Evaluating Manuscripts of Takeda Army Strategist Yamamoto Kansuke

There are countless examples of old military manuals and martial arts-related scrolls that have survived to present times. Containing important information regarding combative (and sometimes non-combative) topics, they are usually provided to those privy to the knowledge, or copied by said information with permission to do so. That being said, there can be multiple versions from one source, with each having either slight differences, to not resembling each other at all. There are reasons for this, many which can be deducted to when it was written, who wrote the document in question, who the person was that received it, to whom the audience was. One example of this is the many documents that are stated to come from Yamamoto Kansuke, the famed military strategist during the 16th century.

For today’s article, two types of manuscripts will be presented that fit this topic. Both stated to come from Yamamoto as a singular source, they’ll be examined in terms of content, as well compared to evaluate their similarities and differences.


Yamamoto Kansuke is an individual highly debated amongst researchers and scholars alike. This stems from topics such as validity of his existence to authenticity of various manuscripts that helped structured the Takeda force and associated groups. When looking at these manuscripts, many are signed by him, or reference him for his impeccable knowledge. Let’s look at two that I have in my immediate collection, which are “Heihō Hidensho” (兵法秘伝書) and “Gunpō Hyōhōki” (軍法兵法記), and look into their background info.

Pic of the book “Yamamoto Kansuke “Heihō Hidensho””, with box cover (left) and front page (right).

First up will be the Heihō Hidensho. This was one of select works that are said to come from Yamamoto Kansuke’s knowledge on combat. Going by the date of 1701 as when it was written, it would eventually be compiled together with many other documents into a collection in remembrance of the Takeda clan and their rule over Kai (present-day Yamanashi prefecture) during medieval Japan. This collection is called “Kai Sōsho” (甲斐叢書), and has been reproduced on numerous occasions as a large volume of historical reference books from the 1800s to the 1900s by individuals like Hirose Hirokazu (廣瀬廣一), and the group “Kai Sōsho Kankoukai” (甲斐叢書刊行会). The manuscript Heihō Hidensho is located in the 9th volume of the Kai Sōsho.

For this article, the book “Yamamoto Kansuke “Heihō Hidensho””, published by the company Keibunsha, will be the resource used. It not only shares the same name, contains the entire manuscript have been retained. While one can say its source material is dated, this reproduction can be seen as fairly modern, mainly because the original text has been slightly modified to make it easier to read & understand, while still retaining its old Japanese feel. The modifications primarily relate to updating older kanji not part of the standardized Japanese language. There are more unspecified updates/edits in this book version, which will be spoken upon later in this article.

Pic of the book “Zusetsu – Kobudōshi”, with box cover (left) and front page (right).

The 2nd resource, “Gunpō Hyōhōki”, is claimed to have been written by Yamamoto upon the order by his lord & ruler of Kai, Takeda Shingen, for the sake of his army. This particular manuscript is dated 1546, and is signed to a Nagasaka Chōkansai¹ by    the strategist himself, which can be determined by the signatures in the manuscript. This resource was drafted into 4 parts.  One of these parts is called “Kenjutsu no Maki”, which is considered invaluable and possibly a glimpse at what the legendary Kyō ryū² may be based on.

In the book “Zusetsu – Kobudōshi”, there is a section dedicated to Yamamoto Kansuke that includes the Gunpō Hyōhōki to its entirety. This is reproduced in this book as-is in the form of photos from the original source. Note that the original source does exist in a book form, which can be accessed at certain libraries in Japan. Visually, it appears to be an authentic document, as it follows the format of similar documents produced in the 16th century. This includes type of speech, and using a cursive writing style, which proves to be a challenge to read. There are lots of text with the context focusing on kenjutsu


To get a clearer picture on the similarities and differences between these two documents, we will look at the contents on military combat, particularly from the Heihō Hidensho’s “Mokuroku” section, and Gunpō Hyōhōki’s “Kenjutsu no maki” section. These are much easier to analyze, even if we don’t look at the particulars in the techniques, as well as being accompanied with pictures. Here’s a partial look at their table of contents:

Heihō Hidensho: Mokuroku

  1. Fighting forms (形勢, Keisei)
  2. Method of hand-to-hand fighting(拳法, Kenpō)
  3. Method of sword fighting (剣法, Kenpō)
  4. Method of staff fighting (棍法, Konpō)
  5. Long-range weapons – naginata, yari (長道具ー鎗、長刀, Nagadōgu – naginata, yari)
  6. Method of archery  (弓法, Kyūhō)
  7. Firearms (鐵袍, Teppō)³ 

Gunpō Hyōhōki Kenjutsu no maki

  1. Three points regarding kenjutsu (劔術三ツの要といふ事)
  2. Postures with 3 height levels when wielding the sword (上中下段かまいの太刀)
  3. Postures with the sword against unexpected encounters (りんきおうへんかまいの太刀
  4. Forms for utilizing dual swords (両刀をつかふの形)
  5. Forms regarding battles between swords and spears (鎗刀戦いかまいの形)
  6. Diagrams of positions during battles between spears and archery (弓鎗戦かまいの圖)

At a glance, there are similarities between each book. For example, both put a great emphasis on sword fighting. Although it is not shown above, Heihō Hidensho’s section called “Kenpō” (Method of sword fighting) has its own table of content that, if listed, would require its own separate article, while everything else can be covered together in another article. In comparison to the Gunpō Hyōhōki, the contents on sword fighting is similar as it has many teachings that focus on using the sword against another fighter with a sword, while there are also lessons on using longer weapons against each other, and a small quip on archery. Interestingly, there is a focus on using a sword against different types of foes. Here are some pics for comparison, starting with those from the Heihō Hidensho on the top row, and Gunpō Hyōhōki on the bottom row:

From another angle, Heihō Hidensho has a dedicated section on hand-to-hand combat called “Kenpō” (拳法), which focuses on using restraining techniques such as grappling and strikes against  an opponent while wearing one’s swords sheathed on the side, and whether the opponent attempts to draw their sword or not. For the Gunpō Hyōhōki, it appears that there is no conversation on this. However, it does have several sections that cover this topic, which are “Torite no koto” (捕手の事),  and “Jūjutsu-ate no koto” (柔術当ての事).  Unfortunately, both are not accompanied with pictures, but instead are coupled with long explanations on the topic. If anything, the Torite no koto section does mention about the possibility of iai techniques during torite, so this could be compared with Heihō Hidensho. For the most part, both manuscripts use this idea of hand-to-hand techniques as more supplemental to kenjutsu.


As mentioned before, great importance is placed on kenjutsu in both documents. The direction both go with discussing the strategies while using the sword is through postures that signify an attitude or state of mind. The terms to indicate these in Japanese vary depending on the source. For instance, the word “kamae” is a common term for this. In the Heihō Hidensho the term “kensei” is another version, while  “kurai” can be found in the Gunpō Hyōhōki. One thing to understand when interpreting these is that these postures, despite which label is used, are not static stances. Instead, they represent strategic points of movement in response to the situation against the enemy.

First, let’s review a list of select techniques in the form of kamae from Heihō Hidensho:

  • Hira jōgo kensei (平上後剣勢)
  • Migi jōgo kensei / Hassō (右上後剣勢)
  • Hira ue musubi mae kensei / Takanami (平上結前剣勢・高波)
  • Hidari ue musubi Mae kensei / Jōdan no Kasumi (左上結前剣勢・上段の霞)
  • Hidari ue mae kensei / Kissaki Oyobi (左上前剣勢・切先及び)
  • Hira ue mae kensei / Tōhō (平上前剣勢・当法)
  • Migi naka musubi Mae kensei / Chūdan no Kasumi (右中結前剣勢・中段の霞)
  • Hidari naka mae kensei / Yoko Seigan (左中前剣勢・横青眼)
  • Migi shita ushiro kensei / Sha (右下後剣勢・車)
  • Migi shita musubi mae kensei (右下結前剣勢)

Each of these kamae are listed on their own page, as there are thorough explanations and examples on how they can be utilized against an opponent. The name for each one is more descriptive in terms of how they are assumed, although some of them do have alternate, unique names that are expresses a concept of imagery, which are used in different martial arts schools. At their core, they are variations of kamae that most practitioners of kenjutsu, kendō, gekiken, and the like should be familiar with. For example, from left to right:

Hidari ue musubi mae kensei = Kasumi (jōdan)

Hidari naka mae kensei = Seigan (chūdan)

Hidari shita musubi ato kensei = Waki (gedan)

For each kamae are explanations on how they can be utilized based on the enemy’s actions. The defender’s response isn’t as strict in terms of the counter attack, which makes things a little open-ended for interpretation. For example:

Hira jōgo kensei

ORIG: 敵より先に践込みて己を撃とせば其太刀の出るをよく見て左の身足を引て敵の撃出す手をうつべし

TRANS: The opponent takes the initiative and attempts to strike. Carefully watch when the opponent’s sword comes at you, then turn your body sideways with your left leg forward, pull your right leg back, and cut their right hand.

While this paints a rather clear picture in terms of movement using the attacker-defender model, it is also open-ended, for the type of the attack from the opponent is not specified, while the defender’s (us) initial position is not stated. This is pretty much how the techniques play out in this document, making it a supplemental source to any kenjutsu-focused martial arts school that can be studied upon.

Now, we turn our attention to Gunpō Hyōhōki, and look at some of the techniques mentioned:

  • Jōdan (2 types)
  • Chūdan (2 Types)
  • Gedan (2 types)
  • Denkō no kurai (電光の位)
  • Kasumi no kurai (霞の位)
  • Seigan no kurai (清眼の位)
  • Suigetsu no kurai (水月の位)
  • Yōgan (陽眼)
  • Ingan (陰眼)
  • Murakumo (村雲)
  • Yamatsuki (山月)
  • Nyūin no kurai (入引の位)

For this section, it starts off explaining the importance on 3 height levels while wielding the sword. They are the following:

Jō-chū-gedan kamae no Tachi

  • Jōdan (上段) = Upper stance
  • Chūdan (中段) Middle stance
  • Gedan (下段) = Lower stance

In almost all styles of kenjutsu and its modern equivalents, the idea of 3 height levels is a common principle. Illustrations show 2 ways of doing these, generally with one having the sword held in front, and the other with the sword held behind. This is abit different from what is shown in Heihō Hidensho, as there is not a great number of kamae where the sword is held behind. In the pictures provided, lengthy descriptions for these kamae and how to apply them is given based on one’s opponent’s actions. Each of the kamae are labeled according to their height level along with a unique name.

Let’s look at the following example below:

Jōdan – Denkō no kurai

This is the posture on the right. As a small explanation, in response to an enemy’s attack, the defender brings the sword above the head to the right, and strikes from overhead.

Take note that the picture sequences are not necessarily correlating with each other, especially in the later parts of the document. Each kamae, side-by-side, is significant in the Gunpō Hyōhōki; what’s important is the descriptions next to them. In a way, it’s a concise format to present lessons without using a step-by-step method.

The relation between the two documents is that Heihō Hidensho also follows the 3 height levels as specified in Gunpō Hyōhōki. Not only that, it follows the same order starting with high level postures, mid-level postures, then ending with low-level postures.


At first glance, when reading the particulars for these, it’s quite normal to think that both manuscripts are authentic & have been kept intact in terms of their original writing. This is certainly not the case for the Heihō Hidensho for a number of reasons which will be explained. As for the Gunpō Hyōhōki, this has a greater probability due to its appearance and contents, for much of the points on combat are done in a conversational manner that is not directly clear unless the reader has initiative knowledge in said topic, as opposed to very detailed, step-by-step descriptions that almost anyone can grasp. Take note that while this fits as what may be expected out of an older manuscript, just how much of it is 100% authentic as the lessons of Yamamoto, and isn’t a product of forgery, is hard to determine.

For the Heihō Hidensho, there are many points to pick up that indicate it’s not the original work. For starters, the original version, which would’ve been handwritten, is not available for view. Instead, we have a reproduction in print type of it in collection of other documents. It is mentioned to be reproduced several times, which most likely includes edits to suit the times, such as the kenjutsu kamae being compared to other unmentioned martial systems by presenting alternate names. Possibly the biggest clue is how the actual contents read; the way combat was approached was vastly different in Sengoku period in comparison to Edo period, and the way Heihō Hidensho reads coincide with the latter. For example, the hand-to-hand techniques demonstrated in it deals with situations in plain clothing and swords sheathed, which was a growing trend during martial artists during mid-to-late Edo period that were focusing more on jūjutsu and iaijutsu. Furthermore, the illustrations for the kenjutsu are not only similar to the style of specific artists during Edo period, but other pictures such as the ones used to illustrate staff techniques are not Japanese at all.

Finally, we look at the connection between both documents. Considering that they come from the same source, one can deduce that they were drafted around the same time period. Of course, this cannot hold up as an argument, since whereas Gunpō Hyōhōki looks to be a more authentic that was kept intact, we only see the typed version of Heihō Hidensho, which is a reproduction of said original source. This is even true when looking at the version in the Kai Sōsho. Despite presentation, if we compare the contents and acknowledge the similarities, (i.e. focus on kenjutsu, scenarios in which strategies for kenjutsu can be applied, etc.) what can be said about the differences? Let’s look at two points that can be considered.

  1. Information may differ based on the person whom was receiving the manuscript – Depending on a person’s rank, or even affiliation, there are cases where one individual would get more clearer notes, while a person may get less. It can be argued that those were highly-ranked group leaders would’ve received a much more detailed documentation, as it would be necessary when training their team. However, for someone who may have been a specialist may receive a more concise version that skims the surface, which could’ve just been enough for that individual.
  2. Manuscript may have been reproduced several times with edits – It is not uncommon that certain contents change and/or get updated by those who own it. This is true for both private documents, those passed on & used in martial arts schools, and those made for public viewing.

If we take Heihō Hidensho and consider it the same as the Gunpō Hyōhōki, then it’s possible it went through much edits and updates. This isn’t a bad thing, for if you think about it, combative knowledge should apply to the current times in order to stay viable⁵. With this in mind, it’s possible that the original lessons of Yamamoto Kansuke are maintained, but altered abit (or alot) so that it could still be applied in a society that still depended on the sword during Edo period.


It is great that there are documents written centuries ago that have been preserved for today’s generation. There are those that give credit to Yamamoto Kansuke, whether stated to have been penned by him or copied with permission. Unfortunately, researchers are faced with the task of validating the legitimacy of these, which tends to be difficult especially for those from Japan, as there’s a high chance they were produced during the peaceful times of Edo period by writers who try to pass them off as much older works. This brings our look at old manuscripts to a close. Hope everyone found this as an informative, and interesting, topic to read.

1) 長坂長閑斎. Historians believe him to be Nagasaka Torafusa (長坂 虎房), who was a retainer of Takeda clan of Kai.

2) 京流. This is one of 8 legendary sword systems that make up the collective group called Kyōhachi ryū. This was discussed in an article on this blog here.

3) This section may have been an add-on, after the development of firearms improved.

4) In this manuscript, there is no alternative name for this posture. However, I added the label here for this article due to it, from my personal experience, resembling the commonly used Waki no kamae, but done on the left side.

5) This same case was brought up for kyūjutsu (archery techniques) during Edo period, which was covered in an article on this blog here.

The Ura Behind Kata Geiko

Today’s post is regarding recent kenjutsu training done by Chikushin group. It is more of a reiteration of verbal explanations given to students during those sessions. I also express it here for the public to get an idea of how Chikushin group conducts kobudō training.

In our kenjutsu training we’ve been studying a set of kata that focuses on defeating a stronger opponent. Within this are a few kata that uses the scenario where the both you and the opponent are in tsuba zeri-ai (鍔競り合い), which means locking swords together by the swordguard. While dependant on the martial system and their philosophy, this can be a common occurance between two sword duelists where both sides close the distance and are trying to overpower the other. Similarly, this can be seen in today’s kendō.

Example of tsuba zeri-ai in a kendō match. From Wikipedia.

When looking at these particular kata as presented in our group, they present a scenario where the defender must use specific techniques to defeat their opponent who uses tsuba zeri-ai. However, before learning these, we must spend time understanding how to properly apply tsuba zeri-ai and win with it. 

In kata geiko (形稽古, practicing pre-set forms), the one who’s applying the technique as the defender may be viewed as doing the “true” style of one’s kenjutsu, while the attacker is not. This is actually not correct. In fact, we have to also study what is being done by the attacker, as it is very critical for the defender’s technique to work. In the case of tsuba zeri-ai, we initially study the finer details of this technique, from how it can occur when two fighters’ swords clash together, to how to properly initiate it ourselves. It is necessary to apply proper timing, leverage, and power in order to overwhelm another through this. In the end, tsuba zeri-ai becomes a tool in our arsenal, furthering our skill level. This is the ura (裏), or unspoken rules, in studying classical martial arts.

There are plenty of unspoken rules not only in kata geiko, but in many of the components found in classical martial arts. It is just more apparent when training in set forms during katageiko as-is, for if we only focus on what the defender is doing, we will only get a small piece of the puzzle. On top of this, one cannot properly defend against an attack that is not there. It is up to the instructor to ensure that students learn the ins & outs of every kata properly. This includes performing a real technique by the attacker role.

Again, in the case of tsuba zeri-ai, if the attacker doesn’t understand how to apply his/her technique correctly in order to lock swords together, the defender won’t be able to feel the pressure necessary in learning the proper rhythm to counter the opponent. It is the same as blocking a simple punch; if we don’t engage in repetitive drills ahead of time regarding how to deliver a punch with proper power, speed, and from an adequate distance, kata that involve defense against this won’t work.

To get an idea of how tsuba zeri-ai is applied in motion, check out our Chikushin Arts Instagram account. There, you’ll find the exact video posted recently from which the pics above were taken from, along with the complete outcome of the scenario that was demonstrated. On top of that, you’ll also find other kobudō-related pics and videos posted regularly to keep our Instagram account active.

Learning from Coded Instructions

When studying kobudō (Japanese traditional martial arts), you tend to run into many terminology that are coded. This use of wording is a form of encryption to hide the true nature of said lessons or techniques from falling into the hands of a rivaling martial system in the past. In modern times, it is much easier to decipher such jargon due to the openness of martial knowledge by many teachers and avid students. On one hand, these coded words express a lot about the mentality of past Japanese masters based on the environment they lived in, as well as the culture they grew up with, which in itself can be lessons to enrich one’s training.

An example of coded description can be seen in this one line from a document I am currently translating called “Tsuki no Shō” (月之抄), which is a study guide for those who are training in the kenjutsu of Shinkage ryū Hyōhō (新陰流兵法). The line goes as the following:

水月にて 座ト太体之手字ニ身ヲひねり掛ケ 一尺ヲカカへて打へし」

To summarize the line, it outlines how to go about trapping an opponent’s sword. While everything is straightforward, what is not is the part that is in red, which is read as “suigetsu¹”. This is a very common, poetic word that is used within many different fields of interest throughout Japan’s history. A general translation for this would be “water & moon”. In Japanese martial arts it tends to represent the area near one’s solar plexus. However, in the line stated above this would be incorrect. Not to be translated literally, it’s actually interpreted as “when the moon is visible on the surface water”. When read during a description of a sword dueling technique, one would be perplexed as to why this rather flowery, out-of-place visualization is there in the 1st place. Fortunately, after conversing with those who study Shinkage ryū Hyōhō, as well as doing some research on my end, I’ve come to learn that this simple word is actually a coded word for taking proper distance.

Much of what is learned from coded instructions require proper guidance from an instructor, as well as a great amount of training which entails going through trial & error. Just because it is understood that suigetsu refers to distance, distinguishing the point when “the moon is clearly visible on the water” still requires experience. This can be applied to even to the basics of kenjutsu. Let’s take Jōdan no kamae² (上段の構え) as an example. Jōdan no kamae is a universal posture in many martial systems where a sword is held above one’s head. It is considered to be a very strong posture due to being able to deliver a lethal blow to one’s opponent’s head. On the other hand, it is also deemed the most vulnerable, as there is little defense offered for most of the body. Even with these points explained, there are still factors that play a part in how one can take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of Jōdan no kamae. At what range would you get cut if you assume this posture? When can you successfully strike down the opposition through this posture? Actively training and going through trial & error as you put these points to the test will usually provide an answer.

Within the kenjutsu of Kukishin ryū (九鬼神流) which my group studies, are also coded instructions. One of the 1st lessons students learn is the concept of issoku itto (一足一刀), which helps to understand the range where two people’s swords meet. Of course, it goes further than this, as students learn the proper footwork to advance or withdraw in regards to the reach of their swords. Another one can be seen in the kata called kasugai (鎹止). The name for this kata comes from a small interlocking staple-like bolt used to join two pieces of wood together when constructing buildings centuries ago in Japan. For this kata, the idea of “bolting down” one’s opponent is taken from this carpenter’s tool. Of course, the type of footwork, distance and angles required to make this happen requires proper explanation and demonstration in order to grasp this idea.

In conclusion, learning from coded terminology in Japanese martial arts can be a perplexing experience, even when guided by proper instructions. Yet, if one takes the time to understand the reasoning behind it, as well as make use of the visual representation that is part of the Japanese culture, coded instructions can help boost one’s training experience. Of course, this is a case-by-case matter, and depends on whether a practitioner is able to embrace such a manner of instructions.

1) Depending on the martial system, can also be referred to as mizoochi (鳩尾).

2) Depending on the martial system, this kamae is also referred to by different names.

​Irimi Shiai & Its Application To Training

This past weekend during training, I engaged in a session of Irimi Shiai1. For Irimi Shiai, this involved one person using a bokken (wooden sword), while the other uses a training yari (Japanese spear). As this was a rather free form practice, it gave us a chance to work on techniques we learn from Kukishinden ryu Bikenjutsu, and see how to apply it against the techniques from Kukishinden ryu Sōjutsu. However, as this training was focused on the concept of Irimi Shiai, there were some rules we had to abide to, in order to make it a challenging, and informative, learning experience. This also included moments of referring to wearing armor and what role it would play in our kamae, along with spots to attack if the situation was on the battlefield.



What is “Irimi Shiai”, exactly? Well, it is well known as a competitive engagement between a longer weapon and a shorter weapon, but in reality goes beyond this as tactical practice. After Japan moved away from the constant wars of Sengoku period and was followed by several eras that promoted a more peaceful society, many martial schools utilized different training and competitive methods to keep their styles active. One method involved closing the distance between longer weapons, such as the yari. This became more prominent in the 1800s, when most martial schools moved in the direction of Kyōgi Budo² (sports-centric martial arts), competitive engagements that featured a sword style versus a spear style became commonplace.

An artwork (low-quality version) called “Sakakibara Gekikenkai Ezu” by Kaisai Yoshitoshi (aka Tsukioka Yoshitoshi). It features many martial artists in competitive matches while wearing protective gear. In the middle-right, there are 2 individuals squaring off using training yari, while below that are two fighters, one with a shinai, and the other with a naginata. From Wikipedia.


In some older cases of Irimi Shiai, the kenjutsuka (swordsman) dons on padded training armor and uses either a bokken or shinai, while the sōjutsuka (spearman) uses a padded-tip training yari, and no body armor. The goal of this match was the kenjutsuka had to close the distance and get in range to strike, whereas the sōjutsuka had to keep the kenjutsuka with only the tip of the yari. The rules were usually in the favor of the kenjutsuka, whereas they have more range of techniques to use in this match, the sōjutsuka was restricted to only using thrusting techniques, and only to the armored areas on the kenjutsuka. 

Having no body armor for the sōjutsuka is an interesting rule; while it insures the safety of the kenjutsuka (they will get hit a lot by the yari due to its reach), it is a nod the favor of the sōjutsuka, indicating the superiority of the yari. On the flipside, this puts more pressure on the sōjutsuka, for allowing the kenjutsuka to get pass the tip of the yari and in range to attack will put the skills of that sōjutsuka in shame…as well as in the receiving end of the shinai. 


There are records of competitions with Irimi Shiai involved, most speaking in favor of those using a longer weapon such as the spear coming out as the victor. There is a documention of such competition called “Taryu Shiaiguchi Narabi ni Montai³”, written by Kasama Yasunao. In it is analyzation of a large martial arts event that consisted of 17 kenjutsu schools competing against 9 sōjutsu schools. Some well-established and renowned schools were involved, such as Shinkage ryu, Takeda Hōzōin ryu, Sekiguchi ryu, and Niten ryu. Very detailed writeup included a description of each school and their  specialties, the methods some schools use to train, and the techniques used during the matches. In the end, the sōjutsu schools prevailed by having the most wins. 

The settings used for Irimi Shiai isn’t just limited to kenjutsu versus sōjutsu. Depending on the participating martial schools, numerous conditions can be set featuring different weapon systems. Over the years, some of the matchups included tachi vs naginata, naginata vs yari, mokujū⁴ vs tachi, and kodachi vs tachi. Despite the weapon styles used, the idea remains the same when concerning Irimi Shiai: one side is trying to get within range to attack, while the other side is trying to maintain range and keep the other out.



While Irimi Shiai is best suited for sports-related martial arts, it’s important to remember that the principles stem from actual combat. During the long warring periods in Japan, certain weapons were considered superior both in use and the strategies applied to them, such as the yari. On top of this, many types of weapons were carried and used by an armor-clad samurai varying in length, and not always was it possible to carry the “superior” weapon at all times. When a samurai armed with an uchigatana5 has to confront an enemy who so happens to have a yari, that samurai must do what it takes to win. This is true even off the battlefield, where warriors may engage in duels with each other, sometimes facing off against specialists in a specific weapon system. Some examples include Bokuden Tsukahara defeating a renown naginata master named Kashiwara Nagato by cutting of the naginata’s blade with his tachi, and Miyamoto Musashi outbesting the famous spear play the monks of Hozoin took pride in.

In Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, the different ryuha studied do not have a “sports” curriculum in it. This doesn’t mean that one cannot use “Irimi Shiai” as a tool to learn, but gives us an advantage of studying this with rules that are more suitable. For example, many forms and techniques found in Kukishinden ryu are designed for fighting in armor, so one can incorporate this in Irimi Shiai. Certain areas in one’s kamae and techniques are naturally protected by armor, so you can use this factor to guide your movements, as well as pick areas that are vulnerable to attacks on your opponent.

For Bikenjutsu, one can practice using their bokken as a shield to get by the blade of a yari. A practitioner can also seize the yari and hold on to both neutralize it and use their other hand to score a winning blow with their bokken. For sōjutsu, one is not limited to just thrusts with the blade of the yari, so all parts (including the ishizuka) can be utilized both offensively and defensively. Understanding the principles of one’s art, Irimi Shiai can be approached much realistically with less restrictions, yet must retain some structure in order to keep this as a method for learning.



This concludes my story on Irimi Shiai. It was a good experience on my end to engage in Irimi Shiai. I believe it would do wonders for others studying martial arts to challenge themselves in such a training method.


1) 入身試合

2) 競技武道

3) 他流試合口並問對

4) 木銃. The mokujū is a wooden replica bayonet for the purpose of training in Jūkendo. The techniques are heavily derived from sōjutsu.

5) 打刀. Uchigatana can be considered the predecessor of the modern katana due to similarities in blade length and shape. This was used as a close-range weapon on the battlefield.