Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 63

Thread: Naginatajutsu & Sojutsu - FAQ

  1. #31
    MarkF Guest

    Default

    ..."do" forms 道 are not considered koryu.
    I take very mild exception to this comment. The arts practiced at the Kodokan, judo in particular, is not a modern term. These kanji ju-do were chosen specifically because a koryu style of tai jutsu and weapons was called jiu-do by its founder in the late 17th century or early 18th century. Jikishin-ryu Ju-do. However it was pronounced, the kanji are identical to Judo. It also used as its main training style, ran, as in ran-dori. While kata was important, ran was at least as important if not more so, especially in the tai-jutsu area of the ryu.

    Kyudo and kyujutsu are virtually the same thing, always training with some form of competitive practice. Most koryu of all kinds practiced taryu jiai which is thought only to be the hallmark of the meiji era and on.

    Besides, the terms are almost interchangable, the only true difference is in the time it was used. No one really set out to change bujutsu to budo, it just happened, on a timline or continuum of sorts. I sincerely doubt anyone set out to separate them into two columns. Japanese sword arts contain many examples of interchangeable styles, some using jutsu, others -do. Some arts are technically gendai but are taught in the older, classical way while may koryu have adopted some aspects of their arts to some of the ways of gendai. Daito ryu being a large example of not knowing which foot came down first.

    But like I said, I only have a mild interest in it, as I am sure most of us have a different take on the subject (do a search of E-budo using those terms and you should find some examples of threads kept in the archives on this very subject). I doubt a new thread would grab very many these days.

    Also, it is an exception noted not a law of the jungle to which I protest.


    Mark

  2. #32
    Mukeido Guest

    Default

    Naginata-do is specifically not used, and should not be used.
    My original comment should have read Naginatdo is more correctly termed atarashii naginata and is gendai. Sorry, typo.

    I take very mild exception to this comment. The arts practiced at the Kodokan, judo in particular, is not a modern term. These kanji ju-do were chosen specifically because a koryu style of tai jutsu and weapons was called jiu-do by its founder in the late 17th century or early 18th century. Jikishin-ryu Ju-do. However it was pronounced, the kanji are identical to Judo. It also used as its main training style, ran, as in ran-dori. While kata was important, ran was at least as important if not more so, especially in the tai-jutsu area of the ryu.

    Kyudo and kyujutsu are virtually the same thing, always training with some form of competitive practice. Most koryu of all kinds practiced taryu jiai which is thought only to be the hallmark of the meiji era and on.

    Besides, the terms are almost interchangable, the only true difference is in the time it was used. No one really set out to change bujutsu to budo, it just happened, on a timline or continuum of sorts. I sincerely doubt anyone set out to separate them into two columns. Japanese sword arts contain many examples of interchangeable styles, some using jutsu, others -do. Some arts are technically gendai but are taught in the older, classical way while may koryu have adopted some aspects of their arts to some of the ways of gendai. Daito ryu being a large example of not knowing which foot came down first.

    But like I said, I only have a mild interest in it, as I am sure most of us have a different take on the subject (do a search of E-budo using those terms and you should find some examples of threads kept in the archives on this very subject). I doubt a new thread would grab very many these days.

    Also, it is an exception noted not a law of the jungle to which I protest.
    I was of course being VERY general. My teachers often refer to koryu arts as simply budo, kobudo, kobujutsu and at other times as bujutsu. They also use kenjutsu, kenpo, and kendo interchangeably - often referring to the one form. Also jujutsu, taijutsu, kogusoku and judo are all used in my school to refer to the same techniques. It does sometimes depend on the "intention" and "ideology" behind the techniques. There is of course no true "rule" - but I was just being general. Donn Draeger was good at being general in this manner when decribing jutsu and do forms and it does help someone with little or no knowledge to get a "general" feeling for which is which.

    I do think that the gendai arts heavily influenced the practice of most if not all koryu schools, many of which would have passed on into history without the gendai abilities to practice in a safer way.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Mr Kemlo

    Totally disagree with you.

    You say above:

    "I do think the gendai arts heavily influenced the practice of most of not all koryu schools, many of which would have passed on into history without the gendai ability to practice in a safer way."

    Are your serious?

    1-For that statement to be true you would have to show that the koryu schools alterted or changed their training to adapt to a "safer" ie gendai method.

    Since they did not--its an untrue statement.

    2-Define "most"--reason I ask is that the Skoss's produced a 3 volume set of ryu that train pretty much today as they did "back in the day."
    So where do you get "most?"

    3- While your at it-please list for me exactly how the koryu adpoted gendai methods--which specific methods and which specific ryu did so?

    4-Exactly which koryu was "heavily influenced" by gendai methods?

    5-The koryu lasted for many 100's of years--without a titular "safer" gendai method--what is the rational for them suddenly just vanishing?

    6-If they declined, what is your support of it being because they lacked a "safer" method of practice?
    Would it not be more possible that the decline had more to do with the skill being "outdated" than "unsafe."
    After all western swordsmen have been using very "safe" foil-like weapons for many, many decades--and yet the "battlefield" arts declined just the same.

    So it seem that there is far more logical conclusion here.

    Don't mean to sound harsh--perhaps I misunderstood your posit.

    I just seriously don't get how you arrived at that conclusion.

    My girlfriends fishnet stockings have fewer holes than that.


    Chris Thomas

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Shoemakersville, PA
    Posts
    145
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkF
    I sincerely doubt anyone set out to separate the two into two columns.
    Mark,

    Not to stir the pot, but isn't that what Kano expressly WANTED to do? Didn't he wish to preserve that which saw as good and worthy of preservation in his jujutsu studies while diminishing and/or discarding that which was not so good (in his estimation)?

    What I've read on Ueshiba is similar. Take the totality of what they learned, and they wanted to preserve that which was good in the koryu forms and evolve it into something better.

    And isn't "budo" considered the natural evolution of the older "bujutsu" styles?

    *shrug*

    Just something that bounced around in my skull while reading this... if it doesn't seem right, don't take it too seriously.

    Tom
    Tom DeAngelo
    "If you fall down seven times, get up eight."

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Tom

    "Isnt budo considerd the natrual evolution of the older bujutsu styles?"

    NOT by the "older bujutsu styles."

    Perhaps "others" might see it that way.

    Then again it may depend on how you/they personally define the difference, if any, between, "budo" and "bujutsu."

    I tend to lean to toward the idea that its a pretty much a "western" distinction, one that has less meaning overseas--and less implication.

    Could always be wrong of course--would not be the first time.

    Chris Thomas

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Shoemakersville, PA
    Posts
    145
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cxt
    Tom

    "Isnt budo considerd the natrual evolution of the older bujutsu styles?"

    NOT by the "older bujutsu styles."

    Perhaps "others" might see it that way.

    Then again it may depend on how you/they personally define the difference, if any, between, "budo" and "bujutsu."

    I tend to lean to toward the idea that its a pretty much a "western" distinction, one that has less meaning overseas--and less implication.

    Could always be wrong of course--would not be the first time.

    Chris Thomas
    I think the originators of the various budo often billed them that way...as the natural progression of the older systems of military techniques (maybe that's better to use the English than the Japanese). Obviously, those practicing the various koryu don't prefer gendai budo. If they did, they wouldn't be with the koryu at all.

    My point was more that I think Kano *did* want to create two "columns" (to continue with Mark's comment), because he very purposefully set out to distinguish his style as "new and improved" (to use an anachronism) when compared to the older, existing styles.

    Tom
    Tom DeAngelo
    "If you fall down seven times, get up eight."

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Tom

    I don't know, but its an interesting question.

    Hard to know exactly what Kano "really" felt.

    On the one hand we have statements by kano himself that clearly state that he saw himself as a "preserver" of the "old ways."
    A list of classical jujutsu experts and masters that taught at the kodokan in the early days reads like a "whose who" of classcial jujutsu experts.
    Kano even sent/requested his students to be taught classical koryu.
    Arranged for the instruction of some of "his" people in aikido and allowed Funakoshi to teach karate in his dojo.

    On the other hand we have a guy who also clearly stated that his method was "new"--and saw it as both a highly effective form of "self training" AND an effective fighting art.

    Which is one of the reasons he was so respected---he refused to allow his appraoch to be so easily "pigeonholed" as being "just" one thing.

    There is a good lesson there I think.

    Chris Thomas

  8. #38
    Mukeido Guest

    Default

    Are your serious?

    1-For that statement to be true you would have to show that the koryu schools alterted or changed their training to adapt to a "safer" ie gendai method.
    Since they did not--its an untrue statement.
    2-Define "most"--reason I ask is that the Skoss's produced a 3 volume set of ryu that train pretty much today as they did "back in the day."
    So where do you get "most?"
    3- While your at it-please list for me exactly how the koryu adpoted gendai methods--which specific methods and which specific ryu did so?
    4-Exactly which koryu was "heavily influenced" by gendai methods?
    ALL And sorry it is a true statement. If you are hurt by this I'm sorry. Many want to believe that what they are practicing is THE ORIGINAL and unchanged methods of the samurai. Dream on.

    ALL KORYU JUJUTSU SCHOOLS THAT PRACTICE KAITEN WAZA AND UKEMI WAZA BORROWED THE SAFER METHODS OF FALLING FROM KANO'S JUDO. THEY HAD TO, THEY WERE BECOMING ANTIQUATED AND OUTMODED BY JUDO.

    Throwing techniques of the koryu originally included throwing the opponent down in an uncompromising position or throwing them down on their neck or arms. The koryu today practice safe throwing techniques and safe falling/rolling techniques. If they didn't there'd be lots of injuries.

    ALL KORYU JUJUTSU WHO PRACTICE GRAPPLING TECHNIQUES BY GRABBING ONTO A (HEAVY DUTY AND SPECIALLY DESIGNED) UNIFORM ARE PRACTICING KANO'S NEW METHOD.

    Where the koryu grappling arts would NOT have relied on the strength of a modern uniform to effect grips and holds - they do today. That is directly from Judo. Kano's biggest contribution to saving the koryu arts was the requiring of students to grip each other by the garments when executing techniques. He even designed a heavy duty keikogi which all koryu today wear. While it would have been acceptable to pull someone closer by the sleeve, the fact that Japanese clothing is hand-sewn means that you would have probably ended up with a sleeve that had been ripped from the rest of the garment. Also, on the battlefield it would have been dangerous to hold onto an opponents armour for too long.

    Don't practice with your head in the sand.

    .......that train pretty much today as they did "back in the day."
    RUBBISH. Which "day?" 100 years ago, 300, 400? It's a nice fantasy to think that the koryu have remained unchanged and retain the original methods of yesteryear, but it's just that - a fantasy.

    Yagyu Shingan ryu practices in armour, but have you noticed that they remove their datemono? Why? To make practice safer I was told by Shimazu Kenji sensei. By making their practice safer they are also allowing for a greater number of technique variation. They also sit in seiza while wearing armour, clearly not practical and painful with full suneate. The proper method of sitting while in armour would be agura. Seiza was for women and priests, but so many of the koryu practice sitting in seiza.

    How many koryu practice drawing a sword while sitting in seiza? A sword is NOT worn inside a building or while sitting - especially in seiza.

    The koryu have evolved over time to accept the gendai methods of safer techniques and practrice. They have accepted techniques that would not have been practiced by their originators. Does this diminish their cultural significance? No.

    Stephen Hayes had this to say about "traditional":
    "If yours is an ancient tradition, at what time period did your tradition "freeze" into its final form? When did your tradition stop growing, researching, and incorporating innovation? If you are practicing with Edo era (late 1600s through mid 1800s) swords, your tradition has chosen to change, grow, and go beyond the techniques of the Sengoku Warring States period (1500s), during which a completely different style of sword was used. And if you claim to practice the original tradition of Japanese sword as applied in the Sengoku era, then you are stating that your tradition chose to grow and adapt beyond the Muromachi era (1300s into the 1500s) with its distinct style of swords and techniques. How do you decide just how traditional you want to be?

    If yours is an ancient tradition, how would the founder do things if he or she were starting out today? What was the founder's motivating purpose for creating what eventually became your tradition? If it was self-protection, what were the prevailing types of attack that he or she had to deal with? Do you think that those same attacks are in use today? If the point was health cultivation, do you believe that they knew more or different things about health back then as compared with today? If the point was spiritual or character development, what were the cultural conditions that the founder wanted your martial practice to counter? Do those same conditions apply to your own culture in this age right now?"

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Shoemakersville, PA
    Posts
    145
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Mind providing some basis for your knowledge? I'm not challenging you, I'm simply curious.
    Tom DeAngelo
    "If you fall down seven times, get up eight."

  10. #40
    Mukeido Guest

    Default

    Mind providing some basis for your knowledge? I'm not challenging you, I'm simply curious.
    Experience and hard research, practicing several koryu and gendai systems, and long discussions with teachers/practitioners of as many arts (both koryu and gendai) that I can get a chance to talk with.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Kemlo

    Sorry, bro--your unsupported opinion cuts no ice with me.

    You fail to support even one of you "fantasy" posits.

    Oh, you "shout" loudly enough--just are not at all credible.

    Throwing techniques--ok not one koryu ryu in all japan had any falling techinques like judos?
    Your posit is that they were develped out of thin air?

    Or could it be just as possible that the techniques are just adeptation of exsisting techniques?

    Prove it.

    2- What would be the effective difference (note thats EFFECTIVE--not a nitpicking difference) between grabbing a heavy--strong gi top and grabbing the edge of a persons armor?
    Would not armor be strong enough to make a throw?

    3-"Proper" way for sitting for whom?
    You, sitting here TODAY can say with authority that no-one in 1000 or so years EVER sit in seiza--THAT WAS NOT A WOMEN OR A PRIEST?

    Nice time machine you must have there bro.

    4-Course that point is moot with the schools that use iai-goshi (sp) instead.

    5- That ASSUMES folks are wearing shin armor--which is odd, since I can look right at period paintings and drawings and read period descriptions of FOLKS NOT WEARING the said piece of armor.
    Indeed certian classes/types/periods of warrior did not wear them at all.
    Which renders both your posit and any contentions you draw from it moot.

    AGAIN--please provide the source cites for your contentions of "most"

    And AGAIN please list the support for koryu arts "barrowing" safer methods of practice from the gendai arts--you only list one HIGHLY questionable one.
    "Questioable" since you only ASSERT the posit--you don't actually support it.

    Oh, and its STILL ONLY ONE EXAMPLE--stop me if your having trouble here--but "one" is NOT "most" now is it?

    BTW-quoteing Stephan Hayes as if he were Moses himself, newly returned from the mountian, tablets in hand.
    Is not all that impressive.

    A-Questionable that Hayes practices koryu- does the japanese government recognize his art as koryu?

    B-Cirucler arguement-the quote DOES NOT ACTUALLY SAY WHAT YOU USE IT FOR.
    The quote in fact asks a retorical question--then answers it in a fashion which paints his OWN art in the best possibal light.

    Basically its a justifiaction for his art NOT being a koryu.

    Do try to do better next time---otherwise this gets old so fast.


    Chris Thomas
    Last edited by cxt; 28th September 2005 at 22:31.

  12. #42
    Mukeido Guest

    Default

    Whatever.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Kemlo

    No, "whatevvver!"

    (needs more "attitude" and a "talk to the hand" kinda gesture--which I have no idea how to duplicate on-line )



    Chris Thomas

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    49
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Shimizu Nobuko sensei teaches koryu naginatajutsu twice a year in Lubbock Texas. She taught Jikishinkage Ryu Naginatajutsu for many years at the Nippon Budokan but now calls it Ryouen Ryu Naginatajutsu within the Komei Jyuku and puts equal emphasis on waza, kumitachi and tameshigiri.

    This style of naginatajutsu also teaches tanto waza within some of the the naginata waza.

    I hope this helps.
    Brandon Burkett
    Yamauchi-Ha Muso Jikiden Eishin-ryu Iaijutsu

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Honolulu/New York City
    Posts
    448
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    [QUOTE=Mukeido]ALL And sorry it is a true statement. If you are hurt by this I'm sorry. Many want to believe that what they are practicing is THE ORIGINAL and unchanged methods of the samurai. Dream on.



    ALL KORYU JUJUTSU WHO PRACTICE GRAPPLING TECHNIQUES BY GRABBING ONTO A (HEAVY DUTY AND SPECIALLY DESIGNED) UNIFORM ARE PRACTICING KANO'S NEW METHOD.

    Where the koryu grappling arts would NOT have relied on the strength of a modern uniform to effect grips and holds - they do today. That is directly from Judo. Kano's biggest contribution to saving the koryu arts was the requiring of students to grip each other by the garments when executing techniques. He even designed a heavy duty keikogi which all koryu today wear. While it would have been acceptable to pull someone closer by the sleeve, the fact that Japanese clothing is hand-sewn means that you would have probably ended up with a sleeve that had been ripped from the rest of the garment. Also, on the battlefield it would have been dangerous to hold onto an opponents armour for too long.

    Don't practice with your head in the sand.



    QUOTE]

    How old was Kano when he formulated judo? I seem to remember seeing a picture of his keikogi from his teenage years and it was a heavy duty one.
    Christopher Moon

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •