Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2006 17:59:56 GMT
hey all, i am confused. i dont really understand 1) how many types of japanese sword arts there are 2) what they are called 3) what they entail and how they are effective in fighting
ive hear all kinds of different names, but i dont know what they are about.
here is my background and opinion. i have studied jeet kune do for almost a decade, i have weapons training in many different weapons, however i have been a big fan of katanas my whole life, and i want to learn to use them. NOW, coming from jeet kune do, which is very practical, and doesnt rely on scripted choreography (which i have noticed in a lot of instructional kendo videos), i would like the same kind of practicality in training with a katana.
any and all comments welcome. thanks
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2006 19:52:28 GMT
Okay, here we go:
Kendo - Mondern(gendai) Japanese Sword Art. Lit. 'Way of the Sword'. This is comparable to sport fencing. There are stylized Kata that represent different sword principles, but the matches are very very un choreographed. They win matches on a point system, with touches, not cuts.
Kenjutsu - Literally 'Art of the Sword'. There are many many ryu(styles) that are all considered under this blanket term. One could also argue that modern kendo is also Kenjutsu by definition of the term, and vice versa. This is not a common connotation though. Most kenjustu styles are Koryu(traditional/historical styles). There are hundreds of such styles. The most popular, and arguably the most effective are 'Yagyu Shinkage Ryu'(The Yagyu family new shadow school), and 'Ono-ha Itto Ryu'.
Iaido/Iaijutsu - These arts have a similar relationship to Kendo/Kenjutsu. The former means "The way of drawing(the sword)", the latter means 'The Art of Drawing(the sword)". As with most japanese arts with similar nomenclature, the '-do' art is primarily concerned with the development of the practitioner as a human being and martial artist, whereas the '-jutsu' art is more primarily concerned with Practicality, Efficiency, and the Development of the Art itself(this is a generalization). Iaido practice usually involves many stylized kata with iaito(blunted swords commonly made of an aluminum-zinc alloy, not steel) or live blades(shinken), practice in drawing and cutting in the same motion, as well as cutting targets(usually Goza(rice mat) or Bamboo). Kata are done with the primary focus on matching your opponent's movements, and being as precise as possible, rather than pure speed of execution.
Battojutsu - Synonymous with Iaido, but generally the focus is more on drawing/cutting and the performance of good cuts rather than in the kata.
Shinkendo - Lit. "way of the practical sword' or, with some liberty 'The REAL way of the sword'. A gendai variant of Kendo with more emphasis on real sword technique, rather than competition with shinai.
Aikiken - A codified set of suburi(practice cuts), blends(awase), and Kumi-Tachi(paired sword work) developed by Morihei Ueshiba(founder of Aikido) and codified by Morihiro Saito of the Iwama Shrine. Aikiken movements(particularly footwork) trace their lineage to Yagyu Ryu kenjutsu, which Ueshiba studied. The goal of aikiken is to establish a link between weapons forms and unarmed forms in the martial arts as one and the same. While you won't become an expert champion sword-fighter through it's study, you will become very familiar with things like Ma-Ai(timing and distancing) and Blending, both important in real sword-work.
If you want to learn to be a hot-shot with a sword, study Kendo. If you want to be able to cut with great form, study Iaido. If you want to learn how to hit a guy while avoiding getting hit by him, take Kenjutsu. If you want to be a real swordsman, take all of them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2006 22:43:11 GMT
Adam, that is great information. We probably need to sticky a reference thread here in the Japaneese section where we can post this sort of information and then Paul can come around and clean up the thread.
Can you post some pictures or diagrams or the different types of Japanese swords. Most of us are only familiar with the famous katana, but I know there are different variantions with different names.
I have some more questions related to Japaneese swordmanship that you might be able to answer. I have read that the Samarai in Japan had a very restricte way of dueling. Only certain areas of the body where target areas. Can you expand on this.
Is there anytime, such as war, that allowed for hitting anywhere? Are there any modern forms that mirror traditional Japaneese dueling? Are there any the mirrior all out warfare? I am guessing that both would fall under Kenjutsu.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 0:36:47 GMT
Well I read somwhere that when the Samurai dueled they used bokkens (not always though ).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 3:06:16 GMT
I don't think there were any restrictions on targets, as in the kendo kata there are forms that involve attacking the wrists and forearms, and in certain Iaido and kenjutsu forms there are attacks to the legs.
If a couple samurai were dueling and using Bokken then it wasn't a true duel, which could almost be viewed as a legal action in itself, and were almost always to the death.
Miyamoto Musashi said he never lost a duel, but the account where Muso Gonnosuke beat him(bokken vs. jo) is documented. This leads me to believe that since neither party died, it was not a duel to the death, and thus not a real duel.
Musashi himself is the only account that I know of where one used a not-sword in a duel. In fact, in musashi's final duel, he carved an oar from his row-boat into a giant bokken to beat his adversary, who was also a swordsman prodigy. Kojiro(his opponent) used an O-dachi, which roughly translates as 'Great-Sword' - an oversized two-handed Katana. Knowing that a normal sword would not afford him the reach necessary to win, Musashi carved the oar(the only thing around that would suffice) to use for the duel.
According to the story, Korjiro's cut was close enough to cut musashi's headband but not get musashi himself. Fortunately for Musashi, he bonked Kojiro pretty good and won.
As for Arts that mirror the duel or all-out warfare...that's tricky. Most kenjutsu ryu are more duel oriented than not, as(like I said in another post) on the battlefield spears and bows were more primary weapons than the sword. The japanese sword was, like the rapier, more of a dueling weapon than not. At advanced levels, i'm sure kenjutsu employs forms that include multiple attackers, but probably not more than 2 or 3.
I know for a fact that in Iaido/Iaijutsu, there are cutting forms where they set up a rice mat with bamboo core, and then cut in a prearranged form, often multiple cuts per mat, in a certain order. More difficult cutting forms involve the cutting of several mats, usually set up around the practitioner to simulate needing to turn and fight opponents on multiple sides. While not a perfect combat drill, it's really the best they can do, and it's still helpful, as it teaches how to cut with good form in rapid succession against targets at varied angles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 14:14:08 GMT
Interesting what you wrote about Kendo. I think that is the more common fighting practiced. Now you say, they use a point system of touches, no cuts. I was under the impression that they were frull body armor and used full power and speed. Glade you cleared that up for me. I guess part of the confusion is that the names are less common for us English speekers. I think with time and continous discusion, the rest of us European swordmen will become more aquianted with the oriental sword arts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 16:48:38 GMT
wow thats some great info adam, thanks alot for taking the time to write all that. may i ask what you study?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 20:25:49 GMT
If you want to be a real swordsman, take all of them. Oh great. Thanks Adam, here I was deliberating on whether to take KenJutsu or Kendo, now it turns out I gotta do 'em all. I'll just install a great big drain in the bottom of my bank accounts... Fiery Red
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2006 22:48:06 GMT
The reason I say take all of them is because no one art encompasses all there is to real swordsmanship. A real swordsman should be able to duel, battle, cut, do forms, know the principles...etc.
In kendo, they wear a large helmet (called 'men', which as I understand it means 'head' or 'front), a large hunk of body armor like a breastplate called 'Bogu', and thick, usually deerskin gloves called 'Kote', which means wrist or hand. Up until one makes it to Shodan(first degree black belt), only hits to the top of the head, the lower sides, and the wrist are counted as points. Furthermore, you must kiai(shout) the name of the target you're hitting as you hit it, to show that you had that intention. Lastly, only the last 6 inches or so of the shinai(bamboo sparring sword) counts. If you hit with any other part of the weapon, it doesn't count. After black belt, kendoka(kendo practitioners) are allowed to gain points by 'Tsuki', which means thrust. All this is judged by officials who surround the combatants(usually 3 of them in a triangle). Whenever one calls a point, they all signal with flags whether or not a point was scored. So it's kindof a vote between the officials as to which points are awarded and when.
As a separate form of training, there are a number of paired kendo kata done with bokken, which are wooden swords(or sometimes iaito or shinken) that express the different principles in japanese swordsmanship.
As for me, I've not had much truly formal training. I've trained in kendo with my best friend for years(who is a blackbelt holder in both Kendo and Toyama Ryu Iaido). That and I've had experience learning from different other sources, for example, my former bishop at my church had years of experience of Escrima. Also from church, my Priests Quorum advisor did brazilian Ju-jutsu. An old friend of my family is a vietnam vet and taught me a lot about knife-fighting and machete fighting. I trained a lot with those guys, and I practice with my weapons everyday, as well as study books and internet sites. Formally, I've been doing aikido(iwama ryu) for quite a while, but that's it as far as formal training goes. My aikido sensei grew up with different martial arts, and has experience in Tai Chi, Muay Thai, and Systema, along with Aikido. He often mixes in things from other systems as he feels it his responsiblity to acknowledge as much as he can. A member of our dojo is a 5th dan in Kenpo and also studied judo, and he and I have also worked out extensively. Other than that I wrestled in middle/highschool and boxed in a club for a semester.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2006 0:33:09 GMT
Well I read somwhere that when the Samurai dueled they used bokkens (not always though ). A bokken is a weapon. In right hands it is as dangerus as a blade. Many samurais used a bokken against a shinken (real sword) and won. A bokken at high speed WILL crush a skull.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2006 5:06:34 GMT
I'm well aware of that, I just hadn't heard of any samurai preferring to use a bokken for a duel to the death when a shinken was available to them, with the exeption of Musashi. And to be a samurai, one had to have a sword, it came with the title.
I've worked with bokken and shoto, and even the smaller lighter ones are deadly, let alone a dense white oak one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2006 5:27:18 GMT
An odachi is a horse sword. I'd've gone with a katana. The blade is short, true, but he can't swing such a huge sword when I am right on top of him.
Take koryu. Real koryu doesn't cost much. I practice it for free.
L.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2006 7:04:03 GMT
*sob* Oh, oh frak all you guys.
Red John -who goes out into his backyard to hack apart defenseless water bottles in imitation of real trained swordsmen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2006 12:18:36 GMT
May I just say that an Odachi is a katana... =P
Please refer to a daito if you mean a regular longsword =P Shoto if you mean short sword and tanto if you mean really small. Thank you.
Katana simply means sword, even a bokken is a katana. I remember last time I went to japan and said that a bokken wasn't a katana, almost got my head kicked in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2006 0:40:55 GMT
I was under the impression that 'katana' meant longsword. Wakizashi means 'sidesword', and Tachi means 'sword'. Bokken means 'wooden sword', and bokuto means 'wooden weapon'. Shinken means 'real sword', and Iaito means 'Drawing Sword'.
It's strange because Ken, Tachi, and the suffix '-to' all mean sword, but can also mean different things in different situations. for example, 'tachi' can mean 'standing' in certain context.
I think what I was trying to say was very clear, that Kojiro was an undefeated swordsman who used a really really long sword almost supernaturally fast. He was a prodigy in the realm of swords, as Mozart was a prodigy in music. To beat him, Musashi made himself a really big 'bokuto' out of an oar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2006 2:43:32 GMT
I was under the impression that 'katana' meant longsword. Wakizashi means 'sidesword', and Tachi means 'sword'. Bokken means 'wooden sword', and bokuto means 'wooden weapon'. Shinken means 'real sword', and Iaito means 'Drawing Sword'. It's strange because Ken, Tachi, and the suffix '-to' all mean sword, but can also mean different things in different situations. for example, 'tachi' can mean 'standing' in certain context. I think what I was trying to say was very clear, that Kojiro was an undefeated swordsman who used a really really long sword almost supernaturally fast. He was a prodigy in the realm of swords, as Mozart was a prodigy in music. To beat him, Musashi made himself a really big 'bokuto' out of an oar. SS_Viator is technically correct in that "katana" means, literally, sword. It doesn't matter how supernaturally fast he was with the sword. The fact remains true that the odachi (in question) can only move so fast and in certain ways. Unless he was 10 feet tall, had four arms and three legs the principles remain true. L.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2006 6:27:12 GMT
Well he was undefeated in dozens of duels against proficient and highly skilled samurai until Musashi came along to beat him. I don't think I'm going too far in saying that no one alive today could beat him in a duel - principles or no.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2007 2:42:05 GMT
Muso Gonnosuke beat Musashi with only a stick !! Maybe that makes Kojiro look even worse in a swordsmans point of view. Muso was a very profficient swordsman as well as with many other weapons, However , even the best swordsman in the world could have a bad day !! I'm having one now ! Also how do you know that the swordsman of today are crappier than back then. I would quite happily duel with people if I thought I wouldnt spend the rest of my life in gaol if I was to win !!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2007 16:15:21 GMT
I just look at how people trained back then compared to today. Even the most traditional martial artists don't commit themselves quite as much as those guys back then... thousands of suburi, hours of training every day no matter what. Also, and take this for what you will(but I think it has a impact), even if a guy today trains the same art the same amount as a guy back then, there was a certain reality back then of "If i'm not the very very best I can be, I'll be killed", and that I think has certain motivations on a person.
Muso initially lost his duel against musashi. Some claim he initially used a sword, but others say he was using a bo. Musashi used his niten ichi ryu and blocked in an 'x' shape and prevented Muso from withdrawing his weapon, and so musashi beat him. those that believe he used a bo say he cut it in half so he could withdraw it in a later duel(so the length wouldn't hinder it), and then he developed jo techniques. Others believe he made the jo from scratch with the intent of having more range than a normal sword, but still short enough to be versatile enough to use both staff and sword techniques with.
I think he went on to beat musashi in his second duel, but that fact is disputed as musashi said he 'never lost'. I think when musashi said that, he didn't count rematches, because for all intents and purposes he had the right to kill Gonnosuke, but didn't, which would have prevented his later defeat. Another explanation is that musashi only counted duels to the death. Either way, a veteran of a conservative count of 60 duels is quite impressive, and Kojiro had a similar record. I count them in the same class as guys like Sokaku Takeda, Morihei Ueshiba, Bruce Lee, Peter Ralston, etc. Natural prodigies. Like what mozart was to music.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2007 0:08:58 GMT
As far as I know, Musashi "never lost a duel with any other swordsman". Because Gonnosuke wielded a Jo he wasn't classed as a swordsman( Although very profficient with a sword).They had both agreed it was not to the death . Personally I am glad I don't live in a time or land that would require me to be the best and carry a sword at all times ! However all history was not as hostile as it may seem, it was only in times of turmoil that people would have to sharpen their battlefield skills . There were wars that went for 100 years , but there were also times of peace that lasted hundreds of years.
|
|