Purpose of Training - the Do versus the Jutsu

[Bill Mattocks]

I realize a lot of people train for a lot of different reasons. Let me just say right up front that I think all of them are valid. I do not intend to tell anyone else what they should be training for.

I will also say that my own reasons for training have undergone several major revisions over the years.

Some train for physical fitness. Whether that is strength training or endurance training, flexibility, cardio or weight-loss, they train to get in better physical condition and to keep themselves fit once they do. And many kinds of martial arts training are pretty good for that!

Some train for self-defense. Some martial arts forms are specifically aimed at self-defense, too. Reality-based training is what I'm thinking of, modern systems based on surviving an attack on the street. Also quite good and I see nothing at all wrong with it.

Some train for sport or competition. There are many martial arts forms that either support the concept of sport activities or are actually based on the idea of competition, and those are also very cool.

Typically, people have more than one reason for training, and different systems sometimes offer more than one format - you can get in shape, for example, AND learn to spar for competition AND learn self-defense skills. It's not always either/or.

Some even train for camaraderie and friendship or fellowship. Once having become used to training with a particular group, it's difficult to impossible to say goodbye and change groups or walk away from training, just because of the close bonds that have been forged over time. That's great also!

I have partaken in all of those reasons for training. And some of them still apply. I certainly try to stay in some kind of athletic condition, and I strive to be in a position to defend myself. I no longer compete, but I think competition is fine, and I am always willing to help out judging or otherwise assisting at a tournament, especially when friends are involved. And I'm very tight with my friends at my dojo; I could not imagine myself training anywhere else.

However, for me, there is more to it than that.

It started for me years ago, when I read about the difference between a 'do' and a 'jutsu' in various online forums and web pages and so on. I really thought of myself at that time as being primarily interested in the art and science of applied violence, rather than the art of unarmed self-defense as a 'way' or 'do'.

Now it seems things have changed for me. I see that in Japan, flower-arranging, tea-making, calligraphy, and other arts are also a 'do' or a 'way'. And this is far more interesting to me than just the hitting, kicking, and so on. I do not propose to become a Zen practitioner or hold tea ceremonies; as much respect as I have for the culture and history of Japan, I am not Japanese and don't pretend to be. I like the hitting and kicking, believe me. But I begin to see that the 'do' of martial arts flows over from the dojo into my entire life. It has something to say about how I interact with others, or more particularly, how I should interact with others but often fail to do. It has something to say about how I do my work, how I think of myself, how I live.

I am not one given to deep introspection, really. I don't wear a monk's cowl or go on soul-searching missions or give myself mystical names or wear sandals and speak in fake accents. I don't even like tea. But I begin to see how my life's journey has brought me to this path, and I find that I like the path I'm on. Yes, I kick and punch. But I also walk along a road that is built of that, and yet which has very little to do with that, in all honesty. It's more about how to be a person and less about how to hurt people to avoid being hurt. It's just that the former includes the latter.

 

[Buka]

Things change. People change, grow, shift and adapt to what's around them. Training goes on - but what people get/learn from that training differs, because people are not a constant, they are entirely and wholly different from one another, even if their Art is just so.

If an Art is this (whatever "this" is) just sit back and enjoy the ride. It's going to be the balls, it really is.

As for tea, yeah me neither. But sometimes you have to share a cup. Just because.

 

[hoshin1600]

Over the years Il have met and worked with many great martial artists. I love the little nuggets of wisdom I sometimes get. When I share them I try to give credit. I can't remember the exact quote but this is the best I can remember.
This is from Larry Tan...
"When I was young I wanted to learn to fight because deep down inside I was a scared little boy. Well now I'm grown up and not a scared little boy anymore so my martial art needs a different reason for me to keep training."
I think that says it very well. I know it hold true for myself. I remember talking with a student once who said martial arts is all about being able to fight. That having that ability really all that matters. So I proposed ...ok so let's say your the best and you can beat up the world, ,now what? What happens after that?

 

[hoshin1600]

Need I say that this is only my opinion, but it is an opinion formed thru the years of learning from those far better than I.

I would like to make counter point to Bills concept. Most think of Do as a kind of Asian 1960's Hippy peace, love and expanding your mind man. The fool on the hill ascetic living in a cave. A polar opposite of aggressive combat behavior. I would argue that this is not Do. That Do is Jutsu but that jutsu is not Do.
If we take the mythology of Miyomoto Musashi as a kind of Jungian archetype study and a template for Japanese thought we may find our understanding of Do to be only a single view of a much broader sense of the word. Takezo was a strong but wild fighter. It was only after Takuan had locked him in a type of solitary confinement surrounded by books did he emerge as Miyamoto Musashi. A name change to match the change of his inner self. Musashi as a swordsman was technically self taught. His teacher Takuan was a Zen monk not a kenjutsu teacher with a known lineage. His contemporary in the myth was Sasaki Kojiro who was the pinnacle of technical swordsmen who had menkyo in Chujo ryu swordsmanship. So we have the epic battle between the technician and the self taught nobody. What makes the story is that Musashi did not study the technical ,he was a student of the spirit, the DO of swordsmanship. It is this Do that makes the fighter. To forge the spirit is greater than having technical ability. In some martial arts we call this shugyo or hard training. You often see pictures of Mas Oyama running barefoot in the snow or doing kata under a waterfall. This is spirit building. Musashi upon watching a top class Geisha performing a dance was asked what he thought and his reply was “flawless, I did not find an opening anywhere to attack” this shows the continuity and commonality between fighting arts and fine arts. It in no way presumes that there is no violence in fighting arts but that there are common traits.
If we read the books of Lt Colonel Dave Grossman he writes about mans inability to engage in lethal combat. That men find a way to not kill to not fight because it goes against our evolutionary core. This is nothing new we can go back to the writings of Ardant Du’ Picq. He states that “man does not do battle for combat but rather for victory and will do everything he can to avoid the first while attaining the second”. he also goes on to note that in most large scale battles in history, the concept of the clash was a myth. One side would always turn and run instead of meeting the enemy. The evidence being that most soldiers were found to be killed by gun shot or bayonet in the back. The conclusion would be then that it takes a lot of fighting spirit to actually face and engage in lethal combat. The Do in fighting arts was not to become a hermit but rather DO is a path to face the danger and ones own death with out blinking in order to come out victorious. In Asia we have swordsmen but in the old west we had gunslingers. One can imagine the two facing off at high noon. The romanticized version is that the winner calmly aims his single shot while the bullets are flying past him. This was the aim of DO to build the fighting spirit. Zen teaches about duality. The duality of grasping on to living while dieing and conversely being preoccupied on death instead of living. (think ,Tim McGraw ‘s country song "live like you were dying") we all will die but the fear of death keeps us from living in the moment. What a lesson for samurai who new that everyday could be their last.
“samurai must live with the fact that it is their job to die”
“go into battle already dead in order to come home alive”
Is it no wonder that the Cherry blossom, a trees flower that blooms only for a short time and then fall away almost immediately would be so ingrained in Japanese samurai culture?
Do is the study and practice of the spirit within human combative behavior. Justu is the technical side, the technique but it is the Do that enables one to engage and use those techniques.
Publius Flavius Vegetius wrote “ A handful of men Inured to war, proceed to certain victory. While on the contrary, numerous armies of raw and undisciplined troops are but multitudes of men dragged to the slaughter” his lesson was that you needed the technical training while Du’Picq taught us we also need "heart" the courage to actually fight. The samurai had Jutsu and Do.

 

[DaveB]

Hoshin, brilliantly explained.

The only thing to add is that Do and jutsu were never meant to be split. Once mastery of technique is attained one might choose to push further by doing kata under an icey waterfall, but until then it is the difficulty and stress of the jutsu: the development of skill and technique, which forges the spirit.

Jutsu leads to Do. Do powers Jutsu.

 

[TSDTexan]

Hoshin... I have to echo you.
This is right along side what you have said:

Katō Kiyomasa was one of the most powerful and well-known lords of the Sengoku Era. He commanded most of Japan's major clans during the invasion of Korea (1592–1598).

In a handbook he addressed to "all samurai, regardless of rank" he told readers that a warrior's only duty in life was to:

"...grasp the long and the short swords and to die".

But he is best known for his quote:

"If a man does not investigate into the matter of Bu-shi-do daily, it will be difficult for him to die a brave and manly death. Thus it is essential to engrave this business of the warrior into one's mind well."

 

[Hyoho]

Do (path/way) means survival. Do has allowed Bu to survive in Japan after periods of war/conflict with themselves and others. It survives with the merits of being an educational like concept. It is now run/controlled by Monbusho, Japan's education authority. If you are outside Japan it really does not matter what you do. In actual fact if you are outside Japan they are not really interested in what you do anyway. I sad but true fact.

Some of the arts do have philosophical values and precepts. If you can find one and apply the principles to your own life it is of benefit.

Getting old and reaching the end of ones path leads to introspection and reflection. We are all heading that way and younger ones are still trying to figure it out how to walk the path.

 

[Chris Parker]

Need I say that this is only my opinion, but it is an opinion formed thru the years of learning from those far better than I.

I would like to make counter point to Bills concept. Most think of Do as a kind of Asian 1960's Hippy peace, love and expanding your mind man. The fool on the hill ascetic living in a cave. A polar opposite of aggressive combat behavior. I would argue that this is not Do. That Do is Jutsu but that jutsu is not Do.

Er… kay.

If we take the mythology of Miyomoto Musashi as a kind of Jungian archetype study and a template for Japanese thought we may find our understanding of Do to be only a single view of a much broader sense of the word. Takezo was a strong but wild fighter. It was only after Takuan had locked him in a type of solitary confinement surrounded by books did he emerge as Miyamoto Musashi. A name change to match the change of his inner self. Musashi as a swordsman was technically self taught. His teacher Takuan was a Zen monk not a kenjutsu teacher with a known lineage. His contemporary in the myth was Sasaki Kojiro who was the pinnacle of technical swordsmen who had menkyo in Chujo ryu swordsmanship. So we have the epic battle between the technician and the self taught nobody. What makes the story is that Musashi did not study the technical ,he was a student of the spirit, the DO of swordsmanship. It is this Do that makes the fighter. To forge the spirit is greater than having technical ability. In some martial arts we call this shugyo or hard training. You often see pictures of Mas Oyama running barefoot in the snow or doing kata under a waterfall. This is spirit building. Musashi upon watching a top class Geisha performing a dance was asked what he thought and his reply was “flawless, I did not find an opening anywhere to attack” this shows the continuity and commonality between fighting arts and fine arts. It in no way presumes that there is no violence in fighting arts but that there are common traits.

Hmm, you are aware that all of that is complete fantasy written in a fictionalised novel, and not anything like the historical events in Musashi's life, yeah?

Do is the study and practice of the spirit within human combative behaviour.

Actually, no. That's hoplology…

Justu is the technical side, the technique but it is the Do that enables one to engage and use those techniques.
Publius Flavius Vegetius wrote “ A handful of men Inured to war, proceed to certain victory. While on the contrary, numerous armies of raw and undisciplined troops are but multitudes of men dragged to the slaughter” his lesson was that you needed the technical training while Du’Picq taught us we also need "heart" the courage to actually fight. The samurai had Jutsu and Do.

Not really, no… "do" and "jutsu" aren't necessarily separate at all… it depends entirely on the system applying the terms… and, if we're talking samurai, historically the term "do" wasn't commonly used. That doesn't mean the concepts associated weren't present… they were… but they were labeled part of the "jutsu"… or the "ho"… depending on the art.

In simple terms, the translations are as follows:
道 Do (also pronounced "michi") - this term means a path, or way, or street/road. It can apply to anything from a "way of life", a guiding methodology and approach to embracing a larger idea, or simply "this is the way things are done (in whatever we're talking about)". It can have philosophical and spiritual associations, as well as personal development ideals, or not.

Arts using this term include Kendo, Iaido, Jodo, Judo, Jukendo, Karate-do, Aikido, Shodo (calligraphy), Chado (tea), and so on.

術 Jutsu - this term means an art, a practical art, a skill-set, a particular way of performing actions, and so on. It can apply to anything from a basic mechanical methodology to an over-arching approach to an area of knowledge, a way to apply a single approach to all areas and aspects touched upon by the area of knowledge. It can have philosophical and spiritual associations, as well as personal development ideals, or not.

Arts that use this term include Kenjutsu, Iaijutsu, Jojutsu, Jujutsu, Aikijutsu, Naginata-jutsu, Sojutsu, Shurikenjutsu, Kusarijutsu, Bajutsu (horse riding), Suijutsu (swimming), and so on.

法 Ho - this term is more literally "methods", and again encompasses anything from basic "this is the method for this" to "this is an overarching approach to methodology and explanation of larger concepts and areas of knowledge.

A little rarer, this term is found in Heiho (strategy, sometimes pronounced hyoho), Kenpo, Iai-heiho, Batto-ho, and so on.

Interestingly, in earlier arts you'd occasionally get references such as "ken no michi" (剣の道), referring to the "path of the sword"… which is the same characters as Kendo (剣道)… which shows that the term was used in conjunction with other terms (an example of using this term is Musashi's Gorin no Sho, a document on the practice of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu Kenjutsu 兵法二天一流剣術 - which gives us all three terms in one place).

The point is that there really isn't much distinction unless the art itself makes one. Shinto Muso Ryu, for example, has historically been referred to as "Shinto Muso Ryu Jojutsu" (神道夢想流状術), until the 25th head of the art, Takaji Shimizu, changed it to "Shinto Muso Ryu Jodo" (神道夢想流状道) in the 20th Century. Some lines, however, retain the older "jutsu" name… and neither variant has any major philosophical or technical differences that is attributable to the naming convention at all. It is thought that the main reason for Takaji to change the name in the first place was that, well, that's how martial arts were being named at the time, and was to help popularise the new Jodo (a simplified form of jo), which is sometimes taught prior to the formal study of the ryu itself, but just as frequently as an art independent itself.

Hoshin, brilliantly explained.

The only thing to add is that Do and jutsu were never meant to be split. Once mastery of technique is attained one might choose to push further by doing kata under an icey waterfall, but until then it is the difficulty and stress of the jutsu: the development of skill and technique, which forges the spirit.

Jutsu leads to Do. Do powers Jutsu.

Thing is, even there, you're splitting them… which only really happens if a particular art chooses to separate the terms themselves.

Hoshin... I have to echo you.
This is right along side what you have said:

Katō Kiyomasa was one of the most powerful and well-known lords of the Sengoku Era. He commanded most of Japan's major clans during the invasion of Korea (1592–1598).

In a handbook he addressed to "all samurai, regardless of rank" he told readers that a warrior's only duty in life was to:

"...grasp the long and the short swords and to die".

But he is best known for his quote:

"If a man does not investigate into the matter of Bu-shi-do daily, it will be difficult for him to die a brave and manly death. Thus it is essential to engrave this business of the warrior into one's mind well."

Hmm… Kato was quite a figure, sure… but he was unusually militaristic in his views, to the point of forbidding the recitation of poetry, so such views can only be seen as indicative of his approach/ideals. But to the point, the term used "Bushido/Bushi no Michi" (武士道), although it contains the "do" term, is not really anything "spiritual" or any of the other ideas often associated… as Kato was rather opposed to most of the ideals present. He was, rather, eminently pragmatic when it came to military and martial training and methods… which is what many consider the "jutsu" approach.

 

[DaveB]

Thing is, even there, you're splitting them… which only really happens if a particular art chooses to separate the terms themselves.

I was writing from a karate perspective where there was a conscious split written about by Gichin Funakoshi. But thanks, it's interesting to hear from more well read folk.

The understanding that I had come to was that the "do" had been used as a way of de-emphasising the martial elements of an art form as a means of preserving the arts in a post samurai era.

This was certainly the case with Funakoshi's karate. I think I read something similar regarding Kano and judo.

In any case we agree that the separation was artificial.

It was reading about Shin Kage ryu that drew me to that conclusion as the book I read described how the pseudo-mystical mind states that budo karateka advocate had practical battlefield purpose; that the cultivation of the spirit was a medieval solution to what pragmatic karateka and self defense specialists term adrenaline dump.

Or so I concluded... The pieces fit together elegantly enough for me to believe it. Did I misunderstand?

 

[hoshin1600]

Hmm, you are aware that all of that is complete fantasy written in a fictionalised novel, and not anything like the historical events in Musashi's life, yeah?

actually that is exactly what i was referring to. if you were to re-read my post you will notice the following ...in bold

If we take the mythology of Miyomoto Musashi as a kind of Jungian archetype study

i was directly referring to Yoshikawa's novel. i find the juxtapost between the two figures interesting and feel the author made these differing archtypes quite on purpose to highlight the difference in training methodology. it reminds me of Tesshu.

Actually, no. That's hoplology…

..
that is not Hoplology. having been a member of the "International Hoplology society" started by D. Draeger, studying the spirit is not the aim or purpose of hoplology.

Not really, no… "do" and "jutsu" aren't necessarily separate at all…

i dont think i stated that they were separate. i agree with you that they are not. but in western terms and practice i was trying to point the separation only in as far as the way westerners practice martial arts. there are many that strictly speaking only practice the technical side while others are on the other side of the spectrum and look to martial arts as a kind of religious/ spirtual practice. thus my using the Musashi example.

 

[lklawson]

術 Jutsu - this term means an art, a practical art, a skill-set, a particular way of performing actions, and so on. It can apply to anything from a basic mechanical methodology to an over-arching approach to an area of knowledge, a way to apply a single approach to all areas and aspects touched upon by the area of knowledge. It can have philosophical and spiritual associations, as well as personal development ideals, or not.

Which is, unsurprisingly, what the term "art" meant, classically.

I think you spelled "Jitsu" wrong. <ducking>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Chris Parker]

I was writing from a karate perspective where there was a conscious split written about by Gichin Funakoshi. But thanks, it's interesting to hear from more well read folk.

Cool. As said, if a particular system wants to use the terms to differentiate within their own usage, that's entirely up to them… but there is no real distinction that's universal or applied consistently. For example, the "do" suffix is fairly modern… and many Koryu practitioners and teachers, while their particular arts are labeled/described as "jutsu" often, when asked what they do, simply say "Budo" (martial arts)… without any distinction made between their "jutsu" and the common "do"… they're really the same thing.

The understanding that I had come to was that the "do" had been used as a way of de-emphasising the martial elements of an art form as a means of preserving the arts in a post samurai era.

There have been cases where that has been a reasoning applied, yeah… of course, at the same time, you have much more "military" arts than even some of the very old ones, such as Jukendo and Toyama Ryu Iaido (also called Batto-do) which really don't de-emphasise martial elements at all… Toyama Ryu, in particular, has quite a bloody (and recent) history with the Japanese military, as it was formulated specifically for them (Toyama, which gave the system it's name, is a military academy), while Jukendo is military bayonet fighting…

Then, of course, you get systems such as Jikishinkage Ryu, where a previous headmaster referred to his schools methods as "Judo" some 150 years before Kano… very much in the "samurai era"…

This was certainly the case with Funakoshi's karate. I think I read something similar regarding Kano and judo.

Yeah, as I said, the reasoning has been applied a few times… not just with Funakoshi, but with pretty much all Japanese-based karate systems in the 20's/30's. With Kano, he was looking for a way to separate what he did from the classical systems around… and eventually settled on the term "Judo" rather than the earlier used "Kano-ha Jujutsu", for a variety of reasons.

Thing is, while the idea of an art being more than just physical fighting methods, and incorporating some sense of personal development is often cited, it's been present in classical Japanese arts for centuries, and is certainly not anything new, nor anything that necessarily is only "post samurai". (Yagyu) Shinkage Ryu, for example, was highly influenced by Takuan Soho and his communication with Yagyu Munenori… Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu was highly influenced by Musashi's exploration of Buddhism… Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu has incorporated aspects of Mikkyo, spiritual teachings, and more… Kukishin Ryu is highly associated with their family form of Shinto, known as Nakatomi Shinto… and each of these are "jutsu" methods…

In any case we agree that the separation was artificial.

Yep… as well as individually applied.

It was reading about Shin Kage ryu that drew me to that conclusion as the book I read described how the pseudo-mystical mind states that budo karateka advocate had practical battlefield purpose; that the cultivation of the spirit was a medieval solution to what pragmatic karateka and self defense specialists term adrenaline dump.

Or so I concluded... The pieces fit together elegantly enough for me to believe it. Did I misunderstand?

Hmm… potentially, yeah. The spiritual aspects are more coming to terms with the idea that you are taking others' lives… something that goes against Buddhist teachings, for instance… concepts such as Mushin/Fudoshin (which can have spiritual associations, and can be part of the more mental/internal teachings and methods of the art in question) are more about keeping a calm mind within battle… which is really a big part of controlling the adrenaline dump.

I'm a little interested in which book, and which "Shin Kage Ryu" you're referring to… especially with the mention/connection to karate. My mind automatically goes to Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, although I'm familiar with a number of other arts that use the Shinkage name.

actually that is exactly what i was referring to. if you were to re-read my post you will notice the following ...in bold

i was directly referring to Yoshikawa's novel. i find the juxtapost between the two figures interesting and feel the author made these differing archtypes quite on purpose to highlight the difference in training methodology. it reminds me of Tesshu.

Except that a fictionalised novel isn't "mythology"… and, when dealing with a character such as Musashi, there is a lot of false information, exaggerated stories, and outright fantasy that do make up a more "modern mythology" for him… with people accepting such things as historical fact. And it shouldn't be ignored that, if you're making a point about the usage and meaning of the concept by citing an example, citing something that is modern fantasy, has little historical basis, and is highly inaccurate is really not the best way to make the point, as it does not reflect the "Japanese thought" as you suggest, nor does it work as a Jungian archetypal study, let alone an accurate representation of classical Japanese thoughts and application of terminology.

that is not Hoplology. having been a member of the "International Hoplology society" started by D. Draeger, studying the spirit is not the aim or purpose of hoplology.

This might be more an issue of differing perspectives… personally, I don't separate them out, as the spirit is intrinsically linked with the study of the arts themselves… and (I would say) definitively comes within the charter of the IHS, both within the areas of functional hoplology and behavioural hoplology. And, for the record, I've been dealing with the IHS myself for quite a while… and have contact with a number of members, including people who knew Donn Draeger personally…

i dont think i stated that they were separate.

Er…. "Jutsu is the technical side, the technique but it is the Do that enables one to engage and use those techniques… The samurai had both Jutsu and Do…"

Certainly looks like you separated them to me… and did you really say that you can't use the techniques without "Do"?!? Please explain the ability to apply the techniques of, say, Jigen Ryu Kenjutsu then.

i agree with you that they are not. but in western terms and practice i was trying to point the separation only in as far as the way westerners practice martial arts. there are many that strictly speaking only practice the technical side while others are on the other side of the spectrum and look to martial arts as a kind of religious/ spirtual practice. thus my using the Musashi example.

These aren't Western concepts… and the Musashi example failed as it's fantasy. What really got Musashi good was his dedication to physical practice… for the record…

Which is, unsurprisingly, what the term "art" meant, classically.

Yep!

I think you spelled "Jitsu" wrong. <ducking>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Oh, you!!!

 

[Hyoho]

If you want to be able to read Musashi, Kanji has both Confucian and Buddhist meanings to understand. With exception to Gorin no Sho that did not use kanji. The heads of the ryu do study buddhism in great depth to try and have a better understanding of what he wrote. Then again I would not say many of the members of the the ryu adhere to his philosophy set out in other works he wrote.

 

[hoshin1600]

Certainly looks like you separated them to me… and did you really say that you can't use the techniques without "Do"?!?

there is a lot in your post i would like to counter and argue but i feel this would side track to the thread.
i think both of our opinions on this subject are off by a matter of degrees more than miles apart. however the label for this thread by the OP is "DO VERSUS JUTSU" so the terms and usage have been pre- divided from the start of the conversation. you can make the argument that the terms are being misused or that the rest of the forum participants are ignorant fools. it doesnt change the philosophical or psychological view points of those fools, myself included. i think the issue here at hand is that this thread is a philosophical conversation and you are having a historical and linguistic conversation. while being a human wikipedia is great, it is not really contributing to this particular conversation in a positive way it is only detracting from it. after all, a wiki can not create its own original thought it can only regurgitate and recite that which was put into it verbatim.
so i will ask bluntly and directly if you wish to contribute something,, please give your philosophical views on the differences between martial arts and artists that view training as nothing more than a means to bash skulls ( Nate Diaz comes to mind) and martial artists like Tesshu or Omori Sogen Rotashi who view training in a more spiritual context, who i will quote in part...
"Zen without the accompanying physical experience is nothing but empty discussion. Martial ways without truly realizing the "mind" is nothing but beastly behavior"
if you use or are aware of more appropriate wording/phrases in both English or Japanese to define such concepts please share, so we will no longer be such ignorant fools.

 

[hoshin1600]

duplicate post deleted

 

[hoshin1600]

to bring this thread back to the OP topic, here is something else to think about for those who are interested.
VIKTOR FRANKL INSTITUT. Logotherapy and Existential Analysis
Viktor Frankl was a WWII Auschwitz concentration camp survivor. during his time in Auschwitz he proposed that he had to find meaning in life and meaning in suffering. that there was meaning in suffering.
logotherapy/ existential anaysis
Human beings are not only free, but most importantly they are free to something - namely, to achieve goals and purposes. The search for meaning is seen as the primary motivation of humans.

“Those who have a 'why' to live, can bear with almost any 'how'.”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning

“Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather must recognize that it is he who is asked. In a word, each man is questioned by life; and he can only answer to life by answering for his own life; to life he can only respond by being responsible.”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning


i believe there is a parallel to be drawn between the experience of suffering and the experience of combat. Japan had a very long period of war. that would seem to me as good fertile grounds for a transformation from brutal killing and death to a type of existentialism and path to find meaning in the killing and death. maybe combat has a natural progression from mere killing to a higher plane of human understanding.

looking at the rates of PTSD in todays soldiers. one can only imagine the effects of the Sengoku period of their history that lasted 136 years. what effects would that have over the entire population and society? maybe the meaning found in combat was a natural way of dealing with and overcoming these negative effects

.“In some ways suffering ceases to be suffering at the moment it finds a meaning, such as the meaning of a sacrifice.”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning

 

[Hyoho]

Bushido ethics during the sengoku jidai were a means of controlling the masses. De facto samurai controlling public order. One really need s to live in Japan as a citizen to fully understand how they tick. They are not a load of 'samurai'. Only 2% of the population even practices Budo most of them being kids. There are lessons to be learned by what just a few wrote in the past out of a mostly illiterate group. They dont make 'comparisons'. They are 'Japanese' Either you are one of them or you're not! Even nowadays they expect blood when you work. To criticise someone as an ignorant fool the convex mirror comes to mind.