessons of tea to fighting, about which he knows nothing, will be practically impossible, no matter how much "mushin" he has doing tea.

Anyway, the definition of "Budo Seishin" is the key here. Since this thread is "Let's see you do that with shinken", not "let's see you do that with a shinai and bogu following the rules", I took issue with the idea that studying tea would help you learn how to fight and that practicing how to fight was unnecessary for developing the spirit needed to learn how to fight with real swords, which is how I interpreted the meaning of "Budo Seishin". If, however, "Budo Seishin" is taken to mean the sort of spirit that is inculcated through the practice of modern cognate arts such as kendo (which, while a very tough discipline, is not real swordfighting), then that is an entirely different discussion.

Actually, this is probably the crux of the disagreement. I do not accept the contention that the spirit of the art can be divorced from the physical practice of the art. They are one and the same thing and they cannot be separated. This Western-style dualistic approach, where the spirit is over here and the technique is over there, is only possible when the practice of the art is used for the purpose of teaching something other than how to fight, which is the case with all modern sportive arts.

I don't want to get into "but the purpose of the martial arts is much broader than just learning how to kill people". Yes, it is. No argument. But that's "a whole 'nother thread", as they say.

Originally posted by Brian Owens
Hopefully that amplifies what I said into something resembling what I mean. Words really are inadequate.

Yeah, I guess so.

PS: Oh, yeah, as an old SCA member (no longer active) I can say that while there are rules in SCA combat the fights are not scripted, at least in the lists at SCA events. Shows for the public (Renaissance Faires, etc.) are a different matter. We used to break each other's hands and give each other concussions with alarming regularity.

(Actually, something just occurred to me: you're not comparing the practice of kata in koryu systems with recreationists re-staging the Battle of Gettysburg, are you? I agree that that sort of "emulating combat" has no value for learning "Budo Seishin".)

Bruce:

I think I remember you. You visited our kyudo class a few years ago before you headed off to Japan or something, right? How have you been?

[Charlie Kondek]

That's it, Chris Moses, I'm calling you out! You have insulted my honor. Prepare for a visit from me and to settle this in the old fashion!

Oh, wait, this isn't the Kwestionable Kenjutsu thread...

Originally posted by Bruce Mitchell
Was re-watching Kurosawa's "Hidden Fortress" yesterday and one of the scenes in the beginning has an armoured samuria running backwards, then four mounted warriors ride up and poke him full of holes with their spears. Probably what a lot of sword fights actually looked like.

Finally, someone attempts to answer the question, however tongue in cheek! But, you know, it reminds me: every time a movie comes out in which there is sword-fighting some pursists around here sniff that "real sword fighting looks nothing like that." Well, I'm still curious to know what the heck it does look like! I tend to think you might actually see some of the things you see in the movies, full on blocks, edge to edge, smashing and slashing.

[Dan Harden]

Earl

You and I have been over this about a dozen times so there is nothing I am going to offer here presently that you haven’t read from me in the past.

To the tea drinkers who think to learn Budo Seishin from preparing tea: I think what is missing is the very fact that to sustain a focused state that would involve Budo -one would need to involve budo? Unless one were to be serving tea Araki ryu or Takenouchi ryu style- I see nothing to be gained. But maybe that’s just me. The quandary of how to train men to maintain awareness and avoid a stress-induced adreniline dump is hardly new.
There is simply no substitute for hard training to learn how to fight with weapons, or without. Keeping your wits about you, remaining focused and being able to perform, function, improvise and think while under increasingly applied stress is an old, old, training tool utilized by serious men.
Nothing else will get you there.
Nothing.
It can be carried out in various and thankfully less dire- means and methods in a dojo setting with the right teachers.
That said, for most people here I would venture that-
“Writing” eloquently
Is their substitute for
“Fighting” eloquently

Personal questions
Ask yourself what sort of shape you are in? Fatigue makes cowards of men.
What sort of conditions have you faced?
What type of men have you faced?
What experiences do you have that have fostered an incremental increase in your personal judgments to weigh abilities, advice and the written works of others to a point that you may correctly discern good sound advice from more Budo/Zen/Samurai story telling?
Soldiers are soldiers and have a unique tendency to act like soldiers. Study soldiering and those who taught them. Then go back and read more Japanese stories about all aspects of the Bushi's duties and training; both soldiering and civil.

Drinking coffee, not tea
Dan

[chrismoses]

Originally posted by Charlie Kondek
[B]That's it, Chris Moses, I'm calling you out! You have insulted my honor. Prepare for a visit from me and to settle this in the old fashion!

Oh, wait, this isn't the Kwestionable Kenjutsu thread...

Under a bridge in NJ? (hopefully some of you have been here long enough to get that reference...)

[charlesl]

(the retarded kid in the class bows his head and raises his right hand)

I'm not familiar with the term "budo seishin".

Anyway, the definition of "Budo Seishin" is the key here. Since this thread is "Let's see you do that with shinken", not "let's see you do that with a shinai and bogu following the rules", I took issue with the idea that studying tea would help you learn how to fight and that practicing how to fight was unnecessary for developing the spirit needed to learn how to fight with real swords, which is how I interpreted the meaning of "Budo Seishin".

"budo seishin" means "fighting spirit"?

"Fighting spirit" being that quality of character that gets you off your arse when you've slipped in the mud for the 100th time, you're worn out as hell, and in a lot of ways you'd just as soon die right here and now than keep going, but instead you get up again and deal with yet another armed sociopath who's coming over to kill you?

Or is it what I think of as "combative aggression," the quality of character that motivates you to run over and kill that joker who keeps slipping in the mud?

Or some combination of the two? Or something else?

[Earl Hartman]

Originally posted by Dan Harden
Unless one were to be serving tea Araki ryu or Takenouchi ryu style

Snerk.

Kinda like learning how to bow Nagao Ryu style (where, as you are bowing to each other, the other guy tries to grab you by the hair and kill you, and you counter by poking him in the eye and breaking his arm).

That's the very first kata you learn, actually.

[Earl Hartman]

Charles:

Translated literally, "Budo Seishin" just means "the spirit of budo".

However, I don't know what Brian has in mind specifically when he uses this term. As I said, I think this is the crux of the disagreement. This term means different things to different people. It seems prety clear that at least in this particular case Brian and I have different ideas about what "Budo Seishin" is.

Since we were talking about what a real swordfight might look like, it was in this context that I took issue with Brian's apparent belief that studying tea was a way to achieve "Budo Seishin" and that that emulating combat was unnecessary for this.

I will let Brian take it from there if he is interested.

[Brian Owens]

Originally posted by Earl Hartman
...(Actually, something just occurred to me: you're not comparing the practice of kata in koryu systems with recreationists re-staging the Battle of Gettysburg, are you? I agree that that sort of "emulating combat" has no value for learning "Budo Seishin".)

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. Kata is not a re-enactment of battles, but a method of training for battle.

I'm heading off to work now, but will respond to your other points ASAP.