Did O-Sensei Misinterpret the Meaning of "Budo"?

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[aikishrine]

Is it at all possible that O'SENSEI misinterpreted the meaning of Budo? Based on some of my reading Budo has a different meaning among the Japanese thought, than what O'SENSEI taught. This could very well be my misunderstandings of O'SENSEI'S teachings though. Just looking for your opinions.

[Janet Rosen]

IMHO there is no one "right" definition of any term in any given culture. Every person brings his own filters based on experience, beliefs, expectations, priorities, world view....

[Nick]

Budo means "Martial Ways". The etymology of the kanji suggests some things a bit deeper (please see Dave Lowry's Sword and Brush for more), but... I don't really see aikido is not a "Martial Way." It's a pretty broad term.

You're gonna need some specifics.

[acot]

You know, I've never given much thought to it. A very interesting discussion indeed. Although, since we only can go by what he taught and wrote most of it will be pure speculation.

[Carsten Möllering]

Hi
Is it at all possible that O'SENSEI misinterpreted the meaning of Budo? Based on some of my reading Budo has a different meaning among the Japanese thought, than what O'SENSEI taught. This could very well be my misunderstandings of O'SENSEI'S teachings though. Just looking for your opinions.
In which way or direction do you think Uehsiba misinterpreted the meaning of budo?

There are much parallels to his interpretations in other arts like katori shinto ryu e.g.
So I don't see any difference.

It's more that modern westerners misunderstand his interpretations by using his words like "love", "harmony" etc. but interpreting them in a modern, western way, I think.

That "budo is love" is a very old saying. It isn't something invented by O Sensei.

Carsten

[crbateman]

Any time one mixes ideologies and literal translations, and then further complicates them with cultural factors and the passage of time, you will get a discussion for which there are numerous points of view, each with its own well-supported argument. You are also likely not to be able to come to any tangible solution. What is more important is what it means to you.

[Ron Tisdale]

Is it at all possible that O'SENSEI misinterpreted the meaning of Budo? Based on some of my reading Budo has a different meaning among the Japanese thought, than what O'SENSEI taught. This could very well be my misunderstandings of O'SENSEI'S teachings though. Just looking for your opinions.

Hi Brian (please don't hit me with a stick ;)),

I need to ask what you think Ueshiba Sensei's interpretation of Budo was?

What do you think the general interpretation of Budo is?

What do you base those thoughts on?

Then I might be able to address your question better. To get some common understandings I would recomend 'Budo Training in Aikido' [Budo Renshu], and Donn F. Draeger's 'Martial Arts and Ways of Japan' series. Those would give us a reasonable starting point (although I do think Draeger went a little far in his demarcation between Budo and Bujutsu).

Best,
Ron

[aikishrine]

Hi Brian (please don't hit me with a stick ;)),

I need to ask what you think Ueshiba Sensei's interpretation of Budo was?

What do you think the general interpretation of Budo is?

What do you base those thoughts on?

Then I might be able to address your question better. To get some common understandings I would recomend 'Budo Training in Aikido' [Budo Renshu], and Donn F. Draeger's 'Martial Arts and Ways of Japan' series. Those would give us a reasonable starting point (although I do think Draeger went a little far in his demarcation between Budo and Bujutsu).

Best,
Ron

A stick, ouch:D

It just seems to me that O'SENSEI really puts an emphasis on love and peace in regards to his idea of Budo, which i whole heartedly appreciate and follow, to some degree. But it is my understanding that Budo "martial ways" is a more war like term. Like i said though i am probably completely wrong, or just uneducated enough at this point to make an educated decision about this. That is why i am asking for input to help me out.

[Ron Tisdale]

Definately read those that book and the series by Draeger. Also, there is a good list of books at Koryu Books web site. Keiko Shokon is one of my personal favorites.

A lot of the Aikido/Budo is love you'll find in Ueshiba's later thoughts. The prewar material gives it a good balance.

Best,
Ron

[Josh Reyer]

In that case, no Ueshiba did not misinterpret the meaning of "budo". The idea of budo being about love and peace goes back to the earliest schools of Japanese combat. The Japanese martial traditions that we have today were born in a period of prolonged warfare, and finding a way out of the cycle of violence was a major theme. Iizasa Choisai Ienao, founder of the oldest surviving kenjutsu school made the statement "The ways of war are the ways of peace" a primary mission statement of his ryu, as well as the idea of "defeating the opponent without drawing your sword."

The only real difference on this score between Ueshiba and most other martial traditions is that typically the "love and peace" was of a Buddhist variety, while for Ueshiba it was an Omoto-kyo variety.

[Carsten Möllering]

In that case, no Ueshiba did not misinterpret the meaning of "budo". The idea of budo being about love and peace goes back to the earliest schools of Japanese combat. The Japanese martial traditions that we have today were born in a period of prolonged warfare, and finding a way out of the cycle of violence was a major theme. Iizasa Choisai Ienao, founder of the oldest surviving kenjutsu school made the statement "The ways of war are the ways of peace" a primary mission statement of his ryu, as well as the idea of "defeating the opponent without drawing your sword."

The only real difference on this score between Ueshiba and most other martial traditions is that typically the "love and peace" was of a Buddhist variety, while for Ueshiba it was an Omoto-kyo variety.!
Yes, that is my understanding too.

In "Budo" of Ueshiba O Sensei which is of 1938 you find both: "Budo is love" and also "If your opponent really attacks strike to his face with all your power." (Cited by heart.)

And also the katori people learn both at the same time: The idea of "defeating the opponent without drawing your sword." and they also to use their swords very well.

As I said: It's our understanding of love and harmony which creates a misinterpretation, I think.

Carsten

[Ketsan]

Hi Brian (please don't hit me with a stick ;)),

I need to ask what you think Ueshiba Sensei's interpretation of Budo was?

What do you think the general interpretation of Budo is?

What do you base those thoughts on?

Then I might be able to address your question better. To get some common understandings I would recomend 'Budo Training in Aikido' [Budo Renshu], and Donn F. Draeger's 'Martial Arts and Ways of Japan' series. Those would give us a reasonable starting point (although I do think Draeger went a little far in his demarcation between Budo and Bujutsu).

Best,
Ron

It's not a "stick" it's a jo. :D

[Ron Tisdale]

If Sensei hits me with it, it is a jo...If Brian hits me with it, it's a stick! :D :D
Best,
Ron

[aikishrine]

If Sensei hits me with it, it is a jo...If Brian hits me with it, it's a stick! :D :D
Best,
Ron

Actually Ron if i hit you with it its by accident;)

[Ellis Amdur]

Ueshiba is truly the first to use the word "love" - ai - in relation to budo. Furthermore, "peace" is not the peace that most folks seem to think. Peace is a well ordered realm. The Tokugawa period, the most perfect totalitarian society ever constructed, was the budo ideal. And there were 200,000 executions in that 300 year period, with such acts as a person buried up to their neck, with a bamboo saw placed beside them and any passerby could take one cut. And that after one was beheaded, the executioner had a side business of cutting out the executees liver and selling it to convert into home remedies.
The budo peace - sure, it had things like TSKSR's ideal of being so centered and powerful that the duel didn't start - but the larger purpose was that, thereby, society would not be disrupted.
Ueshiba's interpretation of budo was both orthodox (he,t oo, supported peace in the realm) and revolutionary (spiritual renaissance in the service of harmonizing the realms of heaven and earth.
Ellis Amdur

[Peter Goldsbury]

In "Budo" of Ueshiba O Sensei which is of 1938 you find both: "Budo is love" and also "If your opponent really attacks strike to his face with all your power." (Cited by heart.)

Carsten

Are you sure you have the right book in mind? You mean the training manual for soldiers, right? Any references?

PAG

[jxa127]

The budo peace - sure, it had things like TSKSR's ideal of being so centered and powerful that the duel didn't start - but the larger purpose was that, thereby, society would not be disrupted.
Ueshiba's interpretation of budo was both orthodox (he,t oo, supported peace in the realm) and revolutionary (spiritual renaissance in the service of harmonizing the realms of heaven and earth.
Ellis Amdur

Ellis and Peter,

I recall reading, I think in Dynamic Aikido by Gozo Shioda, a comparison of the "philosophy of aikido" to the tenets expressed in the Seventeenth-Century text, The Life-Giving Sword.

Was that connection just something that Shioda (if I have the correct author identified) saw, or did O Sensei also refer to the life-giving sword?

Regards,

[brUNO]

Budo is Love, God is Love; therefore God is Budo (or vise-versa)? Sorry, I guess not all of mathematics' formulas work in Budo.

I have posted this before... ( and because no one contradicted it and I would like to know either way if this is true or not) so I'll post it again.

To the best of my limited understanding, Aikido was founded officially in circa 1942. It is a modern Budo distilled from ancient sword schools. Post-war Japan was not allowed to openly practice weapon-based/violent martial arts. Many schools were banned and some Ryu retreated into secret practice in the mountains or monasteries. Aikido was one of the few Budo that was allowed to continue openly. I think this was because the kanji was conveniently translated as "The way of Peace and Harmony" and because of statements like "Budo is Love". These were convenient translations, but that doesn't mean they are not still true.

If there are scholars/historians here that can deny/confirm this I would love to hear from you!!!
[I have it in my notes but not sure where the source lies. I think (not sure) I got some of this history from Pascal Krieger, Sensei's book on "Jodo, The way of the stick" (I no longer have the book, just notes I took from it). He gave a lot of history of Budo in that book, but the stuff about Aikido practice in post-WWII Japan was from a seminar I attended on Aikido.]

I have heard other paradoxical sayings like, "the cut that saves lives" and "the killing mind" that don't necessarily have violent or "killing" attributes. I don't think these were from O'sensei, but they are from Budo. Aikido was derived from sword-based arts yet we don't do the techniques with swords but by following the same principles with our bodies. The fact that we cut with our spirit/mind/body and not a sword, could be ..."Love". (?)

I agree with some of the posts above that as foreigners to Japanese culture we miss a lot in the translation/interpretation. John Stevens, D. Draeger and Pascal Krieger were just a few men that immersed themselves in the Japanese culture and have a better understanding than we "gaijin". I saw that Prof. Goldbury had posted so that's why I came to this thread, I was hoping he had shed some light on the matter. So, would you please, sensei?

Onegaisumasu.

[Fred Little]

Ellis and Peter,

I recall reading, I think in Dynamic Aikido by Gozo Shioda, a comparison of the "philosophy of aikido" to the tenets expressed in the Seventeenth-Century text, The Life-Giving Sword.

Was that connection just something that Shioda (if I have the correct author identified) saw, or did O Sensei also refer to the life-giving sword?

Regards,

Hiya Drew:

I'm not Ellis or Peter, but suffice it to say that the folks I know who practice Yagyu-ryu sword view the doctrinal presentation of many contemporary aikido shihant regarding "The Life-Giving Sword" as an "interesting" misreading that has more to do with the "harmony" = "love" reading of "ai" in "aikido" than it does Y. Munenori's treatise or the role the technical principle plays in the curriculum of Yagyu Shinkage Ryu.

Regards,

FL

[MM]

Budo is Love, God is Love; therefore God is Budo (or vise-versa)? Sorry, I guess not all of mathematics' formulas work in Budo.

I have posted this before... ( and because no one contradicted it and I would like to know either way if this is true or not) so I'll post it again.

To the best of my limited understanding, Aikido was founded officially in circa 1942. It is a modern Budo distilled from ancient sword schools. Post-war Japan was not allowed to openly practice weapon-based/violent martial arts. Many schools were banned and some Ryu retreated into secret practice in the mountains or monasteries. Aikido was one of the few Budo that was allowed to continue openly. I think this was because the kanji was conveniently translated as "The way of Peace and Harmony" and because of statements like "Budo is Love". These were convenient translations, but that doesn't mean they are not still true.


From memory, so I may have some things wrong ...

Ueshiba's main martial influence was Daito ryu. His main spiritual influence was Oomoto kyo. You can probably generalize that those two are the foundations to Aikido -- not distilled from ancient sword schools.

The name "aikido" might have been officially recognized in 1942, but that doesn't mean the art was founded then. :) Ueshiba adopting the name, yeah, okay. Founding his art? No, I think he started doing that a little before 1942. We know he was teaching Daito ryu up until maybe 1935-ish. I don't recall off hand when he stopped. His experiences with Oomoto kyo were well on their way by then, too. So, the timeframe between 1935 and 1942 really can cover some amazing history with Ueshiba.

I thought that the ban on martial arts after WWII wasn't an overall ban at all, but just that they couldn't be taught in schools? I'm pretty sure the DNBK wasn't banned. And I doubt it's as simple as some martial arts were allowed to practice because they were "ways of peace and harmony".

EDIT: Found this article
http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_svinth_1202.htm

Off-Topic:
Couldn't help myself, but I laughed when I read this part:
Along the way, tournament judo came to be described as a waste of time, kendo was derided as dancing with bamboo rods, and kyudo was ridiculed for being hopelessly out of date.

[Carsten Möllering]

Hi
Are you sure you have the right book in mind? You mean the training manual for soldiers, right? Any references?
I refer to

Morihei Ueshiba: Budo, Teachings of the Founder of Aikido, Kodansha International, Tokyo 1991 (Paperback Edition 1996)
English Translation by John Stevens

I always assumed, that not only the photos but also the text belong to the training manual of 1938. Isn't that correct?

I refer to the following passages:

p32:
"Our enlightened ancestors developed true budo based on humanity, love, and sincerity; it' heart consits of sincer bravery, sincere wisdom, sincere love, and sincere empathy.These four spiritual virtues should be incorporated in the singel sword of diligence training; contnatly forge the spirit and body and let the brilliance of the transforming sword ermeate your entire beeing."

p34:
"... those sincerely training inother forms of budomanifest teachings that reflect the grand dsign of heaven and earth and lead to enlightenment. Hence the virtues of bravery, wisdom, love and empathy, are united in the body and mind, creating a beautifull valiant sword that directs us to greater and greater realizations."

p43:
"Note: In actual combat, strike your opponent's face with full force."

So Ueshiba himself was not aware to be the first one to connect budo and love?

What am I getting wrong?

Carsten

[jxa127]

Hiya Drew:

I'm not Ellis or Peter, but suffice it to say that the folks I know who practice Yagyu-ryu sword view the doctrinal presentation of many contemporary aikido shihant regarding "The Life-Giving Sword" as an "interesting" misreading that has more to do with the "harmony" = "love" reading of "ai" in "aikido" than it does Y. Munenori's treatise or the role the technical principle plays in the curriculum of Yagyu Shinkage Ryu.

Regards,

FL

Hi Fred! I only called out Peter and Ellis because they'd recently responded to this thread. It's great to hear from you.

So, the The Life-Giving Sword connection to aikido is somewhat tenuous. My follow-up question: how commonly read was The Life-Giving Sword in Japanese martial arts circles in the 20th century?

Regards,

[Fred Little]

Hi Fred! I only called out Peter and Ellis because they'd recently responded to this thread. It's great to hear from you.

So, the The Life-Giving Sword connection to aikido is somewhat tenuous. My follow-up question: how commonly read was The Life-Giving Sword in Japanese martial arts circles in the 20th century?

Regards,

Good question, Drew. Peter has a much better sense of that than I, particularly with regard to what specific texts Ueshiba might have read.

In this case, I would note a few other data points -- a) the Shinkage-ryu scroll that Ueshiba received from Takeda in Ayabe in 1922, b) Takeda's widely documented illiteracy c) Ueshiba's history of appropriating and re-spinning traditional words and catchphrases which he found had surface resonance with his own Oomoto-derived notions of renewing the universe into a closer -- if historcially suspect -- alignment with those notions.

Barring compelling evidence of his familiarity with the text, I would guess he had heard the phrase, likely from Takeda, and then repeated in some of his own three am discourses to freezing uchi-deshi, some of whom subsequently added their own spin when marketing the art in the cultural milieu of the Seventies and Eighties.

Best,

FL

[C. David Henderson]

Did Picasso misunderstand painting?

[brUNO]

The name "aikido" might have been officially recognized in 1942, but that doesn't mean the art was founded then. :) Ueshiba adopting the name, yeah, okay. Founding his art? No, I think he started doing that a little before 1942.

...I thought that the ban on martial arts after WWII wasn't an overall ban at all, but just that they couldn't be taught in schools? I'm pretty sure the DNBK wasn't banned. And I doubt it's as simple as some martial arts were allowed to practice because they were "ways of peace and harmony".
Thank you Mark,
1st question, DNBK? :confused: Que? Onegasisumas.

Yes, I knew he did it B4 '42, that's why I put officially in "quotes". I thought Daitoryu & Shinkage-ryu WERE both sword-based arts? I thought a "Daito" was a samurai who carried two swords? Hmm...

Being banned from schools sounds more correct, now that I see it. I have someone I know who is very knowledgable on Budo history that can clear that up for me.

Thank you for your timely response. I wanted to get my story str8 4 my records.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did Picasso misunderstand painting?

Uh, ....yes! Both eyes on the same side of the NOSE! Maybe Van Gogh would've been better :D :p ?

[Ron Tisdale]

Different kanji I believe, Bruno. There are some good articles on aikido journal that give a good synopsis of the history.

B,
R

[Josh Reyer]

Yes, I knew he did it B4 '42, that's why I put officially in "quotes". I thought Daitoryu & Shinkage-ryu WERE both sword-based arts? I thought a "Daito" was a samurai who carried two swords? Hmm...Daito-ryu is a jujutsu art, not a sword art. Shinkage-ryu is a sword art, but its influence on Takeda Sokaku's Daito-ryu is circumstantial at best. Takeda did study Jikishinkage-ryu, an off-shoot of Shinkage-ryu. However, to my understanding, Daito-ryu does not derive technically from Jikishinkage-ryu. Shinkage-ryu influence on Ueshiba's aikido is negligible.

A "daito" is a term used to describe either a large sword, or the larger of the two swords all samurai carried. However, the "daito" of Daito-ryu is not "large sword", but rather "Greater East".

All samurai, by law, carried two swords, so there was no special name for a samurai who did so. Perhaps you are thinking "daisho", which is a term (meaning "big and small") referring to the two swords they carried.

[MM]

Thank you Mark,
1st question, DNBK? :confused: Que? Onegasisumas.

Yes, I knew he did it B4 '42, that's why I put officially in "quotes". I thought Daitoryu & Shinkage-ryu WERE both sword-based arts? I thought a "Daito" was a samurai who carried two swords? Hmm...

Being banned from schools sounds more correct, now that I see it. I have someone I know who is very knowledgable on Budo history that can clear that up for me.

Thank you for your timely response. I wanted to get my story str8 4 my records.


DNBK = Dai Nippon Butoku Kai. Generally (and the more knowledgeable here will correct me or add details), the martial arts organization of Japan. Um, but there's a whole lot of history with the DNBK.

If you'll note Fred's post about Ueshiba receiving a scroll in Shinkage-ryu from Takeda and Takeda's background in the sword arts, you can start to see the differences in what was later called Daito ryu and Aikido. More specifically, Daito ryu aikijujutsu, not Daito ryu kenjutsu. Or look at it this way ... take a look at all the sword arts of Japan and how they are taught today. Pretty much still sword arts. How is Daito ryu and Aikido taught today? Mostly they aren't sword arts. Big differences sometimes.

So, I don't think you can say that Aikido is "modern Budo distilled from ancient sword schools". You can probably say that Ueshiba had training in some form or another of kenjutsu and kendo and it influenced him somewhat (how much is another debate) in the forming of his Aikido.

[Ron Tisdale]

I have heard different ideas about the pairing of Ono-ha Itto ryu with the Aiki-Budo of Tokimune Sensei. Any contributions along those lines?

Best,
Ron

[Fred Little]

Perhaps you are thinking "daisho", which is a term (meaning "big and small") referring to the two swords they carried.

That's another phrase that should come with a big flashing warning light, since slang usage refers to widespread sexual practices among the samurai, in an oblique anatomical reference to the two "swords" of a samurai and his (often) considerably younger boy-toy, as some unfortunate souls have discovered well after getting themselves tattooed with the kanji in question....

[Ron Tisdale]

Yikes....
:eek:
B,
R :O

[Peter Goldsbury]

Hi

I refer to

Morihei Ueshiba: Budo, Teachings of the Founder of Aikido, Kodansha International, Tokyo 1991 (Paperback Edition 1996)
English Translation by John Stevens

I always assumed, that not only the photos but also the text belong to the training manual of 1938. Isn't that correct?

I refer to the following passages:

p32:
"Our enlightened ancestors developed true budo based on humanity, love, and sincerity; it' heart consits of sincer bravery, sincere wisdom, sincere love, and sincere empathy.These four spiritual virtues should be incorporated in the singel sword of diligence training; contnatly forge the spirit and body and let the brilliance of the transforming sword ermeate your entire beeing."

p34:
"... those sincerely training inother forms of budomanifest teachings that reflect the grand dsign of heaven and earth and lead to enlightenment. Hence the virtues of bravery, wisdom, love and empathy, are united in the body and mind, creating a beautifull valiant sword that directs us to greater and greater realizations."

p43:
"Note: In actual combat, strike your opponent's face with full force."

So Ueshiba himself was not aware to be the first one to connect budo and love?

What am I getting wrong?

Carsten

No, no. I am not stating that you are getting anything wrong. O Sensei's 'aiki is aiki' (matching ki and love ki) references need to be treated with great care and so I am making doubly sure which text of M Ueshiba you are using.

As I have shown before, the introductions of the Budo manual (1938) and the Budo Renshu training manual (1933) are very similar. In the texts you cite, the term appears with other virtues that have come from 'our enlightened ancestors' and these virtues form 'the body into a true sword', which is yamato-damashii (the principle behind the divine sword that manifests the soul of our nation' -- I am using the Stevens translation because it is convenient, not because it is accurate). The entire first section presents a connected argument.

Another wartime text presents the virtues (obviously from 'enlightened ancestors'), which are desirable in warriors, namely, the ultranationalist Kokutai no Hongi (Cardinal Principles of the National Entity of Japan, 1935), which was banned after the war. The question for readers of the Budo text is the extent to which this is coincidental.

This is as much as I have time for at present (I am struggling to finish Column 13 in time for Jun's deadline).

PAG

[Don_Modesto]

That's another phrase that should come with a big flashing warning light, since slang usage refers to widespread sexual practices among the samurai, in an oblique anatomical reference to the two "swords" of a samurai and his (often) considerably younger boy-toy, as some unfortunate souls have discovered well after getting themselves tattooed with the kanji in question....LOL!

FWIW: http://www.hanzismatter.com/

[Buck]

Maybe the answer is O'Sensei didn't misinterpret, rather defined a type. Maybe it is kind of like cooking where recognized chefs add their own style to a standard dish. Oh, say Chicken soup, for the example. The basic ingredients are the same, you start with a chicken broth and pasta, with chicken. What makes it good is how you make the broth, add the spices, and how you make the pasta, and prepare the chicken, and finally add other stuff like celery etc. The stuff you make the soup with isn't what makes the soup it is how you put it all together to make it your own dish.

I think this is really a difficult question. For one is it possible to nail down an exact definition of Budo that is universal, like chicken soup broth? Two, how is it defined what is properly interpreted and what isn't in terms of Budo. Three, what is the standard of budo that we measure everything else by?

Budo is a term I see used in so many ways, from karate schools, mcdojo's. I am not sure how the Japanese really use it or intended it to be used Like, is it a broadsweeping term, an abstract, a catch-all, I don't know? And has the meaning change through the years, did Budo mean something different when it was first used, then what it means today?

Ya, know, I don't know if he did misinterpret the meaning, he could have, it is possible. Personally, I would like to read more in detail from those experts on this. Then I would ask does it matter if he did. I say this cause I don't know what then is the affect upon Aikido.

I guess it all means then what is Aikido then if it isn't a budo?

[George S. Ledyard]

Is it at all possible that O'SENSEI misinterpreted the meaning of Budo? Based on some of my reading Budo has a different meaning among the Japanese thought, than what O'SENSEI taught. This could very well be my misunderstandings of O'SENSEI'S teachings though. Just looking for your opinions.

O-Sensei did not "misinterpret" the meaning of Budo. He redefined his Budo through his creation of Aikido. Aikido is clearly a form of Budo; the Founder always said it was. He also was clear that he knew and intended for his Budo to be different than what had gone before. This is not a "misinterpretation" it is a radical redefinition.

[C. David Henderson]

Like Picasso, in that sense.

[mukyu]

Are we not missing something here in English translation?

Does not the English term "martial arts" translate both into "Budo" and "Bujutsu"?

[Don_Modesto]

O-Sensei did not "misinterpret" the meaning of Budo. He redefined his Budo through his creation of Aikido. Aikido is clearly a form of Budo; the Founder always said it was. He also was clear that he knew and intended for his Budo to be different than what had gone before. This is not a "misinterpretation" it is a radical redefinition.
Hey, George! Enjoying your posts, as usual.

Have you read Friday's article in the conference compendium, Budo Perspectives? It touches on the meaning of Budo and attacks our popular teleological view of it.

(http://www.amazon.com/Budo-Perspectives-Vol-Alexander-Bennet/dp/4990169433/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I35K3YGJZB7DXS&colid=2G9YRQKEK1F9K)

[Ron Tisdale]

I'd like to see that...the link mentions "when it becomes available"...am I missing something?

Best,
Ron (waves to Don)

[Peter Goldsbury]

I'd like to see that...the link mentions "when it becomes available"...am I missing something?

Best,
Ron (waves to Don)

The book was published in 2005. I think I bought mine the following year. :)

PAG

[Peter Goldsbury]

I'd like to see that...the link mentions "when it becomes available"...am I missing something?

Best,
Ron (waves to Don)

Hello, Ron.

Perhaps you are. :)

The book was published in 2005 and I received my copy a short while later (not via Amazon). ;)

Best,

PAG

[George S. Ledyard]

Hey, George! Enjoying your posts, as usual.

Have you read Friday's article in the conference compendium, Budo Perspectives? It touches on the meaning of Budo and attacks our popular teleological view of it.

(http://www.amazon.com/Budo-Perspectives-Vol-Alexander-Bennet/dp/4990169433/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I35K3YGJZB7DXS&colid=2G9YRQKEK1F9K)

Have the book but haven't had the chance to read it all yet. I am usually in the middle of three or four books at any one time. I'll kill six or seven recreational fictions for every serious academic book I get through. They are my "rest" activity. Hope to see you this year some time...
- George

[Walker]

I'd like to see that...the link mentions "when it becomes available"...am I missing something?
(waves to Don)

Ron,
It's published by people associated with Kendo World mag so it comes from Australia.
http://www.kendo-world.com/products.php?s[id]=1&s[cat]=4

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi guys,

:blush: I'll try that link again...sounds like a good one!

Doug, man, it takes a long time to get books from Australia!

B,
R

[Don_Modesto]

Hope to see you this year some time...
- George
Me, too.

The reason I asked about Friday's article was that he suggests that martial arts FROM INCEPTION were of spiritual/antiquarian design. He cites the evidence of injury reports to show that sword wounds were far down the list of relevance to battle. Ergo, as the KORYU BUGEI (even the JU HAPPON BUGEI) center around the sword, their purpose was other than utility.

The way I piece this together is that as MICHI (i.e., the layering of the spiritual onto the secular/the secular as a map of the spiritual), the bujutsu already were budo and Osensei's version of BUDO is pretty much a affirmation of this paradigm, a reformation rather than a revolution. What say you?

Thanks.

[Don_Modesto]

I'd like to see that...the link mentions "when it becomes available"...am I missing something?

Best,
Ron (waves to Don)Waves back!

I got mine through interlibrary loan and copied out what I wanted.

Interesting juxtaposition of Friday's revisionism and the stolid traditional line from the some of the Jpn (I didn't read the whole thing). Wonder how he was received presenting the paper.

[George S. Ledyard]

Me, too.

The reason I asked about Friday's article was that he suggests that martial arts FROM INCEPTION were of spiritual/antiquarian design. He cites the evidence of injury reports to show that sword wounds were far down the list of relevance to battle. Ergo, as the KORYU BUGEI (even the JU HAPPON BUGEI) center around the sword, their purpose was other than utility.

The way I piece this together is that as MICHI (i.e., the layering of the spiritual onto the secular/the secular as a map of the spiritual), the bujutsu already were budo and Osensei's version of BUDO is pretty much a affirmation of this paradigm, a reformation rather than a revolution. What say you?

Thanks.

a) I think that Karl Friday was probably correct...
b) I don't think that most Japanese viewed it that way
so
c) O-Sensei stating it right out loud and in your face was still a revolution

Just look at how entirely impossible it is to get Aikido practitioners themselves to stop trying to make it into a "fighting style".

[Rennis Buchner]

Interesting juxtaposition of Friday's revisionism and the stolid traditional line from the some of the Jpn (I didn't read the whole thing). Wonder how he was received presenting the paper.

While I have no idea how his paper was received at the presentation, I know several Japanese sensei who in general agree with his overall premise. I think his idea is really only "shocking" to those whose primary knowledge of Japan is filtered through our martial arts related hobbies and colored by the whole idea of it being primarily a combative endevour. For most historians I know over here the reaction would be more in the "well duh..." catagory as the transition for fighting arts into the traditional ryuha structure with in the warrior class is just part of a general trend of the times of "packaging" information of all types together into various art forms. The idea that traditional ryuha training was the primary means of training martial skills for use on the battlefield seems (and I believe Friday discussed this as well, it's been awhile since I've read it) to have only take hold in the Edo period. Now within the context of individual ryuha (or even some generations of a ryuha's history based on the personality of the head teacher at that time), some did place more or less emphasis on how combatively effective their methods were, and some ryu (or again teachers) did lean more and more to the "combat as the main focus" type of thing, but extreme levels of sophistication in method, theory and practice of many ryu make them inherently somewhat uneffective for quickly and effectively teaching usable battlefield skills for the everyday troops and seem to have them leaning more towards the realm of mastery for mastery's sake which, while including a heightened ablility to survive on the battlefield, also contains any number of other aims. That is not to say they aren't effective, many of them are devistatingly effective on the combative side of the equation. It's just that the road to reach that level in many case was unrealistically long for the ryu to really be only about combat (keep in mind it is difficult to talk in general about traditional ryuha this way as there is huge range of variety between different schools and their aims).

I think it is a fair arguement that for most of all major ryuha's existence they have been outside of the context of "battle" for most of their history (even the oldest ones you are probably only talking about the first couple of generations who lived in a world where such worries were real), and this loss of the potential of actually having to go and fight and how one might train for such an event, made it easy to think that the more organized and successful "ryuha" bugei where the normal way to train combative skills as there were the method that survived.

But enough about that,
Rennis Buchner