Three preventive methods

The Three Methods to Forestall the Enemy presents initiative as a practical discipline with three distinct forms: attacking before the enemy, taking the lead while he attacks, and accompanying his attack while controlling the exchange. The distinction matters because forestalling does not always mean moving first. It means reading the situation, affecting the enemy’s choices, and gaining command of the encounter—sometimes by attack, sometimes by apparent weakness, and sometimes by joining the movement already under way.

The Three Forms of Initiative

The first method, Ken No Sen, is to forestall the enemy by attacking. The second, Tai No Sen, is to forestall him as he attacks. The third, Tai Tai No Sen, is used when both attack together: the practitioner accompanies the enemy’s action and forestalls him within that shared movement. The teaching insists that there are no other methods of taking the lead. These are not merely three tempos of a single assault; each describes a different relation between one’s action and the opponent’s initiative.

The account places a high value on taking the lead because it can bring a quick victory, but it does not reduce the principle to aggression. The practitioner must make the best of the situation, see through the enemy’s spirit, grasp his strategy, and defeat him. The specific judgment involved cannot be fully explained in writing. The three names provide a framework for training and decision, not a mechanical sequence that can replace attention to the circumstances.

Ken No Sen: Attack Before the Enemy

Ken No Sen begins with the decision to attack, but the attack may carry several different outward appearances. One approach is to remain calm and dash in quickly, forestalling the enemy through direct speed. Another is to advance as though forcefully while keeping the spirit reserved, taking the lead without openly committing everything to the appearance of strength. The method therefore includes not only a rapid assault but also a controlled advance that conceals reserve within apparent pressure.

A more forceful version advances with the strongest possible spirit, then, on reaching the enemy, quickens the feet slightly beyond their normal pace. That small acceleration is meant to unsettle the opponent before sharply overwhelming him. The change in pace is specific: the practitioner does not merely charge at one fixed speed, but intensifies the movement at close range, where the enemy must respond to the altered rhythm.

A further form keeps the spirit calm while attacking with the feeling of continuously crushing the enemy from beginning to end. Its aim is to win in the depths of the enemy, not simply to score an opening blow. Taken together, these examples show Ken No Sen ranging from swift entry to reserved advance and sustained pressure. Its unity lies in establishing the initiative, while its means vary according to how the attack is presented and maintained.

Tai No Sen: Take the Lead While Responding

Tai No Sen begins with the enemy’s attack. One response is to remain undisturbed while feigning weakness. As the enemy closes, the practitioner suddenly moves away, indicating an intention to jump aside. When the enemy relaxes, the practitioner dashes in with a strong attack. The sequence makes the apparent retreat part of the initiative: the enemy is encouraged to misread the response, and that relaxation creates the moment for a counterattack.

The other example meets an attack with an even stronger attack. Rather than withdrawing or waiting for a visible lapse, the practitioner takes advantage of the disorder in the enemy’s timing that results from the intensified response. These alternatives share the same principle but use different means: one induces a mistaken expectation of evasion, while the other disrupts the rhythm directly. In either case, the opponent’s first move does not determine who controls what follows.

Tai Tai No Sen: Join the Attack and Forestall

Tai Tai No Sen applies when both parties attack together. If the enemy’s attack is quick, the practitioner must respond strongly and calmly, aim for a weak point as the enemy draws near, and defeat him decisively. Calmness here is paired with force: the response does not imitate speed for its own sake, but uses composure to direct the attack toward a vulnerable point in the closing movement.

If the enemy attacks calmly instead, the practitioner observes his movements and keeps the body rather floating, joining the enemy’s movement as he approaches. The practitioner then moves quickly and cuts strongly. The two cases distinguish the response according to the enemy’s manner of attack: meet quickness with calm, targeted strength; meet a calm approach by joining its movement before accelerating into a forceful cut. The method’s defining feature is not passivity or simple imitation, but the ability to enter the same action and still determine its outcome.

Judgment, Training, and the Meaning of Forestalling

The account cautions that these methods cannot be made fully clear in words. The practitioner must judge the situation among the three forms, and should not assume that taking the lead always requires attacking first. Even when the enemy initiates, it remains possible to lead him around. The principle is thus broader than chronological priority: an opponent may act first yet still be drawn into a response whose timing and direction are controlled by the practitioner.

The broader instruction on positioning gives this judgment a physical setting. The practitioner is advised to chase the enemy toward the left and into awkward places, keeping his back toward obstacles and preventing him from looking around. In houses, thresholds, lintels, doors, verandas, and pillars can restrict the enemy’s view and movement; bad footholds and obstacles at the side can likewise be used to establish a predominant position. This environmental guidance clarifies how initiative can be shaped before and during combat: the practitioner works not only on the enemy’s timing but also on the ground and obstacles that condition his choices.

The related instruction To Move the Shade addresses the case in which the enemy’s spirit cannot be seen. In large-scale strategy, the practitioner indicates an intention to attack strongly in order to discover the enemy’s resources, then uses a different method once those resources are visible. In single combat, a feint can prompt an enemy holding the Long sword in a rear or side attitude to reveal it; the practitioner can then use what has been shown to win. Negligence risks missing the timing. This example extends the logic of forestalling from responding to visible action to eliciting information when intention is hidden.

To renew applies when an entangled spirit leaves no possible resolution. Rather than continue efforts that have reached a deadlock, the practitioner abandons them, regards the situation with a fresh spirit, and wins through a different technique and a new rhythm without changing the circumstances. The book also directs the reader to consider renewal in large-scale strategy. In combination, these teachings make the three methods a flexible account of initiative: seize it before an attack, recover it within the enemy’s attack, or find it in shared motion—and, when the existing exchange cannot be resolved, change the spirit and the rhythm rather than persist blindly.