Vintage ju-no-kata with Mifune as uke

Who is tori? Yoshiaki Yamashita?

noboru wrote:Who is tori? Yoshiaki Yamashita?

Looks like Kano shihan.

Description to the video says

"Tori: Yamashita Yoshitsugu" (second line)
"Uke: Kano Jigoro" (third line, which is wrong, it is Kyuzo Mifune)

柔の形
取り：山下 義韶
受け： 嘉納 治五郎

If you see Tori as a bald man (as I do) it can't be Yamashita, because Yamashita had full hair.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamashita_Yoshiaki

As I understand japanese Judo hierarchy, Tori has to be of equal or higher rank than Uke.

If the footage is from about 1920 (and Mifune was 6th Dan in 1920), Tori has to be one of the few 7th Dan and higher in 1920.

Anatol wrote:As I understand japanese Judo hierarchy, Tori has to be of equal or higher rank than Uke.

May be it for public demo only. I don't know. In some koryu during teaching kata. Sensei or instructor is as Uke / Uchidachi. Pupil is Tori / Shidachi.

When I lear kata in judo, I started as Tori, my sempai was Uke and give advice me and teaches me with creating situation for kata - Nagenokata, GoshinJustuNokata. Could be nice hear experineces in judo from other people about this.

Here is nice article from Nishioka Tsuneo sensei (ShintoMusoryu jojutsu). He explained roles in jojutsu/kenjutsu kata in his ryuha.

Source: https://www.koryu.com/library/tnishioka1.html

Uchidachi & Shidachi
by Nishioka Tsuneo

Uchidachi
Uchidachi, "striking sword"

Shidachi
Shidachi, "doing sword"

The heart of bujutsu is rei. The responsibility of a teacher is to communicate this to students. If this communication fails, students can develop incorrect attitudes and the true meaning of training is lost. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of abuse of power in Japanese budo today. In my opinion few teachers are teaching the principles of budo correctly. Rei in budo has become very artificial, resembling the old-style Japanese military hierarchy. The true meaning of rei is no longer expressed. We seem to be preserving only the worst parts of Japanese traditions and culture, and we need to consider ways to change this situation.

Bujutsu leads to rei. The instructor ideally behaves as an exemplar to lead students toward something higher. Rei is an expression of humility towards that higher existence. But some people, as they develop their skills and achieve higher rank, dismiss what they ought to have learned about rei. Those who fail to work as diligently to improve the spirit as they do to improve their techniques are likely to forget the proper humility of true rei. They are apt to become overconfident, proud, and patronizing. Spiritual development and technical development are entirely different things and there is not necessarily any relationship between them.

Training in jojutsu, for example, has a wonderful quality because it can result in both sorts of development; spiritual growth leads to technical growth and vice versa. Development is not merely a matter of technique. However, if physical techniques are taught improperly or superficially, students will become confused. There will be even greater misunderstanding if the focus is only on the process of polishing techniques. We must never lose sight of the intent to "correct and improve the spirit." The only way to ensure this is to study under a master teacher.

In general, people misunderstand what a master teacher is. They can become confused, equating the idea of a master with that of an instructor or a senior. Unfortunately, as one's skill level increases, so, often, does the size of one's ego. Too frequently, younger people who are of high rank or who have received a license or scroll assume that they are qualified to be a teacher just because they have instructor certification, own a dojo, or have students. It is a grave error to believe that a person is a master teacher just because of a high rank or license.

Once, my teacher, Shimizu Takaji Sensei (1896-1978), told me not to copy the jo practiced by his junior fellow student Otofuji Ichizo Sensei. Unless one carefully reflects on what Shimizu Sensei really meant, this statement can be easily misunderstood. He knew that there were some differences between his way of using jo and tachi, and the way in which Otofuji Sensei used these weapons. Even in kata bujutsu,[2] it is very natural for there to be differences in the form. That's because different people have different levels of technical understanding and different mindsets. This leads them to make movements in slightly different ways and they pass on these individual characteristics in their teaching. Shimizu Sensei was afraid that young students would notice these differences, get confused or suspicious, and think that one way or the other was wrong. He seemed to have been concerned about the inevitable errors that result when a student is unable or unwilling to follow just one teacher. He urged me to follow a single teacher, to the greatest extent possible, and to avoid confusing myself unnecessarily by looking around at other teachers.

Having more than one teacher can create serious problems in your training. On the other hand, insisting that students blindly "follow one and only one teacher" can result in separatist cliques and prevent students of different teachers from being able to practice together. This distasteful situation still occurs in the Japanese martial arts world. The only solution is to wait for the spiritual growth of both the teacher and the disciple; then students can train under a single teacher and still benefit from interacting with students from other groups.

This is why an understanding of rei is so essential to the process of spiritual growth in bujutsu. One of the most profound expressions of rei lies in the interaction between uchidachi, the one who receives the technique, and shidachi, the one who does the technique. Unfortunately, even teachers often misunderstand the subtleties of uchidachi and shidachi in kata training. They fail to pass on to their students the difference in intent inherent in these two roles. Particularly in the classical traditions, the roles of uchidachi and shidachi are quite distinctive. Each has its own unique psychological viewpoint. It is essential that this distinct quality always be maintained. I believe that the difference in these two roles is the defining characteristic of kata training. Recently, I've come to the realization that it is not even worth training unless both partners properly understand this.

When an outsider watches kata, it appears that uchidachi loses and shidachi wins. This is intentional. But there's much more to it than that. Uchidachi must have the spirit of a nurturing parent. Uchidachi leads shidachi by providing a true attack; this allows shidachi to learn correct body displacement, combative distancing, proper spirit, and the perception of opportunity. A humble spirit is as necessary as correct technique for uchidachi. Deceit, arrogance, and a patronizing attitude must never be allowed in practice. Uchidachi's mission is vital. In the past, this role was only performed by senior practitioners who were capable of performing accurate technique and who possessed the right spirit and understanding of the role. Uchidachi must provide an example of clean, precise cutting lines and correct targeting, and must also convey focused intensity and an air of authority.

If uchidachi is the parent or teacher, then shidachi is the child or disciple. The goal is to acquire the skills presented by uchidachi's technique. Unfortunately, students often act as though they want to test their skills against those of the higher-ranked uchidachi. They consider this competition to be their practice. In fact, this leads to neither better technique, nor greater spiritual development, because the correct relationship between uchidachi and shidachi has been obscured. It is the repetition of the techniques in this parent/child or senior/junior relationship that allows for the growth of the spirit through the practice of technique.

The roles of uchidachi as senior and shidachi as junior are preserved regardless of the actual respective experience levels of the pair. Kata must be practiced so that trainees learn both to give and to receive. This is what makes technical improvement and spiritual development possible. Unfortunately, in jo practice, people sometimes think that they practice both roles merely to memorize the sequential movements of the two different weapons, tachi and jo. There are even some instructors who teach that the aim of Shinto Muso-ryu jojutsu is to learn how to defeat a sword with a stick. This is an error. If it continues, kata bujutsu may die out, because both the technique and the spirit of uchidachi will not improve.

These days there are fewer people who can perform the role of uchidachi correctly. I believe that bujutsu evolved into budo only by maintaining the idea of uchidachi and shidachi. This idea is a fundamental characteristic of the classical bujutsu. Although the Japanese arts, such as kenjutsu, iaijutsu, and jojutsu, have been transformed from "jutsu" into "do," if the proper roles in training are not preserved, the "do" arts will veer off in the wrong direction. Obviously, there is a difference between attempting to preserve the proper distinction between uchidachi and shidachi yet not achieving perfection, and a complete lack of effort or understanding about the distinction. The existence of the intent or the quality of the intent is manifested in daily practice and actions. Those who have the eyes and experience to see can tell the difference.

However, my concern is that these days fewer people understand this concept. In the future there will be fewer still. People seem no longer to recognize that the existence of uchidachi and shidachi is the essence of budo training.

All things considered, I am convinced that the most important things I have learned from Shinto Muso-ryu and Shimizu Takaji Sensei are the roles of uchidachi and shidachi in kata. There is no way to transmit the kata of the Japanese classical traditions without a proper understanding of this spirit of giving and receiving. It is not right for seniors in the uchidachi role to mistreat, bully, or torment their juniors. On the contrary, their job is to guide and educate. In the same sense, it is also terrible to see shidachi assume an attitude that is essentially patricidal, and attempt to destroy the uchidachi. I can only say that such a spirit should never exist.

Shimizu Sensei always said, "You must train with me" [i.e. directly with your own teacher]. He constantly took the role of uchidachi. Even with beginners, he never relaxed his attention. He was always serious with everyone. He was never arrogant and never lorded it over another person. I believe that this attitude is the most important teaching of kata bujutsu, and Shimizu Sensei's training was a wonderful example. This spirit is difficult to nurture, not only in jojutsu but in other situations as well. It is entirely different from a senior student or teacher showing off his skills to his juniors by treating them with arrogance and condescension. It is so easy to become trapped in a cycle of interaction that causes shidachi to react by attempting to compete with uchidachi. The guidance of a master teacher is absolutely essential to avoid this situation.

Uchidachi teaches shidachi by sacrificing himself, training as if he were going to be killed at any moment; this self-sacrifice embodies the spirit of teachers and parents. Kata training is of no use without understanding this. It is this spirit that allows shidachi to grow and polish his or her own spirit. Kata bujutsu teaches neither victory nor defeat, but rather how to nurture others and pull them to a higher level. That is budo.

I earnestly hope that everyone, particularly those who practice jojutsu, remember this axiom: "Do not be jubilant in victory; do not become servile in defeat. Lose with dignity." This is the spirit we must emulate.

thank you for your opinions

Anatol wrote:Description to the video says

"Tori: Yamashita Yoshitsugu" (second line)
"Uke: Kano Jigoro" (third line, which is wrong, it is Kyuzo Mifune)

柔の形
取り：山下 義韶
受け： 嘉納 治五郎

If you see Tori as a bald man (as I do) it can't be Yamashita, because Yamashita had full hair.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamashita_Yoshiaki

As I understand japanese Judo hierarchy, Tori has to be of equal or higher rank than Uke.

If the footage is from about 1920 (and Mifune was 6th Dan in 1920), Tori has to be one of the few 7th Dan and higher in 1920.

Anatol sama!
Ohisashiburi desu!

In my experience in Nihon den Kodokan judo, a couple of schools of karatedo, and some koryu jujutsu schools, generally tori is the senior practitioner.

BUT, that can be and is often reversed for demos, apparently to highlight the skills of the junior.

In jodo (Noboru san! thank you for that from Nishioka sensei, a fine gentleman I met a number of times, and studied under not nearly enough) and most kenjutsu schools, AFAIK in demos, _tori_ is the _junior_, while the senior is uke (I'll not introduce the traditional names, which are different from judo, e.g., shidachi / uchidachi, etc. according to the school).

And I am not at all sure why. Never actually though to ask, probably should sometime.

My impression (informed by much of anything) is that the senior is showing that he/she can provide a suitable target without fear, without unintended weaknesses, and that uke can take the attack with aplomb.

Because, think about it. If I present myself to someone with a 5 foot / 1.3m oaken staff that can break my bones, and I go through a complex kata, and at the end of it, the staff stops an inch from my skull, but I am in perfect balance and composure, and demonstrating full knowledge of the reach and effect of that staff, AND how to counter it, who is demonstrating what?

Have I not demonstrated that with such knowledge that I could take another half step back (or just lean back...) and then eviscerate tori if I wished? Everything is in place, everything is ready, everything is complete. All in fullness.

Anyhow, that's the way I saw it, but what do I know.

But for judo, the ideal is anyone changes to either tori or uke role without hesitation. One of my favorite sensei is a retired Tokyo Metropolitan Police judo instructor - I can walk up to him, name any single technique from the judo kata curriculum, and he will say the kata name, the next kata, and demo left or right immediately. Beautifully.

I think that amazing, and try not to resent him for it.

L Gatling
Tokyo

NBK wrote:

Anatol wrote:Description to the video says

"Tori: Yamashita Yoshitsugu" (second line)
"Uke: Kano Jigoro" (third line, which is wrong, it is Kyuzo Mifune)

柔の形
取り：山下 義韶
受け： 嘉納 治五郎

If you see Tori as a bald man (as I do) it can't be Yamashita, because Yamashita had full hair.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamashita_Yoshiaki

As I understand japanese Judo hierarchy, Tori has to be of equal or higher rank than Uke.

If the footage is from about 1920 (and Mifune was 6th Dan in 1920), Tori has to be one of the few 7th Dan and higher in 1920.

Anatol sama!
Ohisashiburi desu!

In my experience in Nihon den Kodokan judo, a couple of schools of karatedo, and some koryu jujutsu schools, generally tori is the senior practitioner.

BUT, that can be and is often reversed for demos, apparently to highlight the skills of the junior.

In jodo (Noboru san! thank you for that from Nishioka sensei, a fine gentleman I met a number of times, and studied under not nearly enough) and most kenjutsu schools, AFAIK in demos, _tori_ is the _junior_, while the senior is uke (I'll not introduce the traditional names, which are different from judo, e.g., shidachi / uchidachi, etc. according to the school).

And I am not at all sure why. Never actually though to ask, probably should sometime.

My impression (informed by much of anything) is that the senior is showing that he/she can provide a suitable target without fear, without unintended weaknesses, and that uke can take the attack with aplomb.

Because, think about it. If I present myself to someone with a 5 foot / 1.3m oaken staff that can break my bones, and I go through a complex kata, and at the end of it, the staff stops an inch from my skull, but I am in perfect balance and composure, and demonstrating full knowledge of the reach and effect of that staff, AND how to counter it, who is demonstrating what?

Have I not demonstrated that with such knowledge that I could take another half step back (or just lean back...) and then eviscerate tori if I wished? Everything is in place, everything is ready, everything is complete. All in fullness.

Anyhow, that's the way I saw it, but what do I know.

But for judo, the ideal is anyone changes to either tori or uke role without hesitation. One of my favorite sensei is a retired Tokyo Metropolitan Police judo instructor - I can walk up to him, name any single technique from the judo kata curriculum, and he will say the kata name, the next kata, and demo left or right immediately. Beautifully.

I think that amazing, and try not to resent him for it.

L Gatling
Tokyo

Interesting, I remember reading/being told the opposite, with the natural order being that Uke was always the more senior. If one believes that the purpose of kata is not display, but to improve one's judo, then the role of Uke is to teach the more junior person how to do the waza. A more senior Uke will already know how the waza is supposed to work in terms of kuzushi, debana, principles etc....

If I may stick my 10 cents worth in here..................I'd tend to agree with Jonesy...(at the risk of a severe thrashing from NBK during my next Tokyo visit)...... I was taught that Uke was the more important part of the Kata, and usually the more Senior of the pair, because without Uke, the Kata cannot flow, Uke is in charge of the attacks and the timing must be spot on, therefore the person with the control of the Kata must be the Higher grade

OK, simple question for Jonesy and BillC -

If uke is meant to be the senior person, why is there zero record of Kano shihan acting as uke, but tons of him as tori?

Also, why are the Kodokan demonstrations always have tori of equal or higher rank?

Could it be that the idea of uke being the higher grade is when tori is learning the kata(to assist tori in learning), and during demonstrations tori is the higher grade(to perform the demonstration as well as possible)?

Could it be that the idea of uke being the higher grade is when tori is learning the kata(to assist tori in learning), and during demonstrations tori is the higher grade(to perform the demonstration as well as possible)? wrote:

I think the same.

On this forum is hread about it.
https://judo.forumotion.com/t2722-uke-tori-and-their-roles-in-kata

I tried to look to any book from Draeger, Kotani, etc. and I did not the explanation in way how Nishioka sensei talked about situation in jodo.

May be direct question to High level Kodokan teacher could help for understanding roles.

Draeger have very nice text in his book. I found some extract on judoinfo.com page. https://judoinfo.com/kata/

classicschmosby wrote:Could it be that the idea of uke being the higher grade is when tori is learning the kata(to assist tori in learning), and during demonstrations tori is the higher grade(to perform the demonstration as well as possible)?

I think it so. And in my experience in judo, that is it.
But in the classic jujutsu / kenjutsu schools, usually the opposite. The senior will do both roles to teach but is usually the aggressor / attacker / 'tori' in demos.

noboru wrote:...
May be direct question to High level Kodokan teacher could help for understanding roles.

Draeger have very nice text in his book. I found some extract on judoinfo.com page. https://judoinfo.com/kata/

I'll try to ask sometime, but am not optimistic. They'll typical have opinions but few historic citations.

NBK wrote: ... But in the classic jujutsu / kenjutsu schools, usually the opposite. The senior will do both roles to teach but is usually the aggressor / attacker / 'tori' in demos. ...

Lance, your use of the term 'tori' here irritates me.
While there are opportunities when tori may be called the 'aggressor', or 'attacker', like most of the time in Nage no kata for example, isn't that reverted in forms like Kime no kata or Kōdōkan goshinjutsu?

As to my understanding, 'tori' ('doer') and similar expressions like 'nage', or 'shidachi', are simply designations for the person that executes the 'principal' or 'final' ('deciding') technique(s), regardless of his role as the aggressor / attacker, or as the defender in a given set, while 'uke' ('receiver'), and similar expressions designates the 'victim' of this 'principal' or 'final' ('deciding') technique, regardless of his prior passivity or 'aggression.

For example, if we simply practice seoi nage in kihon, the person thrown is called 'uke', and the thrower is 'tori', this time as well as the 'attacker'.
But if we practice seoi nage as a defence against a Shōmen uchi (overhead attack), the thrower is still 'tori', even if he now is the defender against 'ukes' previous attack. In this set, uke was the 'aggressor / attacker'.

According to this, shouldn't it read: ' But in the classic jujutsu / kenjutsu schools, usually the opposite. The senior will do both roles to teach but is usually the aggressor / attacker / 'uke' in demos.'?

However, I don't think, terms like 'aggressor', 'attacker' or also 'defender', are most suitable to describe the meanings of 'tori' and 'uke'.

From http://www.judo-ch.jp/english/dictionary/terms/

Uke
In Kata (Form) and Yakusoku geiko (Agreed-upon practice) exercises, "Uke" (Player receiving opponent's attack) refers to the combatant who is receiving a Waza, and "Tori" (Player executing technique) refers to the combatant who is executing the Waza. Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) maintains the correct posture, and allows Tori (Player executing technique) to easily execute the Waza without resisting. Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) moves in tandem with Tori (Player executing technique), allowing himself to be thrown, and practicing his Ukemi (Break fall) techniques in the process. In order for the Yakusoku geiko (Agreed-upon practice) to produce the desired results, Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) most move his body in preparation for Tori (Player executing technique) Waza even before Tori (Player executing technique) executes it, thereby allowing even difficult Waza to be executed smoothly and easily. It is important that Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) and Tori synchronize their motions (and breathing) to ensure that the Waza are executed in a natural manner. Moreover, this practice provides Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) with the chance to learn, with his very body, what type of destabilization leads to what kind of throw.

Tori
"Tori" (Player executing technique) refers to the person who is executing a Waza during Kata (Form) training or Yakusoku geiko (Agreed-upon practice). The contestant who receives this Waza is called "Uke" (Player receiving opponent's attack).
After performing Tai-sabaki (Body shifting / Body control) to destabilize Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack), Tori (Player executing technique) throws Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) down onto his back. Even after the throw, Tori (Player executing technique) does not release Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack) pulling hand until the Waza is completed.
Yakusoku geiko (Agreed-upon practice) provides Tori with the opportunity to learn how to destabilize Uke (Player receiving opponent's attack), and to learn the proper timing for executing the throw. Tori (Player executing technique) thus increases his skill for performing the Waza accurately.

Noboru Sensei, ..... Thank you,.....I like the way you have worded this....nobody has ever made it this clear for me..........although I do understand and have always done so..........I'll use your description in future to assist my Kata students.

Thank you, I am not sensei and I only paste here the description form judo channel. I did not write this text. Have a nice day.

Hi all!

I am aware, that Tori and Uke are interchangeable and Uke is a very important part of any Kata and also that Uke is sometimes the instructor of Tori

but!

the video is an old footage and footage was very expensive at that time and it is also a high level demonstration.

It would also be uncommon, that Uke (Mifune) is about 15 to 20 years younger than Tori and being Tori's instructor at that time. Judo is and was a young man's sport/martial art and Tori obviously knows his Ju no Kata.

I am going with Busen Milano (they did the same research than I and came to the same conclusion but having better evidence because of a photograph made before or after the footage)

Tori is Hajime Isogai

"Below is an image of the performers of the movie (the first and second from the right). Probably the guy of the previous movie is the first on the right in the image and looks a lot like Isogai Hajime."

http://www.busenmilano.org/ju-no-kata/

Forse

Reinberger wrote:

NBK wrote: ... But in the classic jujutsu / kenjutsu schools, usually the opposite. The senior will do both roles to teach but is usually the aggressor / attacker / 'tori' in demos. ...

Lance, your use of the term 'tori' here irritates me.
While there are opportunities when tori may be called the 'aggressor', or 'attacker', like most of the time in Nage no kata for example, isn't that reverted in forms like Kime no kata or Kōdōkan goshinjutsu?

As to my understanding, 'tori' ('doer') and similar expressions like 'nage', or 'shidachi', are simply designations for the person that executes the 'principal' or 'final' ('deciding') technique(s), regardless of his role as the aggressor / attacker, or as the defender in a given set, while 'uke' ('receiver'), and similar expressions designates the 'victim' of this 'principal' or 'final' ('deciding') technique, regardless of his prior passivity or 'aggression.

For example, if we simply practice seoi nage in kihon, the person thrown is called 'uke', and the thrower is 'tori', this time as well as the 'attacker'.
But if we practice seoi nage as a defence against a Shōmen uchi (overhead attack), the thrower is still 'tori', even if he now is the defender against 'ukes' previous attack. In this set, uke was the 'aggressor / attacker'.

According to this, shouldn't it read: ' But in the classic jujutsu / kenjutsu schools, usually the opposite. The senior will do both roles to teach but is usually the aggressor / attacker / 'uke' in demos.'?

However, I don't think, terms like 'aggressor', 'attacker' or also 'defender', are most suitable to describe the meanings of 'tori' and 'uke'.

It's a typo, should read:
The senior will do both roles to teach but is usually the aggressor / attacker / 'uke' in demos.

All better now?