The Book of Five Rings and Airsoft

[Gato]

Originally Posted by Akinno

That was exactly my point. The part with handling the weapon with one hand was just a direct example. Everyone is so quick to make assumptions. I just wanted to discuss the topic as a whole. I also think relating to already integrated concepts is also missing the point. It's about looking at things from a different perspective. But I apologize for fueling the internet hate machine. I'll just reframe from doing so in the future.

"When nine hundred years old you reach, be as accepting, you will not!"- Master Yoda (Slightly edited)


This is now the only source of knowledge and philosophy you need or are allowed to use.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Western martial philosophy and traditions are more applicable to the use of firearms.

[Jimski]

Clausewitz

[MultipleParadox]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

Western martial philosophy and traditions are more applicable to the use of firearms.

I disagree; I'm not discrediting Western philosophy on that matter however. For one, I'm sure they're just as good, and I haven't read much, if any, so I wouldn't be able to tell.

Where I disagree is in the statement that one is more applicable than the other. As Drake stated, it's about the underlying concepts, in which case you could apply Musashi's teachings to about every aspect of life, assuming you are ready to adapt your reasoning to the situation you're trying to evaluate. This goes with plain martial arts, eastern or western, modern or not, swords and firearms... but also at how you are approaching your everyday problems.

Go rin no sho, as well as Sun Tzu for that matter, is extensively used in financial and economy teaching after all (or so I heard).

Now don't get me wrong, whatever I just wrote is not to try and teach or enlighten anyone, just writing my thoughts.

To OP:
Thanks for posting this, I haven't read the book in ages and it made me want to reread it, which is a good thing (especially since I'm seriously considering starting to train in MA again, after more than 10 years! :x: )

--

It's definitely an awesome book, I think that everyone with at least the slightest intention of bettering themselves should read. Musashi is certainly well worth discovering.

[Jimski]

precisely, the underlying concepts in Sun Tzu are applicable somehow to modern warfare, but the original text is very specifically focused on medieval fighting on chinese ground (rice fields etc)

as Sun Tzu for that matter, is extensively used in financial and economy teaching after all

these are the underlying concepts.The text from Sun Zu is mostly useless for finance or personnal strategy in its original form.

[Ricochet]

Concepts maybe can be interpreted for modern combat. Core values can of course be applied anywhere, such as finance; at least at the metaphorical level. The basic properties of combat are extraordinarily different though. Offense of course has been prized over all else forever in war ("The best defense, is a good offense". -Clausewitz-). Defense is where you may find one major difference. Assuming of course your opponents are skilled in combat as well, you "will" have to block, parry, deflect, and possibly be expected to take damage. In a gun fight, it's more of a "wear armor, and don't get hit". Although there are training techniques on how to maximize effectiveness and survival whist injured, getting hit, or putting yourself in "harms way", is in itself a failure. You can't block a bullet or deflect a bullet. Your secondary is CQB, or "last ditch effort"; even possibly for egress. You do not use your primary or secondary weapon to repel an attack, unless you return fire (hence: "a good offense"). Although the philosophy is what's important, direct tactical advantage in a modern combat situation leans farther to a more blunt aggressive tactics versus precision killing, within a smaller time frame. If you wanted to apply the mysticism of the east to modern warfare, you'd have an easier time with economic or psychological warfare.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by MultipleParadox

I disagree; I'm not discrediting Western philosophy on that matter however. For one, I'm sure they're just as good, and I haven't read much, if any, so I wouldn't be able to tell.

I think that everyone with at least the slightest intention of bettering themselves should read. Musashi is certainly well worth discovering.

I agree in principle.. there is in fact only one human martial art, all cultural interpretations of that art are focused on the same body of human knowledge.

After 30 years of Martial Arts Study, a decade of military service and 14 years as the principle instructor of a Western Martial Arts School, I think I have a perspective that is relevant.

When I teach Combative Attributes, be it empty hand, with weapons of the hands or firearms I use a Western approach because it is directly applicable without modification or interpretation. Firearms Combatives is a Western Martial Art, Modern Military Doctrine is a manifestation of Western Consciousness, ideals and culture. All modern Military forces the world over have adopted an approach and structure that can be drawn right back to the Roman Legion.. which was eventually supplanted and assimilated by Western Germanic culture. Which was of course vested with Middle Eastern ethos, through Christianity.
Western Martial Culture is an amalgam of Ancient, Germanic and Middle Eastern that, by this particular combination ( in my opinion) brings it most close to the one true Human Martial Art that makes it tenants and principles foundational to all human combat without interpretation.

Adherents to other arts may disagree based upon their narrow view, and they are free to disagree, no one has a monopoly on knowledge or ignorance. there is enough of both to go around.

[Ricochet]

That's very true. The combination of schools is what is modern. History has shown that a working ideal or philosophy may one day be trumped. For example; the phalanx invented by Alexander the Great was in use in one form or another for a very long time. Other Greek nations, northern tribes, and if course the Roman legion adapted these tactics to suit; but followed the same basic principles. Now, that pattern wouldn't work. Out of necessity, someone eventually came up with a way to negate that type of fighting; because they couldn't match either martial might, numbers, training, or funding of their opponents; but they "must" win for survival or freedom.

Modern day full contact sports are another good example of this. You don't often see purists in MMA anymore, and if you do, they tend to not do well. Although a strong application of Karate or Muay Thai may defeat Tai Kwon Do or Kung Fu; they may be bested by Judo, Wrestling, or Jujitsu (just an example, no need to start a thread on how traditional Goju-Ru would still beat Tiger Wu-Shu!). So now MMA for example blends all the winning attributes into a different aspect of martial force. The basic concept was the striking of boxing, the kick/knees/elbows of Muay Thai, the take downs of wrestling, and the submissions of jujitsu. Now of course it's very much become it's own thing and continues to grow.

The philosophical points would have been all that was useful when the first time an army if swords and spears went up against an army of guns and cannons...just sayin'.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

the phalanx invented by Alexander the Great was in use in one form or another for a very long time.

The genesis of the spear Phalanx is lost in time.. but I expect it has it's true beginning in groups of spear wielding hunters going against very big game in the Neolithic Era..

The human animal deprived of natural weapons, bestowed with intelligence has devised every means of combat, from the cast stone and stick to space launched Nuclear Missiles, we are the ultimate killing Machine.

no culture in the history of man has been so innovative and so seeking for advance in efficiency and effectiveness in killing their fellow man as the Europeans.

[Ricochet]

It's been said that early man would've used long spears, brutally close together to take down large or even quick prey. I'm assuming everything from elephantidae, large felines, and bears.

The unit battle formation involving platoons of soldiers on an equal march carrying rows of spears, shields, or swords known as phalanx first appeared in Greece around the Bronze Age (at least first recorded). There are no records of these tactics being used during the siege of Troy; however the structure, and function was perfected by Alex. The phalanx systems used by Spartans, Romans, Athenians, and Corinthians were often accredited to him.

I was referring to the system he created, not the first usage of such a system, or a comparable system used by early man. I guess that's like comparing the first two men having a fist fight to the first time to studies of martial arts collided.

Anyways, I think we are on the same page. The samurai (for example), had certain codes they lived by. Things like their sword was their soul, their emporer was a living god, and that honor must exist in all things they do. They were such a prolific fighting force, that they are revered to this day. Their ethos, mantra, or code was the basis for much literature. However their fighting ideals couldn't last. Today you'll find enemy's goading their nemesis into a fight, using politics to shift the balance of truth, and then winning a battle without pulling a trigger. Always cheat, always win. The invention of the atomic bomb stands a symbol of modern brute force. If you can trick, disorient, or dominate your enemy, it is no longer considered dishonorable. Sportsmanship left Warfare long ago, and so did the tactics that flowed with such beliefs.

[Aquamarine]

Originally Posted by pugs144

Who's condemning? Did you expect everyone to massage your balls for quoting Musashi?

I'd be lying if I didn't raise my hand.

[THe_Silencer]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

The phalanx systems used by Spartans, Romans, Athenians, and Corinthians were often accredited to him.

I was referring to the system he created, not the first usage of such a system, or a comparable system used by early man. I guess that's like comparing the first two men having a fist fight to the first time to studies of martial arts collided.

If you are referring to the system Philip II of Macedon (Alexander the Great's daddy) created, then please specify that you are talking about the Macedonian phalanx, not just Greek phalanxes in general, since there's a distinct difference in armament (longer pikes called Sarissas and smaller shields in comparison to the more traditional hoplite panoply). Even though Alexander III of Macedon did not invent the Macedonian phalanx, He conquered most of the known world with it.

Spartan, Athenians, Corinthians, and the rest of the Greek city states were utilizing the phalanx hundreds of years before Macedon was even a blip on the map.

Also, the ancient Romans that most people are thinking of did not utilize the Macedonian phalanx or any phalanxes at all in their Legions (outside of hired mercenaries). The Roman legionary system of warfare was considered far more versatile and mobile compared to the Macedonia armies and their heavy infantry was considered the envy of the civilized world (though their cavalry was awful compared to everyone else, and certainly won't hold a candle to Alexander's Companion calvary). This system allowed Rome to eventually conquer the remainder of Alexander's successor states. Though to be fair, the Etruscans, a civilization living in Italy before the Roman hegemony came to be did utilize phalanxes, just not the Macedonian kind.

[LukeBrinsmead]

not bad,
I would even say that I liked it!

[Johnsonwach]

Similar measures will be taken for the show in Poland, which is a time-marking fight for Wach who eyes a big 2020 run. The 40-year Johnson vs Wach live old from Krakow was in line to face unbeaten heavyweight contender Agit Kabayel, only for such a pairing to fall through along with thousands of other bouts over the past seven weeks due to the ongoing global health crisis.

[Henry Rolland]

Originally Posted by LukeBrinsmead

not bad,
I would even say that I liked it!

agree, cool