Kendo, Kenjutsu, Iaido, Iaijutsu instruction(repost)

[Zen_Celt]

This is sort of an FAQ for the less informed among us(myself included). For the purposes of this thread the definitions are as follows-
Kenjutsu: Japanese art of sword fighting
Kendo: sport derivatve of Kenjutsu
Iaijutsu: derivative of Kenjutsu in which the sword starts in the saya
Iaido:I don't know, see below


I see the difference between Kenjutsu and Kendo, but what is the difference between Iaijutsu and Iaido?

Do I have to go to Japan to learn Kenjutsu(I've heard there are VERY few decent schools in the U.S. and they are generally closed door)?

Does one need to learn Kendo to be good at Kenjutsu?

Should Kendo and Kenjutsu be seen as similar or as separate arts?

Since Iaijutsu(as far as I know) seems to be a precursor to kenjutsu(Iaijutsu is with sword in saya, kenjutsu has sword already drawn) are they taught together or do I need to travel to different dojos to learn them both?

I think I had more originally so if I think of them I'll repost, in the meantime, could anyone help me with these please? Also, for all the newbies out there, If you have questions this is meant as an FAQ guide for basic information so feel free to post them here.
Domo Arigato
Scott Torrence

[Charles Mahan]

I think you'll find this thread will start off fairly informative, but might easily descend into the tired old arguments. I usually avoid these, but I'll give my assesment anyway. The board has been slow since the crash.

First a little about myself, so you'll understand the angle my opinions are coming from. I practice Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Iaido under the Eishin Ryu Seitokai, which constitues by a sizeable margin the largest of the Eishin Ryu groups. My instructor John Ray holds a nanadan(7th degree) in this system and trained in Japan for 10 years before setting up shop in Denton, Texas. My exposure to other systems is very limited, near zero really, but I've been practicing regularly under Ray-sensei for more than 4 years. During that time, we've had seven visits by four different sensei from Japan, so I know a little anyway about this style.

In addition to my real word practice of Iai, I've spent most of those 4 years, lurking on Kim Taylor's iaido-l listserv and here at e-budo, so I'm not exactly new to the online budo world.

Ok enough disclaimers, on to the part where I make a public idiot out of myself. Why did I ever decide to delurk.

On the topic of Do vs. Jutsu.
In the US and the rest of the western world this subject has taken on a level of importance that is not seen in Japan. The most commonly used distinction is that the proponents of XXX-jutsu systems claim that their styles are more combat effective than XXX-do systems. In the Ken world, Kenjutsu practioners appear to use jutsu to set what they do apart from the sport world of Kendo.

There aren't just a whole lot of Iaijutsu people. Of course, there aren't just a whole of of Iai people either . I suspect the people who do make a distinction between Iaijutsu and Iaido do so to put emphasis on the idea that their style is more combat effective. I will try not to make any judgement calls here on the validity of these claims.

These perceived differences between do and jutsu is largely a western distinction. The Japanese for the most part use them interchangably, much the way we use freeway and highway interchangably. Is there a technical difference between freeway and highway? Probably, I'm not a language expert, but does everyone use them to mean the same thing? Yep.

On the topic of Ken vs. Iai
As you yourself pointed out, Iai is really quite old. The founding of the Iai is usually attributed to Hayashizaki Jinsuke Shigenobu (with the occasional Minamoto thrown in) around 450 years ago. Most Iai styles will trace their lineage back to him.

I cannot speak for other styles. I'm not really qualified to speak for MJER, but I will anyway because I'm an obnoxious american . One of the basic precepts that sets us appart from the Ken world , and I suspect most other Iai forms share this precept, is known as Saya no Uchi, or literally inside the saya(scabbard). This precept basically holds that victory and thus survival starts before the sword is even drawn.

In defense of kata practice
Traditionally, Iai practice places heavy emphasis on kata(prearranged form) practice. Through kata the student learns the basics of the style. Through enourmous repetition you build good habits and muscle memory. Kata practice is necessitated in Iai, because our techniques are the dangerous. Wow that sounds arrogant, but think about it. It's the art of drawing a sword, which means you have to draw a sword, which requires a scabbard, which requires... a sword. Admittedly there are Bokken that come with plastic sayas that could be used in two man practice, and they are in fact but only at very high levels(This may not be true in other styles of Iai, but in the Seitokai student's don't usually study the two man kata until they are around 6th dan).

The purpose of repetitive practice is to prepare you for situtations where you don't have time to think. Through kata practice you commit the basic techniques of the system to muscle memory, so that if you were ever jumped by thugs in the streets of Tosa wielding 30 inch razor blades and actively attempting to remove pieces of your anatomy and you have absolutely no margin of error, when you draw your sword and cut at the nearest opponent your swords angle of attack will be good without you even having to think about it. That's a lot of details for one sentence, but that's only the tip of the iceberg for the scenario. You will transition from your opening cut to a powerful vertical cut to your openents head by first passing through a blocking position in case he gets a cut off before you can finish him. No time for thinking, the guy behind you is too close, so you turn 180 degrees with no difficulty, just like you've done in practice 10,000 times and cut him down before he can strike. If you are lucky, the remaining assailants are so awed by your quick thinking, intensity of spirit, and obvious skill that they withdraw in fear.

One last section that will probably be controversial
The general consensus amoung many sword students and armchair sword students online seems to be that Iai is a subset of the wider realm of Ken. I would argue that this is simply not the case. In my experience, Eishin Ryu is a fully formed sword style with pretty much everything one would expect to find in a regular Ken style. This is the part which might be controversial, because of my limited experience with other styles. The same kinds of techniques are found in both Ken and Iai. If anything Ken is actually a subset of Iai, because it leaves you unprepared for a scenario in which combat begins while your sword is still sheathed. Boy that one's probably gonna get me in trouble

There seems to be a common misconception concerning katas. The idea is that a student of a system which practices kata will suddenly be attacked and the student will pick a kata from the 50 or so in the system and use it to defeat the opponent. This idea is frankly ludicrous. The real world simply does not conform so neatly. Fortunatley, this isn't the way it works.

At the introductory level, kata are very rigid. The student needs to learn the basics of the system. The correct way to stand so that your cut is stable and powerful and yet flexible enough to turn at a moments notice. The correct way to cut an opponent without overbalancing, etc... This is the level I'm still at. At very advanced levels, the student begins practicing variations of the kata that deal with slightly different situations. In an actual fight a well trained practioner throws kata and variations aside and uses the basic techniques in whatever fluid combination necessary to destroy the opponent. Could an Iai student draw the sword first and then approach his opponent? Of course. The basics are still valid. You give up some flexibility in the encounter. If you don't immmediately draw your sword, it might be possible to diffuse an ugly situation before it turns violent, but once it's drawn the fight is on and your a fool if you don't act accordingly. And probably a dead fool at that.

Admittedly this post is rambling just a wee bit, but it's late and I'm tired. Apologies.

I will now attempt to summarize by answering some of your specific questions.

I see the difference between Kenjutsu and Kendo, but what is the difference between Iaijutsu and Iaido?

I make no distinction for a couple of reasons. The first is that in Japan the distintion does not truly exist. In the US the distinction that is usually given is that Iaijutsu places a greater emphasis on combat effectiveness and Iaido places a greater emphasis on the spiritual side of things to the point of neglecting combat effectivness. IMHO(holy or humble your choice) that's just cadswallup. This arguement relies on convincing the audience that the arguer's style is superior, because the arguer says so. There isn't any proof offered, just an appeal to the mystical Japanese term, jutsu to justify the claim. Officially speaking what I do is reffered to as Iaido, but we concentrate very much on the combat aspect of the techniques. Do we believe there is a spirtual element to the workout? I suppose. I can't really speak to this since it isn't discussed in our dojo so much. I suspect that there is a certain degree of personal development that comes with any highly technical and demanding endeavor.

Since Iaijutsu(as far as I know) seems to be a precursor to kenjutsu(Iaijutsu is with sword in saya, kenjutsu has

As I have already argued, I believe that you learn a fully developed sword style when you learn iai. At least, you do with Eishin Ryu. I'm not gonna get dragged into the merits of one style versus another.


I certainly hope this helps clear some things up. My wife has just given me that, "You've been at it for more than an hour" warning so I have to get off to sleep. My apologies if I have stepped on any toes, I have tried to limit my response to my own personal realm of experience. I also apologize for the lack of compositional excellence, I'm too lazy to spell check and such at this late an hour.

I've just put on my asbestos undies, so fire away

[Enfield]

Originally posted by Charles Mahan
The general consensus amoung many sword students and armchair sword students online seems to be that Iai is a subset of the wider realm of Ken. I would argue that this is simply not the case. In my experience, Eishin Ryu is a fully formed sword style with pretty much everything one would expect to find in a regular Ken style.

I think along these lines as well.

Just to throw some wood on the fire, I was looking in my ZNKR Japanese-English Kendo Dictionary yesterday, and the entry for "iai" (no "do" or "jutsu") starts off with (I'm quoting from memory, so it's probably not exact), "Iai is a form of kenjutsu ..."

[Nathan Scott]

I really wouldn't get caught up with these types of terms, or whether your art is a "-do" of "-jutsu". It is irrelevant and futile.

The local representative of an art IS the art as far as your concerned, and various instructors may be very -do or -jutsu within the same art.

Always look at the instructor.

Also, there are very few kenjutsu (assuming this refers to classical ryu-ha) that are closed to new students. They, and some modern dojo as well, simply require that students approach them with proper etiquette, the inclination to work hard to learn something, and patience.

Serious minded students with good character and motives rarely have trouble being accepted into any dojo.

[yamamatsuryu]

First, let me say this. as far as Jutsu vs. Do..... Does it really matter?? Is Jutsu more or less effective than Do?? Especially when it comes to swordsmanship?? I live out in the boondox, so I always get current events about the time when everyone else has labeled it as history . Last time I remember an actual duel with swords was....Um....Well, I DON'T remember an actual duel with swords. I do remember hearing talk that Jutsu is more effective than Do because it's more circular than Kendo (linear in approach) and that Do is more effective because it practices free-form fencing and yadda yadda yadda. My answer is PHOOEY.

Now then, to answer some questions for Mr. Torrence.

"Does one need to learn Kendo to be good at Ken-Jutsu" - No. I have ever studied Kendo, so I can’t speak with experience, but I do know of several people whom are excellent swordsmen and have never studied Kendo.

"What is the difference between Iai-Jutsu and Iai-do" - Since I have never studied Iai-do, I will leave this question (Along with the flames I’ll start) alone

"Do I have to go to Japan to learn Ken-jutsu" - No. Although there are very few Ken-jutsu schools in the U.S., and some of them are, in fact, closed door, there are open-door schools here too. You will, however, need to be dedicated to get in

"Should Kendo and Ken-jutsu be seen as similar or as separate arts?" - Yes, they should.

"Since Iai-jutsu (as far as I know) seems to be a precursor to ken-jutsu (Iai-jutsu is with sword in saya, ken-jutsu has sword already drawn) are they taught together or do I need to travel to different dojos to learn them both?" - I cannot speak for every school, but in ours, Iai-waza (Jutsu) is incorporated within our Ken-Jutsu. There are, however schools that "concentrate" on one or the other, and some that teach both.

Now, to write about what Charles Mahan wrote:
Shame on you, you obnoxious American!!! Not for speaking out about your school, but for having such a long post!!!
What Most (Not all) Iai-schools call Kata, we call waza. Ours is also performed faster and while wearing the wakizashi. Also, I’ve noticed (With what limited experience I have OBERVING Iai-do, that, although many techniques are similar, we use totally different names for some of them.
To expand on your "controversial" section, without getting into detail, I mostly agree with your view on "Kata". Through repetition, the student learns the basics (By student, I mean everyone, from the beginner to the instructor). As one progresses, s/he learns to transcend the technique and move into Mukei, where action is spontaneous and formless. This part of the waza (Kata) might work here, but this other part of this other Waza (Kata) works here and so on and so forth, so by the time you are done, you’ve completed a whole other technique that fits that current situation. That’s why we say that Mukei changes every time you perform it.

Now, to write about what Enfield wrote:
Hello Fellow Pacific Northwesterner!!!

And finally, to Nathan Scott:
Amen


Jared Albrecht

"And ALL things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, BELIEVING, YE SHALL RECEIVE" Mt. 21:22

[hyaku]

I think a few people who have posted have missed the most important point.

When we mention the history and swordsmanship we have to bear in mind that there have been substantial changes in techniques over the times. In specializing with a certain art from a certain period we can clearly define the different use of the hands, hips, footwork etc

There are a few subtle similarities between certain arts that can help us advance and in other ways we have clearly define the different technical principles of each art. Having practiced all of the above for a number of years I can assure readers that it is advantagious to do "all" of the arts if you can to proficient degree. This helps you better in defining the differences.
To improve your Kendo do Kenjutsu. To improve your Kenjutsu do Kendo etc.

When we take on the task of going into a different facet or different historical period of arts it may at first feel like we have started all over again. But then certain imprinted things we have learned over the years kick in.

I really has nothing to do with whether ot not it was effective in the battlefield or not. The records show there were more injuries sustained from arrows, spears and stones anyway.

In modern times we use all the waza and kata from these clearly defined historical periods as a physical/educational tool for self improvement.

It really is no good to make armchair judgements about things you have seen and not done.

Hyakutake Colin

[Kolschey]

Thank you, Mr. Colin.
Well spoken!