Are you an asset or liability to JSA?

[Nathan Scott]

Hello all,

This is a subject that is being hashed around on the JSA forum of swordforum right now (and others off and on), in respect to the concept of learning JSA through self-training.

Many eager, prospective sword students are not fortunate enough to have qualified sword instruction in their immediate area, and are not able or willing to make deeper sacrifices to seek it out. It would seem that these people are (often times) convinced that they can teach themselves JSA accurately and effectively based primarily on the logic that many fuedal era bushi had done this with varying amounts of success.

So the question I'd like to pose is:

1) If you try to teach yourself "Japanese Swordsmanship" without formal qualified instruction/guidance (using books, internet and video), do you think it is possible to reach a comparable level to those that have trained formally?

2) If your passion to learn, study and perhaps demonstrate or teach, and be apart of the continuing legacy of JSA is so strong, how would you view this kind of contribution to the arts? In regards to safety and accurate transmission of the arts, would you be aiding in the preservation and continuation of an important "cultural asset", or would you, for lack of a better term, become "part of the problem?"

Following are excerpts from three of my posts copied from swordforum/jsa:

First of all, historians consider what is known about Musashi to be sketchy at best. While there may be some truth to what is written about Musashi, such as that he existed, I wouldn't believe everything you read about this legend as if it were the gospel truth.

Secondly, learning swordsmanship in feudal Japan by yourself is totally different than trying to learn Japanese swordsmanship in the modern western world - or modern Japan, for that matter. They are very very different times, and simply cannot be compared, so please resist using historical Samurai as examples of how JSA can be learned independent of a ryu-ha or qualified instructor in the present day. It is an irrelevant and inaccurate analogy.

If there are those that are determined to believe they can learn JSA without the help of qualified instruction, in spite of the strong opposing opinions of quite a few experienced kenshi, then so be it. It is not a subject that can be proven on paper, and frankly, those that already have strong opinions about how to learn something are most often not teachable anyway.

It would be easy to simply say, "to each his own - have fun". But the problem is that people that try to teach themselves JSA are literally a liability to the JSA world, IMHO.

Yes this is a strong statement, but I am not trying to offend anyone or come across "elitist".

Anyone who is going to train themselves is surely going to seek a training partner at some point, and *probably* train around other people eventually, in front of an audience, teach what they've learned to someone else (either physically or verbally) to some degree, and/or these days, likely get a shinken and practice techniques and cutting.

As a result, the likelihood of accidents is greatly increased, as well as the percentage of misinformation that will be disseminated to others.

Accidents in JSA affect all of us who train and/or teach JSA, both in the reputation of the arts we study, as well as opportunities and facilities to demonstrate and teach. Many places, like the Long Beach Convention Center in CA, no longer allow "Japanese type swords" on the facility. There were so many accidents at the Ed Parker Invitationals with unqualified Karate and Tae Kwon Do people using sword wallhangers in competition or in cutting stunts that they now consider it too much of a liability. Some entire countries have banned or severely restricted the ownership of Japanese style swords because of their use in domestic and sometimes absurd assaults.

Knowledge without correct experience to give the knowledge perspective and depth is most often superficial, and sometimes incorrect. Academic knowledge in an art requires proper experience to firmly identify and establish the information. Likewise, physical practice must also be combined with "academic" analysis to clarify the principles being taught in order to eventually reach one's potential. The two go hand in hand.

If you have a passion and love for JSA, you might consider how training informally will affect the JSA you love as a whole.

I'm sure I'll get blasted by some for my view on this, but my guess is that most serious students of JSA will agree. Take that for what it's worth. If qualified instruction is not available, and travel to qualified instruction is not possible or convenient enough, then I would recommend pursuing the academic part of JSA for now and training in another martial art for the time being. That would show respect for the sword and it's history more than trying to teach yourself.

For the record, I respect the strong desire to learn JSA often expressed on this list and others, but there are simply certain realities that must be acknowledged. Some may have to sacrifice more than others to follow their desire or passion, and that is just life.

**

There is one big problem with historical reconstruction: there is no way to test it accurately to verify the effectiveness of the reconstruction as it was once used historically.

What kind of weapons and techniques would the art be used against? On what kind of terrain and weather conditions? Which techniques were effective against which type of opponent and weapon? How much of what was recorded in each country was untainted by patriotism or politics? Were there any fighting formalities or taboo (like those found in Kamakura jidai battles in Japan, for example) that may be widely unknown? How did the culture of the country at that time affect battles?

And most importantly,

What subtleties and intangibles are missing that can't be gleaned from limited records?

Now, someone will be quick to state that this applies to all extant combat arts that use obsolete weapons today, which is a valid point. But in *theory*, there is one major difference.

In most cases there is an unbroken line of direct transmission of the art (or at least the techniques and principles, directly or indirectly) that can be traced back to those that lived and used the techniques/systems in combat. There is of course no guarantee that these arts have survived or been adapted accurately, since as I mentioned, there is no way to conclusively test them now. But, there is a reasonable chance that anywhere from some to most of these arts curriculums have retained critical subtleties and principles that are often transmitted directly, orally, to future inheritors.

It is this potential for direct transmission and oral teachings that separates reconstruction from (at least many) surviving ryu-ha and JSA.

FWIW, I actually think historical reconstruction is a worthwhile endeavor in the absence of a continuously transmitted art. The process and results can still be very telling and significant. But I would hasten to put absolute authority in the methods being reconstructed since even the best records will have gaps and inaccuracies.

No guarantee's all around, but with historical recreation you can be pretty confident that significant elements and factors (historically at least) have been missed.

**

It has been my experience that those who have gained substantial experience in JSA under qualified instruction agree that it is not possible to reach the same level of expertise or knowledge they have without the guidance of a qualified instructor, and the benefit of centuries of trial and error transmitted through their art (whether technically a koryu art or not). Their opinion may have been different before undertaking formal instruction, but after years of formal instruction, in retrospect, they concur that there are many important things they were previously unaware of that could only have been learned through direct transmission.

I've met several people who are exclusively or primarily self taught (a couple are well known names), and they all have certain bad habits in common. They are the same bad habits that the majority of beginners in the dojo share as well, including myself when I first started.

While it may be possible to learn to fight with a sword if given enough time to experiment with one, there are two important factors to consider:

1) the self-taught student will suffer considerably more injuries than one who is being supervised by a qualified instructor. In an art that uses three foot razors, this is a BIG consideration.

2) the self taught student cannot reach the same level as a student who has studied formally and attained a reasonable level of proficiency. This is because the formal student has the benefit of their instructors knowledge and experience, as well as the practical R&D that has been transmitted through the tradition line. Much of this is oral, and only taught to direct disciples.

In a day where most people do not *need* to learn swordsmanship for purposes of combat or self defense, it does not make sense to me to undertake the significant risks (for the students as well as anyone they practice around or with) of injuries and accidents from self study. If swordsmanship is not available in your area, and the prospective student is not willing or able to make larger sacrifices to train formally, then it seems to me that Karate or another locally taught art would be the most logical compromise.

From these excerpts I suppose it is clear what my position is. However, I'd be interested to hear the comments and opinons of others.

This has proven to be a volatile subject, so I would ask that we all try to contribute to a polite discussion.

Respectfully,

Nathan,

I'll have to second your opinion here and offer my thanks for posing this serious question on the discussion board. In the past, accusations of elitism have been bandied about concerning this with elitism being defined more like snobbery. At times there can be a fine line defining elitism & snobbery... and some JSA practitioners are snobbish but thats not really the subject here is it. What we are really discussing here is whether qualified, safe and responsable instruction is demanded to produce talented, safe and responsable practitioners. Practitioners who accurately reflect the talent and ideals traditionally associated with the highest level of JSA.

I say move to a qualified teacher if you can't find one near by. If you are really serious this is no big deal. People do it all the time. If you can't or won't move, wait to start training until you can. If you never move to find instruction you shouldn't begin to start with. I know that sounds harsh to some but.....hey.......this isn't basket weaving. You can really screw yourself or someone else up swinging a razor sharp sword around like you're Errol Flynn or Toshiro Mifune. That's just plain nuts!

I wanted to learn photography, so I went to the Brooks Institute and moved to Santa Barbara. It cost me fortune. Why should sword work be any different. If you want something, move to the source. Don't fake it.

(Sorry if I insulted any basket weavers. All the basket weavers out there, please forgive my slight.)

Tobs

[George Kohler]

Hi Nathan,

Sorry for intruding but can you tell us what JSA stands for and what it is?

[George Kohler]

I thought it was some type of Association

[Nathan Scott]

Another option is to host a seminar with a qualified sword instructor. If there is no qualified instruction in your area, I reckon that you can go to it or you can bring it to your own area. Occaisonal training is still beneficial.

Takeda Sokaku from Daito ryu managed to produce (at least) several highly skilled Budo-ka through travelling around teaching in a seminar fashion the majority of his life. Not easy learning, but it can be done if the student is trains seriously enough.

**

Mr. Kohler, sorry about that! JSA (Japanese Sword Arts) has been tossed around a bit over the last couple of years, and I thought maybe it had become a common abbreviation - but I don't think it has yet! (knew I should have spelled it out at least once!)

Thanks for the responses so far,

[Eric Montes]

Nathan,

I must agree with you and Toby on this subject. (I would include other other weapons as well, but that is for another day.)

What scares me most in this type of situation is students who, in their earnest pursuit of JSA mastery, begin teaching others after only a few chances to learn a technique themselves.

But to answer Nathans questions directly:

1) No, students with formal training will generally have a greater understanding of the system in question. A gifted athlete is just that, a sensei (coach in athletic situations) be able to assist that athlete to greater achievements.

2) Without all the cultural baggage (both good and bad) that accompanies formal JSA study, I feel that it would impossible to claim any sort of "Japanese Cultural Asset" status. A self taught person (even if fluent in Japanese) may not have the correct context to place the sword arts in the modern world. None of the teachers that I met in Japan made claims of being a modern day samurai, but the arts of the bushi were a part of their lives nonetheless.



Hope this made sense.

Eric

[Howard Quick]

Hi Everyone,
I totally agree with everything being said here. Although I have only been involved in JSA for a short time, I have been involved in Jujutsu for a much longer period.
It shows how serious a student/instructor is by the sacrifices they are willing to make in order to gain the appropriate instruction.
I don't expect everybody to make the sorts of sacrifices I do but I don't think they will achieve the same level of understanding in thier chosen field if they sit back and wait for the instruction to come to them.
Two years in a row I travelled to Europe to attain instruction from a man I regard as the best, most highly qualified Jujutsu instructor alive today. This cost me about $30,000. Thats Aussie dollars(about $19.95 US).
Now as the Australian representative of the International Shinkendo Federation I will be travelling to the US at least once a year(yep!...sorry Nathan).
I reckon I could buy a pretty good car for that sort of money. As I said I don't expect everyone to do the same, but an hours drive to a respectable dojo is too much for some.
I also believe that the trips to Europe put my Jujutsu ahead of my peers by about 10-15 years. You could not do that from self study(books, video's etc...)They are a great training aid but that is all.
Great subject Nathan..et Al
Best wishes
Howard Quick

[Robert Reinberger]

Mr Scott,

my answers to your questions first:

1. No
2. b.) (You will become "part of the problem", if you stay with it)

That means, I agree with what you've said.

Now about what I've experienced:

I already had about a decade of Budo training, when my interest in Japanese sword arts has reached a level, that prompted me to do something. As I didn't know about a place for proper instruction (and I knew a lot of what was around, in my area), I started self-training, mainly with ZNKR Seitei Iai, because of the amount of informations and material that was available, regarding this subject.

So I trained using books and videos, and even had the opportunity to train some Aikiken and Iaido at mixed seminars, and did this for about 5-7 years. On my club's website I still have some photos showing me in that stage of my training (I think I shouldn't hide them, because this was a part of my personal development and way). I finally found a place, and commenced formal Iaijutsu training (not ZNKR Iaido) in 1989. Therefore I can give my personally experienced impressions regarding the differences.

In 1989, I had a certain advantage compared with other beginners, regarding the knowledge of theory, concepts, history, technical terms etc. I even had advantages regarding patterns of certain Kata.

However, what I've learnt where patterns of movements, without proper basics. That is, even on the seminars where I encountered ZNKR Seitei Iai, only pattern where taught, as opposed to proper suburi and other "Kihon - knowledge". The important details of forms, rythm, as well as "how to swing a sword properly" and other important parts weren't disclosed to me prior to the formal training, even if I knew some of them in theory. And even with proper instruction I still needed more than a year, to begin making correct Tenouchi, for example.

But anyway, I wouldn't go so far to say: "I'm an asset to JSA", nowadays.

I think you can learn something through self-training in this arts. But it isn't very much.

Regards,
Robert

[pgsmith]

Hi all,
I don't post much here because I learn more from the more experienced folks that graciously share their knowledge on e-budo. That being said, I have to chime in on this one as it is one of my personal hot button topics. Our school is affiliated with the Parks and Rec. department and we are listed in their catalogue. Because of that, we get alot of people that sign up to be 'The Highlander' or become an 'Instant Samurai' (just add water! ). Often times these people have read many books on the subject and will show up with their sharpened stainless steel 'gin-yu-wine sam-oo-rye' swords and swing them around to show us what they have taught themselves. When this happens it scares me to death! They usually tend to argue with what we are teaching (that's not what it said to do in this book!), and get upset with the slow pace of learning the basics of the Japanese sword. While there have been a couple that have stuck with it and become good students, most of them drop out after a short time because it takes a long time and lots of repetition in order to learn proper basics. In every case I have had of individuals that were self taught, they had things that they were doing wrong, and had been for a while. They had to not only learn the proper way, but unlearn what they had already made into a habit. I have heard the most prevalent argument (Musashi taught himself) many times, to which I always ask them how many sword fights they have engaged in to test what they are teaching themselves. In conclusion (finally!) I have to state my strong opinion that unless you are truly a fantastically gifted individual, you should not try to teach yourself the Japanese sword.
Sorry about the long and rambling rant folks, I told ya'll that it was one of my hot buttons!

Cheers,

Granted I am basically just repeating everything everyone else said again, the fact that both Mr. Picorelli and myself tried to use Musashi as an example for why it CAN be done makes me think that this little explaination could be usefull to others that are trying to explain it all to people like me.
-Begin Quote-
Well, I have to completely agree with what Mr. Kleinert said at the end of his opinion, that it could be possible for someone to learn Kenjutsu alone however, it would be _highly_ unlikely. I used to think in the same way you are thinking, that if I had enough time I could sit in my backyard doing nothing but thinking about strategy night and day until I had created an art. You want to test whether you are able to do this or not? Ok, here is what you do: Go learn the very basic rules of chess, only the basics so that you can play a game. Now, go find a man named Bobby Fischer. Challenge him to a match of chess, and if you beat him on your first or second try, I would say you are a natural at strategy as Musashi must have been, and I would support your endeavor to learn Kenjutsu by yourself.

What I am trying to say is that if you aren't a natural strategist you probably will not be able to accomplish the things Musashi did (assuming he existed and accomplished what the legends say he did) and I suggest you go about learning Kenjutsu the way everyone else does.

On another point, the reason I believe Musashi is accounted as such a great man is because he was able to use his fighting style with such flexibility. (Remember Im saying things that may go way over my head, so take this as my thoughts, and as my humble opinion) Anyone who was intelligent enough to _create_ his own sword art and have it tested as flawless time and time again must also remember exactly why he performs each and every little itty bitty action. In Shinkendo, (Im sure it is this way in any JSA) when we end a kata, we step backwards with our left foot first. Why? Oh, it must just be a Japanese traditional thing.. right? Wrong. You step back with your left leg so that if your enemy happens to still be alive, you are in a position to draw your sword... whereas if you stepped with your right leg first, you couldn't draw without cutting your leg or stepping back another time. It is just the little things that some people don't see that would get you killed on a battlefield.

So, granted it would be nice to be able to create your own sword art, seeing as you would know why you were doing each and every thing. It would also be almost impossible for anyone without a natural affinity to strategy.
-End Quote-

I hope someone can use this.

--Gary Hill

BTW, if it wasn't obvious, I have since withdrawn my "Musashi argument" and I agree with Nathan.

I also have to say that I am very lucky to have found these online message boards before I tried to teach myself. My friend bought his own katana and his "JSA" is the extent of the Battoho Cardboard Boxgiri which is funny and disturbing at the same time. I suppose someday I will might have to tell him that hes doing it wrong and that he needs to go see a Sensei.

I suppose this topic could be placed in the "anime influenced" box of topics along with the sakaba.

Mr. Scott & friends,

I would have to ask one question. How can anyone who is "self-taught" actually be practicing any sword art? I guess I'm thinking out loud here, but I can teach myself to throw and catch a ball, but I'm not playing baseball until there are others participating with me.
The mere act of picking up a katana and swinging it around--even if I'm copying something I read in a book or saw on a video-- wouldn't actually be a JSA, would it?
I think too many times people (even well meaning individuals with a true desire to learn something) forget the true nature of doing any martial art, or anything for that matter, requires some type of study other than self study. Can you be a watch-maker without studying the art under some one. Sure you can get the pieces and put them together and "make a watch" but does that act make you a "watch-maker". I can fix my toilet, but no one in their right mind would call me a plumber!!
Sure someone with an ability to learn visually, and with decent body control can copy something they see on a video but no one would, or should, think that they are participating in a martial art. I think about a line from a movie I saw where one of the characters said something like--"I sing in my underwear but it doesn't make me Madonna".
One last reference to the Musashi story--I totally agree with Mr. Scott, first of all we don't really know the fact from the fiction and secondly at that time in Japan it would be hard to believe that he didn't learn at least the basics of some martial art, as the story has it that he was a footsoldier in an army. Very different from someone in America where there is no "culture of the sword" deciding that he/she can pick up a sword and is actually doing an art.
Richard

You are facing several difficulties here.

1. If you want to learn "traditional Japanese swordsmanship", you need to start with a
highly qualified teacher of a "traditional" school. There are a now a few (underline the
term "few") of these outside Japan...but they are still as scarce as hen's teeth.

2. If you are lucky enough to train with one of those individuals, you'll be coached through
the physical and mental disciplines that are preserved today by the koryu in Japan. If you
work at it enough years, you may even attain some proficiency.

3. However, to really get the flavor of classical sword training in Japan, you'll have to
eventually spend some time there. The traditional Japanese schools (koryu) are just that; they
are JAPANESE. You'll have to learn the language, eat the food, and work at understanding AND accepting
both the modern and traditional culture. In fact, you'll spend a lot of time there eventually
if you really want to commit yourself to one of those traditions. [Yeah, expect to lose out on
the fast track of career and employment in your home country because you'll be spending a lot of
time as an expat in Japan.]

4. Does this make you proficient in the techniques of your chosen ryu? Hopefully so if you've
trained hard.

5. Does this make you ready to take over the headmastership of the ryu? No. 99.999% of the time
the Japanese would never consider a non-Japanese for that...especially in Japan. (The other
0.001% of the time is when the current headmaster was drunk and made a mistake when he said that.)

You might, however, pick up a mokuroku or menkyo after a number of years of hard training.

6. Are you ready for the battlefield? Probably not. Even in Japan its the rare sensei who
can go beyond the "preservation" mode that most of the koryu are in and really delve into
the combative application of their curriculum. They're definitely there, they just aren't the
easiest ones to find...or join up with.

7. Is it worth it? ...Yeah.

[Nathan Scott]

Welcome to e-budo Mr. Hall. Nice to see you here contributing.

[damn spell-check!]

Regards,

[Mance Thompson]

This is a very interesting thread and since its pure conjecture, here are some thoughts. Oh and I know a basket weaver from South Carolina who makes baskets in the Gullah tradition that sell for tens of thousands of dollars.


1) Perhaps

2) Depending on the results of 1, such a person's contribution could be vital.

I think too many assumptions were made with how one looks at self training as compared to training under "qualified instruction(which again is scarce, how many practicing JSA are actually training under a qualified instructor-and how do you quantify and qualify this, in other words qualified to what)." Examining the myths surrounding the traditional Japanese martial arts(or arts of other countries for that matter), are we to believe that Gods or tengu spoke to select men and showed them the theories or techniques that over the generations, formed the foundation of their ryu? Though there may have been those who perpetuated such myths because they didn't want to give credit to their real teacers, there also had to have been men with little or no training in sword or other arts that through trial and error, managed to create the arts that are now venerated. It's almost like the chicken and egg question but who came first, the teacher or the inventor? We also read of bushi who were taught a little and then told to go out into the world and make the knowledge that they had been exposed to theirs. Again, self training. Nathan makes a good argument for why not to uncritically believe all the tales about Musashi, but at the same time, could not this same argument be used to discredit the scrolls handed down in koryu?

Even with the knowledge of the past(and knowing that at some point, these arts changed greatly as fashion, function, and culture adapted to the societal changes brought about over time), why would we assume that the modern Japanese exponent knows any more about the combat applicability of any of the traditions that they expose than the self taught exponent? Clearly, such a sensei would undoubtedly know how his/her particular system viewed the sword, but considering all the variations in technique, strategy, etc. that one sees in the koryu, wholly buying into one system as having all the answers is a tad myopic.

Even being fortunate enough to study with a master of a sword art doesn't guarantee that the pupil will ever achieve a similar skill level. Language and physical ability, drive, dedication, and so many other factors would have to be analysed to properly discuss this issue. These are the qualities one knows that the lone practicioner may possess if they are willing to sacrifice so much to try and recreate for themselves what the other student has easy access to.

I would take exception with assuming that the person training alone is automatically going to be doing so in an unsafe, non-methodical method. Though there are those who do. Also, for anyone who was self-taught in any endeavor, it stands to reason that you would have a different perspective on learning and would not rest on your laurels since you know that any skill and knowledge will only come through hard work, creativity, and perhaps lucky encounters with someone who could share what they know with you. A far more difficult task than sitting at the foot of the master and being handfed the information. Though we know their journey would be more treacherous, we also have seen from experience how few of those who study with truly great instructors reach a respectable level of skill. If someone had the drive and passion to develop their ability and were lucky and talented enough to reach a level of skill in Japanese swordsmanship, then how could we think that their contribution to the art would be anything short of amazing and important.

The original concerns were:

1) If you try to teach yourself "Japanese Swordsmanship" without formal qualified instruction/guidance…do you think it is possible to reach a comparable level to those that have trained formally?
2) would you be aiding in the preservation and continuation of an important "cultural asset"


My assumption here is that "Japanese Swordsmanship" refers to sword-oriented combative systems that were created and evolved in the era in which the sword was a primary battlefield weapon. That era ended in 1873. Consequently, systems that have been created more than a generation after that time have had little or no "field experience" in their curriculum.

In this traditional view, one would have to become a student of a traditional ryu in order to become proficient in the curriculum of that ryu. Becoming a member of a traditional ryu in Japan takes a good deal of effort-even for the Japanese. A ryu in Japan is as much a social system as it is vehicle for the preservation and practice of "ancient fighting techniques." All of those social interactions-oral transmissions, trips to shrines, watching seniors and juniors of varying abilities, history and legends privy to the ryu-all of that nexus creates the environment in which the student trains. Without that, I don't see how one would be able to faithfully reproduce, for example, the okuden of Maniwa Nen Ryu. Yes, you might be able to watch a video and approximately imitate the movements; they might even be more or less effective. But are you performing Maniwa Nen Ryu oku technique? No.

What you would be doing is creating the new Joe Blow system, based on watching a single (or several) performances of Maniwa Nen Ryu on video. Is it "effective"? Maybe, maybe not. You haven't tried it in battle. (But I assume that's not your purpose anyway.) Do you fully understand the implications of the techniques you are imitating? No.

Are you "aiding in the preservation and continuation of an important 'cultural asset'"? That depends on how culturally important the new Joe Blow system is! As for "preserving and continuing" Maniwa Nen Ryu (or whichever ryu you are imitating)-Baloney!