Characteristics of ryu-ha

In response to the question about characterizing the energy of each ryu-ha, it is not necessarily true that there is a distinct "energy" classification for each method. Some of the Bujinkan ryu-ha are better classified in terms of what makes their mechanics unique. Koppo techniques from Koto ryu emphasize "knockdown" momentum-building technology. Shinden Fudo ryu seems to rely on positioning for leverage. Others are better characterized in terms of their historical purpose and identity; their mechanics may not differ greatly from other systems of the era and area.

Again, as I always caution, please bear in mind that these considerations are at best general descriptions. Certainly, momentum and positioning are factors in Togakure ryu training as well, but are not necessarily the "keys" to what makes Togakure ryu techniques unique. It is so tempting to try to be *decisive* in regards to the Bujinkan ryu-ha. Be very wary of those persons who attempt to gain status as ultimate authorities or instructors by means of decisively pigeon-holing one ryu from the other; Gyokko ryu IS such-n-such, Gikan ryu IS... Truth is that when it comes to fighting to save lives, one method is not going to be so radically different from another, whether today or in 1500s Japan.

(For those tempted to argue with me, remember that I said, "when it comes to fighting to save lives," and not "training to develop a brand identity for cultural or business purposes." Yes, Philippine escrima training looks different from Korean kwon-bup or Japanese koshi-jutsu, and there are structural training-exercise differences between daken-taijutsu and ju-taijutsu, but would the practitioners of those arts really look so different when on the ground struggling to prevent being beaten or choked to death?)

- Stephen K. Hayes