I
was asked recently how much I think koryu budo has changed over the
generations. After staring at my drink for a while, I answered “I
think it has changed a lot, and not much at all.” This goes
for most koryu that were founded during the Tokugawa Era (1604-1868).
They had a relatively stable world in which to grow and develop, so
radical change wasn’t required.
Why
would I think that a 400 year old martial art has changed a lot and
not much at all? I think they would change a lot in that successive
generations would add to the arts. In Shinto Muso Ryu, for example,
various fuzoku
ryu
(affiliated
arts) were attached to the system, and new kata were created. From an
art that started with just staff and sword, it grew to encompass
jutte and torinawa
jutsu
(apprehending
and binding), kusarigama, and most recently walking stick. That’s a
lot of additions.
So
the original arts didn’t change much, they just had more and more
stuff grafted onto the original trunk. And if people are really
learning a particular art, it won’t change much. Why is that? Koryu
bugei students are taught using the pedagogy of kata. In sports there
is always room for change. A new way to do the high jump didn’t
make it stop being high jump. A new ski jumping form didn’t
mean it wasn’t ski jumping anymore. These can easily be changed
because they are defined by the activity and not how the activity is
done.
However,
classical martial arts systems, koryu
bugei,
are defined by their principles as much as their techniques. If you
change the principles, you’re doing something different. Not that
this didn’t happen - there were so many ryuha
(schools)
during the Tokugawa Era because senior practitioners had new ideas
and wanted to develop them. Generally they didn’t change the
school they were in; they created a new school instead. The ryuha
that
lasted centuries were the ones whose principles survived the pressure
testing of time and application. Not competition, but application in
combative situations. Shinto Muso Ryu was practiced by samurai whose
function was public security and safety. Other arts were susceptible
to being used in fights and duels as well as to put down peasant
revolts and otherwise maintain order.
Ryuha
survived
the centuries because their teaching methodology was remarkably well
suited to teaching physical principles and skills, consistently,
generation after generation. The fundamental teaching pedagogy was,
and is, the two person kata. (Solo iai kata are the exception that
demonstrates the rule. Working with live blades is too dangerous for
partner practice, but systems with iai nearly always also include
paired kenjutsu kata as well). In the classical arts, one partner
wins the encounter, shitachi,
and the other loses the encounter laid out in the kata, the
uchitachi.
Unlike
a sporting encounter where the more experienced player is expected to
win, in classical kata training, the more experienced person is
expected to take the losing side. The uchitachi’s
job
is to guide the junior, the shitachi,
so they learn how to do the techniques embedded in the kata without
leaving any openings.
Those
who think that kata training is just repeating rote movements have
never done proper kata training. For example, in weapons kata, If
shitachi
does
the kata incorrectly and leaves an opening, uchitachi
is
quite likely to seize the opening and put their weapon in it. This
can be a harsh way of correction, but it’s an effective one.
These lessons are rarely forgotten. Kata are only meant to be done to
their completion when they are done correctly. I know if I leave an
opening for my teacher, he will show me that opening in the simplest,
most direct way available. He will counter my attack. You might think
my teacher is breaking the kata. He isn’t. I’m the one who broke
the kata by leaving the opening. He simply went with the new
situation that I created by leaving the opening.
The
kata that last are robust. They have to be done certain ways or
openings are left and the student gets whacked. Quickly the student
learns to spot their own openings and close them. The kata don’t
change much because they can’t be changed much. They are structured
in very particular ways for good reasons. If you deviate from the
form you create openings that allow counter attacks to succeed. Just
doing the kata is its own test. If you do it correctly it will work.
If you deviate from the principles that are embedded in the kata you
will find your situation changes from victor to vanquished in an
instant.
As
an incorrigibly American student, I can’t seem to stop myself from
experimenting with the kata I’m taught. I always seem to think that
I’ll somehow learn something new from experimenting. I do learn
things. I learn how not to do the kata. I play around with the timing
or the spacing or something on my own, and then my experimenting
surfaces in the dojo and Sensei nails me, then yells “Who taught
you that!!!” Happens every time.
Since
the kata serve as their own form of checking and correction, they are
exceedingly durable. I don’t doubt that the kata of Shinto
Muso Ryu or Shinkage Ryu or Ono-ha Itto-ryu swordsmanship are close
enough to the way they were done 400 years ago that a modern student
who found themselves 400 years in the past could walk into one those
dojo and participate without difficulty. Kata are that stable.
This
stability can also be seen at the various enbu
held
around Japan. Lineages that split as far back as the 17th century and
had no contact with each other for hundreds of years until recent
times can now be seen and compared in modern enbukai. Besides the
main line of Shinkage Ryu taught by the Yagyu Family, there are
numerous other lines that were founded by their students over the
centuries. When you watch and compare them, it becomes clear that
they haven’t drifted far from each other. The same goes for the
various lines of Yagyu Shingan Ryu, and other arts that have lasted
through centuries.
The
kata that comprise the core of any koryu
bugei
are
stable and solid. Upstart students like me are always trying “what
if” experiments and getting clobbered because our “what if”
just isn’t effective. Even when we no longer have a culture of
duels and taryu
shiai
(inter
ryuha matches) we still have students who want to prove they are
smarter than 400 years of experience. These students cheerfully
challenge how kata are done and the sensei is always ready to show
them that their new idea doesn’t work as well as the one that’s
been passed down to them.
This
helps keep the kata alive even when we don’t have duels and
challenge matches. However, just because the kata are stable doesn’t
mean that they are fossilized and frozen in time. Different teachers
will place more or less emphasis on particular aspects of the kata.
Even the same teacher, over decades of practice, will place different
emphasis on different aspects of the kata. This leads to students
saying things like “But last time you said do it this way.” The
teacher isn’t changing the kata. They are exploring different
aspects of the kata. The teachers know where the limits of each kata
are, and they don’t exceed those limits.
This
stability means that bugei
ryuha
can
travel through time and across cultures with their principles and
their form essentially unchanged. Kata practice allows students to
make mistakes and see why their ideas are mistaken. The students
learn the techniques and principles through a small set of kata. The
kata don’t need to be changed. In fact, they can’t be changed
without losing the ability to teach the principles of the art. The
stability of the teaching method means that the ryuha
change
very little over time. Ryuha may acquire new kata and new weapons,
but their essence remains the same.
Grateful appreciation to Deborah Klens-Bigman, Ph.D. for editing what was a scary mess.