iaido vs iaijutsu?

[jarrod]

i understand the difference between most -do & -jutsu arts, but what is the difference between these two? does iaijutsu train more against a live attacking opponent while iaido focuses more on precision cutting against static targets, or what? thanks for clearing this up.

 

[Sukerkin]

That's not as straightforward a question as you might think, Jarrod .

Iaido is technically what happens up until the point after the nukitsuke (first cut on drawing). After that it is Iaijutsu.

Nowadays you will find all sorts of clubs and school calling their swordwork Iaijutsubecause they think it sounds more 'martial'. After all Ju Jitsu is fighting and Judo is playing, right, so Iaido can't be really sword-fighting can it :shrugs:?

We shall leave those type of schools to one side.

Some of the very old armed styles call their katana based elements Iaijutsu but even the Katori Shinto Ryu term it Iaido and that school is about as 'battlefield' as you can get.

In the end, I wouldn't worry about it for now. Treat the terms as synonymous (along with kenjutsu, battojutsu et al). Iaido is the way of the sword by any other name .

 

[arnisador]

In my experience the terms are indeed used in confusing ways nowadays. Most anything you'll find probably should be described as one of iaido (first draw), kenjutsu (general sword-fencing), or kendo (the modern sport version with sticks). But for historical reasons you'll those mentioned previously as well as batto-do and even kenpo (not the usual use of the term), and indeed some people like to say iaijutsu because it sounds like it should be mroe effective and "pure".

It's certainly true that some iaido schools focus on perfection over practicality, esp. if they follow the ZNKR curriculum only, but the other kind of school is still out there!

 

[jarrod]

thanks guys, that uh...clears it right up. i guess :-/

it would be handy if japanese sword arts were taught all together wouldn't it? how to draw the sword, how to use it once it's out, then shinai & bogu used for free sparring.

thanks again.

jf

 

[Charles Mahan]

thanks guys, that uh...clears it right up. i guess :-/

it would be handy if japanese sword arts were taught all together wouldn't it? how to draw the sword, how to use it once it's out, then shinai & bogu used for free sparring.

thanks again.

jf

They are all taught together. MJER is one style of Iai-do/jutsu/heiho (depends on who you ask, what time of day it is, and the color of your shoes). I will stick to MJER since it is all I know well enough to speak on. The regular training curriculum of MJER as we practice it in the Seitokai consists of around 80 solo and partner waza. Then there are dozens of kae-waza which present variations on the usual way of doing waza. Iaido is kenjutsu.

What seperates Iai ryu-ha from other kenjutsu ryu-ha is an extra emphasis on nukitsuke(drawing cut) which leads to a different mode of regular practice, ie with shinken most of the time. It is necessary to train with a shinken(live blade) most of the time in order to really get the details associated with nukitsuke. As regular practice requires a shinken, most waza in MJER, and other Iai ryu-ha, are solo waza. (NOTE: Shinken are usually only introduced into regular training several years into a students iai career for obvious safety reasons.) The kumitachi, or partner practice, waza are not usually introduced until a ways into the curriculum and are meant to fill in the gaps of solo waza. They allow the student to focus on issues like timing, distance issues, suki(opening) creation, etc. which are difficult to work on when you are training against an imaginary opponent.

There is no "free sparring" inside the MJER curriculum. We can speculate on the reasons all day and not get anywhere meaningful. Suffice it to say that it is not considered a necessary or desirable part of regular training. If it were, then it would be part of the regular curriculum.

As was already mentioned, while Iai concentrates on maximing the effectiveness of the drawing cut, it is hardly the only part of the training. The waza do not stop after the draw, the majority of the each waza occurs after nukitsuke. So there is no need to fear that joining an Iaido school will leave you lacking in some element of basic swordsmanship. It's all there.

The terms Iaido and Iaijutsu are considered interchangable in everyday use. Some styles will pick one or the other terms for their official designation, but members of those styles will frequently use the terms interchangably. The Seitokai line of MJER is a member of the Zen Nippon Iaido Renmei and so naturally uses Iaido most of the time. The Jikishinkai line of MJER chooses to use Iaijutsu most of the time for reasons of their own. If I had to speculate I would assume it had something to do with making it clear that they are seperate from the other lines which use Iaido most of the time.

Iaido is technically what happens up until the point after the nukitsuke (first cut on drawing). After that it is Iaijutsu.

That's a little different from the phrase which I am familiar with. What I've usually heard is that only nukitsuke is truly Iai, everything that happens after that is kenjutsu.

 

[Senjojutsu]

Hello Jarrod,

Please put the style name on the backburner.

Search the Yellow Pages/Google to find the JSA training opportunities within a realistic training radius for your circumstances.

Observe a JSA class, find out their background, go home to do some further readings.

Attend a class or two if you have an opportunity.

If their Japanese Swordsmanship techniques/methods appear to be anything like as within the linked videos that are mocked within these threads - run away!

Kendo World Forums – Flames:

http://www.kendo-world.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=24
​

Good luck,

 

[arnisador]

What I've usually heard is that only nukitsuke is truly Iai, everything that happens after that is kenjutsu.

That's what I thought too. My understanding is as follow: Kenjutsu is the older approach and was intended originally for open battle on a large field, with sword already drawn. (The sword was generally a backup weapon--longer weapons were preferred in battle but could break, be dropped, etc.) Iaido developed later, when one-on-one or few-on-one attacks in cities were more common than battlefield use of the blade. One might need to draw it for a surprise attack.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye, it was a distinction I thought about drawing before but hesitated to so as not to cloud the terminological issue.

The general principles of swordsmanship remain unchanged but the intention of Iai was either to defend against or instigate surprise attacks whilst in essentially urban areas. Many kata include a scenario wherein the practitioner has limited headroom, is in an alley or corridor, attacking through a doorway et al.

So the emphasis is on the swiftness of the draw leading directly into a cut (or a defence) and on the use of movement and surroundings to evade attacks or provide opportunity for attacks, all the while bearing in mind that the iaidoka is unarmoured.

 

[arnisador]

all the while bearing in mind that the iaidoka is unarmoured.

Yes--this changes things too! More freedom of movement, less protection, and less need for a sufficiently strong cut to go through armour (or to target weak spots in the armour).

 

[jarrod]

wow, thanks for all the info guys. unfortunately kendo is the only japanese sword art available in my area, so that's what i've been studying. due to a quick google search i did find out that there is an iaido workshop coming in september, i'll be sure to be there.

thanks again,

jf

 

[pgsmith]

While I think Charles did a very good job explaining things, I want to address a particular statement here ...

In my experience the terms are indeed used in confusing ways nowadays.

While the various terms for Japanese sword arts : iaido, iaijutsu, iaihyodo, batto-do, batto-jutsu, kenjutsu, kendo, kenpo, hyoho, etc ... can be quite confusing these days, this isn't due to people misusing them. They are confusing because the Japanese language is very context driven, and many of their words are interchangeable within a given context. I remember having a conversation not long ago with a very senior Japanese sword art exponent that was visiting from Japan. He used the words batto-do, kenjutsu, iaido, and kendo in the same conversation referring to the same sword art. It used to be that the Japanese sword arts were quite rare, so you didn't hear much about them. Nowadays the popularity, and availability, of the sword arts has greatly increased. Add this expansion to the internet, and you have a lot of different words being used to describe basically the same thing.

 

[Sukerkin]

That is true.

I would say tho' that, if we're trying to simplify matters for someone just starting out in their journey, unmasking the convolutions of the Japanese language might not be that much of a help .

Is it not better to begin with a flawed understanding of the language (especially the ancient forms that apply to the sword arts) and gain better understanding as you go?

That's how I began.

I only started to learn Japanese after I started to learn Iaido and not many practitioners are tempted to do even that {it is monstrously hard for a Westernised linguistic mind-set after all }.

So, yes, the terminology is confusingly applied at times, Jarrod but for us mere gaijin it's not that bad. Iaido is one thing, kendo is quite another - the rest can wait.

 

[Charles Mahan]

In light of the myth of "Iaido as performance art and Iaijutsu as combat effective", I think addressing that particular aspect of terminology confusion is perfectly viable, especially with newer folks who are actually asking about the differences between the two.

People shouldn't use any of these terms as a means for drawing conclusions of any sort about a ryuha. Basically what Paul is trying to do is de-emphasize the idea that there is signficant meaning to be had in the terms. I think that's a valid topic for discussion.

 

[pgsmith]

Iaido is one thing, kendo is quite another - the rest can wait.

That's a pretty good way to look at it, but Charles brings up a good point also when he said ...

People shouldn't use any of these terms as a means for drawing conclusions of any sort about a ryuha.

Too many people try to deduce the emphasis of a particular school by its use of terminology alone, which can be quite misleading. How about this as a definition for the novice: kendo almost always refers to the arts using the shinai, a bamboo sword, and bogu, protective armor. Any of the other names are often used interchangeably.

 

[Sukerkin]

I do agree, Charles and Paul.

Please don't misunderstand my intent in trying to keep things a little simpler to start with as being anything more than that.

 

[Isabre13]

"Do" was added to many arts at the end of WWII becuase martial arts where not allowed during the occupation of Japan.

 

[Kusarigama]

'Do' represents a singular path or way. 'Jutsu' on the other hand offers many different routes. Suio Ryu is a Bujutsu as it offers many routes and tributaries which it demonstrates in its techniques. Therefore, the Hekiunkan (Suio Ryu Iai Kenpo Honbu) is not a Dojo as such as it is not a place to follow a single way, this is different for Kendo practitioners."

Katsuse Yoshimitsu Kagehiro serving as the 15th Headmaster of Suio Ryu Iai Kenpo

 

[Sukerkin]

Interesting.

I've not heard that particular interpretation before. Then again, as if to prove that I'm not some all knowing oracle of the sword arts, I've never heard of Iai Kenpo before either.

With not rudeness intended, what on earth is it? Iai Kenpo ?

Google, also not an oracle it would seem, provided nothing substantive as to this being a koryu art - just the same few quotes promulgated into 'Internet Truth' by repetition.

 

[Hyper_Shadow]

I always thought it went:

Do: Path or Way (Bare bones and basic core)
Jitsu: Art or Style (A closer examination of the do)
Jutsu: Science (The direct reality and deeper understanding)

Do-Jitsu-Jutsu-Jitsu-Do-Jutsu-Jitsu

One without the other is pointles they are all different viewpoints and aspect to the same thing. There is no divide. If you put the divide there then you are seriously not getting the most out of your martial path.

That's about as simple as I understand it. I hope that helps.

 

[jarrod]

if i'm correct, jutsu & jitsu are just different spellings of the same term. generally speaking, do arts are intended for moral & spiritual cultivation as much as martial application. jutsu/jitsu arts are more concerned with winning in conflict.

jf