The (Un)Realities of the Aikido “Sword”

Some students of O Sensei had a very in-depth and involved relationship with the Japanese sword.  Their experience has been passed down in specific associations, but not in the larger Art.  Tachi-dori is still a required test element for black belts, but one that has been allowed to lapse generally and might not even get asked for.

The definition of Tachi-Dori is tied to the definition of the Bokken:

1.       A single edge

2.       A single point that extends from the cutting edge

3.       No tsuba or hand guard

4.       No weaponized handle (ie skull crusher pommel or additional spikes)

5.       Roughly uniform length

6.       Curved

7.       Deployed with the right hand forward and the left hand towards the pommel

8.       No flexible or distracting elements

9.       No hidden weapons

10.   No scabbard

11.   No paired weapons

12.   No surprise attacks

13.   Handle less than a foot long

14.   Only three basic cutting movements allowed

15.   Both hands are on the handle at all times

Exceptions exist to EVERYTHING on this list.  We still train the way we train.

As we train mostly with wooden weapons now, the major difference is in the weight.  A metal sword blade is much heavier than the handle.  It falls into your hands as you swing it.  When you make a Bokken out of a single piece of wood, the handle is wider and fatter and therefore has more mass at the handle than the tip.  The balance feels very different. 

The same weight discrepancy is true of a Shinai.  The Shinai can be a fun training tool, because you can get hit with one and not get much of an injury.  I prefer a Bokken because at least with a Bokken we can tell where the edge supposedly is.  The Shinai is also a little to flexible to represent a sword.

I came across a paperback book from years ago that said the Bokken could be “more deadly than the Katana.”  Dead is dead.  You cannot be “more dead.”  A sharpened katana can kill more efficiently with less effort.  Yes, you can break bones and skulls with a Bokken – the same way you can with a baseball bat.

The length of the handle is almost inconsequential – I myself prefer to use a Bokken with more distance between my hands than a standard handle allows.  With no blade and no hand guard, it really doesn’t matter how or where I hold the Bokken.  The distinction between the real sword blade and the handle is - sharp.  (groan)

The single edge is a good, standard design.  Even in Japan it isn’t the only design.  The Ninja-To is straight, with both sides sharpened.  The hand guard is often depicted as square, with edges to the guard that could presumably be used to catch or cause trauma. 

The Japanese Shikomizue (think Zatoichi) is straight, but often (not always) only sharpened on one edge, no tsuba and often held in the reverse grip and employed with one hand with the scabbard being used to block or strike. 

Many other different names for swords become a statement on the length – only the samurai class was allowed to have the long sword, but merchants could be allowed to carry wakizachi which were of intermediate length.  Law Enforcement officers were allowed jutte (deployed often in the left hand, and wielded single handedly) and in Okinawa the law enforcement officials carried Sai (wielded in pairs).  With no hand guard, grabbing movements that could control the handle or weapons that could catch on the hand guard now run the risk of just slipping down the blade.

The sword is one of the world’s oldest weapons.  Nearly every culture developed some variation on a long blade.  The definition of the sword has a wide range of expressions tolerated within Japan, and many variations exist from other cultures. 

We take the idea of a sword being “razor sharp” as a given.  Apparently, this is not true all around the world.  A friend of mine who studies the German long sword notes a number of techniques using the left hand to grab about a foot away from the tip to make a strong brace or to improve accuracy and power with a stabbing motion on an armoured opponent.

We expect the sword to be a venerated object.  We further try to venerate our ethical response to our attacker and therefore try to elevate our technique.  This can interfere with the idea of a graduated response to an armed attacker.  We do suspect movements that might endanger us in an effort to show proper respect to the 2x2 piece of lumber.  We forgo antisocial movements that might give us a higher chance of success.  We do not appear to be doing this to learn strategies to take out an armed attacker, but rather as a tie to our historical roots.

No one carries a sword anymore.  Immediately post WWII, I think any sword training was discouraged and that has resonated through the decades since - even seniors instructors will claim to know little of the sword.

Why do Tachidori?  What advantages do Aikido people get from this practice?