Jutsu and Do are typically expressed as what we would understand as suffixes applied to Japanese words to clarify the purpose of an activity. Jutsu implies a technique, method, or skill in the normal way we would understand. Do could be translated to mean way, and implies that the activity is a path to self-improvement or self-actualization. An set of examples are Judo and Jujutsu. These are both martial arts focused on grappling. Jujutsu is ostensibly a combat art originally used by samurai. Judo is a sport developed for civilians.
To further clarify, an activity would be considered a Do activity if it was done for interest, fun, a hobby, or self-improvement. Any martial art done for fun regardless of the suffix put on it, would in reality be Do. I don’t care if it’s jujutsu, kenjutsu, iaijutsu, aikijujutsu, karate-jutsu, or whatever.
Modern martial arts, by and large are not conducted with the expectation that the practitioner will actually have to use them. They are marketed as being effective self defense, and the players generally mistakenly believe that they are learning self-defense. Some of the players work to ensure that the techniques would be more viable in the real world, and to be fair, an advanced practitioner may well be capable of using them as such, but the intent during practice is not geared towards use in actual conflict.
True jutsu is practiced in military, police, or other similar training. There is decreased emphasis on form. The primary emphasis is that the technique is simple enough for the practitioner to remember and to be effective under stress with a determined adversary. If the technique needs to be altered on the fly in order for it to work, so be it. There is an emphasis in this type of training on a sufficiently aggressive mindset, which is necessary for someone engaged in a fight to overcome the aggression of the enemy.
In a Do setting, form is typically extremely important. There is an incredible depth of study, to the point of the practice being philosophical. Advanced practitioners, after years of study, are amazing in their power, composure, and economy of motion. This change in the student is part of the goal of the art. The skill attained is secondary. This is the reason for the common idea that when a student reaches proficiency in a martial art the actual skill is no longer needed; the confidence, awareness and physical presence are supposed to be sufficient to keep him out of trouble.
Students in a jutsu setting, by comparison, may seem to have only a crude grasp of the technique. They may seem somewhat ignorant to the Do practitioner. In a way they are. They may not even like the activity they are learning about, but may instead see it as a necessary chore. The samurai had to be proficient in riding a horse, wielding several weapons, strategy, tactics, field movements, etc., that it would have been considered silly to work on only grappling, for example. It is just a means to an end. This reminds me of something that former SAS member Andy McNab said in his book Bravo Two Zero. He said that he didn’t trust people with too much technical knowledge (his example was about guns) to be solid in a fight. He thought that any knowledge beyond how to fight with it was unnecessary, and was a sign of compensating for a lack of real fighting skill.
Do is analogous to laboratory study. Variables can be eliminated, isolated, and the environment can be controlled to at least some degree. Jutsu is analogous to the same topic as applied in the real world. Minor situational variables can and do affect the outcome.
Another way to sum it up:
Do = Process Oriented, e.g. two perfect shots to the body and one
to the head, smoothly, efficiently, and quickly.
Jutsu = Results Oriented, e.g., bad guy is going down, whatever it takes.
Why are you reading about this on a blog devoted to rifle shooting? Because most of us don’t realize the underpinnings and intent of the disciplines we are involved in. We think that because we can shoot accurately, reload quickly, that our rifles are capable of sub-MOA accuracy, all of those things mean that we are bad hombres. It’s going to be a bad day for the stupid perp who makes the mistake of messing with us.
Here’s the breakdown in that logic. While we train to shave a half second off our El Prez (or in my case, shaving 0.2 seconds off of my snapshot time), the stupid goblin who is going to attack us (yes he should pick a softer target to be safe) has experience in doing what works. Though he may be unintelligent, sub-human, filthy, stinky, deplorable, ugly, unimaginative, and hooked on drugs, he can get done what he thinks he needs to get done with surprising initiative, speed, efficiency, ruthlessness, and surprise. He’ll leave you dead and have your flat screen TV mounted using roofing nails he stole from someone’s shed on his living room wall with seven other TV’s before your body has cooled off. Your ability to shoot a 1-hole group at 300 yards is not going to stop the lead pipe that hits you on the back of the head from knocking you out.
The things that make the violent criminal not only useless, but detrimental to society, make him effective in his “trade”. He may only want what’s in your wallet, but he doesn’t care if he has to rip your eyes out or bash your head in with a hammer to get it. Whatever works. Because our minds don’t work like that (thankfully), it makes us vulnerable.
To put it more plainly, most of us practice what we do with a Do mindset, while the dirtbag criminal uses a jutsu approach.
Here’s my take on what shooting activities are which:
Do
Bullseye Pistol
Highpower Rifle
USPSA
IDPA
Appleseed
Tactical Rifle Matches
Basically any competition, target shooting, or plinking
Jutsu
Military
Police
Mercenaries
Civilian “Tactical” Training (Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, etc…)
I classify hunting as a “neither fish nor foul” activity because it doesn’t fit either or could fit in both depending on the reason why.
If you are getting the impression that I’m looking down on or criticizing the Do approach, you would be incorrect. Anything done for enjoyment, pleasure, or self-improvement is going to be approached with the intent to come as close as possible to mastering it. This is what makes things fun and worthwhile. There’s nothing wrong with this.
The Do approach also means that our technical understanding of the discipline we study will likely exceed in many ways that of the professionals who use it for real. Often, the pros will turn to competition to sharpen their skills. This is also an indication of their recognition that their training is often not up to par.
What is important is that we realize the limitations of our approach to learning our activities. We need to understand that being able to use a gun well does not equate to making us a great fighters. Sure, some knowledge may be better than none, but overconfidence without that proper attitude to back it up can be deadly. Conversely, if you have an ideal survival attitude, but your skills are only sufficient to qualify, you are way less effective than you could be.
What I think is the ideal approach is the methodology of the Do approach, which is to say an orientation towards mastery, coupled with the deadly seriousness, realistic, and practical nature of the jutsu approach, which means keeping the larger vision on the “business” of what it is we’re doing.
This is perhaps the single best statement and summary of observation I have ever seen on martial arts as it relates to rifle shooting.
ReplyDeleteI would expect that this might raise the ire of some... particularly many in Appleseed... but observing fact has that effect on people.
The concept is akin to the old Marine DI who states (with regards to teaching recruits about kinfe-fighting) he would rather teach his Marines to be killers than knife-fighters so that if they ever came across a master knife-fighter, they would kill him while he was trying to fight.
Thanks Usagi. I had an idea that you might read this. By the way, your article on the Alpha-Omega male interaction stuff was quite enlightening for me. Anyway, that's my monthly dose of blogger love festing.
DeleteI hope that nobody would take offense to what I wrote here. I didn't really intend this to be a critique, more of a clarification of purpose as I see it, although I have offered what I consider constructive criticism in the past. I have a way of sounding harsher than I am; I have an analytical personality type that comes off as somewhat impersonal when in reality I'm so warm and fuzzy you might mistake me for a honey badger. There was the weekly dose of strange humor.
For the record, I think that what Appleseed is doing is good, and I hope I didn't single them out. The instructors in my area are top notch, in terms of the instruction they offer and their caliber as people. I'm aware of your experience with Appleseed, and I can't really argue with your conclusions in general. It helps to show up to their shoots with some serious study already under the belt, which a lot of the Appleseed folk on the forum (not in my area) strangely tend to dissuade. I disagree with the blanket statement from those instructors that it's easier to teach a correct habit from scratch than to correct a bad habit. It depends... That was the quarterly dose of topic drift.
Thank you. The Marine DI example was spot on.
Well put. I would tend to agree. The thought forming in my mind as I read down to the bottom was perfectly expressed in your closing paragraph.
DeleteA mindset centered on practical application, whether field hunting or combat, using intellect, curiosity, and discipline to find understanding and learn skills for the sake of both excellence in performance, and enhanced real-world effectiveness.
Thanks Pete.
DeleteMr McNab's thought,"... He thought that any knowledge beyond how to fight with it was unnecessary..." is true, to a degree, and wrong to another. Knowledge of the limitations of the weapon system is hardly 'unnecessary', IMO. I've always felt that the better I understand a subject, the more easy it is to utilize in both conventional and unconventional methods.
ReplyDeletePretty much the same, as you say, with the 'traditional' martial artist/karate-do/ju-do practitioner. The skills learned can be applied to self defense beyond being alert (as I've used my kick boxing skills on the street to good avail when needed). But they really aren't the same as walking into a bar and 'training' with a biker gang.
Dunno that I've commented here before, so I'll say it now: Thank you for writing about your expedition into becoming a better shooter.
I've long preferred a rifle for shooting and was pretty good decades ago. Reading you has encouraged me to once again go out more with my rifle rather than the handguns. Hopefully I'll record my excursions and learn anew the joy of long-distance shooting, though I've tended toward combat shooting rather than sniping.
Mr. Wolf,
DeleteI agree with your assessment of McNab's thought, as I had synopsized it.
Your welcome. Writing the blog has been somewhat groundbreaking for my shooting. It causes me to examine what I am actually doing, in terms of purpose, direction, my skill level, my goals, and the boundaries, both "actual" and self-imposed. What I think I am finding out is that the self-imposed boundaries are more significant... to a degree that they hugely overshadow whatever actual limitations there are.
I hope you have fun with your rifles (and handguns).
Thanks for reading.
Interesting thoughts. I am reminded about a couple of things I have been told by some police buddies:
ReplyDelete1. If you get in a fight, don't stop. Don't ever stop, no matter how bad it is, until the other guy is down.
2. A lot of cops don't actually spend much time on the range. When I expressed surprise upon hearing this, my friend said that if I watched videos of actual gun fights (they show these to cops apparently) I would realise that it is nothing like practising at a range or an IPSC match. It is something of pure terror, where you are just doing your best to put the baddie down.
Thoughtful writing with which I agree,I would add never underestimate the adversary as today many come out of the jutsu ranks, I talked with a Border Patrolman who just move to northern border and he said his worst nightmares were the encounters with Honduran special forces trained by SAS that had went over to the cartel payrolls,increasingly skilled operators are going for the money
ReplyDeleteI've been thinking about Appleseed a lot and this post kind of gelled a few things for me. One thing that's interesting about Appleseed is that despite the "rifleman" language is that what they're doing is a good job of laying down the fundamentals. If you can consistently shoot 210+ on their AQT you have to have some abilty to get into positions quickly, use natural point of aim, change magazines, break shots without disrupting anything, that sort of thing. You don't have to be able to call shots, shoot faster than cadance, shoot while moving, shoot with cover, etc. etc. In fact you don't even have to shoot to that level consistently to get the patch - do it once in the half dozen AQTs you do over the weekend and you're golden.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, they put you in a really good position to choose some form of competition or choose some kind of fighting school, learning additional skills in either case. Or if they have their way, get sucked into their instructor training system. On the plus side, whatever you end up doing at least you'll know how to do the basics and shouldn't have any awful habits and it's cheap. On the minus side, they definitely seem to have a problem that people hit that 210 once and they think they're a master.
I'm generally pro-Appleseed, by the way, doesn't mean they don't have pros and cons.
You make valid points, and it seems to me that you have a good summary of what Appleseed does... polishes the basics. That leaves the shooter in command of a rudimentary level of skill that he can choose to do what he wants with, as you point out. For those reasons, I'm also generally pro-Appleseed.
DeleteYou could say that the reason I started my blog is that I didn't really know where to go from there without paying >$1000 tuition for a big name school. I knew enough beyond what they taught to know what I lacked.
I think another strategy is one that John Buol of the Firearm User Network recommends- competition (you did mention that too, just reiterating it). You can get to a pretty high level just from showing up, seeing what others are doing, and getting some pointers.
I definitely find that after having shot IPSC for a while a lot of stuff that seems fairly exotic to a lot of rifle folks is really second nature. I was pleased to see your article on "good enough" sight picture. That kind of handgun work also really gets your trigger control down.
DeleteThank you for the blog, by the way - I found it a couple of days ago while hunting for ways to run a bolt action efficiently and it was a huge help, and now I'm reading the other stuff.
It's funny how the different disciplines enhance each other and given enough time turn out to be essentially the same thing with a different tool or application.
DeleteGlad to be of help.
Anonymous,
DeleteI found your Appleseed post interesting, due to being one of their instructors. Always good to hear some feedback.
Our real purpose of course is not the shooting but getting folks back to being participating members of the Republic. The shooting is the hook to get them out to hear the history story.
Our marksmanship program is one of sound and complete fundamentals, foundational skills. We don't really (or shouldn't really) consider a patch-earner to be a "master", rather this is sort of a benchmark of having demonstrated sound grasp of fundamentals. Specialized applications like long-range precision or CQB are simply not possible to address, nor are we interested in doing so - we only have a weekend with which to work with students. And far too many folks who indulge these various specializations and competitions lack a sound grounding in fundamentals (not to mention the average deer hunter who shoots a box a year). We do what we can to "spread the wealth" of rifle marksmanship fundamentals as it is a rarity anymore, even among some competitors (take away their bipods and see what happens).
We like to think we give a good grounding in necessities and then the student can go on from there towards whatever application or further development they desire, as you say. The more that go through our program the better, especially when it's Moms and kids.
I just think that the 210 level gets oversold to the students. Some of it's the "rifleman" label - you compare somebody who shoots a 210 on an Appleseed level once to what Jeff Cooper would have considered a rifleman and it's kind of a joke. So they leave Appleseed with their patch and a swelled head that really isn't justified.
DeletePlus of course the whole saving the republic thing is ridiculous. I have yet to hear a single explanation of the mechanism as to how this will happen. It's like the underwear gnome meme.
1. Use basic rifle training as a hook.
2. Expose the public to the history of Lexington Concord in a less interestng way than having them just watch the Schoolhouse Rock on the subject (which anybody over the age of 35 probably has seen already).
3. ?????
4. Profit! Uh, save the republic!
Again, I think the basic rifle training is very good in most areas, and I send people to Appleseed all the time. I just wish ya'all would find a little humility, and be a bit more transparent about that step 3. Because I always have to warn people "When you read the website it sounds like they're a militia or something but they're really very nice."
Anonymous, thanks for the reply.
DeleteHhmm. The saving the republic bit is just asking folks to get off their comfy couches and be more involved in the political process. Too many simply don't show up, which give more power to those on the fringes. We point out that it is a lot easier for us to do that than the founders had it.
Never heard of Schoolhouse Rock, and I'm waaayy over 35 (which is probably why).
Your 3.???? is a ?????? to me. We try very hard to not have anything like a militia association, believe me. Instructors have been booted out of Appleseed for starting to go down that path.
As far as profit, technically we are 501c3 non-profit. I have no idea how much the organization has in its bank account, nor have I cared.
Around here, we don't over-emphasize the 210 score so much, at least not that I have noticed (been an instructor in about 28 shoots over 3 years). Agreed that it is more a competence benchmark than a level of mastery. Given that the raw material we usually get tends to be mostly from never-shot-a-rifle-before to occasionally-shoots-off-the-bench, we are happy to get a few people to the level of earning a patch. It is up to them to go out and train and learn more with the tools we give them.
Cooper's standard was fairly high for a practical field shooter, higher than a first-time patch-earner, but not up to say a Master-class bullseye shot. I think I can state that with some confidence since I had the good fortune to engage in highpower bullseye for some years and work up to expert class, and to have attended the Colonel's GR270 class and come away with an E-ticket, so I think I have a handle on an Appleseed/highpower/Cooper comparison. In any event, I think it is better for rifle owners to attend an Appleseed than not.