Did Musashi ever practice Iaido?

[Chris Parker]

Quite a necro here.... let's see if we can at least put some real answers here, such as they exist....

Shinmen Musashi no Kami Fujiwara no Genshin is, to say the least, a rather controversial figure amongst Japanese swordsmen and Koryu systems. It has gone so far as to suggest that many very well established things attributed to Musashi may not have actually come from him, including his famous self portrait, and even up to the Gorin no Sho (Book of Five Rings/Tombstone Book). What stories attributed to him are also in question, as at least four people (during Musashi's lifetime) seem to have used his name, similar to there being many who used the name Hanzo Hattori. And Musashi himself used a number of names himself, including Miyamoto Bennosuke, Shinmen Takezo, and Niten Doraku.

His early training appears to have been under his father, which by all accounts was rather harsh. His father, Munisai, was said to be a master of the Jitte (not, it must be stated, the Jutte), and was the founder of a system of the weapons use. He also was an accomplished swordsman, however it is doubted how much Musashi learnt from him, due on no small part to the fact that Munisai's gravestone gives a date of death four years before Musashi's accepted birth... It is thought that Musashi learnt from his Uncle (Dorin) the system of Jitte and sword that his father (Munisai) left, until from the age of 7, until about 12 or 13. At that point he left, and soon came across a warrior from the Shinto Ryu (either the then-current name for Katori Shinto Ryu, which has been known by a number of names over it's existence, or Tsukahara Bokuden's Shinto Ryu, which came from Katori Shinto Ryu itself), named Arima Kihei, who was in town accepting challenges to further his skill. Musashi, 13 years old, beat him to death brutally with a stick.

He then continued moving around the country, duelling and learning (in his own rough fashion), establishing the reputation he came to have (both good and bad). How much of this is fact is very open to debate, as indeed are all the "facts" I have gone through here (the Arima story is suspect in a number of details, for example).

When he was older (his last duel, the famous duel at Ganryu Island against Sasaki Kojiro was when he was 29), he "retired" to a cave in Kumumoto, and took his Bhuddist name, as well as working on his own system based on his experiences. The result of which is the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu. This system features no Iai within it's techniques, other than a specific way to draw two swords in the Nito Seiho (two sword formal methods).

Opinions of Musashi range from him being borderline-Godlike in his ability and feats, through to a fairly low opinion which refers to the fact that his one battle saw him on the losing side (and many dispute his appearance there at all), him being taken out of it by a simple rock thrown from a foot soldier which hits him in the leg, and more. Personally, I think he was somewhere in between.

Things such as "He fought with two swords when everyone was tought to wield their swords two-handed, with a bokken vs. steel, and sometimes no sword at all, catching his opponent's blade with his bare hands. He even fought a duel once with a log, knowing that it would upset his opponent even more and throw him off." are frankly in the former basket, though. Fighting with two swords existed before Musashi (Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu had been teaching Ryotojutsu [two-sword art] for over 100 years before Musashi, Musashi rarely actually used his two-sword techniques, most often using either a single long or short sword (his main use of two swords was in an ambush where he allegedly fought off a group of about 10 men... of course, what is often glanced over is the way he killed a young chld as a "distraction" on the way to that particular duel....), catching a sword with your bare hands is basically misunderstanding the Shinken Shiraha Dome approach of a number of older systems (although Musashi's Jujutsu skills were said to be quite good, and that again is rather forgotten in the emphasis on his swordsmanship), and the duel with a log is part of a fictionalised woodblock print series, similar to ones depicting Bokuden and others.

So, in short, there is little known in any real, concrete way about Musashi (whoever he may have been) and his training, however there is no account of Iai being part of his training, and it makes no appearance in his Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu system. And as his art is about duelling, more than anything else, and Iai is more for surprise attacks (particularly in koryu systems), I would be rather surprised to find it there.

 

[Vulcan]

.... let's see if we can at least put some real answers here, such as they exist....


Opinions of Musashi range from him being borderline-Godlike in his ability and feats, through to a fairly low opinion which refers to the fact that his one battle saw him on the losing side (and many dispute his appearance there at all), him being taken out of it by a simple rock thrown from a foot soldier which hits him in the leg, and more.

Things such as "He fought with two swords when everyone was tought to wield their swords two-handed, with a bokken vs. steel, and sometimes no sword at all, catching his opponent's blade with his bare hands. He even fought a duel once with a log, knowing that it would upset his opponent even more and throw him off.*" are frankly in the former basket, though.

So, in short, there is little known in any real, concrete way about Musashi (whoever he may have been) and his training

If you conclude that there is little that is "concrete" to be known, then how can you provide "some real answers". What is better about your anecdotal history about his father over the anecdotal history about his duels, when even his birth date and parental lineage is disputed?

I frankly expected more out of you than copy and paste from your sources.

What are your sources by the way?




*Way of the Samurai, Yoshikawa, Eiji (paraphrased)

 

[Chris Parker]

Yes, there is very little concrete known, that was kind of the point of my answer there. In fact, the best that can be said is that most accept that Musashi was probably a real historical person, and at the very least, the painting of a shrike on a branch was by his hand, but other than that, most is taken more on faith than anything else. Not uncommon in Japanese systems, though... the founder of Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu, according to the system, lived to be 102. Many historians think that the dates of his birth are probably about 40 years out, meaning he was about 62 (a far more likely age for the early 16th Century).

My sources include Colin Hyakutake Watkins, Donn Draeger, the teachings of the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, and others. So you know, Yoshikawa Eiji's book is, more than anything else, blamed for many inaccurate stories about Musashi, and is highly fictionalised. It is not considered a reliable source by any researcher of Musashi, including HNIR, despite how good a light it paints Musashi in.

 

[Bruno@MT]

So you know, Yoshikawa Eiji's book is, more than anything else, blamed for many inaccurate stories about Musashi, and is highly fictionalised. It is not considered a reliable source by any researcher of Musashi, including HNIR, despite how good a light it paints Musashi in.

I've read it, and while it is a nice book, it is important to remember that it is a novel. And as such I wouldn't trust it for making a point.

 

[Vulcan]

I've read it, and while it is a nice book, it is important to remember that it is a novel. And as such I wouldn't trust it for making a point.

What source would you trust?


My point, so that is won't get lost, was that Musashi was unorthodox in his martial arts, and probably did not rely on Iado practice. I believe that Chris agrees with me here, no?

As far as the dueling with a log claim...my interpretation is that he possibly dueled with a bokken on one or more occasions, and the legends about him dueling with a log or an oar grew from there.

 

[kaizasosei]

The concept of iai, is more or less one of the main points of the sword arts. The essence of iai has many purposes, to be concentrated in stillness, to be explosive and quick to the point of being blindingly fast as well as efficient and accurate. To blend millions of movements into one movement at an unlimited variation of speeds-in all given directions.

Sometimes i practice iai style cutting on flowers in expensive vases. The target being to slice off a flower or a seleced group of flowers. This is to be done in one move from more or less complete serene stillness. Another time i cut with smaller knives such as a bear claw. Sometimes, i stand there for a minute or so *adjusting*. One may say that the calculating is killing the mushin, but seriously, i have to be careful with the vases...

not only to draw from the side, but to hold the free blade above your head in stillness is also iai. Iai is more than just the draw, it is the complete harmony of distance, angle,breath as well as tension and relaxation. The reason that most iai moves aim to be done with concentration in one move, is because in real combat, you only get one chance. It's the same for a strike in a real fight meaning how to place it if not time it. Now then-O-kay, well, i would say that every human interaction encompasses aspects of iai as it does aspects of kiai and aiki.

So bottom line, i think that the concept of iaijutsu or iainuki and even the term would not have been foreign to a great swordsman like musashi. We can only imagine exactly what his training looked like, but by reading the gorinnosho, one can get a pretty good idea of the simple genious of it.


j

 

[Ken Morgan]

Why are we resurrecting a 7+ year old thread?
Musashi was a trained swordsman, a soldier, who did anything and everything to “win” a fight, his personal survival was paramount. Trickery, talent, deception, power, surprise, and whatever else he had in his bag of tricks. He didn’t **** around, he walked up and killed his opponents. Don’t forget, he was, what? 6’2” or something, at a time when most people in Japan would have been in the 5’4” range, and considering he didn’t bathe, he would have been most intimidating.

 

[Chris Parker]

What source would you trust?

Well, the list I gave above to begin with. Follow that with the Gorin no Sho (although there is a theory that that wasn't written by Musashi himself, if that is the case then it was almost certainly written by his followers, and can be considered fairly accurate), the Dokkodo, modern texts such as "Miyamoto Musashi: His Life and Writings" by Kenji Tokitsu, and honestly, members of the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu themselves. I have some experience in this system (although not a member of the Ryu myself), and find that their comments that you really need to study Musashi's system to understand the Gorin no Sho and his other works properly to be highly accurate.

Yoshikawa Eiji's book is similar to watching "Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story" and thinking it's an accurate biography.... if you weren't sure, it's not.

My point, so that is won't get lost, was that Musashi was unorthodox in his martial arts, and probably did not rely on Iado practice. I believe that Chris agrees with me here, no?

Ha, yes, I absolutely do agree with you there. More so, I don't think it was a case of him simply not "relying" on Iai concepts, I don't think he had any need for them, so he didn't incorporate them at all. It's like saying that someone who drives a BMW doesn't rely on flying to work in a blimp.

As far as the dueling with a log claim...my interpretation is that he possibly dueled with a bokken on one or more occasions, and the legends about him dueling with a log or an oar grew from there.

Yeah, there's a fair few stories around like that, most famously the duel at Ganryu Island against Kojiro. According to the story, Musashi woke up late, and left without his sword. On the boat ride over to the Island he carved a rough bokken out of a spare oar, and used it to cave Kojiro's head in. Even this story has it's critics, who point out that Musashi would not have been alone, but would have had his entourage with him, he most likely didn't kill Kojiro, but probably just injured him instead (and some suggest that Musashi's followers actually ambushed Kojiro later....), and so on. But they do make such fun stories, and can still teach a fair amount if you listen to them properly (like Star Trek, no?).

Ken, ha, yeah, he certainly was someone you wanted to keep your distance from... for a variety of reasons!

 

[pgsmith]

Musashi was a trained swordsman, a soldier, who did anything and everything to “win” a fight, his personal survival was paramount. Trickery, talent, deception, power, surprise, and whatever else he had in his bag of tricks.

Yep! What lots of people forget is that at that time in Japanese history ... scratch that, make it throughout most of Japanese history, that would describe just about every trained swordsman. Some were more famous than others, mainly because they took the time and effort to leave their thoughts behind in written form.

 

[Chris Parker]

Or, of coure, others took the time and effort to write down some really cool stories about them that may or may not have happened.....

Of course, Musashi is not alone in this either. There are plenty of stories about Tsukahara Bokuden that are almost certainly ficticious, same with Yagyu Munenori and Munetoshi, Yagyu Jubei, hell, anyone famous typically has quite a few less-than-factual stories about them! That may indeed be why they are famous in the first place... of course, I'm not implying that Musashi was the Paris Hilton of 17th Century Japanese swordsmen.... not at all....

 

[Vulcan]

Chris, how dare you leave out Hattori Hanzo??! Thirty pushups for you!

 

[Chris Parker]

Yeah, I actually thought about some of my favourite (and least-likely) stories about Hattori later... one where he taught Tokugawa Ieyasu about holding his breath underwater for four or five hours.... or Momochi Sandayu teaching a young Bhuddist monk how to be invisible in plain sight.... oh, those are fun.

 

[Chris Parker]

Must admit I didn't look too closely at this earlier...

The concept of iai, is more or less one of the main points of the sword arts. The essence of iai has many purposes, to be concentrated in stillness, to be explosive and quick to the point of being blindingly fast as well as efficient and accurate. To blend millions of movements into one movement at an unlimited variation of speeds-in all given directions.

Iai is a sword art in and of itself. It does not necessarily follow, though, that it is one of the main points in all sword arts. Systems such as Musashi's own Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu (as I mentioned) have no Iai aspect whatsoever, the same goes for Kukishinden Ryu and Koto Ryu Biken, and many other Koryu systems include no Iai teachings at all.

In terms of it's essence, well that kinda depends on the system itself. Katori Shinto Ryu teaches that seated Iai (note: not from Seiza, as that is an eminently impractical seating method for Iai, and is utilised in systems removed from combative use, but rather from a half-kneel called Tate Hiza) is for situations at night, when you hear movement, as by dropping you can more clearly see your enemy silhouetted against the horizon. This explains their techniques involving leaping up or to either side. Their Battojutsu (standing Iai) is for when you are walking along, and are ambushed. In this school, the concepts of being "concentrated in stillness" are rather beside the point, as you are responding to stimulus.

Hontai Yoshin Ryu didn't originally include Iai, and in fact only incorporated it in the last (18th) generation under Inoue Munetoshi Soke. The techniques were taken from Toyama Ryu, and as a result many Hontai Yoshin Ryu dojo feature a high emphasis on Tameshigiri. Their Iai is often performed in pairs, making it more "combative", although they do teach seated kata solo as well. Within the Hontai Yoshin Ryu, the main reason was to give more of a focus on the sword, as Inoue Soke believed it was very important (as did some of his senior students, such as Kurushima Sensei (along with Inoue Soke he is responsible for bringing Iai back into HYR). A major emphasis in HYR for Iai is to improve the skill of the practitioners for their Tachidori (unarmed sword defence kata), rather than the above mentioned desires.

Tatsumi Ryu teaches with different emphasis again (and very limited technical aspects, including basically one form of draw, in which the sword is turned upside down first, a hallmark back to tachi, which were worn with the cutting edge down rather than up, and a unique method of holding the sheathed blade in your obi), and so on. Modern Iai is again different, other koryu forms (particularly those who trace themselves back to Hayashizaki Shigenobu) have again another approach. So while I don't disagree with your concepts on what Iai can comprise of, it is a bit inaccurate to say that that is what Iai is itself (in all cases), as there is as much variation there as there is in any other area of martial arts.

Sometimes i practice iai style cutting on flowers in expensive vases. The target being to slice off a flower or a seleced group of flowers. This is to be done in one move from more or less complete serene stillness. Another time i cut with smaller knives such as a bear claw. Sometimes, i stand there for a minute or so *adjusting*. One may say that the calculating is killing the mushin, but seriously, i have to be careful with the vases...

Sounds like a cool idea. Such precision training can be great... Tanemura Sensei has spoken about training Sojutsu, aiming his thrusts in the night at the moon, or at the leaves of trees. I've done similar myself. Just be careful of those vases.... some can be priceless....

not only to draw from the side, but to hold the free blade above your head in stillness is also iai. Iai is more than just the draw, it is the complete harmony of distance, angle,breath as well as tension and relaxation. The reason that most iai moves aim to be done with concentration in one move, is because in real combat, you only get one chance. It's the same for a strike in a real fight meaning how to place it if not time it. Now then-O-kay, well, i would say that every human interaction encompasses aspects of iai as it does aspects of kiai and aiki.

I always find Iai to be one of those really interesting concepts... as opposed to the alternate term, batto. Batto simply refers to drawing a sword (pretty close translation there), but iai actually means "to exist in harmony, or to come together in existence"..... cool, huh?

Now, the way I take that is that Iai teaches you to bring your intention, mindset, attitude, spirit, and body together with your technique in a single moment (I think that's pretty close to yours, there Kaizasosei, yes?), so when refering to sword drawing itself, I tend to prefer batto. That said, Iai itself exists with a sword, not without (although the concepts can, and ideally should, be an influence across your life), so taking them into other martial ideas is a little off.

So bottom line, i think that the concept of iaijutsu or iainuki and even the term would not have been foreign to a great swordsman like musashi. We can only imagine exactly what his training looked like, but by reading the gorinnosho, one can get a pretty good idea of the simple genious of it.

Well, we can get a very clear understanding of what his training looked like today, by training in Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, the training school and methods of Shinmen Musashi no Kami Fujiwara no Genshin, handed down through the succession of Menkyo Kaiden and Soke lineages from the 17th Century to today (albeit with a little controversy over that...), as well as the Dokkodo, Gorin no Sho, Hyoho Sanju Go (35 Martial Strategies), and more. And without instruction in HNIR, as well as Bhuddist teachings, it is said that you simply won't understand the Gorin no Sho, despite the simple genius of it. Not saying you won't get anything out of it, just that you'll miss a fair bit.

j

 

[kaizasosei]

Thank you Chris for the informative post.
I do understand that my interpretation of iai was somewhat inflated in that i assume that all sword arts absolutely need this concept for realistic training.
The seated positions, as far as i know, are some of the oldest arguably most holy iai kata and are sometimes known as seitaiiai- meaning 'correct body(posture)iai'
I believe that to integrate seitai and posture into the movements, would mean a further refinement for both iaijutsu art as well as swordarts in general. In that sense, the body and spirit link all fighting arts to one another.


j

 

[Chris Parker]

Thank you Chris for the informative post.
I do understand that my interpretation of iai was somewhat inflated in that i assume that all sword arts absolutely need this concept for realistic training.
The seated positions, as far as i know, are some of the oldest arguably most holy iai kata and are sometimes known as seitaiiai- meaning 'correct body(posture)iai'
I believe that to integrate seitai and posture into the movements, would mean a further refinement for both iaijutsu art as well as swordarts in general. In that sense, the body and spirit link all fighting arts to one another.


j

Not a problem. However, a few little things here....

Seitei Iaido (not SeiTAI - the term refers to "correct, or formal", not anything to do with the body "tai") is the modern form, not the oldest by any means. In fact, Iaijutsu systems (talking koryu here) often are less-than-flattering when it comes to Seitei Iaido due to things such as the use of Seiza, incorrect placement of the sword, techniques that are not really designed to be effective, and so on.

With the seated techniques (from seiza specifically), I don't know that they are any more "holy" than any other, just the ones learnt first in Seitei Iaido, really. As said, Katori Shinto Ryu have their seated techniques (note: not seiza) with the idea of a suspected ambush or attack at night. With seiza itself, the posture is subjected to a degree of controversy. Most koryu systems that date from before the Tokugawa Shogunate (ie during the Sengoku Jidai) don't use it at all, or if they do, it is most likely a much later addition or adaptation, as there is a lot of doubt as to how widespread the sitting posture really was. One theory has it that seiza developed purely for those seeking an audience with a fuedal lord, Daimyo or other, to present themselves in, as the posture actually inhibits the blood flow to the lower legs, making it harder to suddenly spring up and attack the lord.

So if seiza is purely for formal occasions in front of a Daimyo (as the name actually implies), you would not be recieved wearing a sword, so the very concept of practical methods of drawing and cutting from seiza is in doubt. It is also thought to have only really been taken up later in the Tokugawa Jidai (mid 18th century and onwards).

In terms of the "incorrect" placement of the sword, in Seitei Iaido the tsuka is placed across the body, making it easier to reach and draw, but no samurai would wear his sword that way. It leaves no place for the wakizashi. And your idea that these concepts (Seitei Iaido) are needed for realistic training is a little out, especially when Seitei Iaido is not necessarily realistic itself (movements are deliberately large, focused on the form being perfected as much for aesthetic purposes as cutting practicalities). For realistic Iai, honestly, look to Katori Shinto Ryu. That is probably the most "realistic" form of Iai I have come across (including methods of simple practicality such as starting each kata by placing the back of your hand across the tsuka before turning it to grip... this simple movement is to keep your sleeves back out of the way so the tsuka doesn't get caught up in them!). The movements are very tight, direct, and everything is designed from a practical standpoint (hence no seiza...).

 

[kaizasosei]

I think i know what you mean with the blood flow in seiza. I can relatively easily sit in seiza for an hour without moving but one great teacher i have had the honour of meeting, Hosokawasensei, can sit in Seiza for six hours without visibly moving.　　




j

 

[Vulcan]

I think i know what you mean with the blood flow in seiza. I can relatively easily sit in seiza for an hour without moving but one great teacher i have had the honour of meeting, Hosokawasensei, can sit in Seiza for six hours without visibly moving.　　




j

It takes a lifetime of practice to learn how to subtly sway and circulate your blood flow while keeping your posture in seiza for long periods of time. This level of concentration and breathing technique is quite impressive. My teacher is helping me with it, and it gets easier with practice....but I feel like I have a long way to go...

 

[jonpalombi]

I seem to remember hearing that Musashi trained with Bokuden at some point, though I don't remember where I saw that...

Hi Matt,

Sorry you are banned but such is the nature of existence. Well, it would certainly have been marvelous if Musashi had even met Tsukahara Bokuden, let alone, have studied with him. They were born 95 years apart and Bokuden died in 1571 (13 years before Miamoto Musashi was born). For Bokuden to have taught Musashi ANYTHING about the sword, had he lived long enough to have... he would have been well over 100 years of age! Had he been a centenarian, why would he allow such a wild young man into his inner circle? Even so, I suspect Iaido would have been one of the last things he would have instructed Musashi in (if it even existed, as we know it today).

I have always been of the mind that Musashi was soooooo very, very unorthodox, that he continually confounded his adversaries with his own non-traditional, personal style of swordsmanship. Granted, he must have been instinctively superior to ordinary swordsmen. In this light, it is ridiculous to picture him starting his sword-drawing from a seated position or anything like that. He must have done some kind of sword-drawing practice but I seriously doubt he spent much time in personal duels drawing and re-sheathing the katana. Yes, it is a spiritual martial art and that's one of the reasons I love it so. Musashi was a seasoned fighter, so from my vantage point, it is most unrealistic to picture him practicing iaido, as we know it today. That being said, he was probably quite accomplished at the fundamental principles and internal elements involved with the study of iai (call it jutsu or do). Much has been said and much can be interpreted from the legends that spring up form such outstanding individuals. Still, at the day, what do we know for a certainty? How the heck are we to know such specific details? Ultimately, it is best to practice what we have been taught, with all our hearts and seek to improve ourselves in a gradual fashion. All we know without a doubt, is what we have seen from our own experience. In other words, "Shut up and practice."

Be well and practice often, Jon Palombi

 

[Ken Morgan]

Not a problem. However, a few little things here....

Seitei Iaido (not SeiTAI - the term refers to "correct, or formal", not anything to do with the body "tai") is the modern form, not the oldest by any means. In fact, Iaijutsu systems (talking koryu here) often are less-than-flattering when it comes to Seitei Iaido due to things such as the use of Seiza, incorrect placement of the sword, techniques that are not really designed to be effective, and so on.

With the seated techniques (from seiza specifically), I don't know that they are any more "holy" than any other, just the ones learnt first in Seitei Iaido, really. As said, Katori Shinto Ryu have their seated techniques (note: not seiza) with the idea of a suspected ambush or attack at night. With seiza itself, the posture is subjected to a degree of controversy. Most koryu systems that date from before the Tokugawa Shogunate (ie during the Sengoku Jidai) don't use it at all, or if they do, it is most likely a much later addition or adaptation, as there is a lot of doubt as to how widespread the sitting posture really was. One theory has it that seiza developed purely for those seeking an audience with a fuedal lord, Daimyo or other, to present themselves in, as the posture actually inhibits the blood flow to the lower legs, making it harder to suddenly spring up and attack the lord.

So if seiza is purely for formal occasions in front of a Daimyo (as the name actually implies), you would not be recieved wearing a sword, so the very concept of practical methods of drawing and cutting from seiza is in doubt. It is also thought to have only really been taken up later in the Tokugawa Jidai (mid 18th century and onwards).

In terms of the "incorrect" placement of the sword, in Seitei Iaido the tsuka is placed across the body, making it easier to reach and draw, but no samurai would wear his sword that way. It leaves no place for the wakizashi. And your idea that these concepts (Seitei Iaido) are needed for realistic training is a little out, especially when Seitei Iaido is not necessarily realistic itself (movements are deliberately large, focused on the form being perfected as much for aesthetic purposes as cutting practicalities). For realistic Iai, honestly, look to Katori Shinto Ryu. That is probably the most "realistic" form of Iai I have come across (including methods of simple practicality such as starting each kata by placing the back of your hand across the tsuka before turning it to grip... this simple movement is to keep your sleeves back out of the way so the tsuka doesn't get caught up in them!). The movements are very tight, direct, and everything is designed from a practical standpoint (hence no seiza...).

My friend, you think about this stuff waayyyy toooo much. Go practice.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hi Matt,

Sorry you are banned but such is the nature of existence. Well, it would certainly have been marvelous if Musashi had even met Tsukahara Bokuden, let alone, have studied with him. They were born 95 years apart and Bokuden died in 1571 (13 years before Miamoto Musashi was born). For Bokuden to have taught Musashi ANYTHING about the sword, had he lived long enough to have... he would have been well over 100 years of age! Had he been a centenarian, why would he allow such a wild young man into his inner circle? Even so, I suspect Iaido would have been one of the last things he would have instructed Musashi in (if it even existed, as we know it today).

I have always been of the mind that Musashi was soooooo very, very unorthodox, that he continually confounded his adversaries with his own non-traditional, personal style of swordsmanship. Granted, he must have been instinctively superior to ordinary swordsmen. In this light, it is ridiculous to picture him starting his sword-drawing from a seated position or anything like that. He must have done some kind of sword-drawing practice but I seriously doubt he spent much time in personal duels drawing and re-sheathing the katana. Yes, it is a spiritual martial art and that's one of the reasons I love it so. Musashi was a seasoned fighter, so from my vantage point, it is most unrealistic to picture him practicing iaido, as we know it today. That being said, he was probably quite accomplished at the fundamental principles and internal elements involved with the study of iai (call it jutsu or do). Much has been said and much can be interpreted from the legends that spring up form such outstanding individuals. Still, at the day, what do we know for a certainty? How the heck are we to know such specific details? Ultimately, it is best to practice what we have been taught, with all our hearts and seek to improve ourselves in a gradual fashion. All we know without a doubt, is what we have seen from our own experience. In other words, "Shut up and practice."

Be well and practice often, Jon Palombi

I'm going to go the controversial route again (particularly for someone who has some experience in HNIR...), but I really don't think Musashi was that unorthodox. He didn't go around with a left-handed grip (which would have truly been unorthodox, and I only know of two systems said to have occasionally utilised it, one as a method of "playing dumb"), have a "reverse blade" with the edge on the inside of the curve (only seen in anime, really), or anything of the kind. What he was (during his time dueling and engaging in his Musha Shugyo) was unrefined.

By his own admission, he didn't survive or win his duels through much more than luck and determination. The idea that Musashi pioneered use of psychology in combat is incorrect, as is the idea that the methods he used were unique to him. Even the technical make-up of the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu I would not describe as particularly unusual. It's an immensely pragmatic system, focused on immediate effect and direct line actions, with the philosophy of never removing yourself from the combat (and losing your ability to easily counter or attack while opening yourself up to an attack as you retreat), but the basic ideas, targets, actions, movements are similar enough to other systems out there (of course, with their own unique aspects, such as a unique grip utilised by HNIR and more, but they are more in the subtlties). It was only later that he started to put together what would become HNIR.

When it comes to Musashi knowing the "fundamental principles and internal elements involved with the study of Iai", well, I really don't think that even that is necessarily true. As said, many of the older systems (including HNIR) don't include any form of Iai at all, as if it is a battlefield system or a duelling system, it simply isn't needed. Iai is more about ambush attacks than anything else, and if we are talking about a duel, or a larger-scale battle, facing the other guy with your sword still sheathed is kind of dangerous. And that seems to be Musashi's entire experience in combat with a sword.

As for Musashi being "taught" by Bokuden, I haven't heard that either, so not sure where Mark go that from... that said, Musashi's first duel was against a practitioner of Shinto Ryu (Arima Kihei), which either refered to Katori Shinto Ryu (which Bokuden Tsukahara came from) or Shinto Ryu itself (which was founded by Bokuden), so there's some connection between Musashi and the teachings of Bokuden... still not a probablility that Musashi studied Shinto Ryu himself, as it is stated in the Gorin no Sho (from memory) that he is only concerned with his own system rather than any others, although the Wind book is concerned purely with the percieved short-comings of other systems.

Oh, and Ken? Uh, well, yes. I'll go pick up my weapons again for a bit now.