Originally Posted by
Hissho
Note: the tone below is not meant to be challenging in a snarky way, but certainly in a way asking that we re-examine the default response to stuff like this - some people sensitive about these things will not like what is written below:
Maybe they mostly HAD it, but it went away?
Not "free training" in the way we think of it in modern sport terms, which most people seem to limit themselves to when envisioning this kind of training, but in a "force on force" manner that gets progressively more open ended and challenging, while still maintaining the combative form.
Or, maybe the schools that remained vital and viable maintained it, but others didn't keep up - the Kobusho seems to have thought so according to Dr. Bodiford's research.
It only really appears to be post Edo and modern practitioners that have taken the fighting part out: either actual combat, or pre-arranged combat (duels; challenges and musha shugyo - both considered a vital part of training), or "free training."
You can't learn to fight without.....fighting.
I think historically we see that ryuha knew that back when they weren't koryu. It seems that they lost it when they became organizations perpetuating themselves versus organizations perpetuating a warrior ethos conditioned by actual combative preparation.
Following the twists and turns in the aiki-community these days it is fascinating to see that process in action from Takeda to Ueshiba and so on down to the modern form. What makes us think that koryu did not follow the exact same process? Indeed research suggests that this is exactly what happened.
Heck, even Musashi hinted at the beginnings of that process - and the Edo period had just started!
Interesting also to see that reality is being re-discovered in the aiki-world mainly because people started to ask questions. Really fascinating when you consider how long some people have been at it and not been asking those questions or had that realization. A product of the environment, no doubt.
Just something to consider.
Is kenjutsu next? Probably not, as there really isn't a practical need, and it appears people would rather remain mired in arguing definitions, lineages, "paper" and the like.
Is that not a rather dramatic departure from what these things were in the past? When it was hang out a sign board, or walk into town with a flag on your back or kanji embroidered on you clothes calling yourself No Equal Under Heaven (didn't one guy wear wings or a wing pattern to give the impression he was a tengu?? And people say BJJ is aggressive and flamboyant!), issuing a direct challenge to anyone to "try conclusions." Then break out the bokuto and bang, at times in public, in front of peers and others, to leave no doubt as to who had "it" and who didn't.
Who does that today? Even with shinai (developed specifically as a force on force tool for more realism in training....hmmmmm)
If not, are you really practicing anything close to what 'they' practiced, developing the mindset 'they' had, when you don't know you will some day stand across from another practitioner with a threat of serious injury and your livlihood going down the tubes?