Talk:Kyūdō/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ranking Section

The ranking section needs an overhaul. The current information is poorly worded and factually incorrect. If i recall, exams for Kyus/Sho dan are held regularly, maybe every 3-4 months? and exams for sho dan to yon dan are every 4-6 months? with go dan and up being once a year was it? I don't know if different regions have different schedules or it's based on what rank you're trying to obtain. Current article makes it sound like you only have 1-2 chances to take an exam in Japan a year, which is untrue since prefectures hold them at different times, you can just take a train out there. The only countries that have annual exams is the US and Europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.165.51.168 (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

History Section

The history section has the following passage

During the Tokugawa-period (1603–1868) Japan was turned inward as a hierarchial caste society in which the samurai were at the top. There was an extended era of peace during which the samurai moved to administrative duty, although the traditional fighting skills were still esteemed. During this period archery became a "voluntary" skill, practiced partly in the court in ceremonial form, partly as different kinds of competition. Archery spread also outside the warrior class. The samurai were affected by the straightforward philosophy and aim for self control in zen-buddhism that was introduced by Chinese monks. Earlier archery had been called kyūjutsu, the skill of bow, but monks acting even as martial arts teachers led to creation of a new concept – kyūdō

How accurate is this? According to the wiki article on Gendai_budō, The "way of the Bow" was established after the Meiji Restoration (1866–1869). It may just need further expansion for accurate time period. I'm sure there's an official record of when it became officially known as Kyudo? --Zarcath (talk) 22:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

According to Feliks Hoff (2002. Kyudo: The Way of the Bow (1st ed. ed.). Shambhala Publications. ISBN 1-57062-852-1) the consept of kyudo arose "during the long period of peace under the Tokugawa", that is 1600-1868. Hoff also mentions that 'jutsu' was dominant well into the period. But also that the notion of kyudo is older than that of most other 'do's, and the concept was first used by Morikawa Kosan (founder of Yamato-ryu) in 1660.Simohell (talk) 18:12, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Mongol Draw -image

I removed the image representing 3 different ways to draw a bow. It thought it was misleading and not informative enough. The draw claimed to be "the draw for yumi" was not correct. Thumb position was clearly incorrect and also in kyudo yumi is always drawn with a glove. I think it is not worthwile to illustrate a merely similar style of shooting. Pictures of actual kyudo technique would be welcome.Simohell 21:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

And I undid the removal mysef. It is maybe not too wrong, although the thumb is not correct. I do still hope that it could be replaced by all correct image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simohell (talk • contribs) 21:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I have some pictures of a mitsugake holding a bowstring which we can replace the draw image with once I reach 10 edits (Which at the rate I'm going, might be tonight...*Sigh*) Aabh (talk) 15:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Time to master kyudo?

"Kyudo is a rare sport in the sense that one can master the art at 90 or even 100 years of age."

That sounds like you can master kyudo in half a year, when in truth I'd assume at least 30 years. Better start at 60 if you want to be a master at 90 then, or yet better start at 18, because at high age you will not be able to create the specific muscles needed for superb shooting. Kyudo is a physical "sport" after all.

The point is, that a master can continue to be a master until a very high age by perfecting his technique. In Heki-ryu it is said that "a beginner shoots with his skin, advanced with his muscles but a master with his bones." The correct form reduces (although does not eliminate) the strain for the musceles. I have been told that there have been top level kyudo competitions with people over 100 years making it to the top 3. The sentence could be changed to express this idea better, but I am not a native english speaker so better for someone else to do itSimohell 21:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that the setence needs to be changed. I have made a revision. I don't think in that particular paragraph we need to get into the minute details of how an older person can still excel. Zarcath 11:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I changed it again. You added some comments about Zen and Kyudo which are very problematic. Read the discussion about this problem further down. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.61.212.208 (talk) 12:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC).
Your revision is worse then what it was before I changed it. It isn't practiced by both genders equally, it's viewed as a predominantly female sport. You say it's best to start after puberty which is complete speculation on your part. My paragraph only mentions Kyudo can be used as a form of zen mediation. This is not the same as saying Kyudo is Zen training or anything of the sort. The spirit of kyudo is to better one self, and for an introduction paragraph you want to get that across. If you have the right attitude and spirit you can excel at kyudo no matter what your age. Someone even reverted it back to my paragraph and you changed it again back to your version! If you have a problem with the allusion to Kyudo and Zen, just remove that part next time. Zarcath 09:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You should read the discussions here. It is not viewed as a female sport. Starting after puberty is not speculation. As I wrote, it is better to start when your bones have stopped growing. If you start to early, you can get bone defects. That's why most japanese kyudoka start in highschool or college. Starting at 2 is ridiculous. The part about bettering yourself is already described in the paragraph below the introduction. Again: Read before you write something. Spirit and attitude are important, but technique and strength are too. You cannot excel at kyudo if you don't start early enough.

You can LEARN about Kyudo at age 2, I didn't say you could start shooting at targets at that age. Maybe in cases if a young child is shooting an extreme amount, deformations can occur, but this is true with ANY atheletic sport, it's common-sense. I think Japan offering Kyudo courses during High School is just a matter of practicality. Why would they tailor courses for middle-school when children are least likely to care about it? Our youngest student is 13 and a friend in Japan started at 10. Our sensei comes from a Kyudo family and started learning from a young age. With the correct technique, strength does not play a large role, isn't that your example with the elderly? Zarcath 09:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
(the example with the elderly was not his but mine.) It is maybe a question of if learning at age 2 can be called learning kyudo. It is may be more like learning in general. I would like to think that kyudo needs to be a conscius effort towards a specific goal, not only mimicing others movements. This is something a very young child may not able to comprehend. Again difference betweed plain technique and the way (dō). I know some cases with kyudo starting at age 10. For instance late headmaster of Heki-ryu Insai-ha and one of the original 5 developers on kyudo kyohon Sakae Urakami (10. dan, hanshi). In any case if we say "at any age" we can't then define again from ages "2-100". Thus I removed the numbers. Simohell 10:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually, no one even really touches a bow here (Japan) until late Junior High or High School... I guess one could say "You can learn Kyudo at 2"... but it's like saying "You can learn to fly an airplane at 2"... and that's misleading. It implies that Kyudo can be practiced by young children, and that really is considered too dangerous (It may be different in the West... but that's the case here in Japan). It's not "practicality" that causes Kyudo to be practiced only in High School and above, if that were true then Kendo wouldn't be practiced in junior high. Its not all because of bone defects, Kyudo is a dangerous sport, resulting in death if mishandled (We had a girl get shot just a couple of months ago by accident in a high school). There is a level of maturity you need to have to perform Kyudo. Your sensei must have decided the 13 year old was mature enough (Which is perfectly alright), but it is really rather uncommon. Thus, I revised the opening paragraph slightly, and added the section on Kyudo and children. Aabh (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Myth about haya and otoya

It's a myth that haya and otoya exist to avoid hitting the same spot. Arrow makers simply didn't want to throw away one wing of a bird.

I belive you have at least a slight mistake here. If you have made arrows yourself you know, that each feather is cut in half - and both halves can be used (if the feather is large enough). This also applies to the birds tail feathers, which I hear are the best. Thus even from the tail you get both haya and otoya, although there is no 2nd tail to throw away. An in any case the flight of haya and otoya is different, since not only the feathers but also the lining of the feather is revesed. (the feather for the 1st arrow is left towards the tip while with the 2nd it is the other way around)Simohell 21:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm.. the most important reason for different rotation appears to be the flowing speed of the air. One side of the feather is smooth and one rough. So air touching the rough side will flow slower and the air touching the smooth side will flow faster. This information is from a Japanese documentary involving people from Tsukuba university. They show this effect with a bigger scale artificial model...Simohell (talk)

When you split a full feather in two, the two sides will be different. You cannot use them on the same set of arrows. I have seen the "underside" of feathers used on makiwara and enteki arrows. The feathers should be aligned straight on the shaft, so Otoya will just spin in the opposite direction of Haya. This has no effect on the path of the arrow though. You can make a set of arrows with haya and otoya from the tail, because the feathers are bent differently starting from the middle.

The alignment of the feather is different in different arrows because the "stick" part or "pen" (I don't what it is called in English) is slightly thicker from one side and also thicker towards the tip of the arrow. In otoya and haya the thick part is on different sides. (thus I have been told, the first arrow is chosen in order to show the cleaner side of the feather towards kamiza). Therefor if the stick-part is straight the feather is aligned differently and if the feathers are straight the stick-part needs to be aligned differently.
It is hard for me to accept that the flight path would be exactly the same: the spinnig affects the stability of the flight and hineri affects the spinning. This would implicate that the spinning is initially stronger in one arrow and weaker in the other. Then the first would stabilize sooner and it means that the flight pattern is not identical. The effect of the difference in spinning may be of course only theoretical but so is the whole question since there never will be two identical realeses. It is obviously fair to say that the different spinning will not in practice make any difference in whether two consecutive arrows hit each other or not. - which in a way would appear to mean it cannot be properly proven to be wrong either.
Discarding one wing does not seem to be a logical explanation in any case. Any professional arrowmaker would be making hundreds and hundreds of arrows. I would imagine he would have a stock of feathers, wings or birds big enough to make a set of arrows only from a few left wings and another set from the same birds' right wings. There would not be any problem with discarding wings then, just to make the different or even randomly mixed sets. A bird might also have one damaged and one good wing, or what ever.
There may be many other reasons as well... yin and yang kind of things or just wanting to make a rather insignificant although clearly visible difference appear to have a meaning by making different justifications. Maybe the article could say it is claimed that the effect of different rotation... or something like that. To make judgement of the generally spoken idea that spinning affects the flight pattern it would be rather good to have a source that proves or indicates it otherwise. Simohell 21:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Considered a female sport?

TakyuaMurata: I removed the sentence In Japan, Kyudo is sometimes considered female sport. because that sentence, to me, reports an opinion about Kyudo and does not discuss the art directly. But I agree with you in that it is a key fact that many women practice kyudo in Japan, so I added: In Japan, by most accounts, the number of female Kyudo practitioners is reported to be at least equal to and probably greater than the number of male practitioners.

If you really want to include text about how Kyudo is viewed in Japan as it pertains to the sexes, I will not disagree with you any further, but I feel the original sentence implies a sexism which, although it may be true, is not about kyudo but is an opinion about Kyudo. - Marteau

In any art with a majority of male practitioners would it be stated in the beginning of an article? I wonder... in any case as far as I know there is only one female Hanshi-rank kyudoka in Japan. So a very very clear majority of experienced kyudoka are definately maleSimohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Or it is a sad testament to discrimination of women in Japan. Especially if you consider that there are over 100 Hanshi. The percentage of women who train Kyudo is surely higher than 1%! As far as I know there is a special committee who decides who is worthy of the titles Hanshi, Kyoshi and Renshi. I would assume those are all male too.

I'm not so sure. In my dojo I have approximately 25 students that visit from time to time. My master is 8th Dan (Challenging 9th Dan), and there are two other 8th dans in the class (Lower ranking than my master), these three are male. Next down, though, is a 7th dan female (She's been practicing for 25 years). After that it seems to be 50/50, with a number of female and male 6th dan and below. I'm not so sure its a matter of prejudice anymore, many women give up kyudo here to care for families or other matters. Japan has been slow to join the equal-rights movement, but in the 90s, things really changed here. It's not perfect, but it is approaching equality really fast. In any case, it's hard to find women who have been studying kyudo for 30 or 40 years (Which is generally what it takes to be Kyoshi here in Japan) and didn't give it up because (in the 70s or 80s) their husbands told them to, or whatever. I think, given another 20 years, you'll see just as many females in the high ranking positions as you do males. There were two female and three male judges at my Shodan test, one of the females was 8th Dan, the other 7th Dan. Anyway, that's why you see so many young women in Kyudo but not so many older women... give it 20 years and you'll see that change. I guess I shouldn't protest the "womens' sport" thing... that's already been done. :D But I will add that my dojo is 50/50 and the last competition I went to was pretty much 50/50 Aabh (talk) 23:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed sections

Some things that can be incorporated:

Onuma Hideharu, 15th headmaster of Heki Ryu Sekka Ha, said the purpose of kyudo was to achieve perfection (which he considered to be impossible--when asked "why bother, then?" he replied "to not try is to be less than human.")

History of the modern form of kyudo as set by the All Japan Kyudo Federation (Zen Nihon/Nippon Kyudo Renmei) following World War II.

Hassetsu should be covered at least briefly--at the very least the basic movements should be listed:

1. Ashibumi (setting the feet properly)
2. Dozukuri (proper posture)
3. Yugamae (readying the bow)
(3a. Torikake (setting the glove))
(3b. Tenouchi (gripping the bow))
(3c. Monomi (viewing the target))
4. Uchiokoshi (raising the bow)
5. Hikiwake (drawing the bow)
(5a. Daisan)
6. Kai (finishing the draw)
7. Hanare (release)
8. Zanshin (continuation)

The differences between bushakei (warrior-style kyudo) and reishakei (ceremonial-style) should be expounded.

Difference between 'shomen no kamae' and 'shamen no kamae'; 'shomen uchiokoshi' and 'shamen uchiokoshi' etc.

Different types of yugake:
mitsugake (three-fingered) -- standard
yotsugake (four-fingered) -- used by many advanced practitioners; originally for long-distance shooting
morogake (five-fingered) -- used almost exclusively by Ogasawara Ryu practitioners

I just read this section and it contradicts what I wrote about a five-fingered glove (I didn't even know they existed! :D), so I will add that back in, would someone who knows more about the morogake please expand upon it? Aabh (talk) 23:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


I have added a more detailed explanation of the hassetsu. Bits are taken from the Finnish version of the page, which also has a larger history section, parts of which could also be used here. That version is more heki ryu-centric, though, but on the other hand this version is fairly ANKF-centric. Also added References, feel free to add more. The Hoff book is primarily about heki ryu. Vuori 12:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Also added the "approximately half a million practitioners". This number of mentioned both in the Hoff book and the Tripplett article. I moved the Guide to studying martial arts in Japan to the budo article, since while interesting, it's not directly relevant to kyudo. Vuori 16:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art

A list of kyudo dojo outside of Japan would be a useful link.


Equipment Used by 'Advanced' Practitioners

Recent add: "Even advanced kyudoka typically own non-bamboo yumi and ya due to the vulnerability of bamboo equipment to extreme climates."

Advanced? Is that true? Advanced beginners, sure, but truly 'advanced'? I really have a hard believing that someone who has practiced kyudo for 10+ years would use a synthetic yumi or a ya not made of bamboo, other than as a training aid. But then again I have lead a sheltered life ;) Marteau

Yes this is quite true - for instance in addition to some European there are both Japanese Heki-Ryũ sensei (which obviously means renshi upwards) who use (at least when visiting Europe) non-bamboo bow and especially non-bamboo arrows Simohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

---

It is true. I study at a dojo in Apex, North Carolina (USA) under Dan DeProspero, renshi rokudan. While I have never seen my teacher shoot with a fiberglass bow other than as a demonstration, his senior student (a yondan who has been practicing kyudo for almost thirty years) does indeed use a carbon bow during the winter months when it is too cold to use a bamboo bow safely (for fear of breaking).

---

Interesting. I'll ask Don Symanski (who probably made the bamboo yumi's this yodan is concerned about) about that, and what the safe temperature range is for his yumis. Marteau 16:54, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

--

It is indeed a Symanski bow that he uses. As further clarification, the bow can and has been used during winter months (which normally means in the thirties at night time practice)--it just has to be warmed up so it is not as rigid. I didn't intend to say the bow was in immediate danger of breaking during winter use--it most certainly is not.

--

Thanks for the clarifaction. I'll still ask Mr. Symanski (on Sunday) about what the proper use is for winter, because I think it will be a good addition for the Yumi article and because I'm curious. I'll be particularly interested to get his take on rigidity in coldness. I do recall him mentioning an absolute temperature you should not go outside with a yumi, but I'll have to get him to remind me on that. My personal understanding on the coldness issue was that it is not a good idea to take a yumi which has been indoors at a relativly high temp outdoors and use it without it becoming acclimated to the coldness because of the temperature differential. Other than that I personally don't worry about coldness, it's low humidity I worry about. In North Carolina dryness is probably not a problem but where I practice (Boulder, CO) it can get very dry and I have seen yumis 'explode' is the only way I can categorize what happens to them sometimes. Someone will draw a yumi subjected to dryness, and it just 'explodes' is the impression it gives me when it happens. That's the only time I've seen one suffer damage from usage is in the summer. Thanks, and I'll let you know what Mr. Symanski thinks about how his yumis should be used and treated in the cold. Marteau 04:43, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Competition

The article currently reads: In this respect, competition, examination, and any opportunity that places the archer in this uncompromising sitation is important

This makes it sound as if competition and examination are, without a doubt and universally, a part of Kyudo, which is not true. To most kyudoka, sure, but it is not a universal belief. I'd like to see that sentance reflect that, or at least not make it seem that all practitioners believe that competition and examination are a good thing (in fact, some would say not only are they not important but are bad things, but I'm not about to go there ;) Marteau 05:28, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

--

A good addition to this issue may be to bring up the three "modes" of shooting: toteki, kanteki, and zaiteki.


Kyudo as Zen Meditation

Recently additions were made to the main article that implied Kyudo was tightly bound together with Zen Buddhism. I do not feel that this is accurate. There is Zen influence (as with most Japanese martial arts), but in my experience it is not dominating. Some schools may have a lot of Zen influence, some may have very little. I feel the issue needs discussion before it is added back into the article. --65.190.189.82 15:37, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I would tend to agree with you that this tight bondage of Zen and Kyudo is a relativly recent phenomena. A hundred years ago, to the best of my knowledge, Zen was no more assoctiated with Kyudo than any other Japanese art, as you stated. However, Zen and Kyudo are, today, tightly bonded for many practitioners (perhaps 'That Book' is responsible for it) and a paragraph or two about it would be a welcome addition. Marteau 16:09, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Some would say (and have said) that there is no bond between Zen and Kyudo, only at best between Zen and Zen practitioners' perceived "Kyudo".Simohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
This excellent article, written by Yamada Shoji, deals with the problem of Kyudo and Zen: "The Myth of Zen in the Art of Archery" http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/jjrs/pdf/586.pdf —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.61.214.20 (talk) 18:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
The article by Dr. prof. Yamada is an excellent source also for some other aspects of kyudo. The article is a proper academic source on kyudo (one of the few available for non-japanese-speakers) that can easily be referred to. Dr. Yamada is not only an associate professor in International Research Center for Japanese Studies but also an experienced kyudoka himself and a member of Nihon Budô Gakkai, the Japanese Budo Academy. Rather too often we need to rely on less reliable written sources or oral tradition (some of the latter is of course passed on by academically merited professionals of kyudo, but the notes taken from the lectures are not easy to verify). Simohell 20:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

more media?

on a sort of random note, i noticed members of JPop group Morning Musume doing kyudo in the music video for their song "Namida Tomaranai Houkago":

(http://www.youtube.com/watch.php?v=sAW-1A_tybE&search=namida)

while not the ideal example, i think it'd be helpful if more photos or video showing kyudo, elspecialy the beauty of hassetsu, were added to the article. maybe a section for media links should be added for outside galleries, videos, or the appearance of kyudo in the media? --Gar2chan 05:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed the empty photo caption since it had been there for a while. It would be nice if someone has a new photo or could put up the old one with a suitably bot-compliant copyright statement. Vuori 10:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm Japanese and I practice Kyudo.(Sorry,I cannot understand English well...) I read this page,and I discovered some mistakes.For example,"Seisha seichu(正射正中、正=correct 射=Asibumi-Zanshin 中=hit)" is not populer Kotowaza(Japanese proverb).Usually,Japanese people using "Seisha hitchu(正射必中、必=necessarily)"

Macrons?

Should this not be moved to Kyūdo? LordAmeth 19:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Typical Kyudo Session

Going to add a section describing a typical practice session. There's a blurb about it stuck in the Kyudo Equipment section (The kyudo archer will typically begin a practice session by shooting at a straw target (makiwara) at very close range (about seven feet, or the length of the archer's strung yumi when held horizontally from the centerline of his body). Because the target is so close and the shot most certainly will hit, the archer can concentrate on refining his technique rather than on worrying about where the arrow will go.)

I Would rather see here a clarification of what school of kyudo. I have practised kyudo for just a few years, but long enough to say that your "typical" session has little to do with what I see more than once a week (not in Japan though). Perhaps this is not typical "kyudo" although it may be typical "some-ryu kyudo". Also ommitting rei from beginning of practice session might be considered even offensive by someSimohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's see about getting some pictures of the different yugake and the differences in the grasp. Also need to add the makiwara arrow to the equipment, though I'm not sure what it's official name is, we just call it the makiwara arrow. Zarcath 02:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The Hoff book just calls it the makiwara arrow too. Vuori 21:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Makiwara ya means an arrow used to shoot a wrapped straw [target].

True - the target is called "Makiwara" the arrow to shoot makiwara is called "Makiwara ya" which translates to -of course- makiwara arrowSimohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I expanded on some of the yugake section. I wanted to check with you guys first before I added this in. My sensei has said that in the old days, practitioners never shared their gloves with any other shooters and never showed their knock grove because it would give away their shooting technique. Other then our club gloves, students with their own gloves don't let others use them. Zarcath 13:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The glove obviously should fit perfectly. A good glove is tailor made for a single person made according to measures of each finger and different parts of palm and wrist. A cheap glove is chosen from the stock according to the same measures. Therefor an experienced shooter would not use another glove nor would it make sense to lend your own to someone else. Also a glove shows one's skill level and shooting technique flaws by the way it wears. Therefor is traditional not to let others apart from your teacher to look closely at your glove.Simohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for "History" section

It would be great if someone could write a section on the history and development of kyudo. I was particularly curious how long the name kyudo has been in use, and whether it was preceded by "kyujutsu", or was called something different. Also, is there a form of kyudo anyone practices that is still considered "koryu".Bradford44 16:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Heki-ryu at least has unbroken line of masters, with Insai-ha brach dating back to the teacher of the Shogun Tokugawa Iyeasu. Also Heki-ryu Insai-ha is today taught using texts from the 17th century combined with modern teaching.Simohell 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Kyūdō in Popular Culture

When making additions to Kyūdō in Popular Culture, please add if the character is a practitioner of kyudo or not and follow the format already provided! In the future if new pop culture notes are added, the person may not be a practitioner, it could be a news story or new style or movement.

Ishida from Bleach At first glance I thought Ishida from Bleach was a Kyudo practitioner, but I'm not sure I would classify him as such. Does any japanese with a bow automatically make them a kyudo practitioner? Ishida uses his bow in his RIGHT hand (I spoke with my sensei and she said all practioners she knows of shoot LEFT HAND) and his form does not follow any conventional style. I know it's fantasy anime but I would describe him as having his own bow style that is not related to Kyudo at all. Does anyone agree/disagree? I think it would be terrible if new students came in with the wrong pre-conception.Zarcath 12:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

if it was not japanese language version, maybe the image was mirrored to match western way of reading from left to right, Japanese comics are read from right to left, and therefor sometimes mirrored for the english or other western editions. In kyudo there is no shooting with bow in your right hand.
It is the original japanese version that he is shooting left handed. I'm going to remove him from the list. Zarcath 07:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Someone edited the Kyudo page (rather poorly) inserting an inuyasha reference seemingly willy nilly. I fixed it so it wasn't as obnoxious. Zarcath 01:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The section 'Kyudo in popular culture' uses the term kyudo in rather relaxed way. Referring to battlefield archery I think it would be more appropriate to use the term kyujutsu. In kyudo the purpose is more or less to shoot a perfect shot. On the battle field the purpose is just to simply win the battle (which of course requires for an archer to master his weapon). There are a number of other appearances of kyujutsu in popular culture, and some that refer to the art in a bit more focus. These however are not kyudo as such.

  • Manga Lone Wolf and Cub story 71 The Kyushu Road, Kazuo Koike and Gosuki Kojima. A duel between a swordsman and an archer.
  • Movie Ran, Akira Kurosawa (1985). Shows shooting both on horse and on foot.
  • Movie Kumonosu jo by Akira Kurosawa (1957) [aka Cobweb Castle, Throne of Blood...]

Simohell 11:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

For above mentioned reasons I decided to remove some references to popular culture. For those with an opportunity please check this with the anime/manga references. If it aims to kill it is not kyudo. It may be kyujutsu and a separate list might be added, since there is an obvious historical connection. Simohell 20:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Kyudo not Kyūdō in the title

LordAmeth touched on this briefly above, but I will expand on it. According to WP:MOS-JP:

Article titles should use macrons as specified for body text except in cases where the macronless spelling is in common usage in English-speaking countries (e.g., Tokyo, Osaka, Sumo and Shinto, instead of Tōkyō, Ōsaka, Sumō and Shintō.)

Outside of this page and Japanese/English dictionaries, I have never seen kyudo spelled as kyūdo or kyūdō. Even the All Nippon Kyudo Federation uses kyudo exclusively on the English version of their website. Unless someone can give me a good reason why this page should continue to violate the style manual, I am going to rename the page to Kyudo and switch the redirects. Mordrid52 19:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Japanese people often don't care to a use proper transcription so this is not an argument. And i am not aware that Kyūdō would be a so common word in english as Tokyo is. I think the current spelling is correct according to the rule you cite. About what LordAmeth said, he wanted to move Kyudo to Kyūdo. Perhaps someone knowing japanese well enough could enlighten us to know if the last o is long or not. Med 20:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Typing "kyudo" is by far easier than typing "kyūdō" which I always have to do by copy pasting from existing articles. Also many fonts or especially old printing machines don't have the proper letters. There are also different methods of translitterating Japanese to western alphabet. In some occations, such as Japanese Budo Association Budo Charter (http://www.nipponbudokan.or.jp/shinkou/html_1/mainenglish.html) ZNKR is written with "Kyūdō". None of these are however the "official word" because the official word is not written with western alphabet. In my mothertongue the official recommended method is to translitterate with ū and ō so there is no question. It's best of course to follow English Wikipedia's reommendation. And yes there is always an ō in dō, if such translitteration method is used (jūdō, kendō, kyūdō, karatedō, budō　etc.). Mixing different methods is I think a bad idea. Simohell 20:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Not even the word "kyudo" is in common use in the English language - therefore a particular way of writing it cannot be in common use either. Most people, even those with passing familiarity with the martial arts, have no idea what kyūdō is. This is unlike judo or kendo, which are in common use, and therefore are written without macrons on wikipedia (on the other hand, karatedō and budō should be written with macrons). Further, ease of editing articles is never a good reason to pick between alternatives. The familiarity of the names of two major Japanese cities, the name of the Japanese national sport, and the name of one of the six or so major religions on Earth are incomparable to kyūdō, which to non-martial artists would be considered an obscure martial art. In fact, the two Japanese cities cited in the rule are two of only four Japanese cities in existence that WP:MOS-JP#Body text #9 ever permits to be written without macrons.
Additionally, the rule cited would only apply to the article title. Every use of the word "kyudo" in the article body should undisputably still be written as "kyūdō", according to WP:MOS#Body text. Note also that it has been the practice on wikipedia for the "body text" rule to be read in conjunction with the article title rule, such that the rule for article titles essentially becomes simply that: loanwords get no macrons, all other words get macrons. This represents a transition from a few years ago, when macrons were disallowed in article titles. With more sophisticated web browsers, what was previously a software issue no longer is a problem. As such, wikipedia appears to increasingly prefer that special characters (such as macrons, or accents) be used whenever appropriate.
In conclusion, the rule, which is not inconsistent, is generally that all Japanese words get macrons for double-vowels every time they appear (even in titles), except when they are in extremely common use in the English language or could be considered loanwords (such as the capital city, national sport, etc...), in which case they never get macrons. Kyūdō does not fall into that extremely small category, and thus should remain macronned. Bradford44 13:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Five-Fingered glove?

I made some major edits on the article (Mostly to include the Japanese side of the art... which wasn't really here... and I thought that was kinda wierd :D), but the article specifically stated a "5-fingered glove" which I've never seen nor heard of... No one has ever mentioned a "Gogake" in my dojo, nor have I ever laid eyes on one... No one on line sells one... and it seems that if you had a Gogake, you couldn't hold your otoya during the firing procedure (As you would also be looping your thumb under your... pinky... which, trying it while typing this article, almost cramps my hand :D)... I chalked it up as an error and deleted it when I rewrote the section on yugake... If I'm in error (And I could very much be!), please accept my apologies and replace the portion under "gogake"... :D

I also have a derth of photos which I'll upload to populate the article with as soon as I reach 10 edits and get auto-whatchamacallited... Aabh (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so now I've talked to Sensei and I found out a lot more about the "Morogake", I changed the article to reflect the Morogake, but Sensei indicated that there were two types of Morogake, one with a hard thumb, used in Dojo, and one with a soft thumb, used for Yubasake (sp? Sensei talks to me at high-speed Japanese because he wants me to really sharpen my skill... but unfortunately that just means I mis-hear new words a lot...), horseback archery, the soft thumb being needed to allow the rider to also grasp the reins. We are gathering enough information now that I'm starting to think the article needs to be split out into smaller articles... Aabh (talk) 15:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the term you're looking for is yabusame. As for the morogake being impractical in terms of finger/thumb placement during the draw given the question "how am I expected to hold my otoya while shooting?", remember that not every style has you holding the otoya in your pinky while drawing. Clearly, yabusame would be one such exception. I practice Chikurin-ha, and we don't hold the otoya while shooting either. The otoya is flipped downward, with the knock resting against the platform and the tip pressed against your hara, just under the knot on the front of your hakama. I have yet to learn the reason for this, but it does seem to give one greater attention to one's posture (lean too far forward and you'll impale yourself, too far back and the arrow will fall over). Tenmiles (talk) 05:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
It is. It's amazing how much one can learn in a short amount of time. I read my own post and said "Gee Aabh, you meant "yubusame" You just saw a demonstration two months ago..." :). I've seen Chikurin-ha and it's fascinating (And considering how difficult it is to keep one's posture in Dozukuri, I can totally see benefits to Chikurin-ha)! Be patient with me, though... I am learning Kyudo in a foreign language... And only this past year have I actually seen more than my dojo... so my perspective is all over the board... I'm trying to be very careful what I put in the article... but in here I seem to get a little sloppy :D Sorry about that :D Aabh (talk) 12:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Citing sources

Okay, so while I'm at it, I'm really new to Wikipedia... how do I cite "My Sensei" as a source? I mean, I hate to say this, but my sensei (As I'm sure many of your sensei's are) is a deep well of knowledge... He's pretty high ranking... I kinda think that might qualify him as a source... I would like to kill off the "This article doesn't cite sources" tag... but how do I do that? Aabh (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately citing an individual is not easy if at all possible. Sources need to be things someone else can look up, if he has written a book the that can be cited but it is not possible to someone to confirm things by going & asking him. If you read WP:Reliable Sources then it will give you an idea to the kind of sources that need to be used. --Nate1481(t/c) 20:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Nate, but I do believe we have a larger problem that may need to be addressed by the community at large... because I clicked on a few martial arts pages at random and all of them have the notice. Which implies to me that no martial arts page will ever lose that tag. If Wikipedia ever decides to purge the "Non-Cited" pages, all martial arts (Or at least most of them) will be lost. We all learn in-dojo... all data is handed down during our tea breaks or during training... history is conveyed this way... It's really going to be an issue... This may be something all of us budoka may have to take up with Wikipedia... Aabh (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Should one read Japanese sources are plenty, but also some in English:
- The by far best source for technique would be the ZNKR Kyudo Manual (volumes I-IV). There is perhaps not that much else needed. Writing anything not verifiable in the manual, based on any single sensei (whatever rank), is higly questionable (with the exception of different ryu-ha, in which case we might refer to mokuroku or writings by the sensei).
- For Heki-ryu at least there are plenty of written sources in English, such as Felix Hoff and Luigi Genzini, as well as academic studies in Japanese.
- For spirituality and history we have at least the article by prof. Shoji Yamada "The Myth of Zen in the Art of Archery".
- For the physics of the shooting a lot of material is availabe (in Japanese) by prof. Toshio Mori (Mori-sensei), the chair of kyudo at the University of Tsukuba and his faculty. They have done research also on the history and probably everything else related to kyudo as well.
I would expect there are also publications by ZNKR and articles by the members of Nihon Budo Gakkai not already mentioned. Kyudo is an art with a lot of written sources available. At the moment there are too many "usually", "generally", "it is common" etc. without a proper reference Simohell (talk) 10:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


In terms of reliability, the problem with citing "my sensei" as a source is it's unverifiability. While your sensei may actually be the most reliable and authoritative source you have access to for information, it's no good in an encyclopedic article (unless he's published a book) because it's just as indistinct as "my sister's boyfriend's cousin's boss". Allowing the use of unverifiable sources basically opens up the ability for people to make up whatever BS they feel like. I doubt that Wikipedia will ever decide to "purge" non-cited articles; that defeats the general purpose of the site. The point about the message which warns visitors of "uncited sources" is that it is a disclaimer - a warning - to the visitor, that they should not consider everything they read as gospel. When a source for a particular piece of information is cited, it allows an interested reader to look it up, verify the information, and maybe even learn more from further reading (or exploration) of that source. It's like a bibliography in a research paper. If you want your readers to take your information as credible, it has to be verifiable from another source. The fact that some (or a lot) of information in martial arts articles is un-sourced does not necessarily mean that the information is no good, but it is still fair to alert readers to the fact that it's equally possible that some information which has been contributed is simply being made up by someone. Tenmiles (talk) 05:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I completely understand where you are coming from... however, my point is that martial arts, by nature, is an oral tradition. I would hate to have to remove all of the information that my sensei gave me, which was from his sensei, which was handed down for many, many years, simply because the one book (I'm exaggerating for illustration purpose :D) doesn't cover that. For example, there is a school in Colorado which, apparently doesn't perform all of the steps of the hassetsu (I think they are leaving out Zanshin? I'm not sure -nothing wrong with this, BTW, just a case in point), anyway, if they happened to be the only school whom published a book, we could not put in anything about Hassetsu if we wanted to cite sources (Because they have a "Shichisetsu"? er... "Nanasetsu"? whatever, it can't be called "8 steps" if you only have seven). Even though most of us would know that was a true fact.
Actually, as long as no one deletes the article out of hand for lack of sources, I guess I'm cool with it having that warning (Because your point is a very good one :D)... I was more alarmed that some Wiki-bot would come along somewhere along the line and delete the Kyudo article for not having cited sources... :) Aabh (talk) 12:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
For major traditions of kyudo what a sensei says is verifiable from written sources. For an article on physics we wouldn't quote a lecturer, but refer to a book on the subject of the lesson. Most of the things we are taught were written down already in the 16th century. There are kyudo mokuroku (and some other old writings) published with explanations, which means that the oral tradition is written down (for some branches). And if something is not written down I strongly feel that it should not be written down in Wikipedia.
As for minor traditions: best to start a separate article. For the article on kyudo in general we should keep to the main stream. For an encyclopedia article there is a clear demand on relevance. Then there it is quite possible to refer to publications. It just means one needs to make an effort.
...and I very much think it is hardly possible to leave out Zanshin. Simohell (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


A very late afterthought: The talk pages here seem to be an appropriate place to record and discuss specifics which might (should?) otherwise be left out of the main article due to lack of citeable references, such as the teachings imparted by one's sensei. As regards the school in Colorado, you are most likely referencing the Chikurin-ha style taught by Kanjuro Shibata-sensei's Zenko organization. The hassetsu there is referred to as the shichi-do, or seven coordinations. Nothing is actually left out, but Zanshin itself is not considered a separate step; rather, it is sort of "combined" with or "proceeds from" Hanare. Officially, the shichi-do is comprised of the following steps:

  • Ashibumi
  • Dozukuri
  • Yumi Gamae
  • Uchi Okoshi
  • Hiki Tori
  • Kai
  • Hanare

I think the philosophy here is that these first seven steps are physical motions, whereas Zanshin is what remains after shooting. Simply, it is not a moment one performs; rather, it is the result - the state one finds one's self in - after performing the other movements which lead up to the shot. Tenmiles (talk) 21:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Major traditions to list only major traditions

Yabusame (horseback)

  • Takeda-ryu
  • Ogasawara-ryu

these share both the same origin, Ogasawara is I think better known. Despite low number of practitioners (it's very expensive and therefor elitistic) both are are major because of the long history and continuing practise.

  • Heki-ryu (kyudo on foot)

split school, and accoding Leif Bagge (The history of Heki Ryu From the Insai Ha point of view) not all brances connected to same teacher, Heki Danjo Masatsugu name was known and used by others as well to promote their schools.)

  • Heki-ryū Chikurin-ha (see Onyumishi Kanjuro Shibata XX) - - - traditional, active in the west (Shibata). If Shibata-sensei referenced should it distinct Cikurin-ha Bisshu?
  • Heki-ryū Insai-ha (aka. Heki To-ryū) - - - Major tradition, in Japan but esp. in Germany, Italy, Austria and Finland
  • Heki-ryū Sekka-ha - - - traditional, school for a prominent kyudoka in the US Dan DeProspero
  • Honda-ryū - - - A hybrid created from the old schools by Honda Toshizane, bases for modern ANKF kyudo
  • Yamato-ryu - - - First introduced word Kyudo (Morikawa Kozan) in the beginning of 17th century. I don't know if major today. I think not to be listed but mentioned in the text.

Zen-kyudo traditions - I think these are not "major tradition" but recent new traditions, I propose them removed.

  • Muyoshingetsu-ryu - - - Recent development
  • Chozen-ji - - - recent development, it also seems that Chozen-ji is not (only) kyudo but a Zen tradition.

Simohell (talk) 10:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Equipment Costs

Currently there is a line that states

Kyudo is an equipment-intensive and expensive martial art, sometimes costing tens of thousands of Yen or many thousands of Dollars. After many years of practice, it is not uncommon for a Kyūdōka (Kyūdō Practitioner) to have invested a good sum of money into the art


This seems inaccurate or like a scare tactic. With modern materials Kyudo can be very affordable. Carbon Fiber bows range from $200-400ish range, it doesn't become a serious investment until you start buying bamboo, and you aren't "forced" to buy bamboo. You could be a long-time kyudo practitioner and only have invested $1000 into it. I think the sentence should be either removed or changed to reflect accurate price points rather than vague assumptions. Zarcath (talk) 07:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please do change or remove it. First of all I think we should always avoid the phrase "it is not uncommon". Also I think it is possible to practise kyudo for decades with the same equipment cost one would expect for a kendoka of 3.kyu with the cost of proper bogu. The main cost for an advanced kyudoka must be dojo/club membership and participation in seminars (at least unless one lives in Japan).Simohell (talk) 09:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I put that in there intending it as a comparison to Karate, Judo, etc... I would certainly be willing to change it, I certainly didn't mean for it to be a "Scare Tactic", but it seemed that, like Kendo, you had a lot of equipment you needed to buy pretty much up front (Before you pull your first bow, you'll need your first bow... and a glove... and at least one arrow... and giriko.... etc. Whereas in Judo you just need you). Knowing that was where I was going with that (NOT scare tacticing :D), what would folks recommend? Aabh (talk) 21:46, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
In Judo one would need an extra insurance/license to be allowed to practice and compete (at least where I'm from). This is of course not a piece of equipment, but the cost will also accumulate while kyudo equipment lasts for a long time. In five years time one might end up paying an extra 1000 for insurances, where as for kyudo nothing. Yabusame is clearly an expensive art, since one needs a trained horse, but otherwise I see no significant difference.Simohell (talk)
Also (and I am sure this is highly dependent on where you practice) a beginner may have dojo-provided equipment (glove, bow, arrows) to use until they can afford their own. My first investment was a yugake, after practicing for three or four months. I still don't even own my own yumi, but my dojo has about a dozen in different weights which are used by students of various levels of experience who do not yet own their own. The cost is undeniably significant when one wants to really get into the practice, but I'd agree that this is true for just about any sport or martial art. Tenmiles (talk) 06:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Bow form and use of the thumb

I wanted to ask if anyone knows of resources discussing the possible use of thumb rings for drawing the bow in Japanese traditions. Was the use of a glove with a stiffened thumb so universal that archery thumb rings are unknown in Japan? This would seem unlikely. If any sources can be found it would be interesting to discuss the use of such rings.

Also, it seems to me that some mention of why the bow is used 'asymmetrically' should also be mentioned. Are there any reliable sources discussing why the bow is gripped below its center-point? It would seem that this had to do with being able to fire a large bow from horseback without having the lower half of the bow knocked about against the saddle or the horse's body. Here again I have not yet found references (though I've just started looking). --Picatrix (talk) 14:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Hideharu Onuma and Dan DeProspero write in Kyudo - the Essence and Practice of Japanese Archery, that "It is doubtful that the Japanese ever used such a ring, preferred to use a leather band. Eventually a full glove was used, ..." Also Feliks Hoff writes that in old times the gloves had soft fingers in order to be able to wield a sword. A similar requirement is with yabusame.
About the bow I think there is no certain information. There is an article that lists the common explanations and presents a credible new one: The Asymmetrical Japanese Longbow, Graham Aston, 1997. According to Feliks Hoff the first written document of the asymmetrical bow dates back to the 3rd century (Gi Shin Toi Dan). Kyudo manual discusses the japanese bow from a bit different point of view, but includes one sentence on the grip: "...presumably because, through experience, this position was found to be the best compromise for functional balance and aesthetic considerations." Simohell (talk) 22:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I've also done some preliminary research. I found this:

Joseph Needham, Robin D.S. Yates, Science and Civilisation in China, Cambridge University Press, 1974, p 117 [referring to the so-called 'Mongol' thumb release]: "The Japanese too used the method, but in place of a thumb-ring they utilized a shooting glove with a specially re-inforced and grooved thumb."

I found a couple of other references, and like Needham, as well as Onuma and DeProspero all mention that such rings were not used in Japan. While I think it is highly unlikely such rings were never used there, the scholarly consensus is currently that they were probably not used, so that's that. Japanese desire to assert ethnic and cultural independence from the Asian mainland might have something to do with why such rings have not come to light, or been recognized for what they are. But this is speculation.

As for the asymmetry of the bow grip, thanks for the link to the article. I did not feel the arguments were strong, but it did gather together several existing theories and present them in one place, which was helpful. For what it is worth, I also found this:

Thomas A. Green, Martial Arts of the World: An Encyclopedia, ABC-CLIO, 2001, p20 "The Japanese bow, or yumi, is about seven feet long and constructed of laminated bamboo. The grip is placed one-third of the way up from the bottom, unlike the grip on Western and Chinese bows. This placement of the grip allows the bow to be used on horseback while retaining the advantages of a longbow."

I'll dig around a little bit more to see what else I can find. Best, --Picatrix (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

While the location of the grip is often suggested to facilitate shooting from horseback, it seems that the asymmetry of the bow predates mounted archery in Japan (Onuma/DeProspero). Tenmiles (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Ink image of archer

Regarding [1]: Where is this from? The archer is holding the bow upside-down! This image should perhaps be removed due to misleading imagery? 79.161.72.238 (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, it is a drawing. It is far from correct also in the body. Incorrect photographs or technical drawings should be removed. I think this picture however is not meant to illustrate the technique, but perhaps a more general idea. (Also I think the artist ran out of space on the paper) I see no particular reason to remove it... i wouldn't use it as the only illustration.Simohell (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I disagree; the artist did not simply "run out of space" since the bow is clearly asymmetric with the long end down (ie. upside-down). The proportions of the bow also seem to be fairly correct. But perhaps you are right wrt. removal; it is a beautiful drawing :) 79.161.72.238 (talk) 13:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

REMOVED: List of fictional practitioners

This unreferenced section has been removed from the article to here, as it's not relevant to the practice or history of the sport.

In summary: how does a list of a few Japanese Manga characters who use Kyūdō, be remotely important or helpful to this article? At best, a note should be made acknowledging the fact, but otherwise, it's pointless.

Where does it end?

Characters who drank tea in a movie? Characters who drove an American made-car in a neo-modernist existentialist film-noir?

et al

Given that "It is a modern Japanese martial art", emphasis on modern, do most of these characters even fit? Kikyou for one isn't even modern... -->

Corrected spelling

Heki-ryū Insai-ha (aka. Heki To-ryū) -> Heki-ryū Insai-ha (aka. Heki Tō-ryū) 日置當流(日置当流)　The wovel is long.

Kyūdō/Kyūjutsu merger

I removed the Kyūdō / Kyūjutsu merge proposal by User:Dbachmann. WP:MERGE procedure not followed, and no discussion a year later. ---> Prburley (talk) 02:41, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

How the bow draw differs from other cultures

Would anyone care to add a description of how the arrow is drawn to the bow draw article? I fear I lack the understanding of this art to describe it properly.Legitimus (talk) 19:49, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kyūdō/Archive_1&oldid=789396076"