Tachi kata 4-7

[cklin]

A while ago, someone explained in another thread regarding the lessons of the first three tachi kata:

Ipponme teaches how to kill;
Nihonme teaches how to disable without killing;
Sanbonme teaches how to be merciful.

I really liked the post, but I've since been thinking about what the lessons of kata 4-7 are and would like to hear what other people think.

[mingshi]

Lessons of the kata? Who made that up?
The Kendo Kata goes in this sequence does not mean that they're intentionally arranged to teach specific lessons....! Response to different Kamae, yes. Responing with different Waza in various situations, yes.

Sad that nobody ever managed to name them properly. Now we can only refer them in numbers...

If you're saying something about the cut, rather than the Kata as a whole:

#4=kill (Men)
#5=kill (Men)
#6=disable (Kote)
#7=kill (A slice thru body right?)

K#1=kill (Men)
K#2=mercy (point to chest)
K#3=mercy (point to chest plus arm twisting)

Would someone else give other comments too?

[Kent Enfield]

Originally posted by mingshi
Sad that nobody ever managed to name them properly. Now we can only refer them in numbers...Well, you can always refer to them by the name of the main technique, if you want.

Originally posted by mingshi
K#2=mercy (point to chest)I thought that in kodachi no nihonme, you cut men before coming down to point at the chest. (I've only done this kata a couple of times.)

[ben]

Mingshi: The person who "made up" the "lessons of kata" is in this case probably Inoue Yoshihiko sensei, whose excellent and in depth articles on the historical and philosophical aspects of kata are published in Kendo World magazine (doing your work here for you Alex :)). It was he who characterised kata 1-3 in the manner which cklin quotes at the top. However the brief one liners used hardly do justice to Inoue sensei's scholarship. In KW2 he covers 1-3, and in the new KW3 he covers 4-7. You should read them. In the KW2 article, he mentions that originally kata 1-3 were devised specifically for teaching in schools, and 4-10 were considered more for adult kendoka. So it seems there is a sense of a progression in the first three, a teaching about how a human being should strive to live. I've always found it curious that sanbonme is so hard to learn and to teach. Maybe that's because it is a kind of culmination of the first stage of kata.

Without wanting to sound too sucky, I must say a sincere thanks to Alex for translating these articles which give English speakers the first opportunity to find out more about this kind of advanced kendo theory.

b

[Alex]

cheers mate!

I'm working on Inoue Sensei's explanation of the kodachi now. Just keeps getting harder!:alien:

[cklin]

My bad for not attributing the concepts to the correct originator. My paraphrasing was just for brevity, of course.

Mingshi -- you misunderstood what I was asking. As ben points out, I was referring more to a deeper meaning behind the kata (perhaps a philosophical explanation?) rather than to the obvious physical cause-and-effect lessons. But you bring up a good point, it is perhaps the case that all the kata teach just these three lessons. Maybe there is also some basis behind the relative difficulty of T#3 and K#3 when compared to the other kata, which perhaps indicates that showing mercy is the hardest of all.

I guess I'll go re-read the first article in KW and wait to read the next.

[olaf]

I think I understand cklin's question now, after the clarification. After a little thought, here's my take, fellas...

The "lessons" from 1-3 have already been explained in the initial post. I can't accurately pinpoint what the lessons of the subsequent kata are, but here are some important points I think are noteworthy:

#4, though it also results in a kill, does so not via a direct mortal strike, but by means of a counterattack. The shidachi, in parrying during the execution of kaeshi waza, "catches" the opponent's strike, and hurls the blow back towards the uchidachi. This "reversal", or sudden shift in the balance of power, is unseen in the previous 3 kata.

#5, as mentioned before, also culminates in a direct mortal blow. Like #4, it comes only after some complication (a counterattack of sorts is also involved) but the important thing here is the zanshin following the strike. In previous kata, the sequence typically ends after the mortal strike has been delivered. In #5 such is not the case: after striking, the shidachi adopts almost an "extended" zanshin, followed by a return to an offensive position. One could say that the shidachi here is more "alert" than in previous kata...?

#6: that which I have said about #4, #5 also pertains to #6. Perhaps this hints at a progression of some sort, with each kata building on concepts in the previous kata, with increasing complexity? As to the question of what the "new element" in #6 is, I cannot tell...perhaps it is something to do with the role of seme? Recall that #6 is the first time we see the shidachi pressuring/driving BACK his opponent WITHOUT any overt, large movements of the body or sword.

#7 differs from the previous 6 kata in so many ways, I wouldn't know where to start... :)

[mingshi]

Ben: Sorry. Now it makes much more sense if those were characteristics of Kendo Kata. I'd be totally confused if someone said, "hey we'll show you how to be merciful by doing Kata #3..." A bad joke, I had made.

Apologizing to everyone, but I'm still not a KM Mag subscriber... because I change my mailing address too often. I've only read them once or twice whenever the new issue arrive and circulate within the club... Hence I'm still looking forward for a possible back issue reprint, or online articles archive...

Why does everyone find T#3 the most difficult? All 10 are very straightforward...

Kent Enfield: Er, about K#2.... sorry for the confusion.... lack of practice...

Olaf: Mmmm... I doubt your explaination of the "Lessons"....
#4---This "reversal", or sudden shift in the balance of power, is unseen in the previous 3 kata.
Of course! If something is "seen" in another Kata, why would that exist as a separated one???
#5---In previous kata, the sequence typically ends after the mortal strike has been delivered. In #5 such is not the case: after striking, the shidachi adopts almost an "extended" zanshin, followed by a return to an offensive position.
Er, what do you mean by "extended Zanshin"? Kata Tachi #1,3,5,6,7 and all Kotachi ones have significant expression of Zanshin.
#6--- with each kata building on concepts in the previous kata, with increasing complexity?
No they don't. They are from different Ryuha so they should not be related to each other (based on concepts and complexity)
#7--- differs from the previous 6 kata in so many ways
In what sense does T#7 differ from the others (so many ways)?

Blame my English if I sound too haughty
:calm: :calm: :calm:

[stakenaka]

Hmm... I have to disagree wuth Jenny. The original Kendo Kata (created in the late 19th century), was made from different ryuha
1) Hasso of the Jikishin-kage Ryu
2) Henka of the Kuruma Ryu
3) Hachiten-giri or the Hozan Ryu
4) Maki-otoshi or the Rishin Ryu
5) Kadan-no-tsuki of the Hokushin Itto Ryu
6) A-un of the Asayama Ichiden Ryu
7) Ichi-ni no tachi of the Jigen Ryu
8) Uchiotoshi of the Shindo Mugen Ryu
9) Hasetsu of the Yagyu Shinkage Ryu
10) Kurai-zume of the Kyoshin Meichi Ryu
This was abandoned. In the early 1912 the kata was redone, by members of the Shindo Munen Ryu, Musashi Ryu, Jikishin-kage Ryu, and Kyoshin Meichi Ryu. This kata had 9 daito techniques and 3 kodachi forms. Obviously, something happened from then.
Modern Kendo Kata I believe has the most influence from the Shindo Munen Ryu rather than any other school. However, Kendo Kata is not Shindo Munen Ryu Kenjutsu!
So no, each kata is not from a seperate school of fencing: it is a conglomerate with a stronger influence from one school.

(info taken mostly from private conversations and "Modern Bujutsu and Budo" from Donn Draeger)