PDA

View Full Version : Aikido & Daito-ryu: Differences and Similarities?/ Rengokai



Brad Hoffner
15th September 2000, 00:15
Here is a link I would like you guys to check out and see if you agree with it.

Here it is: http://www.niagara.com/~zain/html/aikido.htm

Sheridan
15th September 2000, 00:42
Technically: I see big steps in aikijj all the time.
Historicaly: Ueshiba-san had more then a limited number of Daito-ryu techniques. (IMHO.)

Gil Gillespie
15th September 2000, 02:57
Mike,

I'm not a martinet but somehow the term "Ueshiba-san" seems somewhat disrepectful. You may not consider him O-Sensei, but at the very least I feel he merits the appelation Ueshiba Sensei, even in informal conversation.

Sheridan
16th September 2000, 22:59
Gil:

I've enjoyed your viewpoint and posts in many other threads and don't want to steal Mr. Hoffner's post with a flame war, so I'll keep this short and to the point.
I meant NO disrespect. None whatsoever. However, from my point of view, Aikido is seperate from Daito-ryu. Daito-ryu is the precursor of Aikido and as such Morihei Ueshiba's teachings (hope I spelled that right.) have had no affect on my training. The best analogy that I can give is Bruce Lee. Most of the world consider him the best martial artist of the past century, (argueable, Sokaku and Ueshiba were alive for a chunk of this past century.) but if you study shoalin gung-fu, is Bruce Lee to be addressed as the chinese equivalent of sensei or O-sensei? Again, no disrespect is meant or intended here! I just see things a little differently from my side of the fence. I hope that clears up anything; if I've left something hanging or you're not satisfied with this post then send me a private message so that we don't turn Mr. Hoffner's thread into a petty pissing match.

Regards:
Mike

:toast:

BC
19th September 2000, 18:34
Below is a link to an excellent recent interview of Mr. Stanley Pranin of Aikido Journal by Mr. Jun Akiyama of AikiWeb.

http://www.aikiweb.com/interviews/pranin0800.html

In it, Mr. Pranin makes some intriguing points about the relationship between aikijujutsu and aikido.

Brently Keen
22nd September 2000, 01:26
Nope, I do not agree with the ideas and statements presented on this website.

Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinions, and can say pretty much whatever they like on the internet. BUT, not everyone is in a position to comment intelligently, with sufficient expertise and understanding of the similarities and differences between aikido and Daito-ryu.

There are fewer still who are entitled to teach Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. But that is the subject of another thread I think.

I got a real kick out of this rather funny quote from the webpage in question:

"When you practice a technique and your partner smiles,
it is modern Aikido. If he screams, it is Daito ryu."

Hmmm. Yeah, I guess that's a real good, sure fire way to tell the difference every time. ;) LOL

Brently Keen

Cady Goldfield
22nd September 2000, 01:44
Brently,
I'm assuming you're referring to the first Web site given (the "niagara.com" one) and not the one just before your post, which is a rather pleasant in interesting interview between the delightful Jun Akiyama of Aikiweb, and historian/scholar Stanley Pranin?

The juxtaposition took me aback for a moment. :)

Cady

Brently Keen
22nd September 2000, 06:56
Cady,

You are correct. I was referring to the website mentioned in the original original post, but my comment(s) were not intended to be specifically directed or restricted only towards them, but also in a more general sense. I guess I'm also referring in a round about way to the "What's yours to teach" thread. If the shoe fits folks, wear it.

Just so there's no misunderstanding, I think Stanley's long time involvement in aikido as both a practitioner and especially as a historian and researcher certainly puts him among those qualified to comment.

Although admittedly his relationship to Daito-ryu has been pretty much academic (he hasn't trained in Daito-ryu). We all, including the website mentioned above owe Stanley our thanks and gratitude for his efforts to tell the history of aikido and it's relationship to Daito-ryu in an objective manner. Much of what is known today about Daito-ryu is a result of Stanley's efforts to discover the influences on and the roots of aikido.

Here's another example of babbling nonsense trying hard to sound wise and deep:

"There is no clashing in philosophies. There are no
contradictions. It is wasteful and foolish to look for
them."

Then immediately following that statement, the website features a comparision chart listing the all the so called differences of "Traditional Aiki" and "Modern Aiki" they could think of, complete with clashing philsophies and contradicting approaches!

It's entertaining to say the least.

Brently Keen

Nathan Scott
27th September 2000, 23:00
Hi lads,

Just got back in town yesterday. I need a vacation to recoup from my vacation!

Anyway,

I've seen this web site (Daito ryu Aikibujutsu) several times. It is a nice looking site.

However, in spite of the terminology and authoritative nature some of the articles are written in, there are several inaccuracies I noticed besides those sited by Mr. Keen. This is unfortunate, since sites with good design value and lingo like this tend to sway readers to believe everything written is fact.

I can't comment on the ligitimacy or skill of this group, and there are some things worth reading on their site - but the reader would have to be able to discern what is correct and what is misleading or incorrect to benefit from it.

I also noticed that they are hosting a seminar with Terada Sensei of Yoshinkan Aikido.

Regards,

morpheus
13th November 2006, 21:46
I recently attended an aikido seminar from a relatively high ranking western Aikidoka and was suprised by a few things I heard. He was discussing techniques and and length of time learning. He stated that Ueshiba had little time to learn techniques from Takeda. I would have thought that by now with all that has been written and researched that the history and length of time Ueshiba trained with Takeda would be more clearly evident and accepted. I am always surprised by how little of the history people know of their art.

Cady Goldfield
13th November 2006, 22:30
That "relatively high ranking western Aikidoka"... would be wrong. It's been pretty well documented by Stanley Pranin (a respected expert, and perhaps the most -- or only -- thorough researcher of Ueshiba and Takeda) that Ueshiba spent plenty of time studying with Takeda. Keep in mind that Takeda was more of an itinerate teacher than one with a home dojo. He offered many, many seminars and made regular rounds to various cities. A really dedicated student could get a lot of mat time this way. The emuroku doesn't lie. ;)

I suggest you get a copy of Pranin's Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu: Conversations With Daito-ryu Masters. You might want to forward it to that "relatively high ranking western Aikidoka." :)

Benkei the Monk
13th November 2006, 23:13
I agree with Mr. Goldfield. Ueshiba sensei had a long and strong link with Takeda. The Master visited repeatedly Ueshiba's house as many people said and, obviously, the emuroku doesn't lie :)

don
14th November 2006, 23:10
I recently attended an aikido seminar from a relatively high ranking western Aikidoka and was suprised by a few things I heard. He was discussing techniques and and length of time learning. He stated that Ueshiba had little time to learn techniques from Takeda.This is something that Kisshomaru spent most of his life repeating. Sometimes politics contradicts history.


I would have thought that by now with all that has been written and researched that the history and length of time Ueshiba trained with Takeda would be more clearly evident and accepted. Yes, and after all the sacrifices of Stanley Pranin who has been given a rough ride by the powers that be in aikido.

Cady Goldfield
15th November 2006, 01:38
And, those "powers that be" in aikido are also the ones who insisted that Daito-ryu is extinct. :rolleyes:

Jose Garrido
15th November 2006, 20:07
Amen to that.

But I think that the younger generations of Aikidoka are now aware of Aikido's relationship to Daito-ryu. And also just how much Daito-ryu Jujutsu (and Aikijujutsu) is actually incorporated into Aikido.

Jose Garrido

don
15th November 2006, 21:20
...just how much Daito-ryu Jujutsu (and Aikijujutsu) is actually incorporated into Aikido."Incorporated into"...I think "derived from."

Indeed, except for the politics and bad blood here and there, some of us think of aikido as a branch of DR. Contrary to cliche, you've got "hard" aikido, and you've got "soft" DR. The overlap is significant.

(Btw, Garrido Sensei, many congratulations on a successful seminar with Kondo Sensei.)

Ames
15th November 2006, 22:00
Indeed, except for the politics and bad blood here and there, some of us think of aikido as a branch of DR

I couldn't agree more. And I also think this is EXACTLY the conclusion that the aikido 'powers that be' were trying to cover up.

Cady Goldfield
16th November 2006, 00:31
I've observed that a lot of aikidoka don't want to acknowledge their art's Daito-ryu roots. They treat it as though it were a Neanderthal grandparent they wish wasn't in their family tree. :D

glad2bhere
16th November 2006, 03:10
Thats OK. I get much the same feeling as a Hapkido practiioner and the fact is that we still don't have an absolutely assured idea of where we fit into Japanese traditions--- if at all.

Sorta like being the red-haired step-kid at the family reunion, if you know what I mean.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

SoldierNurse
16th November 2006, 08:43
Thats OK. I get much the same feeling as a Hapkido practiioner and the fact is that we still don't have an absolutely assured idea of where we fit into Japanese traditions--- if at all.

Sorta like being the red-haired step-kid at the family reunion, if you know what I mean.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
It is my understanding Hapkido & Aikido both share a common heritage with Daito-ryu Aikijutsu. Both Morihei Uyeshiba, the founder of Aikido, and Yong Shui Choi, founder of Hapkido, studied Daito-ryu Aikijutsu in Japan under Sokaku Takeda. However, differences in philosophy exists between Hapikido & Aikido regards to one leans towards offensive and the other defensive focus.

I wonder why some aikidoka prefer to disassociate with Daito-ryu aikijutsu. I realize some approach aikido as a means of spiritual enlightenment through the development of "Ki". IMHO, timing, skill, and to a degree strength are just as important as ki. I prefer to focus in on the combat aspect of Aikido, which is more to it's roots. A stream of aikido still exist which maintains the art in its combat effective form, Daito-ryu Aikijutsu.

glad2bhere
16th November 2006, 14:04
Hi, Cary:

Yes, the conventional wisdom--- read also, the "company line"---- is that CHOI Yong Sul studied and mastered DRAJJ. To date there is no firm evidence that I have uncovered to substantiate this. Comments by JANG Im Mok, Ueyshiba's son and Richard Kim do apparently support Choi participating in training related to DRAJJ or with folks who were likewise training in this manner. In this way, Choi would come into a larger constellation of folks who inter-related with each other in the first half of the 20th Century. Individuals associated with this more "eclectic model" include TOYAMA Kanken, YOSHIDA Kotaro and FUNAKOSHI Gichin. Having said this I feel that I would be unfair if I did not take one more step, favoring my personal opinion, and add STRONGLY that this IS only my opinion.

In much the same way that the militant influence on the Japan of the early 20th century was focused through the lower and middle military officer ranks, I am of the opinion that it may well have been students of such personages as I have mentioned who could have championed the eclectic "mixing-and-matching" utilitarian, rather than art-form, approach. In a fantasy I can imagine an individual such as Funakoshi having knowledge that "the kids" were "experimenting" with their materials. In this way, in a post WW II world, we would see such hybred arts as Oyama's KYOKUSHIN Karate, and So's SHORINJI Kempo. To my mind, it would be a process such as this and not direct lineage to DRAJJ that would have produced Choi's "yawara".

I have no intention to offend, and once again state that this is only the musings of KMA researcher based solely on my digging. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Jose Garrido
16th November 2006, 20:03
Don, thanks. The seminar was great and I hope to see you at the next one.

I agree, to some degree aikido is a branch of the DTR with its main difference being the incorporation of the Omoto-kyo influences. After all Ueshiba sensei did receive the highest certification that was being awarded in DTR at the time.

Jose Garrido

Katsujinken
16th November 2006, 21:29
Abundant Peace: The Biography of Morehei Ueshiba by Profesor John Stevens may be the source of what is stated in the earlier post, as that book seems to indicate that Daito Ryu had little influence on Aikido and that the relationship between Sokaku Takeda and Morehei Ueshiba was not a particularly harmonious one and points to other arts including Gotto Yagyu Ryu Ju Jutsu, the Jo from Kuki Shin Ryu. However this is of course all open to interpretation but it does suggest that Daito Ryu has less influence on Aikido than is often supposed. Personally I am not convinced given the similarity between Aikido and Daito Ryu.

Regards

Cady Goldfield
16th November 2006, 22:38
John Stevens was, in fact, wrong. Since he wrote that, it has been documented and shown clearly that Ueshiba M. had a very extensive and close relationship with Takeda S.

The work of Stanley Pranin, which includes first-hand interviews with key people (Pranin is fluent in Japanese spoken and written language) proves it beyond the shadow of a doubt. Pranin had access Stevens could only dream of.

Another thing: Just because Takeda and Ueshiba had a very close relationship, doesn't mean it was a good one. ;) One of the most famous aspects of the history between the two men, is the falling-out that ensued many years down the road. Also, just because Ueshiba trained with Takeda, doesn't mean that he kept things just as he had learned them. Remember that Ueshiba went through his own spiritual and emotional epiphany, and made major changes to the very martial art he had been taught by Takeda. Looking at the two arts now, you would definitely not see much in common. And yet, aikido is very much the "child" of Daito-ryu.

(No, Bruce, not the red-haired one. :D )

SoldierNurse
16th November 2006, 23:45
Hi, Cary:

Yes, the conventional wisdom--- read also, the "company line"---- is that CHOI Yong Sul studied and mastered DRAJJ. To date there is no firm evidence that I have uncovered to substantiate this. Comments by JANG Im Mok, Ueyshiba's son and Richard Kim do apparently support Choi participating in training related to DRAJJ or with folks who were likewise training in this manner. In this way, Choi would come into a larger constellation of folks who inter-related with each other in the first half of the 20th Century. Individuals associated with this more "eclectic model" include TOYAMA Kanken, YOSHIDA Kotaro and FUNAKOSHI Gichin. Having said this I feel that I would be unfair if I did not take one more step, favoring my personal opinion, and add STRONGLY that this IS only my opinion.

In much the same way that the militant influence on the Japan of the early 20th century was focused through the lower and middle military officer ranks, I am of the opinion that it may well have been students of such personages as I have mentioned who could have championed the eclectic "mixing-and-matching" utilitarian, rather than art-form, approach. In a fantasy I can imagine an individual such as Funakoshi having knowledge that "the kids" were "experimenting" with their materials. In this way, in a post WW II world, we would see such hybred arts as Oyama's KYOKUSHIN Karate, and So's SHORINJI Kempo. To my mind, it would be a process such as this and not direct lineage to DRAJJ that would have produced Choi's "yawara".

I have no intention to offend, and once again state that this is only the musings of KMA researcher based solely on my digging. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce
Hello Bruce,

Not offended at all. Your thoughts,as well as others, on this Thread have been a good read.

Ron Tisdale
17th November 2006, 14:59
John Stevens was, in fact, wrong. Since he wrote that, it has been documented and shown clearly that Ueshiba M. had a very extensive and close relationship with Takeda S.

The work of Stanley Pranin, which includes first-hand interviews with key people (Pranin is fluent in Japanese spoken and written language) proves it beyond the shadow of a doubt. Pranin had access Stevens could only dream of.
Hi Cady,

While I agree that Stan's work is clearly more accurate, and the source of the material is impeccable, compared to the lack of footnotes or sources in Steven's books, this does not mean that Stevens did not have access to many interesting sources in the aikido world. The fact is that the Aikikai had a line to peddle...and they used someone to do it. I find the hyperbole used regretable...but it is what it is. This does not take away from the fact that Stevens is also fluent in Japanese, and has taught at a university in Sendai for many years now. I wish some of that scholarship had gone into his books...but he chose a different emphasis. I just wouldn't want someone to get the wrong impression from your post, though I agree with the main thrust of it.


Looking at the two arts now, you would definitely not see much in common. And yet, aikido is very much the "child" of Daito-ryu.

(No, Bruce, not the red-haired one. :D )
Well, there are styles of aikido where there art is extremely close to what you see in some Daito ryu organizations today. The Yoshinkan, for example, has many similarities to what you see in the main line tradition. And there are some similarities between some "soft" (ick, hate that word) styles of aikido and the corresponding "soft" (ick again) styles of Daito ryu. As to how far those similarities go...that's not for me to say. Neither Aikido nor Daito ryu are monoliths...individual styles, teachers, and dojo vary greatly.

Best,
Ron

Mark Murray
17th November 2006, 16:51
Well, there are styles of aikido where there art is extremely close to what you see in some Daito ryu organizations today. The Yoshinkan, for example, has many similarities to what you see in the main line tradition. And there are some similarities between some "soft" (ick, hate that word) styles of aikido and the corresponding "soft" (ick again) styles of Daito ryu. As to how far those similarities go...that's not for me to say. Neither Aikido nor Daito ryu are monoliths...individual styles, teachers, and dojo vary greatly.

Best,
Ron

Ugh, but that's a stark truth. In both cases, Aikido and Daito ryu, there was one person of extreme skill that held it all together. When that person died, things fell apart and their arts fractured. With that splintering, different "histories" were created. It's that kind of mess that those of us great great grandchildren must sort through. And what a mess it is, especially since all the children are gone, too, and can't help sort it out. Third and fourth hand knowledge sucks for accuracy.

Mark

Cady Goldfield
17th November 2006, 17:14
Mark,
Duly noted. I didn't mean to imply that Stevens' research (or language skills) were somehow defective, but only that Pranin was able to get deeper into the subject via communications with "players" that Stevens hadn't been privy to. It's just a matter of extending the research further.

As for Yoshinkan, it's also known that Shioda trained for a time with Takeda, so it's no surprise that some of that shows in his aikido. However, as Ueshiba took his work in a certain direction away from Daito-ryu, so went Shioda in his own direction.

Ron Tisdale
17th November 2006, 17:52
Hi Cady,

That's the problem, in my opinion (putting the hyperbole aside). Because there are no footnotes or sources listed, it's impossilbe to go back over the work and make an educated judgement for yourself. I get the feeling that Stevens Sensei was interested in capturing the mythos of aikido and it's founder. That he has done, and exceptionally well. I am also very enamored of his book on Shirata Sensei, and the one on Tesshu as well. But I don't read those books as history...though the book on Teshhu would have been even better (in my opinion) with footnotes, sources, bibliography etc.

But we also have to look at the historical side...and for that, I'm afraid Stan's work is second to none.

Best,
Ron

Cady Goldfield
17th November 2006, 18:01
Ron,

I agree that it was the mythos that Stevens focused on, and that he succeeded with that, and that Pranin is more the academic focused on historical accuracy. The two clearly had different aims in their work.

Pranin's work truly is second to none in its quest for historic "completeness" and accuracy. That's why individuals who really want to understand the origins from a historical-survey approach, Pranin is the best choice, in my opinion. For those who want mainly to understand the "spirit" of Ueshiba and aikido, then Stevens is likely the best source.

Mark Murray
17th November 2006, 18:20
Mark,
Duly noted. I didn't mean to imply that Stevens' research (or language skills) were somehow defective, but only that Pranin was able to get deeper into the subject via communications with "players" that Stevens hadn't been privy to. It's just a matter of extending the research further.

As for Yoshinkan, it's also known that Shioda trained for a time with Takeda, so it's no surprise that some of that shows in his aikido. However, as Ueshiba took his work in a certain direction away from Daito-ryu, so went Shioda in his own direction.

That's an interesting side note, Cady. Is there anywhere that makes note of Shioda training with Takeda? I can't seem to find it, but then again, I haven't read all the articles on Aikido Journal either. :)

Mark

Cady Goldfield
17th November 2006, 21:34
Mark,
I should have said "it is strongly suspected" instead of "known." :)
Among various sources, I have a tape (from a film) of Shioda doing Daito-ryu techniques (as part of a Yoshinkan demonstration, no less!), which I got from a long-time Yoshinkan person who confirmed the info. Or at least, alluded strongly to it. I doubt he would have gotten that from Ueshiba, who seems to have kept old-style DR to himself.

Mark Murray
17th November 2006, 22:35
Mark,
I should have said "it is strongly suspected" instead of "known." :)
Among various sources, I have a tape (from a film) of Shioda doing Daito-ryu techniques (as part of a Yoshinkan demonstration, no less!), which I got from a long-time Yoshinkan person who confirmed the info. Or at least, alluded strongly to it. I doubt he would have gotten that from Ueshiba, who seems to have kept old-style DR to himself.

As for Ueshiba keeping old-style DR to himself. I'd have to disagree to a point. According to Aiki News #94, "Among the recipients of Daito-ryu diplomas from Ueshiba are Kenji Tomiki, Minoru Mochizuki, Rinjiro Shirata, and Gozo Shioda."

But that's the only official mention I have of Shioda doing DR. Still, it is interesting. I wonder what year they received these diplomas (anywhere from 1922 - 1937), how much they studied, and what skill level the diplomas meant.

Mark

Ames
17th November 2006, 22:39
I've never heard of Shioda training with Takeda (although this is possible). I have heard rumours from folks in the Yoshinkan about him training in the Kodokai though.

Cady Goldfield
17th November 2006, 23:03
The answer to the affirmative or negative would probably be in the aforementioned emuroku from Takeda's numerous seminars. The Yoshinkan person who gave me the tape may well have been misinformed.