| Revision as of 21:18, 17 May 2005 edit66.122.243.90 (talk) Thomas Conlan was wrong because he guessed and made things up. why would you want to use him as a source?← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:12, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,013,033 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] | ||
| (603 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talk header|search=yes}} | |||
| ''I corrected the characters for "loyalty", they clearly must be "忠義" and not "尽忠", which cannot be pronounced as "chugi". | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject Japan|importance=top|history=y|milhist=y|culture=y}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Military history|class=Start|B-Class-1=no|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|Japanese-task-force=yes}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Martial arts}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Religion|importance=Top}} | |||
| }} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| | algo = old(730d) | |||
| | archive = Talk:Bushido/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| | counter = 2 | |||
| | maxarchivesize = 150K | |||
| | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | |||
| | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| | minthreadsleft = 6 }} | |||
| == Chivalry? == | |||
| ''Thanks, bye'''' | |||
| The article now has this anti-historical tidbit: | |||
| == Factual accuracy == | |||
| "Nitobe was not the first person to document Japanese chivalry in this way. In his text Feudal and Modern Japan, historian Arthur May Knapp wrote: | |||
| Why the heck would you quote "serious historians" like Karl Friday? I'd rather hear from someone who actually lived there and translated the books themselves, seeking the advice of experts. Karl Friday didn't even bother to crack open a Japanese dictionary which would have explained to him that it is very old. He is obviously just another westerner trying to rewrite history. | |||
| "The samurai of thirty years ago had behind him a thousand years of training in the law of honor, obedience, duty, and self-sacrifice..... It was not needed to create or establish them. As a child he had but to be instructed, as indeed he was from his earliest years, in the etiquette of self-immolation. The fine instinct of honor demanding it was in the very blood..." " | |||
| proof that Bushido is very old: | |||
| IDEALS OF THE SAMURAI, WRITINGS OF JAPANESE WARRIORS BY WILLIAM SCOTT WILSON | |||
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0897500814/002-6529010-3956843?v=glance | |||
| (EXCERPT) | |||
| Having been born into the house of a warrior, one's intentions should be to grasp the long and the short swords and to die. | |||
| If a man does not investigate into the matter of Bushido daily, it will be difficult for him to die a brave and manly death. Thus it is essential to engrave This business of the warrior into one's mind well. -KATO KIYOMASA | |||
| Which is to say, May noted that the warrior class were brought up to be filial and obedient. How does this constitute 'Japanese chivalry,' rather than Confucianism? Especially if the warriors themselves conceived of their loyalty, self-sacrifice etc in Confucian terms? If the the entire language of loyalty is drawn from the Chinese classics? The most this excerpt shows is that other people besides Nitobe were inventing fictitious pasts and "essences of the Japanese spirit." The point remains that "Bushido" (as presented in this article) is a product of late 19th and early 20th century historical imagination. | |||
| This article is even spinning off further innacurate articles. If a text depicts warriors, it is now automatically part of the imaginary corpus of "Bushido literature." Talking about it in the Tokugawa period is highly questionable, and downright ridiculous when it starts being ascribed to the Kojiki. Now we have "Japanese chivalry" existing even before the emergence of a warrior class! | |||
| Nick Kapur's revision was excellent. I don't see any compelling reason why it has not been adopted. Presumably the page should reflect scholarly consensus, and not the mistaken beliefs of martial arts enthusiasts. | |||
| read it and weep, folks: | |||
| JAPANESE DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF BUSHIDO | |||
| - | |||
| - According to the Shogakkan kokugo daijiten: | |||
| - Bushido is defined as a unique philosophy (ronri) that spread through the warrior class from the Muromachi (chusei) period. | |||
| So, why are these changes blocked? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == Grammar == | |||
| An Expert Speaks | |||
| http://www.kodansha-intl.com/books/html/en/477002942X.html | |||
| AN INTERVIEW WITH WILLIAM SCOTT WILSON ABOUT BUSHIDO | |||
| First sentence: "is a Japanese a phrase". Wtf? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)</small> | |||
| Q.: What is Bushido? | |||
| == "Bushidō" as historical fiction == | |||
| A.: Bushido might be explained in part by the etymology of the Chinese characters used for the word. Bu comes from two radicals meanings "stop" and "spear." So even though the word now means "martial" or "military affair," it has the sense of stopping aggression. Shi can mean "samurai," but also means "gentleman" or "scholar." Looking at the character, you can see a man with broad shoulders but with his feet squarely on the ground. Do, with the radicals of head and motion, originally depicted a thoughtful way of action. It now means a path, street or way. With this in mind, we can understand Bushido as a Way of life, both ethical and martial, with self-discipline as a fundamental tenet. Self-discipline requires the warrior at once to consider his place in society and the ethics involved, and to forge himself in the martial arts. Both should eventually lead him to understand that his fundamental opponents are his own ignorance and passions. | |||
| There is criticism of Nitobe's work as a fabrication, cobbled together from disparate half-truths. See also ''Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit'' (https://www.tofugu.com/japan/bushido/, December 8, 2014). How much of our article reflects history, and how much reflects mythology? ‑‑ ] │<sup>'']''</sup> 17:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Q.: How did the code develop and how did it influence Japanese society? | |||
| A.: The warrior class began to develop as a recognizable entity around the 11th and 12th centuries. The leaders of this class were often descended from the nobility, and so were men of education and breeding. I would say that the code developed when the leaders of the warrior class began to reflect on their position in society and what it meant to be a warrior. They first began to write these thoughts down as yuigon, last words to their descendents, or as kabegaki, literally "wall writings," maxims posted to all their samurai. Samurai itself is an interesting word, coming from the classical saburau, "to serve." So when we understand that a samurai is "one who serves," we see that the implications go much farther than simply being a soldier or fighter. | |||
| To add onto this: | |||
| Also, it is important to understand that Confucian scholars had always reflected on what it meant to be true gentleman, and they concluded that such a man would be capable of both the martial and literary. The Japanese inherited this system of thought early on, so certain ideals were already implicitly accepted. | |||
| Nitobe's work is generally accepted as historical fabrication within Japan. His writings have no basis in reality, with the writer himself believing he had invented the word "武士道" (bushido), due to a complete lack of research done on his part. His writings were criticised heavily by Inoue Tetsujiro, Uemura Masahisa, and Tsuda Sōkichi. All of whom were significantly more prominent historical writers at the time. | |||
| The warrior class ruled the country for about 650 years, and their influence–political, philosophical and even artistic–had a long time to percolate throughout Japanese society. | |||
| He states this in his own writings: | |||
| Q.: The Samurai were very much renaissance men – they were interested in the arts, tea ceremony, religion, as well as the martial arts. What role did these interests play in the development of Bushido? How did the martial arts fit in? | |||
| Inazō Nitobe. Bushido: The Soul of Japan "It is not a written code; at best it consists of a few maxims handed down from mouth to mouth or coming from the pen of some well-known warrior or savant." | |||
| A.: This question goes back to the Confucian ideal of balance that Japanese inherited, probably from the 7th century or so. The word used by both to express this concept, for the "gentleman" by the Chinese and the warrior by Japanese, is (hin), pronounced uruwashii in Japanese, meaning both "balanced" and "beautiful." The character itself is a combination of "literature" (bun) and "martial" (bu). The study of arts like Tea ceremony, calligraphy, the study of poetry or literature, and of course the martial arts of swordsmanship or archery, broadened a man's perspective and understanding of the world and, as mentioned above, provided him with a vehicle for self-discipline. The martial arts naturally were included in the duties of a samurai, but this did not make them any less instructive in becoming a full human being. | |||
| He provides no evidence or supporting work to support this quote, and doubles down later in life. | |||
| Q.: What was sword fighting like? Was the swordplay different for different samurai? | |||
| "Some thirty years ago, when I first wrote an essay on the moral code of the Japanese and called it“Bushido”, there was raised a question both in Japan and among some scholars abroad as to the legitimacy of such a term. They had heard of Shido or Budo but never of “Bushido”. Some of them went even further and doubted the existence of such a code. … But the more I think of it, the stronger grows my conviction that we have been under the sway of ideas and opinions unformulated but none the less potent, whose guiding principle was Honor. And as it came to existence during the days of feudalism, it partook the coloring and taste of the period. Since it was made a class morality of the knights, samurai, it laid particular stress on honor; and because it was primarily meant for observance by that class, we may call it Bushido, the Way of the Fighting Knights.”58 | |||
| A.: There were literally hundreds of schools of samurai swordsmanship by the 1800's and, as previously mentioned, each school emphasized differing styles and approaches. Some would have the student to jump and leap, others to keep his feel solidly on the ground; some would emphasize different ways of holding the sword, others one method only. One school stated that technical swordsmanship took second place to sitting meditation. Historically speaking, there were periods when much of the swordfighting was done on horseback, and others when it was done mostly on foot. Also, as the shape and length of the sword varied through different epochs, so did styles of fighting. Then I suppose that a fight between men who were resolved to die would be quite different from a fight between men who were not interested in getting hurt. | |||
| Ōta,Yūzō, Taiheiyō no hashi toshite no Nitobe Inazō, 20-21 | |||
| Q.: How is the code reflected in Japanese society today? | |||
| Nitobe Inazō. Lectures on Japan, 124-125. | |||
| A.: When I first came to live in Japan in the 60's, I was impressed how totally dedicated and loyal people were to the companies where they were employed. When I eventually understood the words samurai and saburau, it started to make sense. While these men (women would usually not stay long with a company, giving up work for marriage) did not carry swords of course, they seemed to embody that old samurai sense of service, duty, loyalty and even pride. This may sound strange in our own "me first" culture, but it impressed me that the company had sort of taken the place of a feudal lord, and that the stipend of the samurai had become the salary of the white-collar worker.M | |||
| Oleg Benesch, Bushido : the creation of a martial ethic in late Meiji Japan | |||
| That is on the societal level. On an individual level, I have often felt that Japanese have a strong resolution, perhaps from this cultural background of Bushido, to go through problems rather than around them. Persistence and patience developed from self-discipline? | |||
| Oleg Benesch, Inventing the Way of the Samurai: Nationalism, Internationalism, and Bushido in Modern Japan, First edition | |||
| It looks like some people have different beliefs regarding the bushido, and this is reflecting on the previous edits of this article. Something must be done about this, and until that happens, the <nowiki>{{disputed}}</nowiki> tag should remain there. Me, I don't know enough about the subject, so I can't really stick my finger on this. I hoped I could find something more reliable here. As for my opinion, I've always thought their code of honor was indeed real in that past. Something that was common sense, followed by a large part of the samurai. Now I don't know anymore, though. | |||
| These assertiosn fall into direct conflict with the existence of the following works: | |||
| Hishikawa Moronobu " kokon bushido ezukushi" 菱川師宣の「古今'''武士道'''絵つくし」（1684） | |||
| The discussion pertaining this can be carried here.--] 04:26, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Ogyū Sorai "Sorai Sensei Tōmonsho" 荻生徂徠『徂来先生答問書』(1725) | |||
| Recent edits by anon user 203.62.217.146 sound dismissive and POV: "Bushido was the supposed warrior code of the samurai." "In reality, however, bushido was an invention of frustrated samurai", "Today it is dismissed by serious historians" "Bushido re-emerged during World War 2 as Japanese propaganda" etc... Maybe a line could be written on such alternative views (with "serious historian"'s reference please), but isn't organizing the whole article around this theme quite excessive? ] 10:33, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| 「世上に'''武士道'''と申習し申候一筋、古之書に之れ有り候。君子の道にもかなひ、人を治むる道にも成り申すべきやの由、御尋ね候。」 | |||
| I agree this page needs to stay disputed for awhile, and that anon should have worded their entry a little more elegantly, though the actual content of the entry is essentially correct. The mistake people make with the whole samurai/bushido thing is that they are mixing up the eras, and reading the wrong books. The Sengoku Jidai period samurai is the samurai that most people are familiar with. Most of the Akira Kurosawa samurai films are taken from this period (mid 15th century up until the beginning of the 17th century), and this is where the image of the warrior samurai that everyone is familiar with comes from. These samurai were as unloyal as you could imagine, retainers often changed masters, and daimyo were continuingly forming and breaking alliances as soon as an advantage was to be had. Then Tokugawa Ieyasu won the battle of Sekigahara and established the Tokugawa Bakufu, ushering in the "Edo period", and with it several centuries of peace. In this period the samurai quite rapidly became aristocrats. They still wore their swords and some of them even practiced the martial arts, but there were no battles to fight and most samurai spent their lives on guard duty, collecting taxes or enjoying poetry and theatre (along with booze and the odd trip to the brothel!). This is where the image of the elegant & learned samurai comes from, though even that has been exaggerated somewhat over the years. | |||
| Now, the topic of bushido. I was going to write up my opinions on the matter, but the article listed on the current Bushido page, http://www.koryubooks.com/library/kfriday2.html, does a pretty good job of it (and it's written by historian Karl Friday, to boot). A quick summary would be - during the Edo period, the period of peace, the Tokugawa Bakufu had to find a way to satisfy and reward their samurai, who no longer had much of a chance of moving through the ranks without the opportunity of proving himself in battle, which had been the main cause of promotion in the Sengoku Jidai period. To do this the Bakufu tried to change the concept of "honour" from a personal one to that of the clan and your master. The intent of this was that even if you were likely stuck at your social level for your whole life, you should still work hard to make your clan and your daimyo look better, which in turn will make you look better. To anyone who has read "Hagakure" this should sound familiar, giving and not getting anything back but the knowledge that you've improved your clan's status. | |||
| As you may imagine, this didn't quite work in practice as samurai are, after all, human beings, and are just as ambitious as everyone else. It also led to some problems, like with Lord Asano and the 47 ronin, who revenged their lord as any good samurai was supposed to, yet were still condemned to death because they acted contrary to the Bakufu's ruling on the matter. But the actions of these 47 men were pretty unique, and could not be considered the standard. | |||
| The real problem is that during the Edo period there was a certain consensus of what defines a samurai, however it differed from clan to clan and was not a written code in any sense of the word, nor was it followed by each and every man who wore the two swords. It's also important not to think of this as "bushido", as this term was simply not used back in those times. | |||
| I think a great book that should help disillusion people about samurai of this period is the dairy of Katsu Kokichi, titled "Musui's Story: The Autobiography of a Tokugawa Samurai". This is a great example of exactly what a good percentage of the samurai had become during the period of peace following Sekigahara. "The Taming of the Samurai" by Eiko Ikegami is also a great look at the changing role of samurai during the Edo Period, from a sociological perspective. It touches on the Hagakure as well. | |||
| Personally, I think the Bushido article hosted here needs a couple of things to be complete - a quick description of the transition of the samurai from warriors to administrators, a description on what it meant to be a samurai in the Edo period, the appearance of Bushido as Japanese propaganda after the Meiji restoration and a final blurb about the modern view of the bushido code, comparing the fiction to fact.--] 04:25, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ] (]) 01:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC) | |||
| What I find wrong here is the way the anon user filled the article with his "the bushido was nothing but a farse" pseudo-arguments. Things were not so simple. There ''was'' a strong feeling of keeping an honorable status among the samurai of certain eras in the feudal Japan. What you say about the samurai changing their concepts through the ages, Angus, sounds more than plausible, but still, there was no farse. Sure, our minds are filled with fantasy nowadays, and that surely clouds our judgement regarding certain things (specially things like this), but I still think this article is filled with endless bias. I will give an example that might sound good for some, and might sound like BS to others, but there it goes anyway. | |||
| ==Multiple Types of Bushido== | |||
| I think one of the biggest demonstrations of honor to one's owns beliefs, at that time, was the ]. The reasons varied greatly. Tainted reputation, overwhelming disappointment, protest, etc. Cases of seppuku, however, weren't isolated among the samurai community. They were very common. It was part of their culture, and still is, in certain ways. It comes from the concept that it's better to have an honorable death than live a life in shame. It was a fast way of getting rid of every single dishonor on their lives. It was an act considered to be so full of honor, that after it's done, the person would be forgiven of everything. A decent ending. Now, anyone paid attention to the recent cases of mass suicides in Japan, set up via the Internet? Young people commiting suicide together inside cars? Would that be just a coincidence? I wouldn't say so. There's more there than meets the eye. | |||
| The page has improved significantly to explain the multiple Bushido types through history. Such as: Ancient Bushido (Heian-Kamakura, 794-1333), Sengoku Bushido (Sengoku period, 1336-1603), Edo Bushido (Early to late Edo (1603–1868), Meiji Bushido (1868-1945) and Contemporary Bushido (1950–Present): it is still used in various forms such as business, communication, martial arts and a way of life. Each type has distinct features. Bushido was originally focused on valor and later gained morals for attitude and behaviour. "Bushidō (武士道, "the way of the warrior") are regulations for samurai attitudes, behavior and lifestyle." Bushido is best used as an overarching term for all the codes, practices, philosophies and principles of samurai culture. Bushido is by extension the Japanese way of the warrior. Thus Nitobe Inazō's popular book "Bushido: The Soul of Japan (1900)" must not be used as the primary interpretation, because it does not represent all bushido types and interpretations by samurai and important figures. There are earlier works which describe bushido long before Nitobe. The historical development was put in chronological order with additional references. Etymology was expanded with important terminology. Additionally, valuable images were added about Bushido such as: Koyo Gunkan by Kosaka Masanobu (1616), Kashoki (Amusing Notes) by Saito Chikamori (1642) and Book cover of Kokon Bushido Ezukushi (Bushido Through The Ages) by artist Hishikawa Moronobu (1685). Images of the Hagakure and Musashi's Book of Five Rings could be included. - ] (]) 01:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| The "Ancient Bushido" section includes vague information that is uncited and doesn't really make sense: "The old samurai didn't discuss morals of the modern samurai. The exception is feelings of mercy and natural feelings. The focus was overwhelming others by force, governing and protecting the land. The substantive aspect was important. The samurai of this time were terrifying and pure fighters." It is unclear who the "old samurai" or "modern samurai" are, how/why they would be discussing each others' morals in ancient times, what "the exception" is for "mercy and natural feelings" (and what those things even are), what "focus" is being discussed, what "the substantive aspect" means and how it was important, etc. The statement that they were "terrifying and pure fighters" is both extremely vague and a value judgment unsupported by a citation; terrifying according to whom? Pure in what way? This just sounds like someone's opinion that isn't clearly related to any source. ] (]) 17:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC) | |||
| I'm not just pulling that off my head, though. I've read a lot about it, so nah, I'm not wrong. You might think this is completely unrelated, but to everybody that read a thing or two about suicide in Japan, you know that these aren't the only cases. Why do certain subway stations in Japan have acrylic barriers in the platforms to prevent people from jumping down the rails? Keep thinking. | |||
| :: I agree with {{user|65.144.88.134}}, the "Ancient bushido" section was poorly presented and not backed up by the references. I have ] and removed that section. ‑‑ ] │<sup>'']''</sup> 22:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
| Alright, this is just an example. Now, to my point. Would a culture that preserved such traditions based purely on honor (which "evolved" through the ages, certainly), so strongly, have nothing to do with that same honor? It's true I'm talking about something more complex than bushido right now, but see if you can trace the connections. As it's said in the ] article, "Seppuku was a key part of bushido". I'm still talking about the same thing, besides the appearances. "Invention of frustrated samurai"? I wouldn't say so. | |||
| --] 01:07, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Styling bushido consistently throughout == | |||
| Looking through this article, I have found bushido spelled with and without the macron over the o, and both italicized and not, and both capitalized and not. | |||
| Hi, I agree with AngusH. But this article is titled Bushido which is a term that did not even exist before the late Edo period and in fact probably the Meiji era (mid 1800s). Niitobe's book Bushido, written in English, is the most widely read text on this topic and it is largely fictious, although Japanese themselves have adopted much of it. Niitobe turned his back on Japan. The book Shogun is another bad influence. | |||
| One of the tenets of good writing is consistent style; that is, except for direct quotations, bushido should be typed the same way every time. I suggest using "bushido" without the macron, in roman (non-italicized) type, and lower-cased. | |||
| Just as well I didn't write this article, it would have been far more pointed. Maybe I can re-write it. | |||
| In 2010, this article was moved from Bushidō to Bushido by community consensus. That is my justification for removing the macron in all references to the term. I think there is sufficient usage of lower-cased "bushido" in the sources used in this article to justify lower-casing it ourselves. However, whether it should be italicized is a closer call. | |||
| As for Seppuku, it was far more rare than reported. Mostly it was a forced suicide. Originally the individual stabbed himself and the assitant decapitated him after sufficient agony had been endured. By the Edo period people were commiting seppuku with (folded) fans, they reached for the fan as a purely symbolic act and were decapitated by the "assistant". | |||
| The Misplaced Pages Manual of Style instructs us to italicize romanized words that are not in common use in the English language. However, looking at our sources, it seems italicized as often as not, though whether those sources are authorities on whether a word is in common usage in the English language is a separate argument. I asked a linguist her opinion about the commonality of "bushido" and she said she thinks it is common enough in English to use roman type. I think it is common enough, but I know that society at large is not saying "bushido" every day. So I leave it up to community consensus. | |||
| Kaonashi, there are no subway stations in Tokyo with acrylic barriers to prevent suicides. | |||
| Should we italicize bushido? I vote no. | |||
| Yes, there are. It's glass by the way, if that makes any difference. This time I'll even show you I read about it. That's a famous Brazilian magazine that talks exclusively about the Japanese culture. What you're referring to is right at the editorial. Too bad you won't be able to see it. And yes, you guessed it. It's Tokyo. Congrats. | |||
| — ]<sub>]</sub> (]) 11:35, 15 March 2021 (UTC) | |||
| : How to style the term depends in part on how it's being used. | |||
| As for seppuku, I'm afraid you don't completely understand it. The "assistant" you talk about was usually a close friend of the person in question. He was there to finish his pain as soon as possible, by yes, chopping the head. They had no reasons to make the seppuku committer endure more pain than necessary. Now, about the "forced seppukus" you also referred to, that's not that different either. When captured prisoners were sometimes given the ''choice'' of commiting seppuku or by dying by the sword of someone there. To be given such a choice was a great regally. It was better to commit seppuku and die a honorable death than dying by the hands of the enemy, once again. In that case, the "assistant" would be there to end the person's pain just as fast. No changes on that. Otherwise, why would the enemy suggest the seppuku anyway? It's a chance of being "forgiven" by many. Not a chance of getting through even more pain.--] 15:43, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| : If it's being used as a Japanese term, then we should keep the macron and italicize. The first sentence in the article lede is one such example, and the caption on the image of the kanji spelling is another. | |||
| : If it's being used as an English term, then we should lose the macron and not italicize, and also not capitalize. The running text in the ] section is one such example. | |||
| : ], ‑‑ ] │<sup>'']''</sup> 00:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC) | |||
| == A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == | |||
| *Factual accuracy: sliding walls in the recently built subways throughout Japan are not designed specifically to avoid suicides, but more generally as a security feature against people falling on the tracks. It's been especially implemented when there the trains are fully automated and don't have drivers (such as the ] line going to ]), but not exclusively. It is also a usefull security feature when you have a ] rushing through a station without stopping (in that case these are not "walls", but sliding barriers about 1 meter high, which cannot prevent someone jumping over anyway). By the way, the latest line in the Paris Subway also has sliding transparent wall: ], which is also fully automomated. Of course, there are also some suicides in France too...] 21:59, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: | |||
| * ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-05-30T17:22:06.687902 | USS Bunker Hill hit by two Kamikazes.jpg --> | |||
| Kaonashi (literally) Mr No Face, I have lived in Japan for 8 years, Tokyo for 3. I catch the subway daily and have never seen a barrier of any type. Perhaps you could tell me the name of the line and station that have these barriers. As PHG mentioned the Yurikamome does, but if I remember correctly that is a monorail (certainly not a subway) and of course the Shinkansen (bullet train) has them ''at some'' stations. | |||
| Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 17:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
| Yes I do understand Seppuku; problem is there was no enemy after Tokugawa united Japan. I used quotes on the term assistant as during this era seppuku was used as a form of execution and the assitant was most usually not a close associate and the subject did not stab himself. | |||
| The biggest problem with Japan's history is that most of the English (or non-Japanese) texts are wrong. | |||
| I say those who disagree with what 203.62.217.146 has to say change this article back at least for the moment. ] 16:54, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I disagree. In my opinion leave it as it is now until someone comes up with something better. Better a sharp, pointed entry than a fictional and misleading one. --] 05:11, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :What you say would make sense, if the "sharp" and "pointed" content in question had any theoric basis. Never saw those claims anywhere else. What I did see, funnily enough, is exactly the "fictional and misleading" claims. I'll refrain from this discussion from now one, though. Better that way.--] 00:03, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Fair enough, not sure what more I can do to convince you otherwise outside of the link I posted as well as my first post above, and the other information I added in my original post, all of which has been taken from a great variety of textbooks on the subject. Please feel free to check out this page, too: . If I still can't sway your opinion, *shrug* what more can I do? --] 03:17, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::Either way, it seems to have been fixed now by this PHG figure. I've never seen the claims made by 203.62.217.146 anywhere else, and chances are they were just supporting a wild conspiracy theory or something with little basis in reality. It is good the way it is, and if someone can back up up those unfamiliar claims with fact I will accept it. Until then, the whole "Bushidō didn't exist" argument stands alongside those infernal "Hirohito was evil" and "Japanese people are lazy" rants in my mind. ] 13:41, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::What's here now is fair enough I guess. Let me clear one thing up though: Bushido did "exist" and I don't mean to imply it didn't, it just wasn't a "code". Bushido simply means "way of the warrior", and there was obviously a "way of the warrior" (i.e.. a way that a warrior could be expected to behave), and it did go by this name. This was more cultural than anything else though, and was the result of centuries of families specialising in the martial arts, and varied in many ways from house to house. Out of interest I picked up my copy of the Cambridge History of Japan volumes 3 & 4 (arguably the best and most complete books you can get on the topic of Japanese history, which explains their price...), which cover the samurai/bushi periods, and checked the index for mentionings of "bushido". There are precious few, I believe only two, neither being longer than a single sentence. I feel this should help people gauge exactly how important bushido was in the grand scheme of things.--] 04:22, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == I am starting a Samurai / Bushido website == | |||
| I am giving wikipediots a preview of what will be on it. See the wikipedia SEPPUKU and SAMURAI pages also. Enjoy the links and remember "It is man that makes The Way Great"-- MASARU 5/3/2005 | |||
| == The word "Bushido" did exist as a word before the Tokugawa era == | |||
| The writings of Imagawa Ryoshun, author of "Michiyukiburi" and "Nan taiheki" mentions "The Way of The Warrior" (Bu Shi Do) in his "regulations" (AD1412). The regulations were respected by traditional Japanese as a guide to correct moral and ethical behavior until world war II. | |||
| == Samurai fiction == | |||
| what is it about samurai that so fascinates people that they feel the need to Make up things about them? Bushido has a set of three kanji representing the word. The kanji for "creed" has never, to my knowledge been used in the word for Bu ("military") it is a very distinct symbol. I challenge you to find one mention of the symbol for creed in japanese literature to represent "bushi". That would change the meaning of the word. Japanese people define the meaning of a word by the underlying character, not the romanized pronunciation. Source books in Chinese literature during the warring states period were the source of the adopted "bu shi" characters in Japanese. These books are more than 2000 years old. By the way, "secrets of the samurai" is one book I reluctantly admit to reading...in 1991. It is lame and actually compares budo, bushido and bujutsu which are distant relations. | |||
| == Thomas Conlan was wrong because he guessed and made things up. why would you want to use him as a source? == | |||
| Historian Wrong About Samurai--http://hnn.us/comments/32133.html | |||
Latest revision as of 16:12, 10 July 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bushido article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 years  |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
Chivalry?
The article now has this anti-historical tidbit:
"Nitobe was not the first person to document Japanese chivalry in this way. In his text Feudal and Modern Japan, historian Arthur May Knapp wrote:
"The samurai of thirty years ago had behind him a thousand years of training in the law of honor, obedience, duty, and self-sacrifice..... It was not needed to create or establish them. As a child he had but to be instructed, as indeed he was from his earliest years, in the etiquette of self-immolation. The fine instinct of honor demanding it was in the very blood..." "
Which is to say, May noted that the warrior class were brought up to be filial and obedient. How does this constitute 'Japanese chivalry,' rather than Confucianism? Especially if the warriors themselves conceived of their loyalty, self-sacrifice etc in Confucian terms? If the the entire language of loyalty is drawn from the Chinese classics? The most this excerpt shows is that other people besides Nitobe were inventing fictitious pasts and "essences of the Japanese spirit." The point remains that "Bushido" (as presented in this article) is a product of late 19th and early 20th century historical imagination.
This article is even spinning off further innacurate articles. If a text depicts warriors, it is now automatically part of the imaginary corpus of "Bushido literature." Talking about it in the Tokugawa period is highly questionable, and downright ridiculous when it starts being ascribed to the Kojiki. Now we have "Japanese chivalry" existing even before the emergence of a warrior class!
Nick Kapur's revision was excellent. I don't see any compelling reason why it has not been adopted. Presumably the page should reflect scholarly consensus, and not the mistaken beliefs of martial arts enthusiasts.
So, why are these changes blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.194.201.74 (talk) 23:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Grammar
First sentence: "is a Japanese a phrase". Wtf? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.40.165.11 (talk) 17:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
"Bushidō" as historical fiction
There is criticism of Nitobe's work as a fabrication, cobbled together from disparate half-truths. See also Bushido: Way of Total Bullshit (https://www.tofugu.com/japan/bushido/, December 8, 2014). How much of our article reflects history, and how much reflects mythology? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ 17:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
To add onto this:
Nitobe's work is generally accepted as historical fabrication within Japan. His writings have no basis in reality, with the writer himself believing he had invented the word "武士道" (bushido), due to a complete lack of research done on his part. His writings were criticised heavily by Inoue Tetsujiro, Uemura Masahisa, and Tsuda Sōkichi. All of whom were significantly more prominent historical writers at the time.
He states this in his own writings:
Inazō Nitobe. Bushido: The Soul of Japan "It is not a written code; at best it consists of a few maxims handed down from mouth to mouth or coming from the pen of some well-known warrior or savant."
He provides no evidence or supporting work to support this quote, and doubles down later in life.
"Some thirty years ago, when I first wrote an essay on the moral code of the Japanese and called it“Bushido”, there was raised a question both in Japan and among some scholars abroad as to the legitimacy of such a term. They had heard of Shido or Budo but never of “Bushido”. Some of them went even further and doubted the existence of such a code. … But the more I think of it, the stronger grows my conviction that we have been under the sway of ideas and opinions unformulated but none the less potent, whose guiding principle was Honor. And as it came to existence during the days of feudalism, it partook the coloring and taste of the period. Since it was made a class morality of the knights, samurai, it laid particular stress on honor; and because it was primarily meant for observance by that class, we may call it Bushido, the Way of the Fighting Knights.”58
Ōta,Yūzō, Taiheiyō no hashi toshite no Nitobe Inazō, 20-21
Nitobe Inazō. Lectures on Japan, 124-125.
Oleg Benesch, Bushido : the creation of a martial ethic in late Meiji Japan
Oleg Benesch, Inventing the Way of the Samurai: Nationalism, Internationalism, and Bushido in Modern Japan, First edition
These assertiosn fall into direct conflict with the existence of the following works:
Hishikawa Moronobu " kokon bushido ezukushi" 菱川師宣の「古今武士道絵つくし」（1684）
Ogyū Sorai "Sorai Sensei Tōmonsho" 荻生徂徠『徂来先生答問書』(1725)
「世上に武士道と申習し申候一筋、古之書に之れ有り候。君子の道にもかなひ、人を治むる道にも成り申すべきやの由、御尋ね候。」
Constalation (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Multiple Types of Bushido
The page has improved significantly to explain the multiple Bushido types through history. Such as: Ancient Bushido (Heian-Kamakura, 794-1333), Sengoku Bushido (Sengoku period, 1336-1603), Edo Bushido (Early to late Edo (1603–1868), Meiji Bushido (1868-1945) and Contemporary Bushido (1950–Present): it is still used in various forms such as business, communication, martial arts and a way of life. Each type has distinct features. Bushido was originally focused on valor and later gained morals for attitude and behaviour. "Bushidō (武士道, "the way of the warrior") are regulations for samurai attitudes, behavior and lifestyle." Bushido is best used as an overarching term for all the codes, practices, philosophies and principles of samurai culture. Bushido is by extension the Japanese way of the warrior. Thus Nitobe Inazō's popular book "Bushido: The Soul of Japan (1900)" must not be used as the primary interpretation, because it does not represent all bushido types and interpretations by samurai and important figures. There are earlier works which describe bushido long before Nitobe. The historical development was put in chronological order with additional references. Etymology was expanded with important terminology. Additionally, valuable images were added about Bushido such as: Koyo Gunkan by Kosaka Masanobu (1616), Kashoki (Amusing Notes) by Saito Chikamori (1642) and Book cover of Kokon Bushido Ezukushi (Bushido Through The Ages) by artist Hishikawa Moronobu (1685). Images of the Hagakure and Musashi's Book of Five Rings could be included. - Artanisen (talk) 01:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
The "Ancient Bushido" section includes vague information that is uncited and doesn't really make sense: "The old samurai didn't discuss morals of the modern samurai. The exception is feelings of mercy and natural feelings. The focus was overwhelming others by force, governing and protecting the land. The substantive aspect was important. The samurai of this time were terrifying and pure fighters." It is unclear who the "old samurai" or "modern samurai" are, how/why they would be discussing each others' morals in ancient times, what "the exception" is for "mercy and natural feelings" (and what those things even are), what "focus" is being discussed, what "the substantive aspect" means and how it was important, etc. The statement that they were "terrifying and pure fighters" is both extremely vague and a value judgment unsupported by a citation; terrifying according to whom? Pure in what way? This just sounds like someone's opinion that isn't clearly related to any source. 65.144.88.134 (talk) 17:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with 65.144.88.134 (talk · contribs), the "Ancient bushido" section was poorly presented and not backed up by the references. I have been bold and removed that section. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ 22:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Styling bushido consistently throughout
Looking through this article, I have found bushido spelled with and without the macron over the o, and both italicized and not, and both capitalized and not.
One of the tenets of good writing is consistent style; that is, except for direct quotations, bushido should be typed the same way every time. I suggest using "bushido" without the macron, in roman (non-italicized) type, and lower-cased.
In 2010, this article was moved from Bushidō to Bushido by community consensus. That is my justification for removing the macron in all references to the term. I think there is sufficient usage of lower-cased "bushido" in the sources used in this article to justify lower-casing it ourselves. However, whether it should be italicized is a closer call.
The Misplaced Pages Manual of Style instructs us to italicize romanized words that are not in common use in the English language. However, looking at our sources, it seems italicized as often as not, though whether those sources are authorities on whether a word is in common usage in the English language is a separate argument. I asked a linguist her opinion about the commonality of "bushido" and she said she thinks it is common enough in English to use roman type. I think it is common enough, but I know that society at large is not saying "bushido" every day. So I leave it up to community consensus.
Should we italicize bushido? I vote no. — JarmihiGOCE (talk) 11:35, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- How to style the term depends in part on how it's being used.
- If it's being used as a Japanese term, then we should keep the macron and italicize. The first sentence in the article lede is one such example, and the caption on the image of the kanji spelling is another.
- If it's being used as an English term, then we should lose the macron and not italicize, and also not capitalize. The running text in the Bushido#Origin section is one such example.
- HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ 00:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in History
- C-Class vital articles in History
- C-Class Japan-related articles
- Top-importance Japan-related articles
- WikiProject Japan articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- C-Class Japanese military history articles
- Japanese military history task force articles
- C-Class Martial arts articles
- C-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles