[yt]F85XWVwBqHQ[/yt]
Seite Iai - Kata01 - Mae
- Thread starter Bob Hubbard
- Start date
Nice to see that even Seitei Iai can't mess up Mae too badly 
.
From an MJER perspective I have a couple of criticisms as to posture after chiburi and cross-body angle during noto but otherwise {leaving aside anti-Seitei bias} not badly executed.
.From an MJER perspective I have a couple of criticisms as to posture after chiburi and cross-body angle during noto but otherwise {leaving aside anti-Seitei bias} not badly executed.
Hey, hey, hey watch it there Mark, IÂ’m, MJER and a Seitei iai guyÂ…..
What did you expect? HeÂ’s MSRÂ…Â….. :shock:
What did you expect? HeÂ’s MSRÂ…Â….. :shock:
:lol: Cheers, Ken.
I do see the point of the attempt to standardise a core set of forms that Seitei attempts. It is just that I welcome the diversity of styles that still exist and think that Seitei was an ill-advised step in the wrong direction i.e. towards conformity.
One day I am sure that I shall learn them so that if I attend some classes at another school I shall have some common ground forms that we could all do together.
Mind you, I do reckon that it wouldn't be that hard to pick up a different schools forms well enough not to cut the chap next to me in line.
I do see the point of the attempt to standardise a core set of forms that Seitei attempts. It is just that I welcome the diversity of styles that still exist and think that Seitei was an ill-advised step in the wrong direction i.e. towards conformity.
One day I am sure that I shall learn them so that if I attend some classes at another school I shall have some common ground forms that we could all do together.
Mind you, I do reckon that it wouldn't be that hard to pick up a different schools forms well enough not to cut the chap next to me in line
.
ThatÂ’s the joy of seitei, if you donÂ’t want to do them, donÂ’t join the Kendo Federation!
I like the idea of a set standard. This is how itÂ’s done, no thatÂ’s wrong/right, and then having our own Koryu on top of them. I consider seitei to be just one more step, one more school that I have learned in addition to MJER and a hald dozen others. Everything is acceptable in koryu, not so in seitei.
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Ah, but that depends on the Koyu in question, my friend....
Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu pride themselves on retaining the original methods of the Founder some 500+ years ago, and although they still have written accounts and descriptions of some "lost" aspects, to try to recover them is considered to be a potential impurity being introduced into the school, so Otake Sensei refuses to allow it.
The current Soke of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, Iwami Toshio Soke, changed a number of aspects of the performance of it's kata relatively recently, Kim Taylor has a brilliant breakdown of the changes and thoughts as to why they occured.
Ellis Amdur, along with one or two others, helped recover the lost kata and teachings of KusariGamajutsu and Nagamakijutsu for Toda-ha Buko Ryu, although not without complication (in the form of major influence from his Araki Ryu training and teaching), with the approval of Niita Soke.
Ellis' other Koryu system, the Araki Ryu, has a long history of pressure-testing it's techniques, and adjusting them, or even dropping them completely if found to be lacking.
Hontai Yoshin Ryu was originally a system based on a number of weponry schools, most specifically Ito Ryu Kenko Ryu Sojutsu and Kyochi Ryu Sojutsu, as well as being well known for Sword, especially Kodachi. In the last generation, a new syllabus for Iai was added to give the practitioners more experience and skill with handling a sword for the sword-defence techniques (incidentally, the system became focused on Jujutsu after meeting with the Takenouchi Ryu in it's second Generation, and exchanged almost all it's weapons systems, save Kodachi and some sword I believe, in favour of Kukishin Ryu technologies in it's 4th Generation), taking the new Iai forms from Toyama Ryu.
There's a lot more examples I can think of, but as you can see, some will strive to stay unchanged, others will happily change if the need arises. Personally, I feel that the aspect that must remain consistant and unchanged in a Koryu system is the "feel" of it, or the "flavour". When Ellis first presented the Nagamaki and KusariGama kata to the Soke of the Toda-ha Buko Ryu, she indicated that what they had created was not her system, it was techinically correct, but the flavour wasn't there (it was Araki Ryu's....). So Ellis went away to have another go at it, and when he presented it the next time, the flavour of Toda-ha Buko Ryu was there, and the kata were re-integrated into the system.
Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu pride themselves on retaining the original methods of the Founder some 500+ years ago, and although they still have written accounts and descriptions of some "lost" aspects, to try to recover them is considered to be a potential impurity being introduced into the school, so Otake Sensei refuses to allow it.
The current Soke of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, Iwami Toshio Soke, changed a number of aspects of the performance of it's kata relatively recently, Kim Taylor has a brilliant breakdown of the changes and thoughts as to why they occured.
Ellis Amdur, along with one or two others, helped recover the lost kata and teachings of KusariGamajutsu and Nagamakijutsu for Toda-ha Buko Ryu, although not without complication (in the form of major influence from his Araki Ryu training and teaching), with the approval of Niita Soke.
Ellis' other Koryu system, the Araki Ryu, has a long history of pressure-testing it's techniques, and adjusting them, or even dropping them completely if found to be lacking.
Hontai Yoshin Ryu was originally a system based on a number of weponry schools, most specifically Ito Ryu Kenko Ryu Sojutsu and Kyochi Ryu Sojutsu, as well as being well known for Sword, especially Kodachi. In the last generation, a new syllabus for Iai was added to give the practitioners more experience and skill with handling a sword for the sword-defence techniques (incidentally, the system became focused on Jujutsu after meeting with the Takenouchi Ryu in it's second Generation, and exchanged almost all it's weapons systems, save Kodachi and some sword I believe, in favour of Kukishin Ryu technologies in it's 4th Generation), taking the new Iai forms from Toyama Ryu.
There's a lot more examples I can think of, but as you can see, some will strive to stay unchanged, others will happily change if the need arises. Personally, I feel that the aspect that must remain consistant and unchanged in a Koryu system is the "feel" of it, or the "flavour". When Ellis first presented the Nagamaki and KusariGama kata to the Soke of the Toda-ha Buko Ryu, she indicated that what they had created was not her system, it was techinically correct, but the flavour wasn't there (it was Araki Ryu's....). So Ellis went away to have another go at it, and when he presented it the next time, the flavour of Toda-ha Buko Ryu was there, and the kata were re-integrated into the system.
I think you might be in error with your last statement there, Ken.
The central point of koryu arts is that they stay the same {or as much the same as is humanly possible}. They are literally 'old school'
Isn't it funny how predictable Chris is Mark? He pounces like a fat kid on a Smartie, at anything and everything.......
It doesn't matter where in the world you go, Seitei is seitei. Period. As to Koryu, my MJER will be different from yours, and from most others around the world, it depends on one's line. My line started with Haruna Sensei, then it moved around, currently we are with Hatakenaka Sensei. Add in Ohmi Sensei and Kim Taylor's own take on it all and ones koryu becomes a melting pot of skills. I think too many people become koryu snobs.
Thats the joy of Koryu, Seitei mae is acceptable as MJER mae, but MJER mae is not acceptable as seitei mae.
Whatever. As Haruna Sensei use to say, "its all practice".
I disagree, Ken, I am sorry to say.
As far as I am concerned, our MJER should be the same, with perhaps a couple of minor differences due to being taught by different sensei. That is precisely the point of Koryu. If it is changed from what it was then it is not koryu any more.
I understand Chris's points made above but if those ryu that have made changes have an unbroken line then I don't really understand why they altered their schools techniques {unless it was to correct an earlier peregrination into a diversion}. If they change the curriculum then it is no longer the same style and therefore no longer koryu.
Or is it that I am being daft and don't understand properly what koryu means in a modern context?
As far as I am concerned, our MJER should be the same, with perhaps a couple of minor differences due to being taught by different sensei. That is precisely the point of Koryu. If it is changed from what it was then it is not koryu any more.
I understand Chris's points made above but if those ryu that have made changes have an unbroken line then I don't really understand why they altered their schools techniques {unless it was to correct an earlier peregrination into a diversion}. If they change the curriculum then it is no longer the same style and therefore no longer koryu.
Or is it that I am being daft and don't understand properly what koryu means in a modern context?
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Maybe not daft, per se, Sukerin, but there is a slight gap in your concept of Koryu I would say....
Koryu change all the time. The important thing is that the essence remains pure, the methods of transmitting that essence are up to the Soke (or in some cases Shihanke or similar), as it is their responsibility to see that the teachings are best preserved and passed on to the next generation. If that is not possible, it is their responsibility to see to it that the art does not fall into disrepute by becoming something that it is not (hence Niita Sensei needing to approve the recovered Nagamakijutsu kata for Toda-ha Buko Ryu).
As said, Kim Taylor has a great article on the changes that occur: http://ejmas.com/pt/2009pt/ptart_taylor-3_0909.html
Techniques get lost (as in Katori Shinto Ryu, not recovered), recovered (Toda-ha Buko Ryu), added (Hontai Yoshin Ryu Iai), adapted (Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu) or even created (Shinto Muso Ryu's Gohon no Midare, created by Shimazu Sensei). Ryu get restructured and re-organised, changing the very order and make up of the technical curriculum, and even get renamed (Shinto Muso Ryu changed from Jojutsu to Jodo under Shimazu Sensei.... but even more dramatically, the most meticulously followed Ryu, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu has been known variously during it's existance as Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, Shinryo Shinto Ryu, Katori Shinto Ryu, Tenshinsho Den Shinto Ryu, and only came back to Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu at the end of the 1940's under the 19th Soke).
Essentially, a change to the curriculum does not mean necessarily a new Ryu, provided it is a congruent shift in accordance with the Ryu's teachings, instigated or at the very least supported by the head of the system at the time, and followed universally by all students of the Ryu itself. Ultimately it is up to the head of the Ryu as to whether or not to class changes as a new Ryu or not. The techniques are actually the least of all the aspects of a Ryu, and are not it's core. They do, however, spring from the true core of the Ryu itself. And so long as they do that, the Ryu remains pure and unadulterated, despite changes to the techniques or structure to the syllabus.
Koryu change all the time. The important thing is that the essence remains pure, the methods of transmitting that essence are up to the Soke (or in some cases Shihanke or similar), as it is their responsibility to see that the teachings are best preserved and passed on to the next generation. If that is not possible, it is their responsibility to see to it that the art does not fall into disrepute by becoming something that it is not (hence Niita Sensei needing to approve the recovered Nagamakijutsu kata for Toda-ha Buko Ryu).
As said, Kim Taylor has a great article on the changes that occur: http://ejmas.com/pt/2009pt/ptart_taylor-3_0909.html
Techniques get lost (as in Katori Shinto Ryu, not recovered), recovered (Toda-ha Buko Ryu), added (Hontai Yoshin Ryu Iai), adapted (Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu) or even created (Shinto Muso Ryu's Gohon no Midare, created by Shimazu Sensei). Ryu get restructured and re-organised, changing the very order and make up of the technical curriculum, and even get renamed (Shinto Muso Ryu changed from Jojutsu to Jodo under Shimazu Sensei.... but even more dramatically, the most meticulously followed Ryu, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu has been known variously during it's existance as Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, Shinryo Shinto Ryu, Katori Shinto Ryu, Tenshinsho Den Shinto Ryu, and only came back to Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu at the end of the 1940's under the 19th Soke).
Essentially, a change to the curriculum does not mean necessarily a new Ryu, provided it is a congruent shift in accordance with the Ryu's teachings, instigated or at the very least supported by the head of the system at the time, and followed universally by all students of the Ryu itself. Ultimately it is up to the head of the Ryu as to whether or not to class changes as a new Ryu or not. The techniques are actually the least of all the aspects of a Ryu, and are not it's core. They do, however, spring from the true core of the Ryu itself. And so long as they do that, the Ryu remains pure and unadulterated, despite changes to the techniques or structure to the syllabus.
When Chris starts quoting my Sensei, then there's not much else for me to say....
However, does it really matter if there are some subtle differences between our MJER? I would argue that we are in all liklihood 98% the same. Some of that may in fact come from our own personal style/abilities.
