why so many leg defense moves in MSR/MJER and no torso defense?

[hyaku]

I was telling you that 'waza' is as popular and as general as 'budo' in western world. We give them attributes as we please - budo, the way of warrior when bu-do was most of the time the way of peacemaker/justiciar (a glimpse to what bu meant for the founder of the Shorin schools of Okinawan karate is not a wasted time) Waza is a technic and kata is the retainer/container of that said technic. But you decided to say that koryu IS waza. Your interpretation.
The example with that Sensei is eloquent. He said (approximatively), "you have to kill a man to be able to change a waza". Right? If he was really meaning the entire kata, in this case MSR noto was a sacrilege for a MJER practitioner - he CHANGED the waza! !!!!!!!!! There are things that can be changed in a kata and things that CAN'T be changed. And he was pointing toward the efficiency of the technics (waza) that kata in koryu holds. You will be capable to change that technic if you come with something more efficient than what was before - it will never happen.
Regarding the rest of your comment I have nothing to say because it is your understanding against mine. What means 'practicality' in a world where sword is an antiquity or a link to old history? I don't want the answer.

The point is Ryu and the waza within do have 'grey area' that allows variation. This is why partly there are so many splits within groups and ryu. It can also be noted that high level Japanese teachers comments are that someone will do nukitsuke of 'A Sensei", the kiritsuke of (B Sensei) etc and mix it all up.

But different ryu do have different guidelines as to the waza they show. The ryu I head is taught to never ever show the original waza in public but to work on and do a 'variations' for embu. We also bear in mind that no two situations would ever be the same. I dont see what noto has to do with any of this. It is now what could be deemed as a theatrical means of replacing a blade to do yet another kata/waza.

Although you are of course entitled to your opinion it would be nice to know where you are coming from. Your level, experience and the arts you have practiced that lead you to your opinions? I did karate many years ago to win European championships. But I never make comparison with karate and sword arts.

[Brian Owens]

..." During the 8th dan grading that took place in May I noticed that many people performed the Kata with great technical expertise that was lacking with the Kokoro of Iai. When this Kokoro does exist, the spirit of each and every Waza, including the individual components, is discernable, resulting in meaningful Iai. "

Kishimoto sensei has it exactly right, of course, but you don't. Note the phrase "the spirit of each and every Waza, including the individual components..." Those individual components are the kata, and the complete whole is the waza. He was saying that he observed many practitioners who could perform bits and pieces of the waza with "technical" proficiency, but that the complete performance, the waza, lacked kokoro (spirit/mindfulness/intent). You need to just accept that terms don't always mean the same thing from one group to another, and stop trying to push your definitions on the groups in question...the groups of which you are an outsider.

[Derzis]

Yes, he got it right. And in same time he says SEITEI waza while the book you were talking about earlier, the ZNKR Iai says kata. Now, you can argue whatever you want on the word used back and forth eons - is actually what drives you in this topic since basically you did not answered to the main topic related to defensive technics against nukitsuke in iai. The answer is simple: define nukitsuke and you will see why there are no technics against it - or maybe not. And for sure, I am not part of your group.

[Brian Owens]

...the book you were talking about earlier, the ZNKR Iai says kata. ...And for sure, I am not part of your group.

Since you referred to my comments about Kishimoto sensei and about insiders versus outsiders, I'm assuming your comment is addressed at me. But since I haven't said anything about a book I can't be sure. Maybe one of us is confused.

[Derzis]

Lol Oh really? Then I guess 50 years of repetition sometimes ten practices a week have been for nothing if I am still "thinking my way through".

You know is a difference between thinking and actually doing perfect what you are thinking, right?

[Derzis]

Gentlemen, to cut this topic short, waza vs kata in iaido, the trolling subject of this topic. You are MJER, I am MSR. Some Sensei use Kata as term when they refer to Koryu in MSR. In practice, they say "today we'll do 12 seitei katas and will continue with koryu katas". When you go to grading, you have to perform 5 katas - splitting the number between SEITEI katas and koryu depending on how advanced you are. They don't say 2 waza - 3 katas. In normal life in a MSR dojo (at least the ones I've seen), kata/waza have the same meaning - very specific for iaido. The big mistake that is happening here is translating the idea that 'kata' in iaido has the same meaning as in empty hands. In the beginning it may look like that. Your Sensei is stressing you to lower your shoulder, to use your hips etc, ignoring almost the presence of the imaginary opponent - he is there as mannequin, not an important part interacting with you. But the moment you start to think about your opponent, that kata becomes a iaido fighting scenario*. Thinking about your opponent(s) moves and skill level will push you forward to high-ranks. Not because you thought you become 8th dan in a blink as you implied. But this is my interpretation, you are free to have yours.
Based on the texts like the interview with Kishimoto Sensei, where he used the same waza term for Seitei, I think he meant more than just waza=technic vs kata=form. At his level he sees them as iaido fighting scenarios. And they are, since their roots (for most of them) are in koryu. This is my interpretation, not the fact that on a paper it says 'waza' and some sensei says 'kata'. Both are correct, depending what they really mean to me. I am not a Japanese, I will never have his background/DNA/language knowledge to judge my affirmation. Now, you don't like it, it is not my problem.

* When is scenario, you can change tempo, even position of your enemy, etc, things that are happening above a certain level and some are saying that koryu spits in SEITEI.

[Derzis]

Maybe one of us is confused.

Yes, my mistake. On this topic I got confused with so many trolling answers.

[hyaku]

Gentlemen, to cut this topic short, waza vs kata in iaido, the trolling subject of this topic. You are MJER, I am MSR. Some Sensei use Kata as term when they refer to Koryu in MSR. In practice, they say "today we'll do 12 seitei katas and will continue with koryu katas". When you go to grading, you have to perform 5 katas - splitting the number between SEITEI katas and koryu depending on how advanced you are. They don't say 2 waza - 3 katas. In normal life in a MSR dojo (at least the ones I've seen), kata/waza have the same meaning - very specific for iaido. The big mistake that is happening here is translating the idea that 'kata' in iaido has the same meaning as in empty hands. In the beginning it may look like that. Your Sensei is stressing you to lower your shoulder, to use your hips etc, ignoring almost the presence of the imaginary opponent - he is there as mannequin, not an important part interacting with you. But the moment you start to think about your opponent, that kata becomes a iaido fighting scenario*. Thinking about your opponent(s) moves and skill level will push you forward to high-ranks. Not because you thought you become 8th dan in a blink as you implied. But this is my interpretation, you are free to have yours.
Based on the texts like the interview with Kishimoto Sensei, where he used the same waza term for Seitei, I think he meant more than just waza=technic vs kata=form. At his level he sees them as iaido fighting scenarios. And they are, since their roots (for most of them) are in koryu. This is my interpretation, not the fact that on a paper it says 'waza' and some sensei says 'kata'. Both are correct, depending what they really mean to me. I am not a Japanese, I will never have his background/DNA/language knowledge to judge my affirmation. Now, you don't like it, it is not my problem.

* When is scenario, you can change tempo, even position of your enemy, etc, things that are happening above a certain level and some are saying that koryu spits in SEITEI.

We are all aware of what ZNKR Seiteigata Iaido is. Some of us sat on the grading panels in Japan and most certainly sit on panels in other countries. It's a useful tool. I did it when there were four katas and 'still' had not actually made it all up borrowing bits from koryu. Being MJER or MSR has little to do with it. Most good teachers can do both. I'm sure ZNKR is NOT interested in your opinion or interpretation. Neither are the people here that were probably doing it before you were born.

Being Japanese really has little to do with this. But if you live in Japan you fit in with ZNKR guidelines if you do their Iai. However I have listened to holders of Menkyo Kaiden in both MJER and MSR who did iai before they invented Seitei gata and were not happy that you have to do it for gradings. Because after Seitei was instigated there was a problem and many mixed it with the waza of other ryu to water down it's content. But there are lots of teachers out there now. hachidan who did this as a kid that can clearly differentiate between between seiteigata, waza, MSR and MJER etc. etc.

I guess what you really need to do unless you intend to tell us of your background and experience and grades that qualify you to express you strange opinions is just shut up and get on with it like the rest of us and stop trolling the moderators on this forum. That's they way we do things in Japan. Shut up and get on with it until maybe one day we know enough about these thing to actually express an opinion that will extend the knowledge of others and are 'one of those sensei'.

[Brian Owens]

...Based on the texts like the interview with Kishimoto Sensei, where he used the same waza term for Seitei, I think he meant more than just waza=technic vs kata=form. At his level he sees them as iaido fighting scenarios. And they are, since their roots (for most of them) are in koryu.

I think don't think it's that complicated; it's more likely that he used the term "waza" because he's a MJER sensei, and that's the term used in MJER. A MSR sensei would use "kata" for the same thing, because that's the term used in MSR. As several of us have been saying for some time now, terminology isn't universal between groups, but it is usually consistent within a group.

[hyaku]

I think don't think it's that complicated; it's more likely that he used the term "waza" because he's a MJER sensei, and that's the term used in MJER. A MSR sensei would use "kata" for the same thing, because that's the term used in MSR. As several of us have been saying for some time now, terminology isn't universal between groups, but it is usually consistent within a group.

I guess in this particular case as the seiteigata ipponme has been taken from a MJER/MSR waza that's exactly the way some look at it. I am also looking from a point of view of teaching in Japanese and explaining things to a non Japanese in translating for Japanese Sensei. The word kata (katachi) and waza do run over into the language and are not just Budo terms. This question has been brought up in Western seminars many times. The tongue in cheek words of "You would have to kill somebody" were said by Iwata Sensei some years ago when asked if we could make stuff up. I guess some of it does get 'lost in translation'. We cant make waza up but there is an enormous grey area when it comes to timing and the assumption of where the opponent is using creative visualization. That is if our ryu permits us to do such things. Its very important to me as I always do a slight variation of waza but the kata must be adhered to meaning we can mix the various components.

[gendzwil]

The waza/kata thing is interesting to me because in kendo we use the word differently but also in several ways. It can mean a whole category of techniques (eg ohji-waza, kaeshi-waza) or a single one. When doing kendo no kata we refer to each fighting sequence as a kata but in bokuto ni yoru kendo kihon-waza each sequence is called a waza. That's because in the latter there's no story to the action, they are just technique drills.

At any rate, language used in various budo varies. Judo guys say mate, kendoka say yame for example. There are other examples with different words for the same thing or the same words for different things. As a non-speaker I just use whatever terminology is convention in what I am currently doing.