|
Post by aarona on Jul 31, 2016 20:10:43 GMT
thank you, its greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by johnwalter on Aug 1, 2016 13:21:00 GMT
Perhaps the best thing would be for you to come and watch a training session. " I would expect this response from a good dojo. I think at this point you'd be much better off going and watching a couple classes first.
|
|
|
Post by aarona on Aug 2, 2016 14:32:42 GMT
thanks guys! I intend to check at least 2 of them!
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 2, 2016 15:14:52 GMT
Perhaps the best thing would be for you to come and watch a training session. " I would expect this response from a good dojo. I think at this point you'd be much better off going and watching a couple classes first. Not directed at John's comment at all, which i agree with wholeheartedly, but to OP. Beginners are easily impressed, so I would advise also checking out the school's (the ryu, ryuha, or the federation if it is a do) standing on the stage, and then also if you can adhere to the practice method, you like the dojo, fellow students etc, as John says. To a beginner the inventions are often are more appealing than the real ways. Lots of people have wasted years because they were impressed from a position of ignorance.
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 2, 2016 16:04:30 GMT
"We train in Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto ryu which covers a number of disciplines, from using bokken, bo, naginata, ryo-to and kotachi. There is also an iaijutsu component. Much of our practice is based on fighting against armour-wearing opponents. Perhaps the best thing would be for you to come and watch a training session. " Thoughts? I'd go the znkr route, but the katori you mentioned does offer another route, it is nominally a koryu. Albeit less regulated, and rather more open to abuse, imo, than the omori/muso that forms the backbone of the znkr. Which is why I say "nominally" for katori, it could be koryu, but you would have to refer back to the very same school that taught you. There is no objectivity. As a federation of schools you could be surprised by the bloodthirstiness of the curriculum which fall under the umbrella of the znkr, these are the best schools of iai. Their techniques are especially cruel, to us, and the ZNKR'S 12 kata are all you really need to know, in this day and age, to ruin someone's day if they step-in to your zone, if that is a driver of your desire to learn japanese swordsmanship.
|
|
|
Post by aarona on Aug 2, 2016 18:07:00 GMT
"We train in Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto ryu which covers a number of disciplines, from using bokken, bo, naginata, ryo-to and kotachi. There is also an iaijutsu component. Much of our practice is based on fighting against armour-wearing opponents. Perhaps the best thing would be for you to come and watch a training session. " Thoughts? I'd go the znkr route, but the katori you mentioned does offer another route, it is nominally a koryu. Albeit less regulated, and rather more open to abuse, imo, than the omori/muso that forms the backbone of the znkr. Which is why I say "nominally" for katori, it could be koryu, but you would have to refer back to the very same school that taught you. There is no objectivity. As a federation of schools you could be surprised by the bloodthirstiness of the curriculum which fall under the umbrella of the znkr, these are the best schools of iai. Their techniques are especially cruel, to us, and the ZNKR'S 12 kata are all you really need to know, in this day and age, to ruin someone's day if they step-in to your zone, if that is a driver of your desire to learn japanese swordsmanship. I agree, I am leaning toward the Znkr route. As it that is my driver to learn it. Thank you for your help Jammer!
|
|
|
Post by Richard Arias on Aug 3, 2016 8:31:33 GMT
I want to learn whatever is more combat orientated as opposed to sporting. I dont know very much, perhaps nothing haha, but from what I can gather kendo is more sporty then the rest? I am told kenjutsu/iaijutsu, are that battle field techniques? Again, forgive me If I sound stupid. The ZNKR kata were made so kendo students could learn Iai. From a combat standpoint there is much to be lacking in any kind of reality use be it a classical combat sense or modern combative use. Yes the sword has not been standard war issue since 1945 but that is not because it isn't a viable weapon. You have to Decide if you want to learn for the ART in the Sense of self perfection or the Martial Sense of Self protection. Sword techniques have a lot of improvised weapons possibility.
I would look at the Toyama School near you. Modern Toyama Iai batto dojos wont teach you to kill as in the old days and history of the style. But the Kata were used in combat in the last days of the sword in Modern warfare in the Time of automatic weapons. Unlike all these Koryu being pushed toyama has a wealth of Military training knowledge still around if you look. Problem with Koryu is that the techniques have changed so much in their history that no one knows why or when. With Toyama that can still be found as far as why and when.
Kendo can be pretty cutthroat. It was taught at the Military Academies in Japan from 1873 through the end of WW2. In fact it was taught as a part of the Toyama military curriculum and it has been noted by Senior Iai and Kendo masters that students who cross train in both kendo and Iai rise through the ranks quicker. You can find the Kenjutsu in Kendo and Toyama if you work at it. The military used to have competitions during the war with kendo gear being called "kenjutsu".
You should spend time in thought in this. Because I have seen too many people with a high brow look and view because they train in an "old style" I once met a Kashima Shin Ryu sensei (one of the oldest styles) who said "with Kashima Shin Ryu you will never lose, if you lose you are not using Kashima Shin Ryu." The ZNKR kata is great if you want just art, but for use it lacks in some areas.
|
|
|
Post by aarona on Aug 3, 2016 11:19:54 GMT
For the martial sense, no interest in the art. So what would you suggest?
Thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 14:42:41 GMT
I want to learn whatever is more combat orientated as opposed to sporting. I dont know very much, perhaps nothing haha, but from what I can gather kendo is more sporty then the rest? I am told kenjutsu/iaijutsu, are that battle field techniques? Again, forgive me If I sound stupid. The ZNKR kata were made so kendo students could learn Iai. From a combat standpoint there is much to be lacking in any kind of reality use be it a classical combat sense or modern combative use.  Yes the sword has not been standard war issue since 1945 but that is not because it isn't a viable weapon. You have to Decide if you want to learn for the ART in the Sense of self perfection or the Martial Sense of Self protection. Sword techniques have a lot of improvised weapons possibility.
   I would look at the Toyama School near you. Modern Toyama Iai batto dojos wont teach you to kill as in the old days and history of the style. But the Kata were used in combat in the last days of the sword in Modern warfare in the Time of automatic weapons. Unlike all these Koryu being pushed toyama has a wealth of Military training knowledge still around if you look. Problem with Koryu is that the techniques have changed so much in their history that no one knows why or when. With Toyama that can still be found as far as why and when.
    Kendo can be pretty cutthroat. It was taught at the Military Academies  in Japan from 1873 through the end of WW2. In fact it was taught as a part of the Toyama military curriculum and it has been noted by Senior Iai and Kendo masters that students who cross train in both kendo and Iai rise through the ranks quicker. You can find the Kenjutsu in Kendo and Toyama if you work at it. The military used to have competitions during the war with kendo gear being called "kenjutsu".
      You should spend time in thought in this. Because I have seen too many people with a high brow look and view because they train in an "old style" I once met a Kashima Shin Ryu sensei (one of the oldest styles) who said "with Kashima Shin Ryu you will never lose, if you lose you are not using Kashima Shin Ryu." The ZNKR kata is great if you want just art, but for use it lacks in some areas.
That sensei was 100% right. A comprehensive system founded on true priciples cannot fail, it can only be failed. I think you're reading arrogance into a benign statement. Sensei there is basically saying if you don't make any mistakes, then you you don't make any mistakes. The opponent won't have anything to attack. If he does it is because you did something wrong. The self perfection and self protection are inherently intertwined, they are the same thing. Trying to make a distinction between art and practicality is a fools errand. Look at what an art looks like. Do you want to do that? Then do it. Don't want to do that? Do something else. If nothing matches your desire, then either change your assumptions or accept that you probably won't find what you want. What does battlefield sword even mean anymore? Get shot by the guy with the gun? Execute the helpless prisoner afterwards?
|
|
|
Post by aarona on Aug 3, 2016 15:20:02 GMT
Not sure, I was just watching vids and reading up on things, and a few vids had mentioned iaijutsu was more battle field orientated as opposed to kendo.
Like I said I know nothing, so if I come across as silly, My apologies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 16:27:22 GMT
No worries about being silly, the thing is you can take the most "battle-field" combative thing in the world and turn it into an ascetic practice and make it meditation. Or you can take a non-combative art and do brutal things with it, you as the practitioner get to make that call in how you apply it. I really think the best thing to do is look at the people practicing the art - do you want to do what they do, and move the way they move? Then jumping in with them is likely to help get you there. If it doesn't pass that test, then it might not be the way to go.
If the thing you are studying is grounded and a true sword art, then you won't really be able to make an easy distinction between what is "cultivating the self through the sword" and "killing / stopping the other guy from killing" because they are inherently linked together. If it isn't a good offense / defense, then the development of the self is a lie. If the development of the self is true, then it will result in a proper movement that will do what it needs to do if everything is done correctly. If you do it wrong, don't understand what you are doing, or do what you think is the right thing in the wrong place, then you broke it and like that sensei said, you aren't doing X-ryu anymore.
My thing about asking what the battlefield even means is to hopefully get people thinking. It means different things to different people, even in contemporary war. Fallout to the contrary, war does change and what tactics worked in the civil war didn't fly for WW2 and those lessons don't necessarily help in the GWOT or whatever it is being called today. The guys in the Middle East have a different mission and different challenges than the guys doing WW1 trench warfare or clearing islands in WW2. Figuring out where you want to be is going to help you get into the right place.
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 3, 2016 20:03:37 GMT
I want to learn whatever is more combat orientated as opposed to sporting. I dont know very much, perhaps nothing haha, but from what I can gather kendo is more sporty then the rest? I am told kenjutsu/iaijutsu, are that battle field techniques? Again, forgive me If I sound stupid. The ZNKR kata were made so kendo students could learn Iai. From a combat standpoint there is much to be lacking in any kind of reality use be it a classical combat sense or modern combative use. Yes the sword has not been standard war issue since 1945 but that is not because it isn't a viable weapon. You have to Decide if you want to learn for the ART in the Sense of self perfection or the Martial Sense of Self protection. Sword techniques have a lot of improvised weapons possibility. Not at all, Richard. The ZNKR kata are, to all intents and purposes, identical to their koryu counterparts. Where are you getting this information from? Mae is identical to koryu mae, except for the chiburi and seme, ushiro is the same, all the kneeling 4 ways ae the same. I'm sure im exhausting the conversation if I said that kesa giri is the same as koryu, also znkr ukenagashi is from omory ryu from kneeling and traces all the way through to standing ukenagashi - a vital block, I'm sure you would agree. There is no difference between znkr kata and the koryu, except that there are grading points in znkr. The federation bends over backwards to ensure that the kata are from the respective koryu.
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 3, 2016 20:12:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 3, 2016 20:24:48 GMT
For the martial sense, no interest in the art. So what would you suggest? Thanks. I would learn mae (front) and ushiro (rear) from omori ryu, or znkr iaido. I would also learn kesa giri from znkr kata. If I wanted to distill the domestic Self-defence elements form the arty bits. I'd tag on morote tsuki actually, for domestic defence. It means a two handed thrust, always a useful technique if limited, vertically.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Arias on Aug 3, 2016 23:39:26 GMT
The ZNKR kata were made so kendo students could learn Iai. From a combat standpoint there is much to be lacking in any kind of reality use be it a classical combat sense or modern combative use. Yes the sword has not been standard war issue since 1945 but that is not because it isn't a viable weapon. You have to Decide if you want to learn for the ART in the Sense of self perfection or the Martial Sense of Self protection. Sword techniques have a lot of improvised weapons possibility. Not at all, Richard. The ZNKR kata are, to all intents and purposes, identical to their koryu counterparts. Where are you getting this information from? Mae is identical to koryu mae, except for the chiburi and seme, ushiro is the same, all the kneeling 4 ways ae the same. I'm sure im exhausting the conversation if I said that kesa giri is the same as koryu, also znkr ukenagashi is from omory ryu from kneeling and traces all the way through to standing ukenagashi - a vital block, I'm sure you would agree. There is no difference between znkr kata and the koryu, except that there are grading points in znkr. The federation bends over backwards to ensure that the kata a That is kind of my point. If the Gendai ZNKR kata are identical it says something about them both. There are many from the Nakamura-HA Line that doubt the combat use of seated kata when not being done with a Kodachi. But that is because Nakamura was a wartime instructor and while he studied Omuri Ryu he learned the Jissen Budo of the Toyama Military Academy. Yes MJER Is a style that dates back 500 plus years, but what the military discovered from the war use of Gunto no Soho and Toyama is that its techniques as they stand now most likely don't because of the Seated nature and over use of Shinchokugiri. The military could have just taught MEJR or Omuri, Niten Ichi, Yagyu style ex. But that is my point also. Through combat and refining Toyama came to be what it was mostly around 1939. Shooting Has a similar problem in that target shooting is similar to combat shooting, but the practice and techniques are very different because their intent and use is night and day. Even modern Toyama schools suffer from this syndrome.
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 5, 2016 18:47:45 GMT
Hey richard, the ZNKR is a way of grading the koryu muso family of schools that already exist,the kata diverge minimally.
To become competent at these schools takes about 10 years, or in Dan terms for the znkr it is 4th dan. This is the crucial Dan. Or the 10 year mark.
To become proficient in, say, hyoho niten ichi ryu kenjutsu (not their bo etc, just the kenjutsu) takes about 7 to 10 years.
This is not a very expedient way of teaching an NCO how to perform the sword basics, in the context of machine gun/explosive warfare.
This is what toyama ryu was invented for, to teach NCOS to not be clueless with a facsimile of a katana in a few weeks. For instance, there is no such thing as toyama ryu kenjutsu.
Toyama ryu needs to be preserved, and I respect those that do that, but it is, and always was, an anachronistic exercise in jingoistic pride boosting. It is not a viable system of swordsmanship, other than as a path to the older schools.
Do you genuinely think that the Japanese, post-restoration, military heirachy, suddenly realised, in the face of airborne bombing, machine guns and warships, that the katana was a viable weapon,and the Way should be refined to make a new ryu, to face this tech onslaught. And that that school is bound to be the pinnacle?
|
|
|
Post by Richard Arias on Aug 5, 2016 19:35:17 GMT
Hey richard, the ZNKR is a way of grading the koryu muso family of schools that already exist,the kata diverge minimally. To become competent at these schools takes about 10 years, or in Dan terms for the znkr it is 4th dan. This is the crucial Dan. Or the 10 year mark. To become proficient in, say, hyoho niten ichi ryu kenjutsu (not their bo etc, just the kenjutsu) takes about 7 to 10 years. This is not a very expedient way of teaching an NCO how to perform the sword basics, in the context of machine gun/explosive warfare. This is what toyama ryu was invented for, to teach NCOS to not be clueless with a facsimile of a katana in a few weeks. For instance, there is no such thing as toyama ryu kenjutsu. Toyama ryu needs to be preserved, and I respect those that do that, but it is, and always was, an anachronistic exercise in jingoistic pride boosting. It is not a viable system of swordsmanship, other than as a path to the older schools. Do you genuinely think that the Japanese, post-restoration, military heirachy, suddenly realised, in the face of airborne bombing, machine guns and warships, that the katana was a viable weapon,and the Way should be refined to make a new ryu, to face this tech onslaught. And that that school is bound to be the pinnacle? Jammer, Kenjutsu is an umbrella term used pretty often by Nakamura sensei in his books in describing Toyama swordsmanship and inter divisional competition during WW2. I don't think any sensei has the final say what is or is not something that is a general term. It was even used by Takayama Sensei for his version of Toyama for the Navy. Your talking about ranks and standards set by post war dojo's. Many feel that Toyama persevered many samurai spirits and methods more than dojo styles. And depending on what side of Martial you stand on it kinda true and on other points it isn't. Toyama taught in the academy was 6 months and it was enough. But the OP stated the wants function over form. And that rules ZNKR and MEJR out in his need for training
|
|
|
Post by jammer on Aug 5, 2016 20:19:32 GMT
Toyama ryu was invented 200 years after the last meaningful koryu style, and it was designed to train inductees, that weren't already koryu kenjutsuka, how to hold a katana.
The sword was rarely, if ever, used as a primary battlefield weapon, even in the 17th century, what on earth makes you think that it could suddenly become a useful thing for an NCO to learn in readiness for a battle against an aircraft carrier and its entourage of marines, missiles and automatic Firearms? And so why would this style be the superior?
|
|
|
Post by nddave on Aug 5, 2016 20:53:43 GMT
Toyama ryu was invented 200 years after the last meaningful koryu style, and it was designed to train inductees, that weren't already koryu kenjutsuka, how to hold a katana. The sword was rarely, if ever, used as a battlefield weapon, even in the 17th century, what on earth makes you think that it could suddenly become a useful thing for an NCO to learn in readiness for a battle against an aircraft carrier and its entourage of marines, missiles and automatic Firearms? After reading through all this back and forth it seems you're more insistent on being right in a off topic argument of traditionalism vs non-traditionalism, rather than direct the OP to a school better suited for his interests. The OP has already specified his disinterest in more traditional schools so why push the argument towards them? It'd be no different a situation had he asked for a cheap katana and a member kept pushing a high end katana, all the while arguing with other members offering options for cheaper katana. It doesn't matter if one is more "real" than the other if the OP isn't interested in the first place! All Richard was doing by suggesting Toyama was two things, 1) There is a Toyama school in his local vicinity. 2) That upon his knowledge and research Toyama school would be more suited for the OP and his investment/interests in learning a sword art. I think this is the point you've been missing in Richard's replies to you and why your apparent agressiveness seems off topic and more something between you and Richard (seen in previous threads you've argued with him in, namely the Wakizashi thread) that has less to do with helping the OP and more to do with "measuring blade lengths". If you catch my drift. I still feel John's suggestion of visiting the schools available and getting a feel for them is the best advice. There's more to a school than just the art taught, there's the teacher, the assistants to the teacher and students. As well as more basic things like fees, building and equipment conditions and location to home. The "greatest sword art" school in your opinion could in fact have poor conditions and worse unfriendly environment in his location and in fact not be the "greatest sword art" school for him to join. You're whole "what style is best" argument I'm just going to try and stay clear of because these types of arguments are nothing more than immature pecker measuring contests normally instigated by ignorant or arrogant (or both) practitioners or fanboys. Fact is there is no one true style nor is there one right way in any form of martial arts. To have such a mindset further complicates your personal gain from the martial arts as well as constricts the adaptiveness and growth of martial arts in general. Sure there's merit in preserving the traditional arts in modern times (as a form of historical preservation) but to constrict the evolution and growth of martial arts is negative and even goes against the evolutionary growth of these schools' past histories. Again no martial art is exact or complete and none of them ever got to their current prominence all in one day. They grew and came to be over hundreds of years of practice and evolutionary growth.
|
|
|
Post by johnwalter on Aug 7, 2016 14:02:20 GMT
I'm trying to stay out of this ridiculous thread.Its a damn shame the OP has to deal with such foolishness. Again a I say go check out the class and meet the teacher.You'll learn more than you are learning from these comments pulled from books and flat out stupid "my art is the best" comments. Aarona has asked for help finding a school to fit his idea of what he wants,thats it. At this point I'm just gonna laugh and move on.This thread died many posts ago.
|
|