Origin of the Japanese toward cross training

[JohnEdward]

I had a very strict Japanese jujutsu instructor, he didn't tolerate much and the consequences for not following dojo rules or protocol were sever. Most infractions were met with a stern warning, and if that failed with a second occurrence of the infraction, you were expelled from the dojo for life. Like, if you studied another martial art, or crossed trained in an other martial art you would asked to make a choice. If you didn't make that choice within a reasonable amount of time , like the next practice, you were told not to come back.

A component I believe of that behavior and philosophy was the idea you focused on one thing and one thing only. If you where going to be good, you made the sacrifices and committed to one art and its training. Especially, within the first 10 years of training. I was told that this was pretty typical of Japanese senseis of his generation, and it wasn't just contained to martial arts, but also functioned in the Japanese society to a greater extent. The Japanese, I was told, felt that great dedication equal or surpassing that of an Olympic athlete was the only way to success. That no divinations from the path or distractions of the goal wasn't tolerated. Which was really echoed by a friend who spent time in Japan in kendo school and a student was knocked unconscious with a bokken for not paying attention to the sensei's lecture. He wasn't concentrating on the task at hand or staying alert to what was happening during instruction of the task, his mind started to day dream for a second. Then WHAM! the sensei hits him on the top of the head and knocks him out cold with a bokken. I have been told by my Taichi instructor who is acupuncturist, (and whose isn't? ) that that could have kill the student; in Chinese martial arts, the crown of the head is target that results in death if struck hard enough. Talk about whacking someone on the head and not killing them was either a demonstration of great control or dumb luck. So my Japanese sensei fell into that category he was very strict and had that mind set.

Years ago, my Kendo friend introduced me to the Book of Five Rings, where Mushashi encourages diversity in training, studying other martial arts, and occupations as well. This is in strong contrast to what I was taught to focus on one path. My question is does anyone know if Mushashi's advice was ever widely adopted by the Japanese martial's culture? if not was the Japanese martial arts generally always as I described strict, or is that something of say the last 100 years?

 

[pgsmith]

A component I believe of that behavior and philosophy was the idea you focused on one thing and one thing only.

This is not quite the Japanese way. I would venture to guess that the jujutsu you were studying was a koryu, or classical school. Many of the koryu will not allow cross training until a student has achived a certain ranking within that koryu. Some don't allow any cross training at all. Some don't care as long as your training in their school remains constant and correct. To understand the attitude requires some understanding of the koryu, and where they came from. Each individual school was a political entity in its own right, and was controlled by a single person, the soke. The clout that a particular school carried, who they supported, and their world view and outlook varied widely according to the school. Many did not like to take the chance of their secrets being disseminated, others did not want their philosophies to be confused by conflicting philosophies from another school.

Which was really echoed by a friend who spent time in Japan in kendo school and a student was knocked unconscious with a bokken for not paying attention to the sensei's lecture.

This sounds like a bit of exaggeration or urban myth to me. I've been to Japan and trained several times, and have trained extensively with various Japanese instructors, and I've never encountered this type of abuse. Japanese societal ettiquette can be quite strict, but censure is the usual Japanese way of dealing with most transgressions, not violent reaction. To be perfectly honest, I have only encountered this type of aggressvely militant behaviour in American schools that are trying hard to mimic what they believe is the Japanese way.

Many prominent Japanese instructors tout the value of cross training in different disciplines.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I have to concur with PGSmith point of view!

 

[Bruno@MT]

The story with the bokken is an exaggeration I think. At least in the way it was told.
Of course, a student who displeases the sensei may always end up with 'uke duty' and find out exactly how much hurt the sensei can dish out. All in the name of proper demonstration of course.

And in some dojo, discipline may indeed involve a shinai. I know that sumo training for example is very brutal indeed. Being 'encouraged' with a shinai, or simply being told to ram body parts (incl head) against a wooden pole repeatedly, is not uncommon.

 

[Chris Parker]

First things first, the same post in three (very closely related) sections? Not really a good idea... you may want to ask the mods to put them together in one thread, otherwise it's just having the same conversation in three places.

Okay, next, Musashi. Musashi wrote about being a more complete person by having interests outside of martial arts, and wrote of understanding strategy (his strategy) by understanding other martial arts of the day... but that is not really the same as saying you should train in all of them. Essentially the Wind Scroll is a case of "here's how I do it, and here's why I don't do it like other people".

If you also read Hagakure, there are cases of Daimyo rewarding their retainers (samurai) for gaining rank in various systems, such as gaining a particular rank in swordsmanship, a higher wage for then adding horsemanship and archery, and a higher wage for adding spear or jujutsu. So, to that end, cross-training (in complementary skills) was encouraged in certain cases. On the other hand, schools such as Katori Shinto Ryu (until recent times) had as one it's four fundamental rules for training that no other martial arts could be studied at the same time. So really, as Paul said, it depends!

 

[Black Belt Jedi]

I think it depends more on the individual than a ethnic group that think that a Martial Artist should only be married to one style for the rest of his or her life. If people think that way then that could be a classified as just a classical mess, especially when programming that sort of doctrine to students. Cross-training in the Martial Arts had been an old tradition almost since the beginning of humankind. The world was opened to trade routes, so fighting techniques and resources on weaponry were adopted from one civilization to the next. For those that don't believe in studying various Martial Arts systems, have misunderstood what tradition in the Martial Arts really is. It is to always to hold on to tradition, break away and innovate. That is the Shuhari concept the hold, to divert, and to depart.

Before there was Bruce Lee, there were scholar warriors such as Matsumura, Kenwa Mabuni, Hironori Ohtsuka, Kanryo Higaonna, Chojun Miyagi, Chokki Motobu and many Okinawan Karate pioneers have crossed trained in different Martial Arts disciplines. The importance of Martial Arts is to be open-minded, if we don't have that, tradition would be dead.