PDA

View Full Version : Kondo and Okamoto



Chris Clifton
26th April 2003, 08:11
Hey guys,

First of all, I’m not real familiar with all the styles of Daito Ryu, but I have a question. I watched an Okamoto roppokai video the other day and after seeing the Kondo DVD, I have to say that they looked like two completely different arts!

So here are my questions:

I read somewhere that Okamoto teaches the higher level ki stuff whereas Kondo starts with the jujutsu arts and then later teaches more ki stuff. Is that true?

Does Kondo teach the light touch throws that Okamoto does?

Does Okamoto teach the more jujutsu stuff at all or does he only do light touch and one finger throws and things like that?

Please understand I’m not saying one teacher is better than the other, I’m just trying to understand the teaching systems of the 2 styles.

Thanks!

Chris Clifton

Richard Elias
26th April 2003, 11:23
While I cannot speak with great authority on the full curriculum of either teacher, it should be noted that Kondo sensei promised his teacher, Takeda Tokimune, that he would only demonstrate techniques from the Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo (from the first scroll awarded in “traditional” Daito ryu) to the general public. He has, with few exceptions, honored this promise. As such, you most probably will not see fully what Kondo sensei is capable of or imparts to those who are his direct students. I would dare to add that his students are bound by that same promise.

It is my understanding that Kondo sensei is fully capable in all aspects of Daito ryu, whether he chooses to display them or not.

I personally feel that it is a testament to the man’s integrity that he keeps his word and doesn’t feel he has anything to prove.


***Disclaimer:***
I am not a Daito ryu student and the above information was provided to me via one who is. Any misunderstandings in this regard are totally mine. Additionally, none of the above was meant to demean or imply anything about any other Daito ryu practitioner other than what I feel and understand of Kondo sensei in particular. :smilejapa


Brently…

Brently Keen
26th April 2003, 17:22
I'm not sure that anyone since Sokaku Takada is truly capable in all aspects of Daito-ryu.

I cannot speak for Kondo sensei, and what he can or cannot do. Obviously he teaches the tradition as he learned it from Tokimune Takeda Sensei. In that much he is certainly capable. However, I personally think Tokimune's "mainline" represents one of several primary and legitimate branches of Daito-ryu, and that no one branch represents the entire tradition.

Even if Kondo sensei does not demonstrate the more advanced, light touch, aiki throws as Okamoto sensei does, I still think his demonstrated skill, credentials, and tenure in the art speaks convincingly for itself.

Okamoto sensei's skills, credentials, and tenure also speaks for himself. He teaches the tradition as he was taught by Kodo Horikawa sensei. Horikawa sensei clearly also taught as he had learned directly from Sokaku sensei. On one video, Okamoto even gives his explanation of why different teachers of DR differ in their styles.

What you see on various tapes of Okamoto sensei is fairly representative of what is regularly practiced in the Roppokai. However, much more is not shown, video tapes are by no means meant to be comprehensive.

What you do see in the tapes is that there is an obvious bias or slant towards 'aiki no jutsu' type waza and aikijujutsu oyo waza, over straight jujutsu. And that holds true for regular practice and instruction as well. Some important basic jujutsu techniques are taught, but beyond that, jujutsu techniques are not emphasized very strongly, instead aiki techniques are emphasized. Okamoto sensei has (I believe) very good reasons for choosing to be "progressive" in this manner. And the skill of many of his students testifies to the effectiveness of his preferred method (imo).

Much like Sokaku taught different students and groups differently according to their individual personalities, needs, and abilities and Okamoto sensei seems to also do the same. For example among the different Roppokai branches some different things are taught or emphasized more or less than they are at the hombu - even among the senior students at the hombu they've also tended to "specialize" a bit in certain types things - I'm not sure if it's intentional by design, or just a natural result of peoples different personalities, skills and interests - my guess is there's a little of both.

Okamoto sensei does teach some jujutsu, just not very often or as much as perhaps other teachers and branches do. When I was in Japan, I sometimes heard my seniors say that if newer Roppokai members wanted to learn "jujutsu" they could do so from any number of great jujutsu masters in Japan - but only Okamoto sensei was teaching higher level aiki stuff openly. It doesn't make sense to ask Okamoto sensei to use limited class time for jujutsu when such quality instruction is widely available elsewhere - but quality instruction in authentic aiki no jutsu is extremely rare and hard to find.

As in so many things, I like to make a lot of distinctions. There are fundamental differences between "ki stuff" and "aiki stuff" (imo). Ki (chi) stuff is common with many other arts/styles, but aiki stuff is much more unusual, and Daito-ryu is all about that aiki stuff. Some Roppokai members do not make such distinctions, but I do. The two are demonstrably different in both quality and nature. Sokaku was known to assert that "aiki was the essence of Daito-ryu", but as far I know, he never made similar statements about "ki".

FWIW, there is nothing magic or mystical about either ki or aiki, it's all grounded in sound principles - whether or not you believe it or understand it well or even at all.

Respectfully,

Brently Keen

Chris Clifton
27th April 2003, 05:52
Thanks for the info Brently and Richard. So if I understand correctly, Kondo starts with the basics (jujutsu) and works up to the more aiki techniques, wheras Okamoto starts right at the top with the aiki stuff.

If we relate it to other subjects, we usually start with the basics and then work up to the higher level. I imagine someone who has a firm grounding in basic jujutsu to be able to apply some higher level arts with confidence, but if they don’t have that foundation, isn’t it more difficult to apply the aiki arts?

Chris Clifton

Brently Keen
27th April 2003, 22:36
Chris wrote,

"If we relate it to other subjects, we usually start with the basics and then work up to the higher level. I imagine someone who has a firm grounding in basic jujutsu to be able to apply some higher level arts with confidence, but if they don’t have that foundation, isn’t it more difficult to apply the aiki arts"

Well sure, yes and no. If you relate it to other subjects, then your reasoning makes sense - and I'd have to agree. We all need to have basics - some place to start and from which to build on. Without a strong, basic foundation advanced techniques aren't going to be very advanced. Likewise without confidence how can one hope to apply anything consistently?

The important thing however, might be knowing how aiki happens to relate to other subjects like jujutsu, and then perhaps moreso, also how it differs.

When we're talking about aiki it's not just having a firm grounding in basic jujutsu, that makes the real difference (imo), although that might certainly be a big help. Rather I think it's having a firm grounding in the basics of aiki that is of much greater importance.

Foundations and basics are (imo) of such importance that I think they're practically indispensible. However, the issue is not one of basics vs no basics, but rather: "What is basic?" or "What are the basics necessary for applying aiki?", and "What is or are the most effective methods/ways of inculcating and developing those basics into usable applicable skills?"

Without a solid foundation in the basics of aiki no jutsu you cannot reasonably expect to apply more advanced aikijujutsu techniques (doh!) - But where is it written in stone that one must have a solid foundation in jujutsu (or sword for that matter?) to master aiki?

I'm not dismissing the importance of jujutsu or kenjutsu at all - I believe both are invaluable to the study of aiki - I am saying that I'm not sure they are absolutely essential though. There is undeniably, a very close relationship between them, but they are not (imo) fundamentally equivalent or alike despite their many similarities.

For example, if I wanted to master race car driving well enough to win races, would it be equally necessary for me to master the basics of say engine mechanics, or even horse racing for that matter, to become good enough to do so?

A thorough knowledge of either might be of some additional benefit for me, and may also provide additional confidence or insight, or some other sort of competitive advantage - but neither are necessary prerequisites for becoming a NASCAR champion are they? What are the prerequisites, or the basics required to win NASCAR races?

I'm sure that every NASCAR champ is well versed in the necessary basics and foundational aspects of driving and racing their cars - the reason they win however, is more likely related to their successful application of those basics throughout the course of their races than it is related to their previous mastery or success with the basics of something else like mechanics or horse racing.

Just because someone has the fastest car or time racing around the track during trial runs, does not necessarily mean they have what it takes to win races either.

Some may have started out as kids racing their bikes around the neighborhood, and perhaps as teens they graduated to motorcycles, or go karts, others may have started by working in an auto shop - eventually they must've graduated to their race cars and moved out onto the track - where they would've learned the basics all over again, competing with other drivers all intent on winning the prize.

Regardless of their skill and success on bicycles, motorbikes, or go carts - all of that may or may not contribute to and/or ensure their success on the NASCAR circuit. Because racing around the neighborhood on BMX bikes, or tearing up the trails on a motorcycle, or even being an Olympic downhill gold medalist are all different kinds of sports and events that require different kinds of basic skills and strategies to win.

The analogy isn't perfect - and I really know nothing of NASCAR race car driving, but can you see that while racing to see who is fastest might be common to horse races, BMX, motocross, Olympic downhill skiing, NASCAR, and Formula One they are all more or less different endeavors with different skills equipment/tools of the trade, rules/requirements, objectives, etc... they're all racing, but not necessarily the same way or for the same thing.

I think of jujutsu, kenjutsu and aiki as also having some similarities - things in common as well as important distinctions and differences.

Basics are important, and equally important to what the basics are or consist of, is also what the basics are good for.

Finally, even automobile racing has undergone significant changes since the invention of automobiles. The basics, I'm sure have evolved as the capabilities of both men and machines have come a long way. Technology and safety advancements as well as developments in sport psychology, strategy, etc... over time has totally changed the way races are conducted and won - therefore the basics have also evolved - some are still pertinent, others are obsolete, others are brand new. I think it's safe to say for the most part however, that each generation does build upon, further develop, and eventually spring off from the basics (as well as the innovations) of the previous generations.

The same is true for koryu bujutsu including aikijujutsu (imho). Indeed it's the nature of a ryu to flow from a source rather than pool, collect and stagnate there.

I hope that makes sense.

Brently Keen

Brently Keen
28th April 2003, 00:04
Just one more thought on this part of the above quote Chris wrote:

"I imagine someone who has a firm grounding in basic jujutsu to be able to apply some higher level arts with confidence, but if they don’t have that foundation, isn’t it more difficult to apply the aiki arts"

I also know many who have a very solid grasp of basic and advanced jujutsu some are much better than myself - yet they are unable to apply even basic aiki techniques much less advanced ones with confidence.

The key to applying aiki arts doesn't have as nearly as much to do with having "that (basic jujutsu) foundation" as it does with having a basic aiki foundation.

FWIW, I think I may have touched on this point in another thread somewhere recently about whether or not kenjutsu practice would improve one's aiki technique. Because there is much overlapping, various similarities, common principles, etc... there is certainly much benefit to practicing kenjutsu. My point however was - to improve your aiki you need to train in aiki! And preferably do so with a good teacher. Training in kenjutsu or jujutsu or anything else will likely improve your skills in those other areas (perhaps dramatically if you've got a good teacher) - and those aren't bad things to improve, but it won't necessarily improve your ability to use and apply aiki (imo), unless you are also training in aiki - in which case it's the aiki training that is improving your aiki anyway.

Hope you all had a good weekend.

Brently Keen

Richard Elias
28th April 2003, 03:15
Brently,

I will have to totally disagree with you.

Chris is absolutely correct.

Basics are everything. Advanced technique, including aiki, is just the basics in another form.
If your aikijutsu, or aki no justu, or aikijujutsu, is going to use jujutsu as it’s initial form for application then you must have a solid understanding of those basics. You draw distinctions between all of these things, but they are essentially one. One art. They are all interrelate and based in the same principles with different applications. If you don’t see the value in it than I wonder how much you truly understand. Okamoto sensei went through the basics. How can you expect to achieve the same level of ability without them.

To use your analogy:

“… if I wanted to master race car driving well enough to win races, would it be equally necessary for me to master the basics of say engine mechanics, or even horse racing for that matter, to become good enough to do so?”

No, but you would have to learn how to drive first.

Sorry, but this is one of my pet-peeves.
Basics… Gotta have ‘em you’ll never be more than a mediocre martial artist.

Eric Joyce
28th April 2003, 14:05
I would have to agree with Richard too.

I know this is the aikijujutsu forum, but to illustrate the point further, I will use Yoshinkai Aikido as an example.

Shioda Sensei, as well as other teachers in the Yoshinkai, have always stressed learning the basics (the Kihion Dosa)to build a strong foundation for aikido. He also said that without this strong foundation and understanding of basics, aikido (or any other art for that matter) becomes hollow and dancelike. Just food for thought.

I always use the analogy of mathematics. You start of building a strong foundation of understanding numbers (adding, subtracting, etc). Through time as you progress, you get better and learn different ways to apply mathematics (algebra, trig, calculus. etc).

I hope I made a relevant point...it's not often I do :)

Dan Harden
28th April 2003, 14:52
I will willingly step into the breach here.

Richard
I clearly understand your points and I agree with them, but only regarding the whole art. Daito ryu spans from the basic jujutsu of the Hiden Mokuroku to the advanced Aiki-no-jutsu. There are more than a few people who have chosen to concentrate on the Aiki-no-jutsu.

For a moment consider this.
There are a few masters of the art who stand in agreement with Brently. Others do not. While you and I may not agree Brently still stands on a firm ground.

In the past you needed to do the basic jujutsu to understand the "language of Aiki" so to speak. In other words to map out the response mechanisms, the vectors and the softness of attack and defense, to get "the feel" of how a body responds to your arts technique. However, having learned that it is entirely possible to teach ONLY the advanced knowledge someone like Okomoto has learned. THAT.......is both the essence and the reasoning of Brently's description of "jujutsu basics" and "Aiki basics."

I can tell you that Brently and I have long disagreed on this but he is right in what he is claiming.

Here's my take on it.
Aiki of Daito ryu takes a very long time. Once attained it can be used at whatever level you have attained in true fighting(not just hakama time) but heres the rub. If you did not "grow up" with the jujutsu basics, then in the interum you got bubcus, Nadda. As far as martial ability you got what you came in with or you got nothing. You don't know how to fight with any degree of finesse.
The push back to that argument? Some are not worried about pursuing fighting ability anyway, just the finished product of Aiki-no-jutsu.

On a personal note I question the varying degrees of effectively maintaining fine motor control for Aiki "outside" of a controled environment anyway. There are ways to pursue AIki (Daito ryu Aiki) in a fighting format that is still quintessential Aikijujutsu that doesn't look at all like standup, stiff, pretty Japanese Kata. It leaves you with a relaxed response to physical power without needing fine motor skills, But I don't think many are doing the research.

At any rate, in the purest sense both roads lead to the top. One may argue they will get there quickest-the other may argue they will get there safest.
I just don't agree with how ill-equipped it would leave one VS the other on their journey.

In closing I caution you to not overplay Kondo. I have come to his defense (like he needs it)and I support his efforts-but make no mistake- there are those who have been in the art longer then him from three different camps, who know him well and while they think he is a great guy do not consider him all that good past the Aikijujutsu level. Since they are of different camps is it a conspiracy? Jealousy? Fantasy? or is it fact? I know, I know, I can here it now. I am not offering any opinion on the matter. Lets just say there are those who HAVE seen behind the curtain of the few top players that there are and you may (or may not) be surprised at their opinions on alot of things.

As a personal view-I still maintain
Jujutsu and weapons
then Aikijujutsu
while doing Jujutsu and weapons
then Aiki-no-jutsu
While doing Jujutsu and weapons
In a pinch and caught unawares- I would rather have most recently practiced a combination of the above-rather than a single one. Further I have found that these principles seemlessly blend with weapons and other jujutsu arts. They are rational and cogent.

"As you do, so shall you do."

cheers
Dan

Richard Elias
28th April 2003, 17:02
Hello Dan,

First,
I was not trying to overplay Kondo, only passing on a bit of info I thought was relevant to the original question of the differences seen on video. He actually did make that promise and has kept it, I respect that.

As to the rest,
Well met, on all points. And yes I was speaking of the art as a whole.

But riddle me this… ok, these.

Of those that are focusing only on Aiki no jutsu, did they begin with only Aiki no jutsu?
(I know that Okamoto sensei for one teaches it that way but that was not how he learned it)

If that is the case then are they really studying the art, or only one facet of it?

If your not studying the whole art then what are you doing?
(“you” was figurative there)

It is my understanding that each level of the art builds upon the one preceding it. That ultimately they are all cohesive, each complimenting the others. By leaving out some of those more basic elements wouldn’t you then be depriving the advanced level techniques some of what they were originally based on. And, in that, the possibility of missing out on a level of understanding the techniques, and the art itself. Are you not then neglecting a whole portion of the art that makes it what it is.

It has been my experience (though that is far from all encompassing) that those who developed these systems put what’s in them there for a reason. And that sometimes that reason isn’t always clear until you get to see the whole thing, only then does it makes sense.

If Daito ryu is anything like Yanagi ryu, in the more advanced stages of study the lines distinguishing the advanced from the basic start to blur. One sees the basics in all of the advanced movements and the advanced in the basic. Often when confronted with difficulty in applying a more advanced waza the solution ends up being from the basics. And it’s just me making things more difficult than they really are.

Like you, I study weapons and empty-hand together. And in Yanagi ryu all of the different weapons and empty-hand are interrelated and complimentary, a single art. Each part of the art has given me insight into understanding each of the others. But the most unifying principles and skills that permeate them all came in the basic techniques. They are not all sophisticated, just basic jujustu (done Yanagi style of course) but they contain in them the “secrets” to making the advanced techniques work, you just can’t see it until you get there. And if you started with the advanced techniques you may never see them.

But, that’s just my opinion on the matter.

As you said

"As you do, so shall you do."

I like that.

“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.”
Alister Crowely

thomasf5
28th April 2003, 18:03
I studied a Gendai Jujitsu and (for a short time) DR AJJ prior to training in Roppokai. I found that while basic jujutsu was fun, it didn't address the part that was "missing", and I didn't know what that part was. Roppokai answered that question, and fills the void.

Okomato Sensei stated to a group here that it is curious that many martial artists come to Roppokai to "round out" what their style is missing; he does not see Roppokai members seeking the same from other styles. It apparently is not needed.

Jon O'Neall
28th April 2003, 19:11
in the more advanced stages of study the lines distinguishing the advanced from the basic start to blur. One sees the basics in all of the advanced movements and the advanced in the basic.

Richard... that is one of the most cogent things I've ever read here on e-budo.

Richard Elias
28th April 2003, 21:34
Jon,

Thank you.


Mark,

That just adds to my point. You still had a beginning in basic jujutsu.

That what you studied prior to Roppokai didn't have what Roppokai did may be due to it not having been there in the first place. So it couldn't build up to it and wasn't designed to. Or, perhaps you might not have stuck around long enough. And, like I said, you don't realize it until you get there.

But the fast road is not always the "best" road.

Having started with only Roppokai do you think you would have learned all that Daito ryu has to offer?
Would you (have you) learned the full Daito ryu curriculum?
Would you have learned all that Takeda Sokaku had called Daito ryu?

I guess it just depends on what you are studying what you are studying for.
(did that come out right?)

To each his own, or one of the quotes mentioned earlier.

Incidentally, (but not trying to make a point of it, and doesn't require response) there are those that would argue that Daito ryu is a gendai tradition (but that doesn't matter here).

Nathan Scott
28th April 2003, 23:35
[Post deleted by user]

thomasf5
29th April 2003, 03:23
Richard,

I don't know that 4th kyu in gendai jujitsu qualifies as a "start" in the basics of jujutsu, but it did whet my interest. I trained very hard while in jujutsu, emphasis on the HARD. I'm not 18 anymore, and not as limber. Okomato Sensei is a very young 77 years old, but his aiki techniques take less effort than it does for me to breathe. The thing is, at the end of the technique, my uki is still at the same place as when I trained jujutsu: on the floor, in the pin.
KOOOL! No effort, no separated shoulder, no sweat (well maybe a little).

Point is, the element of truth that the advanced has the basics (if done correctly) and the basics provide for the development of the advanced. While the entire DR curriculum would be interesting, Roppokai does provide for principles that teach aikijujutsu from the beginning, subsuming the basics into its practice.

You are correct in one respect: Jujutsu is a good way to go for "something in the meantime", as is boxing, shooting (my other "martial art", etc. It's just that I choose to take the road less traveled BECAUSE it is more interesting, demanding, AND I can't see the end of the road, which draws me ever onward. Everyone needs a motivation. Mine is Aikijujitsu Roppokai.

My very best,

Daito
29th April 2003, 07:39
Hello,

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nathan Scott
[B]Hi all,

Examples:

1) Sokaku - studied jujutsu and various weapon arts.

2) Ueshiba - studied jujutsu, DR and various weapon arts.

3) Sagawa - studied jujutsu and various weapon arts.

This issue is little misunderstood, although correct to some extend.
Takeda sensei taught Daito-ryu. His techniques were successful only because he used Aiki. Other people, who couldn't do Aiki have copied only the forms (outlook), relying on the physical power, thus what they did was jujutsu.
Sagawa sensei could do Aiki since he was 17 years old, so his techniques were effective, be it lock or throw (although in his later years he was famous for his unique skills in immediate body collapsing and multimple attackers defence, due to development of different Aiki based on Takeda sensei's Aiki [when Sagawa sensei was 68 years old]).
Sagawa sensei's father said, that it's impossible to apply a technique on a strong person without having Aiki of Takeda Sokaku sensei. So Sagawa sensei concentrated on capturing Aiki, so that he could perform techniques freely.
It may seem very confusing: Daito-ryu without Aiki wasn't always effective.
To say that Mr.Horikawa learned only Aiki is also little wrong. He was trying to learn higher level of techniques from Takeda sensei. Generally, Takeda sensei always used Aiki, no matter if it looked like jujutsu or aikijutsu, small or big, first teachings or higher levels. That was the unique point of Takeda sensei and Daito-ryu.
In Daito-ryu studied at Sagawa Dojo there is no distinction made between jujutsu and aikijujutsu/aikijutsu. Daito-ryu jujutsu doesn't exist without Aiki, and aikijutsu doesn't exist without jujutsu.
Of course this is from the Sagawa-ha Daito-ryu viewpoint. Others may have different concepts. From what I know Sagawa sensei tried to faithfully follow the teaching way of Takeda Sokaku sensei. This method has been preserved by Sagawa sensei's students, i.e. Kimura sensei.

Paul

Walker
29th April 2003, 08:17
Back in the Aiki Wars, Toby (how I miss the old sod) said something that has stuck with me that I’ll do my best to paraphrase.

One might just have one of those bad days when the ???? [oops bad excrement word :( ] just ain’t cooking (so to speak) and those will be the times when you’ll be glad you have some plain old fashion jujustu to pull your ass out of the fire.

:cool:

Brently Keen
29th April 2003, 09:58
Richard,

I concede your right to disagree, to have your pet peeves, and hold whatever opinions you like, but I don't see such total disagreement between us (at least on this thread between what I wrote and what you'd said to the point of my previous post). Frankly, it seems to me like you're just trying to be contrary - why? You ended your very first response to Chris' opening question by typing my name "Brently..." I presumed that you were inviting my comment, and assumed you be interested in what I had to say on the matter, but I have to wonder if you even read my complete post.

How else to explain your complete disregard of the fact that I repeated numerous times various statements that pretty much agree with your own views as expressed in your response(s)? IOW, why take the main point of my post out of it's context, and totally disagree with the whole post, and characterize (misrepresent?) my view as completely anti-thetical to both Chris' and yours? Why invite my input if only to catagorically dismiss all I have to say, and then question my understanding altogether?

I think if you read more carefully what I actually wrote, there'd be much less to quibble about (even if you still maintained your own separate, distinct POV). If you want to disagree fine, that's what discussions boards like these are for, but for the benefit of the thread at least try to make your points clear and logical.

You wrote:

"I will have to totally disagree with you.

Chris is absolutely correct.

What exactly do you disagree with, on what basis, and why?

What do you mean, "Chris is absolutely correct"? In addition to totally disagreeing with me, the implication you make here is Chris is absolutely correct AND I am totally wrong. Now I've certainly been wrong on numerous occasions, but whether you realize it or not you set-up a conflict between us that didn't really exist, a straw man.

I personally understood Chris to be asking questions about Daito-ryu, about the differences between two teachers, two branches, and their different techniques, different training methodologies, etc.. and questioning how one approach compares to other subjects. Despite noticing some of the differences himself on the videos and asking questions about them, you you insist he's absolutely correct. How is one absolutely correct when they're wondering about something that they don't fully understand? How would you even know he's absolutely correct given your disclaimer in your very first post on this thread? Are you now in a position of absolute, greater, or even similar knowledge about this subject that qualifies you to completely dismiss whatever I say?

As a practitioner of Daito-ryu and a student of one of the teachers Chris was asking about, I attempted to answer his initial questions in my first post, and that simply prompted an additional question on his part, and so I responded by both agreeing with Chris' contention, but then further clarifying my answer by making some important distinctions. you assert that Chris is right on, and I'm pretty much full of it. What's up with that, my friend? Are you so opposed to the distinctions I make that you also refuse to discern between questions and statements now?

You wrote:

"Basics are everything. Advanced technique, including aiki, is just the basics in another form.

Sounds like you're making a definite statement, and you're absolutely convinced of it's truth. In the context of your post, it also sounds like you believe the statement to completely refute my position or statement in my post. But does it really? What did I already say about basics?

"Some important basic jujutsu techniques are taught, but beyond that, jujutsu techniques are not emphasized very strongly, instead aiki techniques are emphasized."

"If you relate it to other subjects, then your reasoning makes sense - and I'd have to agree. We all need to have basics - some place to start and from which to build on. Without a strong, basic foundation advanced techniques aren't going to be very advanced."

Didn't you pretty much agree with and affirm that last sentence when you summed up your post and pet-peeve by saying: "Basics… Gotta have ‘em (or) you’ll never be more than a mediocre martial artist."?

"When we're talking about aiki it's not just having a firm grounding in basic jujutsu, that makes the real difference (imo), although that might certainly be a big help. Rather I think it's having a firm grounding in the basics of aiki that is of much greater importance.

Foundations and basics are (imo) of such importance that I think they're practically indispensible. However, the issue is not one of basics vs no basics, but rather: 'What is basic?' or 'What are the basics necessary for applying aiki?', and 'What is or are the most effective methods/ways of inculcating and developing those basics into usable applicable skills?'.

Without a solid foundation in the basics of aiki no jutsu you cannot reasonably expect to apply more advanced aikijujutsu techniques..."

Sounds to me like I voiced rather similar views about the importance of basics, no? Perhaps we only differ about what basics are, what they consist of, and/or how they should be taught. Those might be valid disagreements - particularly across different arts. Yet you seem to be hung up on the (false) notion that I just don't believe in basics, or otherwise advocate disregarding them.

Back to your assertion that "Basics are everything."

I think we can all agree that basics are important - but what do you mean by "everything"?

Is everything also basic? Are the basics of one thing the same as the basics of all things? IOW, are the basics of English grammar the same as the basics of Japanese grammar? Are the basics of language the same as the basics of mathematics, of physics, of psychology? Are the basics of boxing the same as the basics of wrestling?

Logically, if the answer to any of those questions is "not necessarily", then your statement doesn't hold water, your premise for "total disagreement" is rather weak, unless you completely redefine what you mean by "everything".

"If your aikijutsu, or aiki no justu, or aikijujutsu, is going to use jujutsu as it’s initial form for application then you must have a solid understanding of those basics."

Sure, if you use jujutsu as your initial form for application. But this is another, altogether different premise. I don't use jujutsu as my initial form for application, that's my point.

If your aiki-whatever uses jujutsu as it's initial form for application isn't it really jujutsu? How is it any different from jujutsu? It's not jujutsu that defines aiki no jutsu, or aikijujutsu it's aiki. NO AIKI = NO AJJ, much less aiki no jutsu. In Daito-ryu AJJ, "aiki" is the initial form for application of AJJ techniques. IOW, aiki is the fundamental, basic, essential norm of application of AJJ, not jujutsu. You must have a solid understanding of the basics of aiki to apply aikijujutsu. Despite being related and having some things in common, jujutsu and jujutsu basics are another thing.

"You draw distinctions between all of these things, but they are essentially one.

Here is where we part ways - at least in DR, they are not essentially one, and that is why I draw the distinctions. Sokaku himself drew the distinctions, not me, I only affirm them (just as most of his successors) have done before me. The distinctions are made because they are really there, they exist.

"One art."[b] Yes, but several traditions or branches of that art continue today, and all are comprised of various curriculums, various sub-catagories, specialties, and training methods. Even Daito-ryu's densho affirm these distinctions, in the hiden mokuroku, aiki no jutsu, goshin yo no te, aiki nito-ryu, etc...

[b]"They are all interrelated and based in the same principles with different applications."

No argument there, I agree. I already said, "There is undeniably, a very close relationship between them, but they are not (imo) fundamentally equivalent or alike despite their many similarities."

In closing, I would like to apologize for the defensive tone of this post, I really have no hard feelings. It's rarely ever my intention to be contrary, simply for the sake of being contrary. Although I frequently evangelize for Daito-ryu, am often very opinionated, and many of my ideas go against conventional wisdom, I do so from a genuine desire to share from my experiences and what I've learned, not to disparage anyone else or their arts (excepting the occasional charlatans). I have nothing but respect for you Richard, for the art you practice, your experience in it, and for your teacher. All I ask is a little of the same, even if we don't see eye to eye on everything.

Rather than invite my comments only to contest and dismiss them, why not just affirm for us your first-hand perspective of the basics, distinctions, or universal aspects (if you prefer) of Yanagi-ryu, instead of speaking for or against Daito-ryu.

Dan,

Thanks for the vote of affirmation - I think I completely agree with your take on the matter. What we have is several different methodologies or approaches to developing aiki skills among the branches of Daito-ryu. Naturally each has their own reasons for doing things the way they do, and some may be arguably more or less valid than others, so questions and debates remain about the relative effectiveness and/or efficiency of the different approaches - which is/are better? Ultimately I suppose it just depends... At any rate, I think you made some astute observations that may merit further discussion - perhaps in another thread, or offline. It's getting way late for me now.

I also really liked your maxim: "you do as you do". I hope you don't mind if I steal it once in a while. :cool:

Respectfully,

Brently Keen

Dan Harden
29th April 2003, 15:02
Hi Guys

Rich and Brently
Feel free to use it.
"As you do, so shall you do" has a history behind it I picked up from the father of gun combatives; Masaad Ayoob.
This was the story
In the early seventies there was a police department where everyone was using wheel guns (I think he was reffering to the Philadelphia PD). As they practiced on the firing range they were told to pick up their casings. They routinely did this and put them in their shirt pockets. They did this for years
"As you do..............."

There was a an armed robbery-very agressive perps. Huge gun fight. Our guys emptied and reloaded-they were found dead by the back up unit(s)while reloading they picked up their casings and put them in their shirt pockets.
"So shall you do..........."

One was shot in the head the other in the back.
The department forever changed its approach on the range.
Now if we could only get more PD to spend the money on mandatory continuing education on verbal control and de-escalation training then continual jujutsu and gun combatives we would have men to be reconed with on the street who themselves felt more confident and able with more "abilties at their disposal.



How does "As you do...play out in the mostly fantasy world of Martial arts?

Wrestlers got into the UFC at the onset and ther positions grew. Their early efforts were often failure why?
Wrestling is a sport no hitting and you try to get him on his back/shoulders
"As you do..........."

we got to watch as these big bears had guys on the ground while we were all screaming at the TV "hit him"..."H-I-T H-I-M!!
They kept trying to get the guy flat. Here they were; under stress told up front to be inovative and that it was freestyle fighting. What the heck were they doing in there? Wrestling!
The early judo guys? Same type of thing.
So shall you do........."

They went and studied jujutsu-they came back winners

I have seen more martial artists in friendly freestyle "stall" on the mats then I would have believed possible -through the use of unexpected and nonconditioned attack forms and respones.
Watching the enemy is a good way to know the enemy. Watching the martial arts and seeing the insular ways in which they condition themselves to both attack forms and defense forms is quite telling. Many of our early giants commented on this. There are several memorable qoutes from various teachers about this. Several are from Judo people (gee... I wonder why?) but in truth the vast majority have continued to develop "blind" spots in their thinking and their intent due to conditioned training. Freestlye agianst someone in your style will only get you so far won't it?

Not for everybody
I never have a problem with gentle-people who openly admit they are in it for an art. In truth it is self evident in the manner they execute technique. The sad ones are the guys who think what they are doing will actually work agaisnt wholesale violence and an unpredictable violent mindest.
For this reason alone I have routinely modified my training from the onset to learn the kata and learn it well-then experiment with things I learned from a misspent youth. Thirty years and a few arts later I like what I have.

Daito ryu and its Aiki
I will echo Mr. Wallos's comments about Daito ryu Aiki. While I make NO grandios claims of any kind. I would trade all the years I spent doing anything else for greater knowledge of it. But there is fine motor Aiki which I love but question for use in stress and a unified body movement Aiki that will work under stress. All of it Daito ryu. And outside of its Aiki, its (learning) kata framework all of it-its jujutsu, and its aiki can be both martial and lethal.

It is my belief that the road to get there should be through jujutsu. Naturally my students will "borrow from my experience, and sometimes blindly follow. Why should they go risk their lives to learn what I learned. They can if they want. Most times if I See them really loving -say a wrist lock- technique and I say "Thats fun in the dojo but don't EVER count on it" they listen. Jujutsu with low line kicks, atemi, body attacks sacrfice throws, arm bars, dislocates, twines, neck cranks, back breaks, whole body throws, leg sweeps, head butts, and throat tearing and oh yeah those wrist thingys' is one heck of a great education. I hate to see people pass it by on their way to "Aiki"
Its sort of like watching an Iai guy -who had only done a tiny amount of bokuto two man work whose martial life was spent mostly solo- do the dance. Yet when you face them with bokuto you keep knocking it out of their hand and leaving them looking mortified. You can't cheat your way to any measure of viabilty. Its through stress and testing.
Aiki is learned through kata
It is then understood and put in its "proper place" through stress in freestyle and many, many, failures.
Fail in the dojo to succeed in life.

cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
29th April 2003, 18:48
[Post deleted by user]

Ron Tisdale
29th April 2003, 19:01
I didn't know Sagawa studied Araki ryu...any connection to Ellis Amdur's teacher?

Ron Tisdale

Nathan Scott
29th April 2003, 19:31
[Post deleted by user]

Arman
29th April 2003, 19:43
Well, I've only been studying for a short time, and I only have a shodan, so my understanding of the "art as a whole" is quite limited, I suppose, as compared to others who seem to have rather extensive knowledge of the art as a whole.

But along the lines of what Richard mentioned, I would like to put out there that Kondo Sensei frequently says that the essence of Daito ryu is found in ippon dori.

I don't, can't, yet fully understand this at this point. Maybe in another ten years I might get more out of it, once I've gone through the entire hiden mokuroku and then moved through the aiki no jutsu and the goshinyo no te, etc, etc.

But that is not to say I haven't already understood some things that emanate from this statement. On its face, however, Kondo Sensei is saying that all of DR, not just the jujutsu part, has its foundation in principles embedded within ippon dori. That includes "aiki."

Dan wrote:

In closing I caution you to not overplay Kondo. I have come to his defense (like he needs it)and I support his efforts-but make no mistake- there are those who have been in the art longer then him from three different camps, who know him well and while they think he is a great guy do not consider him all that good past the Aikijujutsu level. Since they are of different camps is it a conspiracy? Jealousy? Fantasy? or is it fact? I know, I know, I can here it now. I am not offering any opinion on the matter. Lets just say there are those who HAVE seen behind the curtain of the few top players that there are and you may (or may not) be surprised at their opinions on alot of things.

I don't know Dan. I'm not much of a conspiracy buff, myself, but I am a political junkie, and we all know what that breeds. Kondo Sensei isn't "all that good past the aikijujutsu level," you say? I don't really understand this statement, but then, I'm fairly new to the art, so maybe it will make sense to me in a few more years, and if I ever get the opportunity to feel what someone who is pretty good beyond this AJJ level is like. There are those that "have seen behind the curtain," eh? Like Oz? That's a rather large, unqualified statement (accusation? insult?), that maybe you can qualify for me? In the meantime, maybe we can clear up who your "wizards" have been, so I can get a better picture of who I'm talking to.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Chris Li
29th April 2003, 20:06
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Hi Ron,

The reference to Araki ryu came from the odd post card that Takeda Munekiyo sent to Sagawa S. and other instructors saying that Sagawa S. was the 36th Daito ryu "Soke".

If this is one of the arts Sagawa S. studied, I'm sure it would be mentioned in Kimura S.'s book on him - or, Paul might know off the top of his head. In other words, I'd say that it is worth finding a supporting source on this question considering the nature of the one we have.

Chris Li read the book though - Chris, you out there?
Regards,

Yup :). It's not mentioned anywhere else in the book, just where the general recitation of Sagawa's "resume" is given on the postcard. The postcard is presented prominently in the beginning of the book, and the impression given is that Kimura believed it to be legitimate (which I assume means that Sagawa did so as well). Stan Pranin seems to imply that the postcard's authenticity may be questionable - anybody know more than that?

Best,

Chris

Hissho
29th April 2003, 20:52
Originally posted by Dan Harden


"As you do, so shall you do" has a history behind it I picked up from the father of gun combatives; Masaad Ayoob.
This was the story
In the early seventies there was a police department where everyone was using wheel guns (I think he was reffering to the Philadelphia PD). As they practiced on the firing range they were told to pick up their casings. They routinely did this and put them in their shirt pockets. They did this for years
"As you do..............."

There was a an armed robbery-very agressive perps. Huge gun fight. Our guys emptied and reloaded-they were found dead by the back up unit(s)while reloading they picked up their casings and put them in their shirt pockets.
"So shall you do..........."

One was shot in the head the other in the back.
The department forever changed its approach on the range.
Now if we could only get more PD to spend the money on mandatory continuing education on verbal control and de-escalation training then continual jujutsu and gun combatives we would have men to be reconed with on the street who themselves felt more confident and able with more "abilties at their disposal.

...


cheers
Dan

Dan,

I don't believe they were actually picking the brass up. What they were doing was taking the extra time to empty the casings from the cylinder into their hands and putting it in their pockets before reloading with a speed loader.

Either way, it proved fatal.

Also not sure I would call Ayoob "the father" of gun combatives, he is standing on some pretty broad shoulders (Fairbairn, Applegate, Cooper...)

FWIW,

Kit Leblanc

I am sure Ellis will chime in, but there are more than one Araki-ryu that contain jujutsu within the curriculum.

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread...

Nathan Scott
29th April 2003, 21:12
[Post deleted by user]

Chris Li
30th April 2003, 00:28
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
The conclusion? The post card is suspicious at best. Maybe Paul can ask Kimura Sensei at some point what he knows about it?

Regards,

Yes, I've heard Stan's arguments, and they certainly sound plausible. I'd be curious to know whether Kimura had the story behind the postcard directly from Sagawa (in which case it may be more credible), or if the postcard was found by Kimura in Sagawa's papers after his death (in which case it may be a case of a mistaken conclusion).

Best,

Chris

Dan Harden
30th April 2003, 01:21
Arman
It isn't an insult to your teacher if you read it that way. And I wasn't quoting myself. Just realize he is standing in a VERY small circle of people with appreciable time in this art. There are "other" camps beside the mainline with their own people who have VERY interesting backgrounds-and they know each other. Some surpass Kondos experiences and skills in several ways. I am not going to go on here. There are people here who know exactly what I am talking about but we should leave it alone. Kondo is great, it starts to sound like I am detracting from Kondo when I am not intending to in anyway. You have read enough of what I have written both here and on Aikido journal to know better than that. I have supported his efforts.
I don't want to sound comprising but there are other sides to the Daito ryu story yet to be told. There are treasures not shared, historical things never thought to be true, there are men who have artifacts and information that would thrill many. They are quiet "behind the scene" type of people uninterested in the world view. You should know that several people have attemted to bring them out and bring information out- to no avail. Think of Sagawa as an example of that.
As I said there are some interesting and knowledgeble opinions about alot of things that will never make it to the internet.
If you read it as insult- you are mistaken. I would revisit that train of thought. Thats not me

cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
30th April 2003, 01:31
Dan,

I don't believe they were actually picking the brass up. What they were doing was taking the extra time to empty the casings from the cylinder into their hands and putting it in their pockets before reloading with a speed loader.

Either way, it proved fatal.

Also not sure I would call Ayoob "the father" of gun combatives, he is standing on some pretty broad shoulders (Fairbairn, Applegate, Cooper...)

FWIW,

Kit Leblanc


********************************

You know I'd love to get more of that story. It is a trusted source But I have used the saying for so long I'd love to have more credible history behind it. I guess it stands on its own merits just the same.

Father of gun combatives?
Yeah I guess your right.... those are big shoulders but he did make some serious head way in our day. He also helped people out of messes though expert testimony.

Hey its good to hear from you again. You are always a sane voice in a sometimes tumultuous place. I hope all is well with the job and hearth and home.
Thanks for being one of the good guys on the street for us.

cheers
Dan

Arman
30th April 2003, 03:38
Dan,

I don't have a problem with a single thing you wrote in your last bit, even if I don't agree with it all. But your previous post was not as, shall we say, judicious?

Let's see:

You wrote,
In closing I caution you to not overplay Kondo.

What does this mean? I didn't see anything other than Richard pointing out something that was true about Kondo Sensei's pledge not to demonstrate in public most of the DR curriculum. This statement by you in response to a statement by Richard that was hardly "overplaying" is curious, to put it politely.

You also wrote,
I have come to his defense (like he needs it)and I support his efforts-but make no mistake- there are those who have been in the art longer then him from three different camps, who know him well and while they think he is a great guy do not consider him all that good past the Aikijujutsu level. Since they are of different camps is it a conspiracy? Jealousy? Fantasy? or is it fact?

Your most recent post goes to lengths to indicate that these aren't your words. So what? You're obviously not that rhetorically challenged that anyone would assume that the fact that someone else said it makes any difference. You are using them in the context of a paragraph that began with, "I caution you not to overplay Kondo." You then add to these "other" words such facetious comments like, "Is it a conspiracy. . .fantasy, etc." As in, "Come on, people!"

THEN you wrote, in the VERY next sentence:
I am not offering any opinion on the matter. Lets just say there are those who HAVE seen behind the curtain of the few top players that there are and you may (or may not) be surprised at their opinions on alot of things.

So, either your logical train of thought is completely disjoined from your writing abilities, or you ARE offering an opinion, but like so many people who aren't polite enough to hash out such things in private, you also lack the courage to just come out publicly and say "Here's what I happen to think." So instead you talk publicly about what OTHER people think, and what OTHER people have said, to say it for you. That may work in junior high debate class, but not in an adult discussion.

If you didn't mean to offend, just say so. But I am not mistaken in how I interpreted your previous post, as you claim. Maybe I didn't read your intent correctly, but I read your words just fine. And the words were fairly insulting, at least to a student of Kondo Sensei. I'm sure Kondo Sensei couldn't care less what you (oops! I'm sorry, what "OTHER" people) happen to think, but if he did, I know he would have more respect than to blather about it on a public BB.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Dan Harden
30th April 2003, 04:09
Arman
I don’t want to quibble. It’s beneath both of us. Please don't look for nuance, subterfuge or any type of mincing of words. I am, at least, being straight up with you.
I see what you mean about the disjointed logic of that one sentence and your right…….
I went from one topic to another in a single line…yikes!
Listen, you know enough to know I say what I mean. I am not being cute nor coy. We have both seen this ugly internet caginess-I want no part of it. I am direct and honest. Contribute anything I write or fail to communicate with ineptitude not guile! I would never treat you (or anyone) in such a way.
I attempted to clarify. I am willing to let it go.
These things are hard to discuss without sounding judgmental. There are very few top players in this field. My attempt was to balance thing out with an understanding of other players involved (which you obviously do not know) to bring about a more balanced view. If I failed in that attempt- I have no problem with a mea culpa. Consider this...Kondo scheduled his first visit. When your teacher asked of exsting Daito ryu practioners .......I came. Who else did?

How that leaves a taste in your mouth is your decision. Consider the intent- as I will not disclose details here.

Man, you just gotta love this instant communication. I am older than you, I think its amazing -this cross continent exchange at a whim

Peace
Dan

Arman
30th April 2003, 04:55
Dan,

I know you were there at the first seminar - I have you on tape.

I appreciate your clarification of intent, and in light of it, I don't want to press this issue any further either.

So, as you said,
peace.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Richard Elias
30th April 2003, 09:25
Pardon me all, while I get up on a soapbox and reply to a post from the previous page that was mostly directed to me. I almost wasn’t going to reply at all but I figured, what the hell, I always wondered if my foot would fit in my mouth.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Brently,

I’m not going to bother responding to you point by point, I don’t want this thread to degenerate too bad, and quite frankly you just go on too long, there too much to respond to. Most of it wasn’t worth responding to anyway.

When I put “Brently…” at the end of my post wasn’t because I was being inviting or interested in what you had to say, but because I knew that since Okamoto sensei was mentioned you wouldn’t be able to resist writing one of your mini novels. (now you’ve got me writing one too)

The gist of this thread was mostly about teaching methodology.

The real disagreement between us is about what defines basics and the relationship between jujutsu and aiki. You make generalities in some aspects and draw hard lines for others.

“I'm not dismissing the importance of jujutsu or kenjutsu at all - I believe both are invaluable to the study of aiki - I am saying that I'm not sure they are absolutely essential though.”

That is where we disagree.

Not sure?
Well, judging from your previous statements Okamoto sensei doesn’t teach much of the jujutsu portion of the Daito ryu curriculum. That being the case would it not be logical to assume that you have not been taught it. (unless you’ve learned it from somewhere else) Yet in the past you have, on many occasions, expressed that Daito ryu jujutsu was separate from the aiki portion of the art and had no aiki in it, though aiki could be applied. Not having learned the jujutsu of Daito ryu how can you make that assumption? There are others that have learned it and contend the aiki starts from the beginning. If that is so would it not be logical to assume that to have a full understanding of Daito ryu aiki that one should learn the jujutsu as well. And please correct me if I am wrong but I don’t believe Okamoto sensei teaches kenjutsu either. So unless you’ve studied kenjutsu from another source you’d have no real experience from which to judge that either. Not to mention that what kenjutsu you could have studied would probably not have been an actual part of the aiki system as well.

Takeda Sokaku did make distinctions between the different aspects of the art, all systems do. It is a way of organizing the system and teaching it in a progressive manner. Generally speaking, it is not intended that you just take the parts you want out of it and discard or de-emphasize the rest. To separate aiki from jujutsu is to separate it from itself. Aiki is employed through the medium of jujutsu. This is perhaps another dividing line between you and I, or rather your definition of Daito ryu aiki and that of Yanagi ryu. In Yanagi ryu much of what you would consider aiki is just what we consider jujutsu. Having had discussed this with other Daito ryu practitioners I have found that though distinctions are recognized they are not emphasized the same way as you do. Not as separate arts, but more like what Mr. Wallos said about Sogawa sensei’s teaching of Daito ryu. Knowing the subtleties in the application of DR “aiki” it can be applied to all aspects of the art and learning it starts at the beginning. The beginning, the basics, are jujutsu. Not just the basics of the aiki portion. I think it could be reasonably stated that the aiki of DR was developed through jujutsu. (not to mention the sword/weapons influence) I only say this because I can’t see those in the past that first developed what is considered aiki as having started with aiki. It had to have grown/developed from jujutsu (and/or sword/weapons). In most MA systems this is the case, that the advanced sprung from the basic through experience and experimentation. I doubt that DR developed much differently. Now here I am not speaking only of the basics of aiki, but of the whole system that employs it, and how it was developed in that system. It might even be notable that though the term aiki was used in DR early on the art was not referred to aikijujutsu until later, it was just jujutsu.

What I meant by “Basics are everything”.

They are the root from which all else in the system grows.

”Are the basics of language the same as the basics of mathematics, of physics, of psychology? Are the basics of boxing the same as the basics of wrestling?”

No, not “not necessarily” but no. (Here you chose to over-generalize rather than make the same types of distinctions you do with DR.) Each of those you mention have their own basics. They are each a form of learning in and of themselves. If you want to relate it to DR the basics are jujutsu. Advanced physics = aiki no jutsu. A part of the whole not a separate entity in and of themselves. An advanced lesson based on already existing set of principle basics. Every thing that is learned has to start somewhere, and most everything that is learned has basics. The basics of that system of learning determine how the rest of that system is learned, and the advanced portions are based on those first lessons. More often than not the advanced portions require the basics in order to be understood and defined. Therefore, the basics are the most important part of the learning process. The basics start at the beginning of that learning process (jujutsu) not at a later more advanced point in that process (aiki no jutsu). That’s not to say that you cannot start learning at that later point and gain useful and applicable knowledge and ability, but that it would be less complete and not as comprehensive as that of someone who started from the beginning. You are not getting all of it, only part of it. If you are satisfied with that, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t be.

I honestly do quite firmly believe that the different aspects of arts of this nature, regardless of the manner in which they are subdivided for the sake of teaching, are all intended to be ultimately a single entity. Not just jujutsu, or aikijutsu, or aiki no jutsu, hiden, kuden, gokui, or okuden divided into different arts and systems. I also think it is more productive and conducive to learning and understanding these already very complex arts by trying to see how all of these different teachings are similar and interrelated than how they differ from each other. In Yanagi ryu and other sogo bujutsu this is particularly significant because of all of the different facets of the art. Were each part of the art viewed as a separate and distinct system in and of itself it would be virtually impossible to learn. From the writings of others that have studied multi-faceted systems it would seem they all have this in common.

I suppose I should add a “IMHO” to all of the above that I’ve written.
It would be my only out for being so arrogant and opinionated.
I blame my parents.

Oh… and finally,

“Are you now in a position of absolute, greater, or even similar knowledge about this subject that qualifies you to completely dismiss whatever I say?”

Why yes… yes I am. :kiss:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

I feel I must apologized to all for the length of this post, the incessant ranting, and taking the thread out of the needle, so to speak.

Domo Sumimasen :nw:

Dan Harden
30th April 2003, 13:17
You two guys just don't get along do ya:D

Richard that mini-novel comment was a riot.
Brently-I love ya guy- but you gotta take that one in stride, that was priceless-you do go on bud-to the point that you lose the audience. Its called over selling. Relax and take Rich's advice. It will help you to communicate better.

FWIW you two.....your endless debating is a fun read over coffee.


Heres my view of the martial art magazines over the last thirty years

"Never have so many said so much to say so little...."

I think there is more to be found in E-budos archives than in all the popular writing I have read over the years. It is a unique window into practioners views about a host of topics. I think this site and Aikido Journal are a landmark in history for the arts.

cheers
Dan

Walker
30th April 2003, 18:25
Originally posted by Dan Harden
I think there is more to be found in E-budos archives than in all the popular writing I have read over the years. It is a unique window into practioners views about a host of topics. I think this site and Aikido Journal are a landmark in history for the arts.
Very true, someday someone is going to mine this site for some great anthrop/soci-ology. I wish them luck with the bull quotient (and apologize in advance for my portion.)

From the perspective of someone starting study without much experience to go on, I would think that Rich’s perspective is a much safer road map. There are too may fables about houses without foundations to think otherwise.

One of these days I hope our paths cross Dan.

Arman
30th April 2003, 18:28
Just wanted to point out that while I agree with you Richard, there has been some confusion regarding the relationship of sword to DR. As you may know, sword is not part of the original curriculum of DR (at least as handed down by Sokaku Takeda). Takeda learned various sword arts, such as Ono-ha and Jikishinkage ryu, but they were not incorporated into the DR curriculum.

Tokimune Takeda was the one who incorporated Ono-ha, and thus he changed the name during his tenure to Daito ryu Aikibudo. DR aikijujutsu, strictly speaking, does not incorporate any formal sword art.

Just to clear that up. I agree with you regarding the overall coherence and unity of the art, and the importance of learning all of it.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Arman
30th April 2003, 18:31
Dan,

BTW, man, CLEAN out your mailbox. I just had a rather lenghty reply to you vanish into thin air because I got a message saying your mailbox was too full.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Cady Goldfield
30th April 2003, 19:40
Arman,

Don't hold your breath waiting for Dan to empty the mail box. He never reads the stuff. He also never replies to any of the e-mails sent him at his home address, nor returns any phone calls. At least, not if they're from annoying people -- such as his own students and friends. :p

The guy is just a total workaholic stress fiend who will happily read and reply to lengthy E-Budo posts, because it's a therapeutic break in his work... but who doesn't find reading and replying to personal communications to be therapeutic at all. He gets too much stuff, and it's overwhelming.

Also, your post shouldn't have vanished. If you go to your Private Message page, there's a pull down window on the right where you can select your "In" box and "Sent" box. Select "Sent" and it will take you to the pages of private messages you have sent.

Nathan Scott
30th April 2003, 21:25
[Post deleted by user]

Arman
30th April 2003, 22:28
Nathan,

Agreed, somewhat. Sagawa dojo is a closed system, for the most part. It would be nice if it opened up a little more so that interested parties could learn more about it. There's no doubting his long experience, but now that he's passed away, do you have any detailed information on the sucession in his dojo. I'd be interested in learning more.

As for nito-ryu - yeah, I've heard about it, seen the scroll with the listing on it (Kondo Sensei let us inspect it at one of our seminars), but I sure haven't heard or seen anything else about it. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But if DR has a formal two-sword set, I'd really be interested in finding out where it comes from and who knows it.

Don't forget, the scrolls changed, in both wording, listings and title. After all, there didn't even exist a "menkyo kaiden," technically speaking, until Sokaku made one up in the 1930's.

But I hear you (even if it doesn't make anything any clearer);)

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Nathan Scott
30th April 2003, 22:57
[Post deleted by user]

Arman
1st May 2003, 03:06
Nathan,

I agree. The Seiden line can pretty much do what they will. I have no complaints other than my own selfish desires to learn more.

Thanks for the info on succession. I read somewhere (I think one of Stan's books) that they don't teach in kata format because Sagawa said that wasn't how Sokaku taught. I think it was in the "Interviews" book. I think that's an interesting comment, and open to all sorts of interpretations.

As for the scrolls: you're right about the Kaishaku Soden, at least from what we can tell. But it just goes to show you the fluidity of the whole thing in only one generation!

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Chris Clifton
1st May 2003, 06:40
Is there no aiki in the jujutsu levels of Daito Ryu???

I don’t know what other teachers say about it, but Kondo is pretty explicit about always using aiki – not just in the higher levels. Besides talking about the subject during seminars, there is a whole section on the Kondo DVD called “What is Aiki?” in which it become clear that he is always applying aiki.

So if both Okamoto and Kondo are applying aiki, are they using the same basics which Brently speaks of? Or are the basics different? If the basics are everything and the basics are different than well… that makes the arts completely different then doesn’t it?

Chris Clifton

Daito
1st May 2003, 08:15
Hello,

1. The "suspicious" succession issue for Sagawa sensei:

I know from Kimura sensei that Mr.Takeda Tokimune came to Sagawa sensei's house few times asking him to take the "Soke" title in Daito-ryu. Sagawa sensei didn't accept for some time, then he eventually agreed, and then again, he gave back the "Soke" role to Mr.Tokimune. I understand that it could be done via unofficial way, so maybe this postcard was just written for Sagawa sensei to see how will the Takeda family write it and if he agreed they would write it formally. But it was rather agreement than official announcement (it looks like it). The reason for Mr.Munemitsu signed first is due to fact that in the family he was older thank Mr.Tokimune, and they were talking about "family art".
I will confirm this and ask about it more when I meet Kimura sensei this year in Japan. I don't want to do it via correspondence. It's not easy to approach him on this matter since he is my teacher, but I will try my best to clarify this. Perhaps there are witnesses. I'm surprised about Mr.Kondo not knowing anything about it, since he visited Sagawa sensei's house with Mr.Tokimune few times (or maybe it was Mr.Kondo's brother, who also studies Daito-ryu).

2. Araki-ryu: I must carefully discuss this with Kimura sensei. I know that he studied Sekiguchi-ryu jujutsu and Ono-ha Itto-ryu kenjutsu, then Kougen-ha Itto-ryu when he was around 9 years old.
He studied these arts before he got idea on Aiki. I don't clearly understand if Sagawa sensei (later in his life) studied or just researched other arts, including judo, sumo, karate, boxing, wrestling, some other koryu jujutsu (which ones?), and even Chinese MArts.

3. Succession issue in Sagawa Dojo:
Sagawa sensei's son was ill during his entire life, he couldn't practice Daito-ryu. I don't know what is his disablility exactly. But he is now "acting" headmaster of Sagawa-ha Daito-ryu. The Sagawa Dojo-cho is Mr.Uchino (most senior student, now an old man as well). Other teachers instruct on different days in Sagawa Dojo. Kimura sensei instructs on Mondays for example. The senior members of Sagawa Dojo are in so called "Aiki-Samonkai" (Sagawa Monjin-Kai), formed by Sagawa sensei for students of 4th Gen and above. It is my understanding that presently Aiki-Samonkai doesn't function (it may me that the teachers don't get on well with one another).
Only 3 students were taught all 10 gen by Sagawa sensei, including Kimura sensei. But the fact that only Kimura sensei is capable of using high level Aiki is well accepted I think.

4. Jujutsu & Aikijujutsu: it's difficult to explain, but maybe Takeda sensei's saying will do "Even Ikkajo-gyaku-kime has Aiki". All techniques that look like jujutsu are taught in Sagawa-ha without using force, without causing pain, very relaxfully. It's truly amazing how they work. I cannot figure that out, yet. Just body collapsing, be it Ikkajo or Kotegaeshi. However there is no way for one to resist them. But, there are ways of implying great pain taught in this Daito-ryu as well. So maybe this is jujutsu.
It's important to notice that all students practice only 6 basic zadori techniques and 4-5 standing techniques during regular practice, nevermind if they are there for 1 month or 30 years!

5. The gen are taught by Koushu (Jikiden Koushu), that is direct teachings, and are only reserved to students that are permitted for such practice. Each gen is only taught during 10 classes. This is the way Takeda sensei taught (althout in his later years he taught only for 7 days!).

6. Menkyo Kaiden issue: this licence didn't exists in earlier days, it was designed by Takeda sensei lately. Before Daito-ryu Hiden Okugi was the highest licence. So, Sagawa sensei didn't receive that. The licences in Daito-ryu are just what they are now: licences. The real level (knowledge of techniques and capability) is a different issue.

7. No kata training: yes, Sagawa sensei never taught by kata, and was against kata. Each time he performed the same waza slightly different, according to application. So in this aspect, Sagawa-ha Daito-ryu is also different (and thus very difficult).

I will try to confirm as much as I can during my next trip to Japan. Kimura sensei is a very busy man, he is proffessor and chief for Math and Algebra Institute and Tsukuba University. Thank you for you patience and understanding.

Paul

Daito
1st May 2003, 08:18
I apologize for spelling mistakes, as I type with my eyes on a keyboard and forefingers. I didn't learn typing well.
Also I haven't re-read my post, so there are some grammar mistakes. Sorry again.

Paul

Arman
1st May 2003, 19:27
Paul,

Thanks for the information!

So how does the curriculum relate to the hiden mokuroku, aiki-no-jutsu, goshinyo no te, etc? Do they follow this format, and if so, how is it studied outside of a kata format? I understand if you wish to be circumspect about these issues.

I am also curious about the current status of foreign students studying at the Sagawa dojo. I had heard that Sagawa Sensei had a very restrictive policy regarding foreigners training at his dojo. Is this still the case? If you are a student at the dojo, then it seems they must accept some foreigners. I was just wondering if you could shed some more light on this issue.

Thanks again,
Regards,
Arman Partamian

Ron Tisdale
1st May 2003, 21:07
Hi Arman,

I'm not Paul, but I play him on TV....

No, but really, I think Paul gave a pretty complete synopsys of the situation in an interview posted somewhere on AJ. It seemed to say that while he was granted an interview, and allowed to train or observe training once, it is not common practise to actually admit foriegners yet. Maybe Paul has some updated information?

Nathan Scott
1st May 2003, 21:08
[Post deleted by user]

Arman
2nd May 2003, 05:27
Nathan and Ron,

Thanks. I remember reading about Paul's one-time experience, but he mentions in his post that Kimura Sensei is his teacher. . .SO, I just thought it might be an interesting development if he has actually been accepted as a student, and if so, maybe he's learned more that he is allowed to share.

As for what information the Sagawa dojo wishes to be kept private, that's fine with me. If Paul doesn't think it is appropriate to answer on a public BB, I'm more than happy to discuss it over private mail. If he doesn't think it is appropriate to discuss some things at all - fine by me too. But, no one ever learned anything by not asking, so I thought I'd ask.:)

Paul,

If you feel uncomfortable talking about any of this publicly, I'd be happy to talk privately with you. If you don't wish to talk about it at all, no problems there either.

If we need to move this to a different, or new thread, fine by me.

Best regards,
Arman (happy to accommodate) Partamian
[couldn't resist Ron];)

Daito
2nd May 2003, 07:12
Hello,

The arrangement of the scrolls used to change quite often in times of Takeda Sokaku sensei, that's what I understood from Kimura sensei's explanation. According to him and Sagawa sensei the scrolls were not important at all. They didn't list the techniques as taught by Takeda sensei in order. Actually, there was no order. It's my understanding that Takeda sensei arranged the techniques into "kajo", but Sagawa sensei used "Gen", however Gen should equal old Kajo.
The system of Daitokan (Hiden Mokuroku, etc) was arranged by Mr.Takeda Tokimune later.

About the postcard: it looks like they decided to announce it around (if the postcard has been sent to other dojos). I cannot write much, since I don't know much about it, yet.

Situation of foreigners in Sagawa Dojo:
Sorry, no foreigners, just me. There is also German friend of Kimura sensei, he was allowed much earlier, but again, they were friends for many years. The Sagawa-ha system is not only closed for foreigners, but for Japanese as well. All must apply in writing, then go through an interview before being allowed.
I wrote letters to Sagawa Dojo for 7 years, receiving 1 reply in 1998: negative. Only in 2001 I got a positive reply for a single experinece class in Tsukuba. Later that year I was allowed to become a student. Now I'm allowed to train regularly under Kimura sensei. However, even so, I was allowed to train in actual Sagawa Dojo in Kodaira only 1 time last year. It was a great experience, for me an honor.
Last November Mr.Hasegawa was allowed for another experinece class in Tsukuba, and this time he was completely puzzled with the techniques. Kimura sensei showed on him various techniques. Mr.Hasegawa is quite a strong man, we tried to wrestle a little, and his balance and power is good. But then when he did it with Kimura sensei he was just "blown off" each time. My eyes pop-out each time I receive Kimura sensei's technique, nevermind Mr.Hasegawa's surprise.

Some aspects of the Sagawa-ha Daito-ryu and the dojo I can reveal publicly, some not. So it's not really "everything secret", just closed for public. But in Japan there exist a lot of information about Sagawa Dojo in Japanese martial arts magazines ("Hiden" "Bugei", etc).

Best regards,

Paul

Daito
2nd May 2003, 07:15
Oh, I forgot:
You're welcome to email me privately: buyokan@hotmail.com or send me a private message on Ebudo.

Paul

Arman
2nd May 2003, 17:45
Pual,

Thanks again. And congrats on being accepted as a student. Seven years, wow! I'll contact you again privately.

Best regards,
Arman Partamian