Has anybody read the Book of Five Rings

[markusan]

Musashi was born to the samurai class, but was Ronin, and Musashi was anathema to the Samurai code in a way, because the basic motivation for the samurai is service, whereas Musashi was very much a lone gun. I found I had to read the book a few times, but at each stage of my own development I found I understood it at different levels. There are two things in particular in this book that I pass on to students even at the most basic level, One is the advice on stance which is "Make your everyday stance your fighting stance and your fighting stance your everyday stance" And the other is the advice about the gaze.

 

To look at things in the distance as if they are close and those things that are close as if they are at a distance. I interpret that as keeping a soft unfocussed gaze when fighting, not staring at a point on your opponent but equally being visually aware of your environment. In the translations I have Musashi keeps repeating, "you must study this carefully", and that's the secret I think. The other valuable thing I get from this book is the emphasis on thinking about not only the technique of your attack but also the spirit or attitude of your attack. Sometimes you attack with an aggressive exploding attitude while other times with a flowing or sticky attitude. Another book with good advice on these things is The Life Giving Sword by Yagyu Munenori, a contemporary of Musashi. The Art of War is compulsory reading but tackles strategy from the opposite extreme, from the strategies required by armies and countries. Most of that is applicable to the one fighter too but Musashi comes from the lone swordsman's point of view then expands the strategy to bigger groups. My advice is to read the Book of Five Rings through, then start again and mull over each topic and really absorb it. If you want a book that demonstrates the difference between Musashi's attitude and that of the working or endentured Samurai, read Hagakure, by Yamamoto Tsunetomo.

[battousai16]

the prince, WW? i dunno, machiavelli's kinda cynical and angry, that book kind of weirded me out. definitely good if you're in the U.S. and you're gonna' take the AP Euro History test, though, cuz it WILL be on it. still, i dunno...

 

though i've read the book of 5 rings, i've been told i purchased a lesser translation of it.

[steveb]

For those of us who might be interested in reading it which translation would you recommend?

[Luckykboxer]

try Stephen F. Kaufmans version.

 

It can come across as a little arrogant but i liked it over the other two i read

[battousai16]

the one i have that supposedly not very good is by Victor Harris. y'know, just so you know what to look out for.

[White Warlock]

You didn't like Victor Harris' version? Wow, you're wierd.

[battousai16]

whoa whoa whoa, i didn't say i didn't like it, i said i was told it wasn't a good translation. hense my use of "i was told that..." and the word "supposedly". and i don't speak a word of japanese, so i can't say anything about that. i had no beefs with the book. and you're calling me weird? you're the one that said The Prince was a good read!

[White Warlock]

Hehe, well The Prince is a good piece to read, but not to take to heart.

[battousai16]

well, unless of course you plan on taking over a country