View Full Version : bushido

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

10/22/2003 7:18am,
hey dudes, just wanted to clarify, there has never been a legitimate art called bushido has there? i was pretty sure it was "the way of the warrior" and a blanket name for all JMA and that no1 had ever assigned it to a single style?

10/22/2003 7:40am,
No ART can call itself "bushido"
Bushido= bushi ( warrior) + do (way)
At the most an art MAY be called Bujutsu, but even that is incorrect as bujutsu means "martial technique", but, the term is used to refer to the classical MA of Japan ( jujutsu, kenjutsu, kyujutsu, etc)
Hope that helped :D

10/22/2003 7:41am,
it did thx dude, i was pretty sure, just wanted to be certain thassal

10/22/2003 2:57pm,
i think there's a "bushido club" at my school. it looks like they teach some kind of crappy aikido derivative.

Ice Queen
10/24/2003 2:58am,
Isn't the bushido the code of the samurai? Or some book called something like that? I'm asking, cuz I have a bad headache and don't remember ****. And I'm in too much pain to go through ALL my damn books.

10/24/2003 3:53am,
Western equivelant of bushido is chivalry, or the way of knight. There is no martial arts called chivalry.

Ice Queen
10/26/2003 2:09pm,
Isn't much chivary in the world these days, period. Anyone recommend a good book to read up on bushido ?

10/26/2003 3:00pm,
Bushido was just a universal code of ethics to try and keep the bushi class in line.


Like any code of ethics it should be taken with a grain of salt.

10/26/2003 6:22pm,
The Hagakure is a good grain of salt to take with the Bushido code.

Ice Queen
10/26/2003 8:23pm,
If MA can adapt to modern days so can a code of honor.

10/26/2003 10:34pm,
"If MA can adapt to modern days so can a code of honor."

To me the only reason such honour was upheld in the old days is that there were no media to expose things when everyone broke it, i think that the complete application of such a code can only be acheived in feudal societies and even then it is a farce.

10/26/2003 10:48pm,
At its heart, honor must be personal, it cannot be imposed from without. Most "Honor Codes" are just rules for behavior that people have given un-necessary weight to.

Best definition I ever heard is this:

"Reputation is what other people know about you;
Honor is what you know about yourself."

Which is more important to you? There is no wrong answer, it's personal.

Ice Queen
10/27/2003 12:37am,
manch...that's where adaptation comes in.

I'd rather have honor. who cares what others thaink of you? I always hear you only go as far your reputation. But if your true to yourself your rep. will reflect that.

10/27/2003 1:45am,
This argument sounds quite Biblical to me, I guess that's because I am a Christian. In my opinion, it is better to be kind than honorable. Honor serves only one's self (glory, reputation, praise) while kindness serves others. I guess that depends on your definition of honor.

Fear of shame only teaches people to be good when others are watching. If they learn to really care about their fellow man, show mercy and kindness, that is a much greater accomplishment.

"Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law." - Romans 13:8

Ice Queen
10/27/2003 2:18am,
Sorry, wasn't trying to be biblical. I don't think you SHOULDN'T show mercy, just depends when and with who. Besides if we all went around forgiving each other, than were would revenge come in to the picture?

10/27/2003 2:37am,
9C, that's the problem with the interpretation of honor in most societies. It's gotten all tied up with shame, and saving face and masculinity. There is no honor in being unkind, ever.

By the way, if you think it would be bad having your reputaion ruined while your honor is intact, try it the other way around. Try being praised while your honor lies shattered at your feet.