Since taking the reins of the Takamura ha Shindo Yoshin Kai in 2003, I have been contemplating a course for the future that honors the legacy entrusted to me by my teacher Yukyoshi Takamura. One subject that has commanded my attention is the risk associated with creativity and change. The challenge the future presents to a classical system of budo is a complex one. Tradition holds that classical bujutsu is taught exactly as it is learned. Because of this, change is frequently resisted and often seen as degeneration. On the surface resistence to change seems a prudent course to follow but this course has frequently resulted in a ryu's technical stagnation and extinction. Why? Because no teacher regardless of dedication or teaching ability can transmit 100% of his teachings. This means something is inevitably lost to each successive generation. How a ryuha confronts this loss of knowledge is extremely important for its long term survival. Exactly what replaces this lost knowledge and wisdom? Who makes the determination of how to replace lost knowledge in a ryu?

In addressing the dilemma of change I try to remember that resistance to change does not exist in any successful long-term endeavor. When faced with a challenge, flexibility and creativity have proven themselves the strategies of success. Without such acumen, a challenger becomes like a stationary target, easily routed because the wise adversary learns from experience and adjusts his strategy accordingly. So given that line of reasoning, change seems good. But the subject is not that simple. Change must be very deliberate and intricate. Change risks obscuring information and knowledge gained through many generations of experienced teachers. The consequences of corrupting the knowledge and wisdom imparted by generations of teachers can be devestating to a ryu. It can cripple a tradition by leaving its core teachings in disarray. It is these teachings that actually define the ryu. Like the proverbial Humpty Dumpty, such knowledge once scattered or obscured can never be fully reconstituted.

So, given the reality that change must be addressed to prevent a ryu's knowledge loss and stagnation, why are so many ryu still unwilling to change? One reason is peace and complacency. Without the dynamics experienced in actual conflict there is simply no impetus to adapt or improve. The status quo seems fine because the status quo is never challenged. Some budo conservatives may disagree with this view, but Takamura Sensei believed that any budo system that never encouraged a direct challenge to its core principles was ultimately no more than calisthentics. He felt that the core principles of a ryu must be tested if it is to remain true to its origins. A challenge to the effectiveness of the ryu if made within the proper context of its goals can be an opportunity for self-examination, learning and potential growth. Properly managed, a challenge is the spark that keeps a martial art "martial."

Another reason for resistence to change is the almost fanatical adoration of a previous teacher or headmaster. Such adoration almost ensures an art's degeneration since the followers believe they will never be able to live up to or surpass their teacher's talents. For a budo legacy to survive, the present-day followers must believe that their teachers' abilities are approachable or even surpassable. It is the duty of the teacher to instill this mature confidence in his students. A teacher must not desire to only create mirrors of himself, but to assist in the creation of at least one more highly polished mirror than himself. The teacher whose ego will not let him accept that it is a sign of his ultimate success to be surpassed by his student is ill equiped to be in a leadership position within a ryu.

Some systems, new and old have addressed the dilemma of change effectively. They recognize that change for change's sake is bad, but that deliberate and methodical change can be good. They recognize that change can be embraced within the confines of both modern and classical budo without compromising the core teachings of the art.

Yukio Takamura Sensei was a rather enigmatic character. To most he appeared the model of a very traditional and consevative classical budoka. However, to those who knew him best he was a conservative renegade. He pushed the boundaries of creativity within the usually staid environment of koryu bujutsu. He strongly believed that without the flexibility to adapt certain aspects of classical bujutsu to the modern environment, that the traditions under his care would stagnate, eventually becoming irrelevant anachronisms.

It is a daunting responsibility to be continuing the path previously tread by him and his ancestors. I hope I can meet this challenge with creativity and wisdom, cognizant of the seriousness of the task before me.