Thread: "Muto"
View Single Post
Old 03-05-2005, 08:09 PM   #19
David Humm
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 269
United Kingdom
Re: "Muto"

Kent, thanks again for your continued dialogue although your line of questioning is almost akin to your fellow e-budo member who virtually accused me of being a fraud simply because I choose to use the sword as an integral part of my Aikido study, I'm bordering on finding that slightly offensive.

Given that you mention e-budo in a recent last post I think I should continue and clarify that following a conversation with Mr. Owens on that forum, I actually altered the wording on my dojo website from "Iaido" to "Batto-ho", I did this because I accepted his point that in the 'scheme of things' it appeared as if I was teaching "iaido" as a separate discipline (which I do not). I will also point out that I am a member of an organisation here in the UK which had Kazuo Chiba Sensei as its technical director for over ten years, we (though not necessarily all) are therefore influenced by his weapons philosophy, myself included. Perhaps when you visited my website you may (or may not) have noted that the (now entitled "Batto-ho") page is (and always has been) presented very much as part of our 'Aikido study' in that; it explains why we study it... and I quote just one short paragraph to illustrate my point...

"Batto-ho may be studied for the same reasons as weapons work with bokken and jo: for what it reveals the roots of Aikido as a martial art." - Kazuo Chiba

Personally I feel you like others on e-budo don't like people (like me for instance) using the term Iaido or batto in the context of Aikido study and development, and I quote from an e-budo post to me... "Do you do real iai or something else?" Just like me asking if your aikido is the real aikido or something else because I study Aikikai and look down on other forms. Isn't it ?

Anyway, I may well be doing you an injustice and apologise if this is in fact the case however; this is the impression I have from posting just two polite questions on the e-budo sword forum and, your responses here.

I posed a question here to gain some knowledge on a particular subject which is of a great interest to me. I did this to enable the writing of a short but hopefully informative document which would (does) accompany a series of lessons for my students on the subject of tachi-dori/Muto application. As I clearly stated it was not intended to be a definitive article and, as you pointed out was a shade linear in its thinking concerning styles etc. (point duly noted, thank you.) Taking this into consideration anyone reading the 'draft' would understand that I am no expert (nor do I purport to be) and was merely attempting to widen both my own outlook and that of my students in a particular subject.

Given that we were all beginners at some point, I am somewhat amused at your comment about my desire to give my students "half" a chance in learning the maai required, in essence a starting point in the basics...

Kent Enfield wrote:
"Do you explain to your students that no half-way competent swordsperson would give them that {"half a.."} chance?
...They already realise this, as they do with their aikido studies, no adversary is going to allow technique to be simply applied on them.
Kent Enfield wrote:
...If you do, then great. If not, then I think you're running the risk of building a false expectation among your students"
As you identified, my article and the lessons with it, are an attempt to "thwart" that expectation, but, we all have to start somewhere, and basics is where that's at.
Kent Enfield wrote:
So what of the above are you including in your "over ten years Iai study"? Is that ten years of long distance study in the BKA, or 6 months in the BKA, 6 months with your aikido organization, then 9 years of self-study? You'd avoid a lot of this confusion if you simply didn't list "Batto-ho" as if it were a separate art alongside aikido and karate on your dojo's website.
Does this entirely matter how that period is constituted? Obviously to you here and others over at e-budo it does. I have taken studies of iaido over a period of ten years and I will continue to do so whenever I get the opportunity, does this mean I'm not a student of iai because I don't train with an instructor every week? No, does this mean I can't integrate the knowledge I have gained directly into the study and practice of Aikido? Absolutely not. Additionally please tell me why in your opinion "confusion" occurs because I choose to have a page dedicated to batto/iai in the context of an Aikido dojo. Remembering, I claim no grades, state no experience in Iaido but do go to great lengths both on other pages of the site and on the batto-ho page to explain why we choose to use the sword (in addition to bokken) within our studies.

</sense of humour re-engaged>



Last edited by David Humm : 03-05-2005 at 08:19 PM.
  Reply With Quote