PDA

View Full Version : Daito-ryu and Secrecy



kusanku
18th November 2002, 21:14
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
[B]Hello Mr. Tung and Mr. Gonzalez,

Thanks for coming on to e-budo to explain more about the Bokuyokan, and for giving away more aiki secrets over the internet. The frauds of the aiki world out there need all the help they can get!:eek:


Aw, Cmon', Nathan.Judo has no secrets,. and there aren't many Judo frauds.I think it may be, and this in all seriousness, that only the fact of keeping things as basic to an art as aiki, secret,this creates the opportunity for frauds to exist, as if there were no secrets, everyone would soon know who was for real. As it is, those of us on the outside, hungrily seeking for the secrets of aikijujitsu and now, we have them:-) thanks to Tung Sensei, have no woy of determining who is a fraud and who real, short of stepping onto the tatami for a litle practice session.The judo way of determining frauds.

What brought this on, was the thread on the Judo Forum concerning Judo fakers, and I was saying there, that I never met a phony judoka except people who claimed black belts in everything to crowds who knew nothing.This because, in Judo, a person not knowing kuzushi, the Judo method, as it were, of aiki,will quickly fall before the first skilled white belt practitioner who is trained in happo no kuzushi.

Whereas, anyone who know anything resembling jujutsu of any type, can claim to be an aikijujitsu deshi as so few know what the real stuff feels like, and get away with it for a long long time.

So, come on, fellows, come clean with those secrets, already!:DI promise I won't claim skill or rank in Daito Ryu.

Finally, I must say thanks to Mr. Tung, for actually stating what Aiki is and what it consists of, Aiki Yoko was the missing piece.Roppo No kuzushi is also an old concept used in early judo along side of happo no kuzushi.

By the way, Yang, Jwing-Ming's modern synthesis of Shaolin Chin Na is very interesting in connection with all this, he keeps no secrets as far as I know. There's really no substitute for training and skill level acquired therethrough.

Anyway, this is just an idea, perhaps the feudal keeping of secrets is past.I know that in Okinawan karate, the keeping of secrets led to a watering down of major proprotions, and those few who actually got the good training, are sometimes jeered at by those who didn't as making this stuff up out of whole cloth.

What is to be the future of aikijujutsu?Shall it be a popularized and watered down thing, with few knowing the real core and foundation principles of the art, or will it be a technology like judo, available to all who wish to spend the time and effort training and learning, or will it be like Okinawan karate, with Tae Kwon Do for kidies on one side, Japanese shiai hard punch kick in the middle, and true karate, over on the side somewhere, tapping the rest on the shoulder and saying, ah there, Gentlebeings, perhaps there are one or two things you may wish to consider?

What is to be the future of the great art of aikijujutsu? Open to the world, or closed to its own practitioners?Thank you, Mr. Tung, for sharing secrets, and Mr. Scott, for confirming that he did so.:D



Anyway, hopefully some of our readers and contributors will have some more questions for you.

More secrets, please.I have a bag in which I collect them.Its the one someone once let the cat out of.

Dawse listener.

Cady Goldfield
19th November 2002, 00:02
It's understandable why DR exponents keep this stuff to themselves. It is profound and of great worth to those who have it. And, it is hard-won. That makes people reluctant to make it openly available to the world.

It takes a lot of hands-on, hard training one-on-one to learn it, and some people never "get" it even after years and years of effort and study. On the part of students, very few stay with it and go the distance to gain it. On the part of teachers, to try and mass-teach it is impossible because the teacher must work personally with each student. The amount of investment in time and labor to teach it one-on-one makes teachers very picky about whether they will pass it on, and to whom.

Perhaps it's not so much that it's a "secret," as it is a labor intensive and deep set of principles that are difficult to give away -- because of the effort and dedication required on the parts of both teacher and student.

FWIW, I used to train in Yang's chin-na (as part of his White Crane and Long Fist curriculum) with one of his former top "disciples." It is very much akin to jujutsu, but it does not include aiki-no-jutsu.

Chris Li
19th November 2002, 01:25
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
It's understandable why DR exponents keep this stuff to themselves. It is profound and of great worth to those who have it. And, it is hard-won. That makes people reluctant to make it openly available to the world.

So is quantum physics. Still, no "secrets" there...

Historically, there were a number of reasons for "secrets" in the arts, many of which are not as valid today. I'm sure that the worth of the thing itself was one of them, but not, IMO, one of the primary reasons.

Best,

Chris

Cady Goldfield
19th November 2002, 01:49
Really, it's not "secrets" as in "seeeecret secrets! I won't tell!" It's just a matter of not casting pearls before people who haven't earned them.

Anyone who really, truly wants to learn this stuff can find entry. The more dedicated, the more they will learn. In that respect, it's not out of reach.

It's just not being hand-delivered to those who are less than committed to learning and valuing it. Those who have it are concerned mainly with increasing and improving their own skills. They have no interest in selling their knowledge or going out of their way to advertise it.

Chris Li
19th November 2002, 02:21
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
It's just not being hand-delivered to those who are less than committed to learning and valuing it. Those who have it are concerned mainly with increasing and improving their own skills. They have no interest in selling their knowledge or going out of their way to advertise it.

OTOH, Sokaku Takeda was very much interested in the money, from what I can tell :).

Best,

Chris

Nathan Scott
19th November 2002, 02:46
Hello Mr. Vengel,

I can't say I agree with you, though I understand your point.

Arts such as this "belong" to those in the art. Those outside the membership do not have any rights to know and/or understand the core elements of the art. It is none of their business. If you want to know Daito ryu aiki, join a real dojo and train real hard. If not, join us here in this forum to hypothosize about what it might be and how it differs from other arts.

Some Daito ryu teachers allow and even encourage open seminars, for better or for worse. Anyone can go to these and then blab on the net about what the teacher said "in confidence". But hey - that's the teachers fault.

Sokaku may have taught a lot of people, and charged a few bucks for each technique, but he is also said to have been selective as to the kind of people such things were taught to.

In "Ima Bokuden", Sokaku stated to the interviewer that "this art is particularly easy to learn so the techniques are never shown in front of outsiders", and how he felt that "it should only be taught to respectable people. It's misuse would be frightening.... teaching others is something that should not be taken lightly".

Let's use the analogy of Kyushojutsu. Such methods were guarded in Japan at one time, and even Ueshiba Sensei seems to have not wished foreigners to learn them for the same reasons Sokaku did not want everyone to learn DR aiki.

Yet now there are websites that show where to strike and explain the methods in detail. However, they do not explain in equal detail how to revive someone if applied, and the great dangers of delving into kyushojutsu without direct qualified instruction. Responsibility comes with learning such things, and often this is looked over in favor of building a bigger name for yourself.

Anyway, fact is that Sokaku was pretty strict, and branches like the Sagawa dojo and Kodokai are known for being conservative. If Yonezawa Sensei reached any high level of skill in the Kodokai, he would have been well aware of this.

BTW, it's my understanding that Yonezawa Sensei "left" the Kodokai in 1992, which does not jive with some of the credential dates listed on the Bokuyokan page, FWIW.

And I'm afraid I don't know enough "DR secrets" to confirm or deny whether the information given is real or not. What I write about here is almost all found either on the net or in English language publications. The explanation of what DR aiki is has been repeated with similar wording by Kondo Sensei and Okamoto Sensei.

Doesn't every art try to stop an attacker as quickly as possible? ;)

Regards,

Cady Goldfield
19th November 2002, 02:50
Chris,
No, Takeda wasn't interested in the money, he was interested in being acknowledged by his student.

When Ueshiba apparently failed to pay Takeda the piddling sum of a few sen for each student who signed up for one of his classes, it was a sign of utter disrespect for his teacher. The money was never the issue; it was a matter of honor and respect. A matter of principle, not of principal.

IMO, Ueshiba was dissing his old master on several levels, which I'm sure is one of the reasons why Ueshiba hightailed it out of town whenever he was told that his old teacher was coming for a visit. ;)

Chris Li
19th November 2002, 02:55
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
Chris,
No, Takeda wasn't interested in the money, he was interested in being acknowledged by his student.

When Ueshiba apparently failed to pay Takeda the piddling sum of a few sen for each student who signed up for one of his classes, it was a sign of utter disrespect for his teacher. The money was never the issue; it was a matter of honor and respect. A matter of principle, not of principal.

IMO, Ueshiba was dissing his old master on several levels, which I'm sure is one of the reasons why Ueshiba hightailed it out of town whenever he was told that his old teacher was coming for a visit. ;)

Actually, I wasn't thinking about M. Ueshiba, I was thinking about Y. Sagawa. In "Tomei na Chikara" Sagawa talks about S. Takeda and money at least half a dozen times.

Best,

Chris

Cady Goldfield
19th November 2002, 15:03
I see it as relating to the same matter, Chris. The "business" of charging for seminars and for per-head students signing an attendence book, was one way of monitoring who was getting taught and of Takeda getting acknowledged as the "head honcho" of the system.

Call it a fief or a tribute, of sorts. By requiring his students to pay him what always seemed to be very modest sums, Takeda maintained a subtle reminder to his students that they did not "own" the art to do with as they pleased.

Chris Li
19th November 2002, 21:49
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
I see it as relating to the same matter, Chris. The "business" of charging for seminars and for per-head students signing an attendence book, was one way of monitoring who was getting taught and of Takeda getting acknowledged as the "head honcho" of the system.

Call it a fief or a tribute, of sorts. By requiring his students to pay him what always seemed to be very modest sums, Takeda maintained a subtle reminder to his students that they did not "own" the art to do with as they pleased.

According to Sagawa the sums were extremely high, not "modest" - a good portion of his time was spent looking for students for Sokaku, since very few people could afford to pay the fees.

There's nothing wrong with that, of course, it's a free market economy. Still, I think that to say that Takeda had no interest in teaching for money, or that money was not an important factor is inaccurate.

Best,

Chris

kusanku
19th November 2002, 22:06
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
[B]It's understandable why DR exponents keep this stuff to themselves. It is profound and of great worth to those who have it. And, it is hard-won. That makes people reluctant to make it openly available to the world.

Oh, I do understand well enough why people keep some stuff secret. I just question the value of doing so in this day and age.I feel it may even be counter-productive.


It takes a lot of hands-on, hard training one-on-one to learn it, and some people never "get" it even after years and years of effort and study.

Though I am not a DR exponent, I believe the reason some people never get it even after years of study, is that they are never clearly given it.I know that even in styles, secrets are kept as reading this forum shows.I know from being in Okinawan karate, that secrets have been kept there, and it has not been good for the style, and I am one of those who was given clearly, those secrets or some of them.

I contrast this with Judo, where no secrets are kept,and where books even clearly detail in physical terms the ways of Judo body dynamics, and with hands on instruction teaching exactly the same thing, no trouble is had by anyone who works hard and smart, in learning the things once kept secret.


On the part of students, very few stay with it and go the distance to gain it.

And no wonder, with principles not clerly enunciated to those students until the have been around for years.Yet in samurai times, the teaching was done more quickly, as it had to be, you needed it to survive, but keppan was taken to insure against disclosure. That was then, this is now.:-)


On the part of teachers, to try and mass-teach it is impossible because the teacher must work personally with each student.

True as well in any art, martial or otherwise, if student its to 'get' it.But a clear disclosure of foundational principles is a good idea anyway, I think.


The amount of investment in time and labor to teach it one-on-one makes teachers very picky about whether they will pass it on, and to whom.

Again, I understand this, I am a teacher myself.But if I teach, I teach it all and withhold nothing, of foundational principles.If I don't weant someone to learn, I don't teach.But the secrests of my arts, are not secret, anymore.And this is no bad thing. I believe that one Shorin Ryu master did a video called 'Once a Secret' on karate.There was once a reason for this to be secret, now there is not.Is not or may not the same be said for DR?


Perhaps it's not so much that it's a "secret," as it is a labor intensive and deep set of principles that are difficult to give away -- because of the effort and dedication required on the parts of both teacher and student.

While for all I know this may be and possibly is true, I have read for months, DR practitioners on here until Mr. Tung, refusing to define aiki, as a secret. Now since DR Aikijiujitsu is based, as I understand it, on two pillars, one being DR Jujitsu, the other Aiki, refusing to define one pillar of the art that makes it aikijiujitsu, is I think, keeping a secret.Why even have an open forum if we are not going to define the art?

I don't mean irresponsibillity. I do not, or try not to, post lethal techniques on the internet, but I do post the foundational principles whereby karate people can learn how to make their techniques more efficient and effective, and learn to understand kata better.If someone applies these to their training, they may learn things on their own that would be what I would not post.

If however, they practice ignorant of the principles which I and others have shared, they may practice years and only have punch punch, kick kcik and any judo or DR exponent will kill them in a minute.So I believe the true principles of karate, how to protect oneself, how to move, how to counter various forms of attack and transform blocks, kicks and punches into more fluid and responsive waza, is something that, if not taught, will never be learned.

So, perhaps many DR exponents are not taught, until long after they begin, the true principles of the art.I can only believe it is the art which will suffer therefrom, as karate has.And as Judo has not.I have posted on other forums and threads,that in self defense situations, judoka are usually victorious because their training is realistic and sound, with principles that are clearly understood and internalized from the very beginning.Even though DR is different, I cannot believe it cannot be done somewhat similarly, I know that karate can be.


FWIW, I used to train in Yang's chin-na (as part of his White Crane and Long Fist curriculum) with one of his former top "disciples." It is very much akin to jujutsu, but it does not include aiki-no-jutsu.

Maybe not, but Taiji does, and Yang teaches that, too.My use of shaolin chin na as example, was that chin na used to be secret, or advanced knowledge within kung fu systems, but it does no harm for Yang to teach it openly.The shaolin chin na techniques, which I practice with a person who trains with Yang directly, are very useful in comparing to karate applications as well.

The pojnt is that Yang breaks down the chin na into principles and categories that make it much easier to get ones mind around the concepts therein.

Now, I have to believe, yes, we have different capacities, but as in Judo, the arts can be clearly explained and thus better taught to more people.When we keep secrets, as it was done in karate, only a few schools wind up with the whole pig as the Okinawans say, the rest only have the skin, maybe at most the bones too.

After all, the real secrets of Okinawan karate, are the same as those of Chinese kung fu; acupuncture points, chin na, and vital strikes, as well as body dynamics and evasions, and some psychological principles.It is good that this knowledge, which is no secret to acupuncturists and shiatsu people, chin na, aikido, and jiujitsu and judo people, has been preserved in those and other places for comparison sake.Otherwise, some would think we were making it all up.

If daito ryu actually has acces to knowledge these others do not, they should, I feell, go public with it.You still would have to trin and have hands on, and the frauds would be more easily found out.As it is, anyone with some aikido and jiujitsu skill, can pretend to be a DR exp[onent and fool most people. I remember the seventies, when Kung Fu masters were everywhere, and you couldn't tell the real from phony because real Kung fu principles had not been shared.Now they have and people can tell.Mostly.

Before that in the sixties, I met the phony karate kings, who made up their own styles off one book.When you met the real ones, once, never again would the phonies fool you. But phony judoka, there were none.

Very simple to find out. Step on the mat with a real judoka, and the phony went down instantly.I really think the judo approach is the healthies, share it all, teach it to whomever wants to learn, then only the ones who are deidcated will stick, but if they don't get good, its because of them, not because secrets were kept from them.

It is preciseley because of this, that I have shared some former secrets of karate, on the internet, on some sites such as the Baylor University Karate Club, at genjumin's world, or at the Shotokan Planet at Shawn Jefferson's Kata analysis website, or at Kissaki- Kai
Malaysia, at Vince Choo's site, or at the SRSI Journal free sites.

Some people have trained thirty years in karate kata, thinking they know what they are doing, and all the while because of lack of knowledge, have wasted their time.Its a crime.

I think, karate ain't the only art where this happens.It does take years to really get good, but it shouldn't take years to ';get' the core of the art, as far as principles go.As for they are too deep to understand, many masters are not mental giants, I believe from experience, many secrets are quite simple indeed, this is why they are kept secret, not because they are difficult of understanding.Take aiki age and aiki sage, for instance.If you know, then you can do, if you don't know, you will never do.

Try doing judo without knowing ukemi or kuzushi.Now try it with.These aren't hard concepts to explain or understand, or even do. To master them may take time, but to learn them is the work of hours.

I think, DR may bot be that different in this way.

kusanku
19th November 2002, 22:41
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
[B]Hello Mr. Vengel,

I can't say I agree with you, though I understand your point.

Hello Mr. Scott, and always good to hear from you Sir, I learn much each time.


Arts such as this "belong" to those in the art. Those outside the membership do not have any rights to know and/or understand the core elements of the art. It is none of their business.

Yes, the feudal attitude, I was part of that in Ryukyu Kempo as well.:-)Tell no secrets, but then seminars, videos, books exist, which tell at least some of them.Bit of a contradiction, as for instanceKondo Sensei teaching seminars and videos.

I am glad he does, too.


want
to know Daito ryu aiki, join a real dojo and train real hard.

Were there one nearby, I would do so.Alas, there is not.I appreciate effective martial arts.


if not,
join us here in this forum to hypothosize about what it might be and how it differs from other arts.

Thank you, I have done and may continue to do so.:-)



Some Daito ryu teachers allow and even encourage open seminars, for better or for worse.


As above stated, indeed.



Anyone can go to these and then blab on the net about what the teacher said "in confidence". But hey - that's the teachers fault.


Exactly.




Sokaku may have taught a lot of people, and charged a few bucks for each technique, but he is also said to have been selective as to the kind of people such things were taught to.

I don't blame him, I am too in person.However, the basic principles, I do believe, should be widely known, that way frauds are avoided and training can proceed on a solid foundation.I don't post death techniques, or such things, other than things it would require trememndous skills to perform.I do put things that help people on the path.Not of DR, but of karate.As an old judoka, and gettin older every day:D, I believ this does no harm.



In "Ima Bokuden", Sokaku stated to the interviewer that "this art is particularly easy to learn so the techniques are never shown in front of outsiders",

Ah! This is enlightening indeed. I have now heard this from source itself.I thought this might be the case, as I said to Cady who said the contrary, that these things were deep, profound and hard to 'get', many never getting it for years, and I thought, yeas, we used to say that in karate, too, about secrets of kata that, when shown, are actually quite simple.So DR is particularly easy to learn, this explains many things. Thank you again.


that "it should only be taught to respectable people. It's misuse would be frightening.... teaching others is something that should not be taken lightly".

Same once said of karate, an art now taught to schoolchildren without noticeable danger.However, the moves are not always properly explained to them, and thiis may be no bad thing, It is when an adult studies for decades without ever learning the meaning of the motions they do, that improperly understood can and will get them killed in a self defesne situation, that I take exception to keeping secrets.But now that I know that Sokaku said this, I do understand.

let's
s use the analogy of Kyushojutsu. Such methods were guarded in Japan at one time, and even Ueshiba Sensei seems to have not wished foreigners to learn them for the same reasons Sokaku did not want everyone to learn DR aiki.

Kyushojutsu? Ah, never heard of it, It doesn't exist and , if it does, no one really knows it, pay no atention to those weird moives in the kata.:D



Yet now there are websites that show where to strike and explain the methods in detail. However, they do not explain in equal detail how to revive someone if applied, and the great dangers of delving into kyushojutsu without direct qualified instruction. Responsibility comes with learning such things, and often this is looked over in favor of building a bigger name for yourself.


Its true, the way kyusho 'knowledge' took off was probably out of hand, but in judo, revival techniques are taught, bedfore the striking methods.In some karate styles as well, it is necessary to learn the ehaling part before the hurting part, or at leasat at the samne time.But I would point out, acupuncture and shiatsu, were never secrets, and always available.As for those websites showing where to strike and explaining methods in detail, sometimes they may, and sometimes they may think they do and really don't.

Many things about kyusho juts are made more mysterious than they shoul be, and the real art of this, is about body mechanics and dynamics, as much as where, how and when to strike, poke and press or twist.

Am I glad the knowledge is at least out there that it exists? Well, I could be happier if people realized what the dangers were.But if it had been taught from then beginning in karate, at least the art would never have become almost lost and watered down.Many people studied karate for self defense and when attacked, were beaten, raped or killed.This is a crime, if instructors knew butwithheld the secrets of the art that enable survival.And those things exist and are not all lehthl.Just effective.

Interception, evasion and unbalancing are three of these secrets, not taught by many karate dojo which emphasize jock ethic tournament fighting and say kata is useless.



Anyway, fact is that Sokaku was pretty strict, and branches like the Sagawa dojo and Kodokai are known for being conservative. If Yonezawa Sensei reached any high level of skill in the Kodokai, he would have been well aware of this.


This seems likely to me, too.



BTW, it's my understanding that Yonezawa Sensei "left" the Kodokai in 1992, which does not jive with some of the credential dates listed on the Bokuyokan page, FWIW.


Of this I too know nothing.



And I'm afraid I don't know enough "DR secrets" to confirm or deny whether the information given is real or not. What I write about here is almost all found either on the net or in English language publications. The explanation of what DR aiki is has been repeated with similar wording by Kondo Sensei and Okamoto Sensei.


I bet you know plenty, as Socrates students said when he claimed ignorance.:DBut that's neither here nor there, thank you for the infoirmation indeed.I have read the other explanations, it was not until Mr. Tung's and your posts, that it clicked. Some of us take time, I guess, for things to sink in.But when once we get them, they stay around.



every art try to stop an attacker as quickly as possible? ;)


Essentially, in my art, too, or arts, the instant you engage with an attacker you must control him,or disrupt him, or destroy his capacity to further attck you.I believe DR says the same.The ways in which this is done may differ. One instructor asked me in a sarcastic manner if I could knock him out by striking his arms.I said, Since he was an instructor, probaly not, but that interception, evasion and unbalancing work on anyone on the planet who is no better than you
or aware of the counters.The foundation principles of kyusho jutsu have, you see, been often misunderstood or misrepresented.

The idea that points and directions of strikes alone, are the magic secrets, leaves out the main things, which are body mechanics, self protection, and observation of the opponent's weaknesses.hitting a small point in combat is well nigh imposible without these elements.

In the same way, the little and simple things taught as I understand it, in DR,are what make the techniques really effective.:-)But then, I don't really know for sure.

Thanks Mr Scott for all your helpful information.I would like to study DR at some time if it becomes possible, as I believe it is an art that is good for health and effective even when aged, in self defense.Suchg things are of interest to me.

Take care, and thanks again,

Nathan Scott
19th November 2002, 23:30
Hello,

Thanks for your reply.

In regards to it, and your reply to Cady, I have a few more comments FWIW.

Things are different now for teachers. In the old days, people were taught and ranked very quickly, but there were not as many people defrauding the system and public. This is because teachers were often challenged, both by outsiders as well as their own students. If they were beaten by anyone for any reason, they would lose their credibility as a teacher and lose their students and dojo. Time to become a farmer or continue in your career in a downwardly mobile fashion.

If neighboring ryu-ha learned their methods, they could create reversals against them and beat the school in a challenge (taryu jiai) or battle. Hence the use of keppan and kisshomon to clearly instruct the student that EVERYTHING they were being taught should be considered secret. That's not to say that people didn't split off, but that they didn't last long if they didn't develop themselves pretty quickly.

Teachers these days rarely have to worry about being challenged, and even it they were beaten by a challenger, their dojo would not be closed as a result. Hey, it's only a "hobby" now, right(?).

Some arts maintain the old style way of thinking for a variety of reasons. It is not for outsiders to demand that exponents disrespect that or break such an implied or explicit bond with their teachers.

Everyone who splits off from an art like Daito ryu tends to spill a bit of the art out publicly in hopes of developing a sense of credibility and deep knowledge within the public eye. All they are really doing is damaging the art they teach and respect for a few fleeting moments of glory. A week later everyone else will be repeating their words as if they were their own, and your sacrifice will be forgotten anyway. It's not worth it. If you want credibility, earn it with sweat and humility instead, and produce strong students.

What we do know about Daito ryu is that aiki is a/the defining aspect of the art, and that Daito ryu approaches aiki in a way that is unique. As such, they don't want to give it away to everyone else. It is theirs, and they developed it through hard work. Others can discover it if they were to specialize in the study of aiki and put generations of R&D behind it, but these days people are too lazy to do the work themselves anymore. Daito ryu has no obligation to give away their core proprietary teachings to outsiders just because they want to improve their own art. Kondo Sensei says that he teaches the Ikkajo section of the Hiden because his teacher said it was o.k. to show. The reason is because the Ikkajo techniques being taught openly are "omote waza", and are not designed to work well. Stealing the Ikkajo omote waza will not get you very far if you don't continue to study DR.

As I said before, most Daito ryu dojo that I know of have a very small membership. This is not because they exclude interested members (for the most part), but because those wanting to learn the art are not willing to put forth the effort necessary to be accepted. The whole point is that if you are not willing to expend a little energy and patience to find and get accepted in a DR dojo, then you do not want it bad enough to put forth the energy and patience to learn the art correctly. In that case, save everyone some time and train in something more convenient elsewhere.

Daito ryu is a very popular name. Everyone wants to know about it but nobody wants to make any sacrifices to gain the knowledge. The art is only "secret" to those who are not motivated enough to earn them.

Personally, I believe that DR could be taught rather quickly, in principle at least, if the teachers were willing to spell them out to a student who holds reasonable skills. However, the art seems to be taught slowly in order to establish loyalty and maintain humility in the student. Giving it all away up front may not be in the best interest of the art or the student, and may develop an ego in the student that will cause them to misuse the methods.

While I am curious as hell about the aspects of Classical arts that their exponents are comfortable with spreading, I don't encourage pressuring them to tell us more if they feel it is their obligation to keep it inhouse. On the other hand, I have found that quite a few people have been willing to pass on inside-info about their art if they believe that you will keep it to yourself and use the information responsibly. That is what relationships are for!

Frauds thrive on information and stolen technique shapes. I say "shapes" because what is stolen rarely end up being what the intended technique is really supposed to be, because they either didn't study the art at all or didn't study long enough. Terms like "aiki age", etc. give credibility to fraud groups, since most of the public can't tell what is good or not good. When Aikijujutsu first became popular, a lot of people were muscling people around with hard-aikido techniques and calling it Aikijujutsu! But only a handful of people knew the difference. There are groups out there with very believable sounding web pages that are still being debated as being real or not, and it is not because of their great techniques, but because of the depth of "correct" sounding information they spout out. It would be far better in my mind to demonstrate principles to someone physically without names than to try to explain them to someone. Not many people can steal an advanced movement principle by feeling it one time, and you would still have the benefit of feeling the idea for yourself.

Anyway, not trying to be argumentative, but rather illustrate the other point of view a bit more.

Regards,

Dan Harden
20th November 2002, 00:54
Nathan; showing an occasional burst of verbosity:D
Anyway, not trying to be argumentative, but rather illustrate the other point of view a bit more.

********************************
And even that is a gift. It is more than I would have offered.
Gees Nathan its fun going to those sites and seeing all new the Aiki masters. Your going to ruin it for everyone....

Dan

Nathan Scott
20th November 2002, 01:10
Hi Dan,

Yeah, your right about that. I think Dr. John Williams is still my favorite. Yucks gallore.

But there are some more carefully crafted ones out there that keep coming up as questions here that I'd like to see kept in the dark. It is like Neo-confusionism, or like when a Japanese rings a bell...
Now you've got me thinking about it.

Gotta run. I've got just enough time to get a quick Ron Duncan fix before heading off to the dojo!

Cady Goldfield
20th November 2002, 02:24
Originally posted by Chris Li


According to Sagawa the sums were extremely high, not "modest" - a good portion of his time was spent looking for students for Sokaku, since very few people could afford to pay the fees.

There's nothing wrong with that, of course, it's a free market economy. Still, I think that to say that Takeda had no interest in teaching for money, or that money was not an important factor is inaccurate.

Best,

Chris

Chris, I see Takeda's actions as being more political than income-driven. He was "peeing on trees" -- marking turf. For everyone who was going around (e.g. M. Ueshiba) teaching "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu," Sokaku had to leave his imprimatur on as many people as he could to leave no doubt as to who the master was. Stanley Pranin has a nice passage in his "interviews with Daito-ryu masters" book that illustrates Sokaku's drive to get his stamp on individuals who had been taught by one of his students (such as the Asahi employees whose Daito-ryu he had to "repair" after they had been taught by Ueshiba).

As for the money, in those times a master's disciples were responsible for supporting him, and that was the case with Sokaku. Senior students were responsible for bringing in students, overseeing the fiscal support of the dojo, and making sure Teacher had clothes on his back and food in his belly. Sagawa may have kvetched about it, but I'm sure he had an understanding of the purpose and reason.

Sokaku had to eat, he also had to maintain an iron grip on the reins of an art he refined through his genius. Choosing to whom it would be taught, and at what price, was part of that process.

Chris Li
20th November 2002, 02:57
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield


Chris, I see Takeda's actions as being more political than income-driven. He was "peeing on trees" -- marking turf. For everyone who was going around (e.g. M. Ueshiba) teaching "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu," Sokaku had to leave his imprimatur on as many people as he could to leave no doubt as to who the master was.

Might be true - except that the money stuff appears to have started before people like M. Ueshiba were going around teaching :).


Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
As for the money, in those times a master's disciples were responsible for supporting him, and that was the case with Sokaku. Senior students were responsible for bringing in students, overseeing the fiscal support of the dojo, and making sure Teacher had clothes on his back and food in his belly. Sagawa may have kvetched about it, but I'm sure he had an understanding of the purpose and reason.

Sokaku had to eat, he also had to maintain an iron grip on the reins of an art he refined through his genius. Choosing to whom it would be taught, and at what price, was part of that process.

Sure, as I said - I don't think there's anything wrong with making money off of your skills. That still doesn't mean that the money was unimportant to Takeda. My point was, I guess, that there is a perception today that it is somehow less pure to take money for teaching something like martial arts, but that perception ignores the fact that many famous Japanese martial artists did just that. Sokaku Takeda taught "30,000 students", or so it's said. Most of those only had a brief contact when he passed through town. Why did he teach them if he knew (as he must have) that most of them would never have more than a couple of days of Daito-ryu? If you ask me, it was for the money (nothing wrong with that, of course).

FWIW, Sagawa was of the opinion that Sokaku Takeda's approach prevented him (Takeda) from reaching his full potential because he never took the time to settle down at his own dojo and continue his research.

Best,

Chris

kusanku
20th November 2002, 21:29
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
[B]Hi Dan,

Yeah, your right about that. I think Dr. John Williams is still my favorite. Yucks gallore.

Even I can see he is a fraud.And thanks too, for the further thoughts, Mr. Scott and Mr. Harden.

However, and also not to be argumentative, I will share my actual reason for interest in DR basic principles.

I have been a student of Okinawan karate now for about thirty years. In process I have learned that it is inteertwined with certain arts which may have been Japanese in origin, and may have been arts actually that were integrated into DR later, speicically the Jigen Ryu arts, and may actually teach aiki, and that these arts show how to apply movement principles in certain styles of karate's kata, that may actually be Aiki principles, and are sure as heck more effective and efficient than most basic karate styles teach.

But I can't tell if they are the same as DR because I do not know DR.If they are, we may not be so different. If not, fine.These principles of torite or toide as pronounced in Okinawa, some say tuite and kyushojutsu, and some call it other stuff,tegumi and whatnot, are also claimed by many who do not know what they are talking about, and in fact, some things I posted on the web long ago, have been stolen by 'sokes'and put on their own sites verbatim. I don't care, at least the information is correct.:-)

This stuff is so little known by most karateka that I have even been accused of making it upo myself. I wish I was such a martial genius as to be able to have done this, but I'm not.Alas.

My interest then, is mainly to check or cross check the principles of several arts against what I was handed after twenty years practice, hard practice, and study.I have been able to do this with aikido, taijiquan, chin na, jujitsu, and other arts, but not with DR. Perhaps I never shall be able so to do. If so, fine.

But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually poractice the art, will not even post the besic foundation principles of the art.Its almost like, what's the point?If you catch my drift.

I do appreciate the other point of view.I come from a time, thirty and more years ago, when challenges between styles still happened.

As far as students developing egos, don't I know it.But I find that usually, those who do, don't learn well, though exceptions exist.

Anyway, just some thoughts, and one more. In this day and age, thinking in terms of insiders vs outsiders, is maybe no longer valid, and this may not cause good resulkts as it once may have.Again, just an opinion.But I have no demands on DR exponents, and those I may have met have usually been forthcoming, with me at least, most people are, guess they think I am a good guy.I try to be, I think that's the most important lesson any martial artist can learn.

>aybe that's enough. I still will read the forum and try to learn the basic principles of dr to see if my suspicions about the Okinawan connection may be correct.I would like to know one way or another.

The body mechanics taught to some at very advanced levels of karate, have similarities with both Taiji and Yoshinkan Aikido, I do know that, and I don't know why.

They are not those arts, but that is as close as I can come to describing what makes them effective in terms many may understand.

Regards to all,
Dawse outsider:-)

Dan Harden
20th November 2002, 23:40
But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually poractice the art, will not even post the besic foundation principles of the art.Its almost like, what's the point?If you catch my drift.

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

John
So whats wrong with that?
Now you know why I pegged this Aikijutsu section "The forum that isn't" on its opening weeks. I said than not much will be said of the art itself and never has.
No one is trying to be cute, coy, or dissengenous. Almost no one in the art will talk about it in any depth at all. I happen to like that. If you want an opinion- the levels above jujutsu are so damn hard to do that there is nothing that anyone cares to talk about.
You just do it.


Dan

Cady Goldfield
20th November 2002, 23:55
the levels above jujutsu are so damn hard to do that there is nothing that anyone cares to talk about. You just do it.

Even if there were something that anyone cared to talk about, explaining things in words to people who are not practicing the art is of little or no worth, as there is no common point of reference. Both sides would just end up frustrated. Which happens enough in Internet forums as is.

Arman
21st November 2002, 18:23
But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually poractice the art, will not even post the besic foundation principles of the art.

Kondo Sensei is pretty open about this. Read his interview in DR Masters, and read his introduction and his 6 Basic Prinicples in Hiden Mokuroku: Ikkajo.

It seems to me what you really mean to say is why don't practioners of the art just tell you how to do it! Two reasons: 1) You can't "tell" anyone how to do it. You have to train, you have to feel it, and then you have to intuitively grasp it. This is true of even modern sport arts. Someone can easily tell me how to do osoto gari, but I won't be able to really do it without training with someone who does know how to do it (at least I won't be able to do it very well). That is what is meant by transmission - it is a supra-rational process, a combined function of mind, intuition and body. And number 2) Who the hell would want to just tell some outsider how to do a particular technique? For what purpose? We can talk principles all you want, but to actually try and explain the physical movements of a kata to a non-practioner seems silly to me. You won't be able to get it that way, first of all, and why would I even attempt to give away what I spent years learning to someone who isn't a member of the ryu? How do I know what you would do with the information? How do I know I could trust you? How do I know that the information given won't be used by the local faux-DR McDojo down the street?

A ryu is defined by its martial information. When that information is diluted or lost, or tinkered with by non-members, the ryu itself is threatened because the very essence of what makes it a definable ryu is being emptied, like water down the drain. Pretty soon, all you'll have left is an empy pitcher.

Regards,

Arman Partamian
Daito ryu Study Group
Maryland

Brently Keen
21st November 2002, 20:00
"But I can't tell if they are the same as DR because I do not know DR. If they are, we may not be so different. If not, fine.These principles of torite or toide as pronounced in Okinawa, some say tuite and kyushojutsu, and some call it other stuff, tegumi and whatnot, are also claimed by many who do not know what they are talking about, and in fact, some things I posted on the web long ago, have been stolen by 'sokes'and put on their own sites verbatim. I don't care, at least the information is correct."

I think the point is (as some one else already pointed out) if you want to "know" Daito-ryu go to an authentic Daito-ryu dojo and get started training.

In my attempts to promote Daito-ryu and share some of what I've learned about the art, I have been as guilty as almost anyone in Daito-ryu for talking rather openly about the art and it's characteristics on the net. And I also have been plagiarized extensively by soke's including some favorites around here.

However, I still have a problem and must care to some extent when even "correct" information is repeated by these sokes and their followers - even correct information first of all gets misunderstood and misinterpreted by people who have no common frame of reference as Cady said. Secondly it gets mixed with incorrect information, and then that incorrect information gets further propagated (in schools, seminars, and on the web), and is gradually accepted or believed by virtue of it's repetition, prominence or association with accurate information or a big name person. In a sense, the correct information validates the incorrect by association. An extension of that is when the correct information starts being dispersed by counterfeit sources and self proclaimed authorities, it lends some validation to the other false claims of those same aikijujutsu charlatans all around the globe.

Generally those in the know can spot a faker miles away - but those not in the know sometimes get taken in. We can dispense more so that people won't get taken so easily - but then some of these charlatans are just eating it all up so they can sound even more legit - it's a vicious circle if the pattern continues to repeat so at some point a line has to be drawn. So that distinctions can be preserved.

I think Cady said that it's like casting your pearls before swine.

Daito-ryu has some pretty unique and amazing things, and it's enjoying a growing popularity nowadays due in part to the popularity of aikido, and people like Stanley Pranin, but also due to the efforts of some generous Daito-ryu teachers to be more open and dispense with some of the secrecy of the past. Now it seems everyone else wants to validate what they've been doing by saying, "hey, we've got that too!", but if what you've got is already good why is there so much need to also have what we've got?

Elitism plays a part - I suppose, but sometimes I'm amused by all the tai chi, judo, jujutsu, aikido, karate, practitioners etc... that also claim to have "aiki". What's funny is that among some of the higher level practitioners of those arts who have come and trained in Daito-ryu they mostly all say that Daito-ryu aiki is very different.

I'm not opposed to being open and sharing secrets, if my sensei wasn't open, I'd have never had the opportunity to discover Daito-ryu. But, nothing anywhere says or compells me to give away all our distinctive characterisitics, definitions, and principles, freely on the internet to strangers I may may not ever meet. Now I generally don't refuse anyone who comes to visit - I think that's being open - I'm happy to show and explain some things that they maybe haven't seen/heard before, but I couldn't (and wouldn't) give it all away to someone who was only coming to see me once or even for a short visit. But if someone wanted to learn and was committed to training on a regular basis - as long as they are sincere and respectable individuals - I'm willing to share everything I know - it might take awhile, but I'm not going to intentionally hold back information and keep secrets and/or mislead them (unless at some point it became apparent that they were being deceitful or dishonest at which point they'd be asked to shape up or ship out) and I think that's more or less what my teacher has done, and I wouldn't want to change that.

Just because some of us have learned principles, definitions, and explanations of aiki and can teach them does not mean everyone else is entitled to a piece of that hard earned treasure without going through a similar process. It's enough (imo) that Daito-ryu doors are generously opening now and people are welcome at least to come and not only see what we do, but also join in the training and begin the learning process - but you still have to come, we're under no obligation to go wherever some interested people may be, and then proceed to give away our pearls below cost. It seems that whenever that kind of generosity is given, the receivers often take that grace and tarnish it with their own egos and sense of self-merit and importance, and the result is not at all unlike the pearls and swine analogy.

"The body mechanics taught to some at very advanced levels of karate, have similarities with both Taiji and Yoshinkan Aikido, I do know that, and I don't know why."

Probably because each are including some internal elements that projecting chi/ki into their techniques and opponents, and of course because all human bodies despite our wonderful differences have similar mechanics to start with. Naturally Daito-ryu practitioners share the same body mechanics - we do not however always share the same techniques, principles, and strategies for moving and manipulating those mechanics - instead we favor the application of aiki (and it works rather well I might add). ;)

"But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually practice the art, will not even post the basic foundation principles of the art. Its almost like, what's the point? If you catch my drift."

Throughout the history of this and other BB's on the net I have frequently posted about the foundational principles, characterisitics, and basic distinctions of Daito-ryu aiki and despite the sometimes honest inquiries and sincere appreciation expressed by some, I have received mostly nothing but opposition, grief, ridicule, and occasionally vicious attacks for doing so. So the point is that some DR practitioners like myself see no reason to repeat what's already been said before ad nauseum much less go any further with additional explanations and clarifications. So we stopped going into the details in public and/or took our discussions off-line. Why throw away even more pearls? What's the point?

We've all insisted from the beginning and ever since that all this stuff is best explained in person where a demonstration is worth more than ten-thousand words on a screen. In some cases dojo doors were opened, invitations were made and seminars were given. The relatively small number of people who have actually been serious enough to take up such opportunities proves our points.

These boards are good for socializing and discussing our common interests, in this case Nihon Budo & Bujutsu in general and aikijujutsu in particular. We can inquire about history and theorize and speculate, share experiences, jokes and ideas, shoot the breeze and whatnot, but if you want to know Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, the boards just aren't capable of accomplishing that beyond perhaps pointing you in a direction you can go for additional information and an introduction.

Respectfully.

Brently Keen

kusanku
21st November 2002, 20:49
Originally posted by Dan Harden
But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually poractice the art, will not even post the besic foundation principles of the art.Its almost like, what's the point?If you catch my drift.

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

John
So whats wrong with that?
Now you know why I pegged this Aikijutsu section "The forum that isn't" on its opening weeks. I said than not much will be said of the art itself and never has.
No one is trying to be cute, coy, or dissengenous. Almost no one in the art will talk about it in any depth at all. I happen to like that. If you want an opinion- the levels above jujutsu are so damn hard to do that there is nothing that anyone cares to talk about.
You just do it.


Dan

Dan-
actually, nothing is wrong with that at all.You pegged it right.And since yesterday, some information and insight from sources not connected to e-budo has reached me, synchronicity anyone? That helps greatly to explain why, too.

It seems that Daito Ryu is based on some principles that are not entirely physically rooted at all.No wonder they are kept secret.You can't really talk about them. Far from being merely just a feudal attitude, I think what you said, Dan, is actually about all that really can be said.Not that I claim to know anything here, in DR, just that I had no idea of the depth of what is really going on.

It is a lot different than other arts, a lot different.

What I was looking for was the physical principles at base of the art. But when physical principles are not the base principles at all, or I should say, not all or even most of them, other than of course the jujutsu, that changes everything.

I had no idea.Now I can't explain, either.Son of a gun.

Some may think this post a troll, or a statement of new knowledge allowing me entry into the Daito Ryu club. No such thing. Something happened between yesterday and today that absolutely changed my perspective on DR, is all.Its as if you are fishing in a stream and suddenly find that the stream you are fishhing in, is the Ocean.

It just changes your whole perspective. You may not understand any more about the ocean, only that it is the ocean.The strteam, or ryu, of Daito, which I had been attempting to examine for common physical principles to certain other arts, is not a stream at all.It is, that is, but the stream is like a current in the ocean, and trying to understand it classified on streams you have known, surrounded by known embankments, simply will not work.

It was a paradigm shift based on information received that put into place the understanding that I have been approaching the whole thing from a too limited perspective.And the heck of it is, that was right in front of me all along.

Only thing I can say is, no wonder the art is so effective.It cannot, looked at from a universal perspective, be anything other than that.

No wonder too, that the principles at core of the art, are 'secret.'So too is nature, until one studies,. experiecnes, and learns to live in harmony with it.

I had no idea.Wow.

Cady Goldfield
21st November 2002, 21:02
But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually poractice the art, will not even post the besic foundation principles of the art.

I don't recall seeing many (if any) discussions of physical priinciples on any of the other forums of this board. How many times to you see judoka discussing judo principles? Or aikidoka discussing aikido principles? Or kenjutsu or iaido folks talking about sword principles?

Like the other forums, the Daito-ryu one is a place to schmooze about stuff that is peripheral to the art's actual principles.

If you really wanted to push the envelope here, you could ask why there's an E-Budo (or other martial arts sites) at all, when we should all just shut up and train, and maybe occasionally oss back a few while chatting with our real-life training companions after class. ;)

kusanku
21st November 2002, 21:06
And I would particularly also like to thank Nathan Scott, Brently Keen, Dan Harden, Cady Goldifield and Arman Partamian for their kind and enlightening responses on here, and that last by Brently was very well appreciated, thanks Brently.

Since what I ran into yesterday has changed my perspective such that it is now musch easier to comprehend what you are all saying.

Brently, I would like to answer one question you asked, about if what I have is so good, why do I need what you have?

Well, physically, I don't.What I do works really well for me, and I too have done seminars, and so forth, and shared as you have things on the net.That can be shared, of a generic nature, and just so people wouldn't get wrong ideas.I have also, as we know, had similar experiences to you as a result.

Call it curiosity, and I do see that the only way to satisfy that would be to join a dojo.

Since what I found out yesterday, I see that even that might not be enough.And I see why not everyone gets it.And because I don't want charlatans and frauds and fakers to increase, I won't say why, either.:-)

Inthe case of the arts I do, it is really hard for someone to fake them, as the principles are pased on through kata, and if a person is not good at the kata, they won't be good at the applications.Sure, they can talk a good fight, but they can't make it happen.

In the case of DR,it would also be simple enough to talk things up, and some apparently have.As you say, someone real will spot a phony miles away. This is true as well in Judo, karate, what have you.What is so different about DR, is a level that other arts , at least most if not all I ever heard of, do not have at all.If you call this aiki, and others call what they have aiki, its a case of words being the same but reality, not.

Its seems the truth upon which DR is based,is not to be found in the manner a person would normally try to investigate a martial art, at all.

That oughta drive the phonies crazy.

Respectfully and regards to all,
thanks you for helping me thorugh this,

kusanku
21st November 2002, 21:16
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
[B]But I find it strange, that this one art, here on e-budo, actually has an open forum, which the participants who actually poractice the art, will not even post the besic foundation principles of the art.

I don't recall seeing many (if any) discussions of physical priinciples on any of the other forums of this board. How many times to you see judoka discussing judo principles? Or aikidoka discussing aikido principles? Or kenjutsu or iaido folks talking about sword principles?

Actually, I have put some on the Okinawan forums, and the judo guys too do this sometimes, and the karate forums once in a great while, but mostly, not, its true.

And when it is done, except on the Ryukyuan and Judo forums, usually the attacks rain hard and heavy.:D



Like the other forums, the Daito-ryu one is a place to schmooze about stuff that is peripheral to the art's actual principles.

Sounds good to me. Somethign happened between yesterday and today, which gave me a whole different insight into this whole situation, such that I am now in total agreement that people shouldn't even try to talk about some this stuff. As to giving it away, not sure you can in print, in fact, pretty sure you can't.

How can you give away the sensation of a day in spring in print? Poetry maybe, but then, you still have to understand that.Never haviong experienced a spring day, someone could not.Same with DR, I now understand. And, no, I do Not understand DR itself, any better than I did yesterday. Only that it is not what I had thought, at all.


If you really wanted to push the envelope here, you could ask why there's an E-Budo (or other martial arts sites) at all, when we should all just shut up and train, and maybe occasionally oss back a few while chatting with our real-life training companions after class. ;)

Because we humans are social animals, as well as thinking and thus curious ones, I guess?And besides, once in a while a pearl of knowledge will drop on one of these forums, and some can recognize them better than others.

Let me put it this way: A Shrine, on a misty mountain top-
inside, darkness.
A shugyosha within, silent, contemplating;nothing results.
Tired, he retires to sleep,. and in his dream, suddenly, light.

Its kind of like that.A seeker first of all needs to know not just where, and what, but how, to seek.

When that is there, its all there.He may know nothing more about the object of his quest(she may too, to be equal about this:-), but now he has found out how to walk the path in that quest.

And that makes all the difference.

Thanks.

Brently Keen
22nd November 2002, 03:30
John,

I'm glad to have been of any assistance, and that you've found something in my post(s), and the others you mentioned worthwhile.

It's rare that someone gets a sudden insight that completely changes their perspective literally overnight. In my experience insights often come in flashes, but changing one's underlying attitudes and beliefs usually involves a process of sorts.

Sometimes discovering a missing piece to the puzzle is all it takes though to make some sense of things that are typically more obscure. Your realization appears to jive with what I've been saying for years though, and that is that aiki is fundamentally different.

Brently Keen

kusanku
24th November 2002, 00:13
Yes. Brently, check your PM, I have sent you details.

What I will say on here-it was a couple of things taken together, and the threads here where we were discussing, that came together to form what I will say was a minor insight with, for me , major effects.

Yes, Daito Ryu is, with certain other arts, fundamentally different, as I currently understand or view things.

There is a reason why, and its a good one, a simp,e one and a profound one.

What is the source of certain traditional martial arts, that seem to be beyond the ordinary, and that is an extraoridnary source, perhaps accessed through need, perhaps through serendipity, perhaps through other means?

Some scientific insights, also have been gotten this way, certainly martial ones that can aid survival of many, have also come this way, and histories tell us they have.

Perhaps, what it boils down to, is that when you approach something extraordinary like this in a mundane way, you just won't get it.But if you approach it in the way it should be approached, that is a different thing.

If you treat the ocean as a strem, death will be sudden, overwhelming and instantaneous.

If you treat the stream like an ocean, disappointment will result.

If you treat the Ocean as the Ocean, then you may live, and sail on it, and dive in it, and find some pearls, and come out safe.

The thing is to know which is which and to treat each one as it needs and deserves to be treated.

John

Tom Douglas
24th November 2002, 17:36
Originally posted by kusanku
Yes. Brently, check your PM, I have sent you details.

What I will say on here-it was a couple of things taken together, and the threads here where we were discussing, that came together to form what I will say was a minor insight with, for me , major effects.

Yes, Daito Ryu is, with certain other arts, fundamentally different, as I currently understand or view things.

There is a reason why, and its a good one, a simp,e one and a profound one.



LMAO . . . Then you somehow forget to post the good, simple and profound reason why.

Mr. Vengel, your cryptic allusion to the serendipitous flash of insight you experienced is as frustrating, useless . . . and perhaps pretentious? . . . as so much of the aikijujutsu mutterings on this page.

The cycle repeats itself.

kusanku
24th November 2002, 19:51
Originally posted by Tom Douglas
[B]

LMAO . . . Then you somehow forget to post the good, simple and profound reason why.

Oh, I didn't foget. I deliberately didn't post the reason why Daito Ryu, and a handful of other arts not necessarily similar to it in any other way, are fundamentally different than most martial arts as currently known, studied and practiced.


Mr. Vengel, your cryptic allusion to the serendipitous flash of insight you experienced is as frustrating,

No doubt.It is meant to be.If it were not, no one would wonder and seek it out for themselves.Some things can not be spoon fed, nor should they be.


useless . . .

No, Sir. I have a couple times asked on here, a question, the answer to which is by no means impossible to find, and which would lead anyone to the same minor insight, that evokes a paradigm shift in how one views DR AJJ.The usefulness of a question is that you must find your own answer.If I just told, then you would have another opinion, and could say whatever you wished in response, and off we go again.\

The question, since you seem to have missed it, is how were some traditional arts derived,seemingly overnight but after years of training, by certain warriors who needed, really needed, to have some means of protecting their lives and those of their clans and proivinces, that would give them an advantage over other similar warriors?

The answer I leave to you, commenting only that most modern people, when they hear the stories of this, say its all smoke,and I do not think that it is, after what in fact occured to me.After thirty-eight years practice of various arts.Yeah, overnight.


and perhaps pretentious?

How so? I don't know DR, I don't claim to know DR, and all I do sayis that some things happened that, taken together, provided me an insight, minor enough, that changed my outlook on what it is and is not.And my whole approach to it.Pretentious it is not.If I spell it out I will be attacked by those who scoff, like you.Who needs it?

Think of the above question about how were certain traditional arts founded, as a koan of sorts.Find your own answer, though there is a definite one I am thinking of. If anyone is insufficiently versed in the open histories of some Japanese koryu not to know these stories, then you don't need to wonder.


. . . as so much of the aikijujutsu mutterings on this page.

Depends who is doing the muttering. Some of the people on this forum, have spent time in Japan with Daito Ryu teachers in dojo, and know whereof they speak. Others may only wish to impart that knowledge.

Me, I am an old Judo and Karate hand,done a little, very little,Aikido, and something called Aiki Budo, and have never done any Daito Ryu, but do admire what I have read and heard of the art, including from a Yoshinkan Godan who did study Daito Ryu, I believe at the Daito Kan, in Japan for a while.Or maybe it was the Kodokai.


The cycle repeats itself.

Life is a circle. What is the difference between the ocean and a stream ?Answer that question, and you are there.

In other words, what is the source of the remarkable power of Daito Ryu Aikijiujitsu? Whence the stream from which it flows, and what is the source of that stream?

Mutterings?Like those of a stream, perhaps, or the far off roar of the ocean in full fury?

More going on than meets the eye here.

Nathan Scott
29th July 2003, 03:15
I've just pasted a previous discussion about this subject in front of this post, and would like to continue the discussion in this dedicated thread.

The subject of whether it is necessary or appropriate to publisize/sell the "inner secrets" of aiki arts has been a subject of friction on the net. Some say that the reasons for keeping the arts secret are obsolete, and/or, that you can't figure it out without a qualified instructor and hard practice anyways. So why bother? Others follow the conservative mentallity and are very opposed to revealing the inner workings of the art to even those not initiated to the appropriate level of the art, let alone those that are not members. Both have valid points - who is right?

If one were to look at the attitude of previous key instructors, it is quite apparent that they were very strict about protecting the inner aspects of the art.

It is known that the lineages that currently comprise Daito-ryu, for example, were taught only to the upper-warrior class in Aizu. Even during Takeda Sokaku's lifetime, he taught almost exclusively to police, military and those of samurai lineage, even though he was advised by Saigo to teach the arts publicly. Sokaku was understood as a non-public person, who was not interested in interviews, demonstrations, filming, books, or photography of his methods.

A well known quote from Takeda Sokaku himself in the artcle "Ima Bokuden" includes the following:


"...However, [Daito-ryu] is taught only to respectable people. Its misuse would be frightening. It seems that in Tokyo now there are various people teaching, but teaching others is something that cannot be taken lightly."

In Kondo Katsuyuki Sensei's "Ikkajo" book, he states:


"Regarding the aforementioned 'secretiveness' inherent in Daito-ryu, it is said that Sokaku Takeda (the 'interim restorer' of Daito-ryu) never taught the same technique twice."

"He later explained by saying, 'if you teach people the true techniques and the next day they leave the school, then all of the secret and oral teachings of Daito-ryu will flow outside the school and be known to the general public.' He also said, 'out of a thousand pupils, teach the true techniques only to one or two. Make absolutely sure of those you choose, and to them alone teach what is real. There is no need to teach the rest'."

"Further, given the traditionally closed, secretive nature of Daito-ryu, I worried to what degree it would be appropriate for me to disclose the oral and inner teachings of the art with which I have been entrusted to those outside the school."

"On the other hand, given the growing proliferation of technical manuals, videos and the like, not to mention the unprecedented availability of all kinds of information made possible today by the internet - much of it incorrect and of dubious origin, I might add - I decided that it would be in the best interest of Daito-ryu to publish a written and pictrorial record of the most fundmental points of at least the first portion of the school's technical curriculum, so that these do not become lost to posterity"

From the AJ article "Sokaku Takeda in Osaka", translated from Daitokan Newsletter #39 ,published by Tokimune Takeda:


Sokaku prohibited Daito-ryu from being transmitted to the general public and taught it secretly as a police tactics method and self-defense techniques for prominent people. Consequently, Sokaku would turn away reporters, commenting that the art was "not a show".

From the DVD "Kondo Katsuyuki - Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu":


"It's also often said that [Sokaku] would not teach the same technique twice, for fear that if he showed things too clearly, people would figure out his techniques too easily..."

"[Sokaku] would allow his students to steal his techniques, but he would never just give them away."

"In many ways Tokimune also continued many of the teaching methods used by his father. This included teaching many techniques in a way that would not reveal their true essence. His view is a fair proportion of students would eventually leave the dojo and stop training in Daito-ryu for whatever reasons. This he felt would cause th Daito-ryu tradition to flow away and become dilluted. For that reason, he often avoided teaching the essence of things so that Daito-ryu would remain as intact as possible."

Students of Daito-ryu are best qualified to keep their methods from being lost. Since the time of this publication, however, open seminars are now being taught to non-members by Kondo Sensei, as well as a bi-lingual DVD released, and news of publication of the Nikajo section has also been announced.

From "Conversations with Daito-ryu Masters":


Pg. 55, Takeda Tokimune - "[Sokaku] never allowed Daito-ryu to be taught to people who were not his students."

Pg. 95, Mrs. Horikawa (re: Horikawa Kodo) - "When Inoue Sensei first began learning [ca. 1963], I believe that the training was quite strict. Showing practice to outsiders was something that Horikawa began to do only just before his death. This was because of Sokaku Takeda Sensei's admonition never to show techniques to outsiders."

Pg. 147, Sato Keisuke - "...I think Sokaku's techniques are truly wonderful and I would like to preserve them for posterity by taking photographs. But I'm afraid that Sokaku will not permit himself to be photographed since he doesn't even allow people to observe his teaching..."

Pg. 148, Sato Keisuke - "Sokaku Sensei used to confirm that no one was observing before he would begin teaching. He was extremely severe in this regard. He absolutely would not show people his techniques."

Pg. 151, Sato Keisuke - "After one session, Sokaku remarked, 'Once you get the knack of a technique you'll be able to execute it rather easily. That's why I don't like to be observed by others when I'm doing techniques."

From the book "A Life in Aikido", pp.299-301:


Up until this moment, demonstrations and lectures about aikido were given by O Sensei alone, and exclusively in the setting of existing dojos. The only exceptions were the official Budo enbu (public demonstrations of various arts) in which O Sensei had participated as a guest. [Ueshiba Morihei] detested the idea of demonstrating for the general public. True budo involved struggle, and invoked the stakes of life and death, so he felt that its inner secrets should be transmitted only to sincere seekers. He believed that to show the secrets freely to outsiders would be immoral, a kind of devaluation or disrespect for the art.

From the book "Discovering Aiki - My 20 Years with Yukiyoshi Sagawa Sensei":


Pg. 44 - "It was difficult to publish a book about Sagawa Sensei because, in addition to his fierce temper, Sensei always said that his aiki was for real fighting and nothing else. For this kind of all out fight where you risk your life, it is natural that there are many secrets. For this reason, Sensei had a tendency not to appear in public."

Sokaku's position is pretty clear from the above writings. It would seem as though Takeda Tokimune Sensei was also fairly conservative, as was Sagawa Yukiyoshi and Horikawa Kodo Sensei. Though the Takumakai has published some of their methods, most of them have been published privately within their own group, and they do seem to be concerned with maintaining control of the content of their art.

From the book "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu", by Okamoto Seigo:


Pg. 7 - "A leading martial arts expert, in his book, once described Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu as an 'intangible cultural treasure'. Mr. Kazuto Ishida, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Japan said, 'These techniques should remain a cultural secret of Japan". He was also a good supporter of Kodo Horikawa Sensei, my master of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. However, against Ishida's opinion, I was obliged to popularize Daito-ryu all over the world because a lot of passionate Daito-ryu lovers are coming all the way to Japan from foreign countries. As a result, I decided to write this book in order to introduce the whole picture of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu."

Pg. 206 - "I can say that 'aiki' is something that can't be explained with pictures or words; it can hardly be understood even in video. Also, I had to omit some techniques due to lack of space and because my students required them secret."

"Unfortunately, as Daito-ryu spreads, and the number of students increases, practice under collective leadership will be inevitable. I'm afraid that, under this situation, I will not be able to point out the characteristics and faults of each student and guidance will become superficial. I have heard that Sokaku Takeda taught either privately, or to less than ten students at a time. I think that was reasonable. The problem with superficial practice is, students tend to be under the mistaken impression that they have mastered Daito-ryu. I am concerned when people, who do not have sufficient technique, comment on Daito-ryu ... Personally, I feel that the world of Daito-ryu is deep and spread infinitely, and I think this is the real difficulty of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu."

The Roppokai, led by ex-Kodokai Shihan Okamoto Seigo Sensei, is known for being very public with their teachings. But even within this group there seems to be a limit as to how much of the inner-methods Okamoto Sensei is willing to put out to non-members. Okamoto Sensei himself states a point of view in his book quoted above that appears to contradict the very publishing of it to the public.

Yonezawa Katsumi, ex-Kodokai Shihan, wrote some interesting things in his AikiNews article "Recalling Kodo Horikawa Sensei":


"[Horikawa's] technique was so brilliant that I was tempted to imitate it immediately. I can understand the reason why Sokaku Sensei himself said the following: 'I never show the techniques in the presense of others, since they are very easy to learn'." (From an interview with Takeda Sensei in 1931).

[snip]

"However, I am deeply convinced that Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu is not an art which has been transmitted through any writings or technical books but through repeated study of its techniques and history in a trust built between teacher and student."

So in conclusion, the only orthodox DR teachers to ever knowlingly publish books or videos/film of their methods are the mainline under Kondo Sensei, the Roppokai under Okamoto Sensei, and to a lesser degree, the Takumakai (referring to the Aiki News technical sections and Nippon Budokan Kobudo documentary). To the best of my knowledge, Sokaku, Tokimune, Sagawa, Horikawa, and most other orthodox teachers didn't publish their methods.

Even Ueshiba Sensei was initially opposed to demonstrating publicly, and was said to change his methods when demonstrating or being filmed. The two books he wrote were both intended to be privately published to a limited number of select individuals, and in "Budo" he is vague about his "aiki" techniques, saying that such methods must be imparted orally. He also does not seem to have taught much of the DR inner-methodology to his students (if known), even though he changed the name of his art and taught independently later in his life.

In regards to the Yanagi-ryu as currently taught by Don Angier, this was said to be a family art passed down only within the Yoshida family. Yoshida Kotaro's son Yoshida Kenji is said to have taught Don Angier the methods because he did not have a son of his own, and didn't want the methods to be lost. Don Angier, assuming the position of Soke of the art, has since conducted open seminars to non-members for many years, and produced a number of video tapes and demonstrations detailing the various aspects of the art.

So assuming that we are talking about arts that are derived from Takeda Sokaku, we can find a very clear pattern of resistance to publicity until the current generation, and even then, most of these branches/arts appear to prefer conservativeness over publicity.

I think most e-budo-ka know that I am against what I consider the "exploitation" of the inner-workings of arts like Daito-ryu (or other respected arts) publicly. I consider it to be very damaging to the ryu-ha ecosystem, and fear that the homogonization of martial arts in general will lead to a big Cluster-F in the intended context and operating systems of the various arts, and cause the traditions of such ryu-ha to be changed to the point of becoming something else (at the expense of killing the original "flow" [ryu]). Once this happens, people will get bored and move on to another style, demand to be informed of their inner methods, and destroy that art. The only recourse will be to create new arts with cool sounding Japanese names and fabricated lineages. ;)

So I'd like to ask, what do you think, and what are your reasons? If you are for making the teachings public, what do you think is going to be the benefit (outside of 5 minutes of fame, money, or, pereceived knowledge/legitimacy)? I don't want to bicker about this, and do not expect all to see eye-to-eye on the subject, but would be interested in reading the points of views of others.

Regards,

Walker
29th July 2003, 07:51
I don’t think it’s a big deal either way.

The secretive ones may find they have fewer and fewer prospects until no one cares and the open ones might watch as the great muddle of humanity smothers the art and breed mutant children. In the end a few will most likely get somewhere with the material and the art lives either way. Or we end up with a withered old man who has been forgotten or a new dance craze out of Ol’ Nippon.

I think we can find examples at every point on this curve from cautionary tales of inbred moribund freaks to spectacular hidden genius and from thriving popular arts with many skilled proponents to empty rituals repeated mindlessly.

What’s going to happen will happen and a few will carry their arts to the next generation.

Speaking of which, how can someone who taught thousands even really be called secretive. And given thousands how many got anywhere with the material and carried on when he was gone?

Eric Joyce
29th July 2003, 18:43
Nathan,

I somewhat agree with what you said. I do believe there should be a certain level of tradition within the art (etiquette, kata, etc.) However, if someone wants to show the public some of the techniques..hey great…more power to them. That’s their perogative. As far as secret techniques, I wouldn’t be to overly concerned with that. I recently re-read an article by Sensei Yukiyoshi Takamura that made sense to me. He said:

“Any martial art is really a set of concepts and ideas. Physical techniques are important but not the defining elements of a style. I have heard some people say that this is not true, that they have secret techniques. So what! I bet another style has techniques that are similar to their "secret techniques." I would guess that what they actually have is more correctly described a secret concepts. All jujutsu traditions do similar joint locks because the joints in all human beings operate in the same way. There really are no new joint locks. It's how they perform the locks that differentiate the styles. The concepts used in the application of the locks are what are important. These aspects are what make one tradition different from another. They are often the okuden.”


So I am guessing here that what Sensei Takamura is saying is it isn’t so much the technique, but rather the cocepts that are more so the secret. If that is the case, it takes many, many years to understand these concepts (something that one will not be able to pick up so easily in a DVD or book. Point being is, I don’t think there is anything to worry about regarding this. Just one guys opinion.

Nathan Scott
29th July 2003, 22:08
Doug,

I think I understand your points. It could be that things will work themselves out anyway, like they have for generations before, but on the other hand, maybe they work themselves out because in each generation there are those that are interested in seeing the arts preserved in tact. If nobody took any efforts each generation, would they still be preserved? Hard to say for sure, but a bit risky to ignore. Also, while every generation surely had their own unique problems to deal with, we've never had a global free-information situation like we have in this generation, and this presents a unique situation that should be addressed.


Speaking of which, how can someone who taught thousands even really be called secretive. And given thousands how many got anywhere with the material and carried on when he was gone?

On the other hand, Daito ryu is known to have had a tradition of focusing on military, police and "politically/socially important" people. Also, one theory is that Sokaku's enrollment books are more of a record of important people he had met than an actual student roll. 30,000 is a lot of students. In any case, Sokaku was clearly selective as to who attended his seminars, often kicking a few bad eggs out before beginning. If you read some of what I quoted in my opening post, it is also clear that Sokaku was selective as to which students he would pass on the real teachings to. In other words, he was still conservative in his teachings

Sokaku had the opportunity to produce books, films, and photo manuals, and was against this to the point of being paranoid. He recorded a great number of people as students, but insisted on person-to-person transmission of the art, and then only to those he felt were of good character. Only a handful of students "got it" because that is all that he wanted to "get it" (though the rest may have gotten some use out of the jujutsu methods taught).


However, if someone wants to show the public some of the techniques..hey great more power to them. That?s their perogative.

It would be more appropriate to say that a person should have the blessing of their teacher to do so, or, a sufficient level of initiation to make such a decision. Those on the net that I notice being pretty open have teachers that are also pretty open, which explains why they don't see a problem with it.

And for the record, we're not necessarily talking about "secrets" or particular techniques. I used the term inner-methods a lot in my opening post for a reason. Some teachers are very open with their omote teachings, but do not want their ura teachings to go outside their student base. It's not that the ura stuff is necissarily "secret", but rather, intended for members only. What Takamura Sensei said was correct. We are not talking about secret techniques, and there likely are other arts with similar techniques and methods. But we are talking about individual traditions, that have a certain culture and way of thinking about them. It is irrelevant whether the teachings are the same as other schools. What is relevant is that many of these schools do not want their methods to become public knowledge.

I used Daito ryu as an example of this because it is an art that I'm familiar with, that has a documented history of being conservative (until this generation).

Regards,

Eric Joyce
29th July 2003, 22:30
Nathan,

I see what your saying now. I think when I posted my comments I was looking at it from the perspective of techniques rather than tradition. From a tradition perspective, I believe I said this in another thread, but I would probably be more in line with you in upholding tradition and keeping techniques out of the public eye. I apologize for my misunderstanding.

Walker
29th July 2003, 22:34
Nathan,

Sokaku had the opportunity to produce books, films, and photo manuals, and was against this to the point of being paranoid. These can be dangerous in and of themselves for their tendency to freeze technique. If Ueshiba demonstrated different technique for the cameras, isn’t that just as dangerous as exhibiting correct technique? That can be just as bad as the loss of technique because it is not recorded. Falling into the wrong hands vs. corrupting the right hands.

It is very difficult to envision the correct course between too much openness and secrecy.

I think mostly we agree, but I don’t think there is much that can be done to control events beyond each of us doing our best to carry and develop our tradition. Hopefully conversations like this will encourage others to act ethically and examine their practices.

Nathan Scott
29th July 2003, 22:58
Eric, no worries. Thanks for playing.

Doug,


These can be dangerous in and of themselves for their tendency to freeze technique. If Ueshiba demonstrated different technique for the cameras, isn?t that just as dangerous as exhibiting correct technique? That can be just as bad as the loss of technique because it is not recorded. Falling into the wrong hands vs. corrupting the right hands.

Granted, but those that are students should understand the difference. Those that aren't students who would look at such publications may be curious enough to look into the art more, and receive direct instruction. From my experience, the koryu attitude seems to maintain that the less the general public understands of the methods they think they see the better. They don't need to understand. Books like Budo and Budo Renshu are both valuable books, because they were both made from training sessions, or for a technical supplement to existing students. Not for the general public. The techniques found there are different from those found in films of Ueshiba Sensei, and direct students would know that. Martial arts are "living" traditions, and that is the tough part. It requires living people to preserve the arts.


It is very difficult to envision the correct course between too much openness and secrecy.

Agreed, and each koryu will have a different historical precedent about this subject. I think all you can do is honor the precedent of the art and the trust developed with your teacher. If your art is "secret", then leave it that way. If it's not, then fine. Each ryu has a different tradition and history.


I think mostly we agree, but I don?t think there is much that can be done to control events beyond each of us doing our best to carry and develop our tradition. Hopefully conversations like this will encourage others to act ethically and examine their practices.

Yep, we can discuss the subject publicly and be aware of what our colleagues are doing. I figure, why not use all this high-tech information stuff for good use? ;)

Maybe for the sake of discussion, I should re-word my query a bit. How 'bout:

1) What is the historical precedent of your art, and your teacher, and why do you think the precedent should or should not be adhered to? If your opinion is different, are you qualified to change the precedent of the art? Is your teacher following the historical precedent of your art, and if not, what might the reasons be? Are they qualified to change the precedent as an individual representative?

2) Are those that insist on making all arts public domain interested in preserving the arts, or, interested in their own gain? Anyone of good character seeking to study a given art can most likely get accepted and learn legitimately, given that they are willing to make some sacrifices. Are we just becoming too lazy? Koryu arts are popular right now, but most people are not interested in conforming to the koryu culture in order to learn them. So these "popular" arts end up having very small dojo.

3) If we homogenized all arts into one "super" art, what would be the benefit? Can all the various arts be taken outside of the historical context they were developed in, and adapted into one super system? How large a curriculum would such a system have to be, and who would correctly manage, adapt the methods to modern day CQC, and disseminate it? How much valuable information and culture would be lost in the process? If the answer is that such a project would be unrealistic, then how is this mass cross-breeding/open seminar trend helping the arts? Are the people mixing such arts sufficiently initiated into the various arts deep enough to understand who to mix them?

These are living traditions, however, some documentation of the art does seem prudent. The issue lies between do you make such documentation public or private. Many koryu have privately published materials that are intended primarily for students and future students (outside the formal densho). Budo and Budo Renshu were both privately published originally.

**

If you look at the above three subjects, it seems clear to me that preserving the traditions for what they are, and adapting the traditional methods as needed on a personal basis is a logical way to go. Making everything common knowledge is counter to the idea of preservation, and would seem to confuse most hybrid systems rather than help them (at least in the short term). Even if a hybrid system were to come up with a suitable operating system, a large number of "irrelevant" information would be discarded at the expense of the root art that once transmitted them.

So what's the answer? How 'bout follow the precedent set forth in your art? To me, anything else seems too risky (in most cases).

Regards,

A. M. Jauregui
30th July 2003, 01:29
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
1) What is the historical precedent of your art, and your teacher, and why do you think the precedent should or should not be adhered to? If your opinion is different, are you qualified to change the precedent of the art? Is your teacher following the historical precedent of your art, and if not, what might the reasons be? Are they qualified to change the precedent as an individual representative?

Well the dojo that I train at is first and foremost a kenjutsu dojo and secondarily one of aikijujutsu. There is some historical precedent for changes in “my” art - Itto-ryu has been split and branched off more then just about anything else... What more the current dojo leader has for the most part dropped all of supernatural BS and archaic rituals. Personally I think that this was a good move for I definitely do not want my hobby to become my religion.

Even after 7 years I am far from the top of the heap, qualification wise... Anyone that would want to train under me would have to be such a fool that they would never get what little I have gotten close to perfect.


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
2) Are those that insist on making all arts public domain interested in preserving the arts, or, interested in their own gain? Anyone of good character seeking to study a given art can most likely get accepted and learn legitimately, given that they are willing to make some sacrifices. Are we just becoming too lazy? Koryu arts are popular right now, but most people are not interested in conforming to the koryu culture in order to learn them. So these "popular" arts end up having very small dojo.

Personally I am not insistent on making all arts public domain but if asked I would have to say that it is better to be open then closed - flowing not stagnant. I am never going to open my own dojo, so I feel that puts me in a different point of view then some of the others that post here.

I really do not teach but do go to an open mat dojo now and then and show a few things every so often. I do not know if it has simply been luck that all of the bad apples seem to disappear after a few sessions or maybe just some innate feeling that drives them away. As for the dojo that I train at it is quite traditional in nature but for some reason or another they put up with me - the prodigal daughter.


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
3) If we homogenized all arts into one "super" art, what would be the benefit? Can all the various arts be taken outside of the historical context they were developed in, and adapted into one super system? How large a curriculum would such a system have to be, and who would correctly manage, adapt the methods to modern day CQC, and disseminate it? How much valuable information and culture would be lost in the process? If the answer is that such a project would be unrealistic, then how is this mass cross-breeding/open seminar trend helping the arts? Are the people mixing such arts sufficiently initiated into the various arts deep enough to understand who to mix them?

A super art would never work. People seem to prefer to specialize and focus on one aspect or another. As a historian I love to know what happened before this and that. But my historical curiosity in regards to the martial arts is not centered on lineage but more on development of certain techniques. For instance when did the term suigetsu charge from a term for proper distance to a strike to one’s solar plexus... Is budo Japanese sure, does it really matter no really...


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
[3b]These are living traditions, however, some documentation of the art does seem prudent. The issue lies between do you make such documentation public or private. Many koryu have privately published materials that are intended primarily for students and future students (outside the formal densho). Budo and Budo Renshu were both privately published originally.

I am all for making such documentation public. The reason being that I have made my own manual as a memory add and an outside manual would provide an alternate perspective. I am not saying that there is not a right and a wrong way to preforming techniques but do to variations in body types (core issue) leads to things ending up a bit different.

Also with out proper instruction all of the manuals in the world are only going to get one so far...

MarkF
30th July 2003, 12:11
Originally posted by A.M. Jauregui
A super art would never work. People seem to prefer to specialize and focus on one aspect or another. As a historian I love to know what happened before this and that. But my historical curiosity in regards to the martial arts is not centered on lineage but more on development of certain techniques. For instance when did the term suigetsu charge from a term for proper distance to a strike to one’s solar plexus... Is budo Japanese sure, does it really matter no really...


Exactly, and we have history which has taught us this. Just as people prefer to socialize with certain groups, so would an all-inclusive budo separate and become part of one's own version and of one's own choosing/teaching, and in short order. Even those who attempt to avoid this at all costs, make certain claims, teach it differently while argument abounds concerning the changes, which may not, in reality, have been a change. It is the human thing to do. Sokaku didn't do this to exclude everyone, only some of them even if they make up the majority, he had his own take and he obviously shared it. Tokimune went from there and shared more, and now Kondo sensei is doing so at a speedier rate (obviously, the time periods are the major difference, but Sokaku had to start somewhere and with some one). As to books and such by S. Takeda, he certainly would have needed someone to do the writing and other technical aspects so how much control could he really have had?. Who would tell him?

Probably not very much thus he was a bit selfish with what he did teach. It still got around. I think it has more to do with his lack of education than what he may have intended, but that's just my opinion. In later years he did become a bit paranoid concerning students and others. Tokimune admits to making excuses for his father's behavior at times. I don't think it was age, I think it started long before that.

Great post, Ana.


Mark

Arman
30th July 2003, 17:32
Also don't forget, what you see is not always what you think it is. For example, in the much publicized Kondo DVD, you'll just have to trust me when I tell you that a lot of the fundamental principles are not demonstrated, to say nothing of the great inner secrets (whatever those may be). In fact, if you were to copy many of the techniques on the DVD, or even the tapes, movement by movement, you would be doing them incorrectly. Just because certain elements are made public, or discussed openly, does not mean that the cat has been let out of the bag, so to speak. Much of what you see is only the outward form of a technique, done incorrectly on purpose.

As with public seminars, I have yet to witness Kondo Sensei giving away anything profound in such settings. If anything, he has been criticized by those who should know better as not being very proficient at certain aspects of the art because he doesn't demonstrate it to them publicly! Hmmm, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Now, I will say I have seen him demonstrate a technique quickly one way, and then slow it down for teaching purposes. Sometimes, the slowed down version is quite different than the version he performed at full speed. Most people don't catch the difference, and if they did, many do not understand what, exactly, he did differently. If you're good enough to see it and steal it, well, nothing wrong that, really. That's part of the budo tradition.

To conclude, don't assume simply because Kondo Sensei (or others) give a public seminar, or release a tape, or write a book, that he is therefore also revealing the secrets of the art. In fact, most of the fundamental principles that make the art work are not demonstrated publicly.

[BTW, Nathan, are you making the aiki expo this year? Chris, Brian and I will be there. I'd LOVE to have another movie night - LOL]

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Walker
30th July 2003, 18:38
Originally posted by Arman
To conclude, don't assume simply because Kondo Sensei (or others) give a public seminar, or release a tape, or write a book, that he is therefore also revealing the secrets of the art. In fact, most of the fundamental principles that make the art work are not demonstrated publicly.Yes, but what will happen when people 80 years from now “rediscover” these video recordings, realize Kondo’s technique on the videos is different from theirs and change to the incorrect public version. Before you laugh - stranger things happen all the time.

[BTW, Nathan, are you making the aiki expo this year? Chris, Brian and I will be there. I'd LOVE to have another movie night - LOL]Are you guys trying to get into trouble again? :cool:

glad2bhere
31st July 2003, 17:57
Dear Nathan, Doug et al:

The concept of secrecy seems to always conjure up pictures of a select group of people preventing the distribution of their particular constellation of truthes. To my mind, the object, then, would seem to be a matter of controlling Power. Knowledge is Power. Theoretically, if I can restrict access to that knowledge, even if I myself do not know, or have not mastered, that knowledge, then, in some way I partake in that knowledges' power, yes?

I would now like to suggest a completely different way of looking at secrecy that really has nothing to do with Power. The word that comes to mind is "Modesty".

Usually reserved for things of a sexual nature, modesty can also reflect a chaste or respectful attitude. Just as one would not take a partner or loved one and capriciously exhibit their most private sexual nature to the public, neither might one capriciuosly disseminate information regarding any other very personal and intimate aspect of their lives. For me, to submit oneself to what is essentially an anachronistic method for revealing ones own weaknesses and then striving to systematically overcome them is pretty intimate. To learn a skill whose only practical application is the subduing, injury or death of another person is pretty intimate. Thats not to say that all people feel this way. Just as there are healthy sexual people there are also pornographers and pediphiles. Just as there are people steeped in the traditions of ancient cultures, there are also folks who will put anything on a video tape or in a book if it will just turn a dollar.

I can understand those who hold with secrecy for the power it may suggest. I can also see an arguement to support those who hold with secrecy for the pride they feel in their personal struggle to be better people. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Kendoguy9
31st July 2003, 20:48
Hello all,

I think I have to disagree with Arman a little bit on one point. Arman said:

"In fact, if you were to copy many of the techniques on the DVD, or even the tapes, movement by movement, you would be doing them incorrectly."

I think it would be better to say that some of the techniques shown on the DVD are simply liberally applied variations of the techniques. Many of them are missing key elements that Kondo sensei wants us to practice, but I wouldn't call them incorrect. If you want to go up to Amano sempai and tell him he's doing the kata incorrectly I'm sure he'll be able to demonstrate it on you the "official way". :)

But it does make a good point about how far can the technique change and still be Daito-ryu. I think (as some of our sempai have told us) there is a spectrum you can stay in and still be doing Daito-ryu. Outside of that spectrum and you're no longer doing DR. I think that the DVD and video are within the bounds, but are just thinned out versions for the public, or just variations that might look "cooler".

I would like to second your point about people outside of our group commenting on Kondo sensei's skill because of what they see in a demo or at a seminar. Kondo sensei has told us many times that Tokimune sensei asked him to only show select parts of the curriculum to outsiders. Kondo sensei has been faithful to this. Tokimune himself only showed select techniques on video and at public demos and seminars. So I think that Kondo sensei is actually following his teacher's model in regard to how much is given to the outside. Besides the information on the tapes really isn't that earth shaking. If someone has any tapes of Tokimune sensei doing waza, slow motion on their VCR, and a keen eye, they could reproduce many of the waza just as well as with Kondo sensei's videos.

I think the quote that Nathan posted from Sokaku, about the techniques being easy to pick up holds most true, and that is why only certain sections are shown to the public.

Just my 2 cents,

Nathan Scott
1st August 2003, 02:15
Hi Arman,


Also don't forget, what you see is not always what you think it is. For example, in the much publicized Kondo DVD, you'll just have to trust me when I tell you that a lot of the fundamental principles are not demonstrated, to say nothing of the great inner secrets (whatever those may be).

That is understandable, but begs another question then - why publish media showing technique that will draw criticism from those that recognize that such methods "wouldn't work"? The media that Kondo Sensei is publishing is semi-instructional in format, as are the open seminars. How many consumers and participants are correctly understanding the intent of these publications and seminars?

Kuroda Tetsuzan Sensei is doing the same thing. He has a large number of publications out on his arts, as well as a running article in Hiden magazine. All of them are semi-instructional in nature, but it turns out that he is quite concerned about non-members trying to steal his methods. So then why publish instructional material on the arts publicly?

Kondo Sensei said in his Ikkajo book that he was publishing his media to combat the "incorrect and dubious" media others are publishing. He said that "I decided that it would be in the best interest of Daito-ryu to publish a written and pictorial record of the most fundamental points of at least the first portion of the school's technical curriculum, so that these do not become lost to posterity" (pages 10-11). So then why record only the omote techniques with partial explanations/application? Are these really the important parts of the art that might get lost to posterity? If you do publish something in order to preserve the important parts of the art that are sensitive in nature, why not privately publish them (like many other teachers, branches and ryu-ha do) primarily for those that are members of the art, so that they can pass them down and preserve them internally? Is it that he might be seeking acceptance from the public as the head of the mainline still (?). This is why I don't understand these publications.


If anything, he has been criticized by those who should know better as not being very proficient at certain aspects of the art because he doesn't demonstrate it to them publicly!

Actually, the typical criticism is in regards to his perceived skill level at executing the techniques that he does show (in particular the aiki techniques), not in the techniques themselves. I don't state this to be rude, but rather point out that this is what the criticism tends to be about when there is criticism. Skill is and always will be a pretty subjective thing though, so there really isn't much use bickering over how good someone is or isn't!


Most people don't catch the difference, and if they did, many do not understand what, exactly, he did differently. If you're good enough to see it and steal it, well, nothing wrong [with] that, really. That's part of the budo tradition.

But you see, it is not a part of the budo tradition, and that is exactly what Sokaku and many teachers were/are very adament about protecting against. Experienced budo-ka who can steal it and adapt it into their own art (or publications) are the biggest liabilities. Allowing advanced budo-ka to steal waza if they can came from the modern open-seminar culture, not from traditional budo. Traditional budo has a clear history of being conservative and in many cases competitive with other martial art groups. There is no benefit in allowing others to steal your methods (is there?).

Here are a couple of more references I came across from the interview with Sato Keisuke in CWDRM, page 148 & 151:


Sokaku Sensei used to confirm that no one was observing before he would begin teaching. He was extremely severe in this regard.

<snip>

After one session, Sokaku remarked, "Once you get the knack of a technique you'll be able to execute it rather easily. That's why I don't like to be observed by others when I'm doing techniques."

Same thing Yonezawa observed in the quote I posted from him in my opening post.


Nathan, are you making the aiki expo this year? Chris, Brian and I will be there. I'd LOVE to have another movie night.

That was fun, huh? As long as my work responsibilities don't start during that time, I should be able to come. I can't however take full credit for the bad-budo collection. Don Angier's group has a lot of good tapes, and our Aiii-icki guy is one of them. I've got to get more of his stuff. I do have some "beautiful violence" that I don't think ya'll have seen yet that I'll bring if I come. We'll talk more about this as we get closer. That American Kinjutsu would be great to see again!

Doug wrote:


Yes, but what will happen when people 80 years from now “rediscover” these video recordings, realize Kondo’s technique on the videos is different from theirs and change to the incorrect public version. Before you laugh - stranger things happen all the time.

Yeah, I could see that. IIRC, Tokimune was the one who created the Ikkajo omote waza, so that something could be shown at demonstrations. But omote waza without proper understanding of the ura is kind of useless to understanding the methods. Someone in the future might be able to make the techniques effective based on knowledge of the omote, but they may not come up with the same thing that was being done previously (thus re-creating or changing the essense of the art).

Chris wrote:


If someone has any tapes of Tokimune sensei doing waza, slow motion on their VCR, and a keen eye, they could reproduce many of the waza just as well as with Kondo sensei's videos.

Agreed. One of the points is that there is very little footage of people like Tokimune Sensei on video, and pretty much nothing of him (that I know of) - books or videos - being sold publicly, because he chose not to publish those types of things for the most part. This tendency to be conservative is surely why he was able to maintain productive relations with the more conservative branches of DR during his lifetime.

Having a handful of demo techniques is one thing, but is the Nikajo section also something that has omote versions? I seem to recall that Tokimune only approved of showing techniques from the Ikkajo omote series (and perhaps a few other standard demo techniques).

Regards,


PS. I think we should set up a separate thread that all the guys can use to flirt with Ms. A.M. Way to stay focused guys! ;)

Arman
1st August 2003, 18:59
Nathan,

I see your point, and do not completely disagree with you. With all respect, however, I think you are being a little too literal-minded with regard to Kondo Sensei's statements and intentions. Let me try and explain my perspective more clearly.

Chris touched on it slightly, though I still disagree with him on the broad strokes. Basically, if you show the outer form of a technique, like ippon dori, and basically explain the gross physical movements without recieving personal instruction on the "little things," you still really won't know how to do the technique correctly. As we all know, it is the little things that are really the big things. So when Kondo Sensei says he wants to make a record for posterity, and to combat misperceptions, etc., etc., he can accomplish this by demonstrating the proper form, by discussing the proper form, but still omitting the little things. It isn't a contradiction, because the outer form you are seeing or reading about is a correct form, but you will have a hard time duplicating it and making it work. I don't see a contradiction in wanting to open up the art a little more than it was in the past, but still not wanting to give everything away.

The tapes, DVD, and book are, IMO, designed for a few purposes, NONE of which are to teach non-members how to do the art correctly. One, they are designed to give a sample flavor of the art to non-members, and perhaps entice them to seek out a qualified instructor. And two, they are designed as learning aids to members, qualified by proper instruction. Finally, they provide a public indication of the manner and form of some of the techniques taught in the school.

The public seminars are similarly designed to give a sample flavor to non-members. They may also provide supplemental instruction for people involved in different branches. In any case, Kondo Sensei doesn't so much teach things incorrectly in such seminars, as he only reveals a finite amount of information.

If you think this is a problem, then consider the quotation you posted earlier, where he talks about Tokimune's warning to only teach the true technique to a few people, and that the rest do not matter. While I think Kondo Sensei is not nearly as conservative as Tokimune was, I believe he took Tokimune's warning to heart. To what degree, I do not know. But I am not so naive as to simply assume he is teaching me EVERYTHING, nor to assume that he has taught me EVERYTHING about how to do every element of a technique (of course, my internal gauge analyzes everything by simply asking "Is this working the way it is supposed to?" If so, then I don't stay up worrying about what I don't, and can't, know). And if I shouldn't assume such things, as a student of his, then why should non-students expect anything more? Because he said he wants to leave a historical record? Because he teaches open seminars? Well, IMO, that ain't reason enough to assume such things. But to each his own.

As for stealing technique, I will have to completely disagree with you. A good teacher only demonstrates what he doesn't mind, at worst, being stolen by excellent practitioners who can learn it by seeing it once, without instruction. As you mentioned, that was why some things were so secret. Because people could steal it. It is the teacher's,and student's, responsibility to protect those things that nobody outside the ryu should know. So if Kondo shows something, but doesn't teach it, and you catch it, well, he must not mind the fact too much. Perhaps that is why some people complain about Kondo's "aiki stuff." He just doesn't show it, for the reasons I stated above. But stealing technique performed in the open is a time-honored budo practice. It tends to separate the excellent from the mere average.

Finally, I would just mention that sometimes, secrets are not as necessary as one might think. Even if Kondo Sensei just told a group of people, "This is how you really do it," and demonstrated a few times, and then moved on, how many people would really get it? Have you not had the experience of going over something with a student time and again, and they still don't get it? They don't practice enough, they forget, they don't stay focused, etc. And you are SHOWING them how to do it, over and over again.

But that is a tangential discussion to the current one. I know we will probably just have to agree to disagree here, but hopefully I made myself somewhat clearer.

And, BTW, I do hope you can make it to the expo. That was a lot of fun.

Best regards,
Arman Partamian

wagnerphysed
1st August 2003, 20:54
I tend to agree with what Arman has said here. To further this point about what is and isn't being shown by Kondo Sensei, Of course in my opinion, I think that if someone were above average and able to steal a technique after only seeing it once, that person could gain allot from attending one seminar. But, I think this is unrealistic.

People see only what they are ready to see. After the appropriate experiences and training failures readiness happens. I think that it only happens though in the area were the most work or failure has been. So, someone coming in from the street, say training only in Jujitsu-ryu or Aikido, probably won't have the readiness in the appropriate area to steal anything from Kondo Sensei. On top of all that, if you blink you may miss the one and only time he offers a technique up to be stolen. IOW, I think that the juice is there for the taking. However, Kondo Sensei is a superb magician and only shows a trick one time. Every time after the real trick, he shows some variation of the trick. Good luck seeing the Rabbit.

So why do all of this? I believe, as do I think Chris and Arman, it is an attempt to attract a few die-hards that might train hard enough and stick it out long enough to carry on the tradition in the manner that he deems necessary. I don't think he is giving anything away by holding seminars and publishing videos, DVD's, and books. If that were the case we would never have needed to go to Japan or have Kondo Sensei and Derek Steele Sempai come to us (Vegas would be out as well...except the movies are worth the plain ticket...along with the free drinks).

Sorry, I know this whole thread isn't focused on Kondo Sensei alone.

Nathan Scott
4th August 2003, 22:06
Good responses guys. Although we may not end up agreeing on some points, I think this thread will serve as a good way of presenting both points of view.

Arman, in your second paragraph you basically said that you believe that there is value in producing a book that shows the "omote" forms, but does not provide the kuden necessary to perform the methods in their final form. I agree with this, but also believe that this supports the logic behind publishing such a work privately. Semi-instructional material such as this will most times be misunderstood by those not in the art, and producing anything semi-instructional to the public implies that you want the public to learn from them. If the public is allowed to learn from them without being a member of the group, that implies that whatever they "learn" is theirs to do with as they wish. As I mentioned about Kuroda Sensei, it gives the impression to the public that the instructor is o.k. with teaching those that are not their students. I would say that such instructors don't seem to understand that this is the impression they are giving.


The tapes, DVD, and book are, IMO, designed for a few purposes, NONE of which are to teach non-members how to do the art correctly. One, they are designed to give a sample flavor of the art to non-members, and perhaps entice them to seek out a qualified instructor. And two, they are designed as learning aids to members, qualified by proper instruction. Finally, they provide a public indication of the manner and form of some of the techniques taught in the school.

How can you say that the intent of this media is not to teach non-members? Why provide names, technical photographs and descriptions? Do you think that the public is going to assume that they are not supposed to try it out, and not follow the instructions and technical tips given in such media? Obviously, the extent of implied-instruction in this media is quite limited, and most of us would agree that you can't truly learn the arts without direct instruction, but I don't think that it can be argued that these publications are formatted in a semi-instructional way.

One of my points is that the reasons you have provided for making these publications could all be fulifilled by simply publishing demonstrations and perhaps some historical background. That is what many arts choose to do, including koryu arts (reference the Nippon Budokan videos). Providing demonstrations does not imply to the public in any way that you want them to learn from the performance, but those interested can get an idea what it is like and decide whether they want to try it formally. It's the same idea as watching a class at a dojo before asking to join. It is not necessary to "try it" first. Either do it or don't do it, but don't "try"! If you watch a class, and say to yourself "I want to be able to do that", then join it and train until you can. If you want to try it to see how hard it is or something, you're approaching the arts with the wrong attitude IMO.

In my opinion, all of your points could just as easily transmitted without any misunderstandings by making such publications demonstration/documentary in nature, and not semi-instructional.

As for only teaching the real art to a select few, I think there may be some misunderstanding about this.

As an example, Tokimune Sensei created DR Aikibudo to be the "public art", that he taught and ranked almost all of his students in (as you know). Those training in Aikibudo still learned effective techniques (ura waza), and gained value from it. I'm sure the Daitokan students can apply effective techniques, as can the various police and military students that were taught in seminars by Sokaku and Tokimune. But only a select few were intended to be ranked in DR AJJ, and those that were selected would learn certain subtleties and methods/tactics that would, I suspect in most cases, make the methods taught more effective or more efficient. Those select few would be the ones that the headmaster would intend to be the next generation of representatives/leaders for the art.

Kondo Sensei seems to prefer to teach in a way somewhat closer to how Sokaku taught, ranking everyone in DR AJJ, but I suspect he is doing basically the same thing.


Finally, I would just mention that sometimes, secrets are not as necessary as one might think. Even if Kondo Sensei just told a group of people, "This is how you really do it," and demonstrated a few times, and then moved on, how many people would really get it? Have you not had the experience of going over something with a student time and again, and they still don't get it? They don't practice enough, they forget, they don't stay focused, etc. And you are SHOWING them how to do it, over and over again.

The comment about secrets not being important is your opinion, but is clearly not shared by all members of Daito ryu (and many other arts) - past and present, for reasons already stated. As I said, allowing any non-members to "steal" the techniques is in no way traditional or historical, but in fact, completely against the idiology of the vast majority of koryu arts (and even some gendai). Just because only a handful have the experience necessary to steal the methods does not mean that the results are less damaging. Those that have the ability to steal the methods are in fact surely the ones who are in a position to do the most damage. But even if you are not worried about non-members borrowing the teachings and subsuming them into their own teachings (complete with a photo of them standing next to Kondo Sensei at a seminar!), or the historical precedence/culture of the tradition, there is still the basic point that the inner-methods of an art are nobody's business but those inside the art. If someone is that interested in the art, why don't they simply join and learn it correctly and formally?


I think that if someone were above average and able to steal a technique after only seeing it once, that person could gain allot from attending one seminar. But, I think this is unrealistic.

I don't, but that is my opinion. FWIW, I picked up a lot from watching Kondo Sensei teach last year at AikiExpo. Maybe not the things he didn't show, but everything that was being shown I thought was very clear. But maybe others did not see what I saw(?). Personally, in the dojo I'm accustomed to being shown a technique once and then being expected to reproduce it. Especially at higher ranks. It's not easy, but you develop an eye for how to evaluate what you see as efficiently as possible. That is an important skill set that I have found traditional teachers try to instill in students. Explaining all the points of a technique repeatedly to a student (aka: spoon feeding) simply creates weak minded, dependent students (IMHO).


So why do all of this? I believe, as do I think Chris and Arman, it is an attempt to attract a few die-hards that might train hard enough and stick it out long enough to carry on the tradition in the manner that he deems necessary. I don't think he is giving anything away by holding seminars and publishing videos, DVD's, and books.

I do disagree with you here. People may not learn the true teachings from such publications and seminars, but they can learn enough to do damage to the art. The most obvious being fraudulent use of the information. But you're free to your point of view!

Though this thread is not intended to be focused on Kondo Sensei, his activity does provide us with a good example for discussion.

Mark, please bring your Amerikin Kinjitsu video, and if you could, an extra copy to keep my warm on those cold nights! yuck yuck yuck...

Regards,

Arman
5th August 2003, 06:00
Nathan,

Some passing thoughts on your reply:

Arman, in your second paragraph you basically said that you believe that there is value in producing a book that shows the "omote" forms, but does not provide the kuden necessary to perform the methods in their final form. I agree with this, but also believe that this supports the logic behind publishing such a work privately.

I don't disagree with you.

Semi-instructional material such as this will most times be misunderstood by those not in the art, and producing anything semi-instructional to the public implies that you want the public to learn from them. If the public is allowed to learn from them without being a member of the group, that implies that whatever they "learn" is theirs to do with as they wish.

I wouldn't go as far as you do here. What a teacher might want the public to "learn" from the material may not be the same thing the public infers from the content, or expects. I don't know how far to extend the responsibility for misplaced expectations to the teacher on this issue.

As I mentioned about Kuroda Sensei, it gives the impression to the public that the instructor is o.k. with teaching those that are not their students. I would say that such instructors don't seem to understand that this is the impression they are giving.

Perhaps so, but I would aver to the common sense of most practitioners. Maybe this isn't so smart on my part. :)

How can you say that the intent of this media is not to teach non-members? Why provide names, technical photographs and descriptions?

I would just refer back to my earlier post about what I believe the purpose of this material is.

Do you think that the public is going to assume that they are not supposed to try it out, and not follow the instructions and technical tips given in such media?

Perhaps they will. But this still shouldn't be confused with qualified instruction, and should not create assumptions unrealistic to the media involved.

One of my points is that the reasons you have provided for making these publications could all be fulifilled by simply publishing demonstrations and perhaps some historical background. That is what many arts choose to do, including koryu arts (reference the Nippon Budokan videos). Providing demonstrations does not imply to the public in any way that you want them to learn from the performance, but those interested can get an idea what it is like and decide whether they want to try it formally. It's the same idea as watching a class at a dojo before asking to join. It is not necessary to "try it" first. Either do it or don't do it, but don't "try"! If you watch a class, and say to yourself "I want to be able to do that", then join it and train until you can.

In my opinion, all of your points could just as easily transmitted without any misunderstandings by making such publications demonstration/documentary in nature, and not semi-instructional.

I agree with you completely.

The comment about secrets not being important is your opinion, but is clearly not shared by all members of Daito ryu (and many other arts) - past and present, for reasons already stated.

Whoah! I said that sometimes secrets may not be as imporant as one might think, not that secrets aren't important at all, or that the kuden of Daito ryu should not be kept secret. I was only pointing out that often times secrets given out are often like pearls before swine - they aint gonna get it anyway. Not that they are unimportant.

I'll let Brian comment, if he wants, on your comments on his post.

This was a good discussion to have, Nathan, as I think it has generated some thoughtful responses on an important topic.

Mark,

Whatever "American Kenjutsu" is, bring it, man! It sounds groovy.

Best regards,
Arman Partamian

wagnerphysed
5th August 2003, 15:10
Nathan, I do think secrets are important and I think some people should be excluded from these secrets. However, I believe the issue at hand is a shade of gray and is always shifting within that gray scale.

People who are not in a particular school should be excluded to an extant. But, there are examples of people in arts at the mastery level sharing their secrets (not all) with people at similar levels in other arts and vise versa. That is why I say to an extant.

With regards to non-members picking up a book to learn an art, I think it is reasonable to expect that these individuals actually think they are learning something. I don't think it is safe to say that in another format their misperception would be any different. I know people who have created branches within their art based on non-instructional (as well as instructional) videos (this is no way to learn an art and I have disassociated myself with these individuals). They truly believed that they were able to pick up the essence of the art from these materials. Clearly this was not the case.

Despite this tragic misperception that may occur in viewers of instructional and non-instructional media, these media still serve a function. Here I agree with your thoughts on the function of the media, it is a view of what the art has to offer. That is really all it can be for non-members. I think the seminars serve much the same purpose.

No offense to you and your abilities, I would be interested in what you actually picked up from Kondo Sensei's seminars. I would hazard a guess that what you did pick up (if you hadn't been working on similar theories or practices I don't think you would have picked up anything) was probably due in part to your efforts in your training and the fact that your art is very similar (and won't go much further without direct instruction). This of course is only conjecture on my part. I can't say for sure because I don't know what you gleaned.

However, I would suspect that if you wanted to take information gleaned from a seminar further you would have to work with Kondo Sensei. If training held your interest (hypothetically speaking of course), then you might actually join the school. If this training continued to spark your interest you might become a member (if you chose not to train with Kondo Sensei would you really benefit from what you were able to learn from your observations?). On the other hand, if you chose not to train with Kondo Sensei or one of his instructors, I don't think the information necessary to further what you gleaned would be available (sorry, just using you as an example here). IMO this is the point.

IMO Kondo Sensei is making an effort to preserve Daito-ryu Mainline. So, I guess my point is this, in order to accomplish this end he must generate an interest. Because of the attrition rate of students this interest must be large. How do you reach a large number of potential students? Seminars and other media are the answer. Is there a trade off? Without a doubt and this is highlighted in our discussion.

The real question is "do the ends justify the means?". My opinions aside, I would have to defer to Kondo Sensei. He is a Menkyo Kaiden holder and held the trust of Takeda Tokimune to carry on the Mainline of Daito-ryu. Whatever his reasons are, I have to believe he knows what he is doing and he is operating in the best interest of the ryu.

Sorry for the length of all my posts recently.

wagnerphysed
5th August 2003, 19:51
I think that people not directly involved with a ryu should not be privy to the inner secrets or kuden of that ryu. It seems unwise to share such gems with people who are not invested in the maintenance and continuation of the ryu.

In addition, I think that not all students in a ryu should get all of the secrets at once. I think that there is (as I wrote before) a readiness involved in transmission of secrets. If a student isn't ready then transmission of the secret may be lost on that student or worse, interfere with their ability to properly learn the art (I'm thinking in terms of necessary prerequisite skills).

Truthfully, this is an opinnion based on a very limited point of view. I haven't been involved in Daito-ryu for very long. But as a teacher I know that certain pieces of information/knowledge/skills need to come first, before more detailed pieces (or sometimes less detailed). Further, sometimes students must struggle with something very difficult before being given the more direct route. It is a part of the necessary growth of the student. Personally I expect a certain amount of this. I can only process and apply so much information at a time.

Chris Li
5th August 2003, 22:39
Originally posted by wagnerphysed
I think that people not directly involved with a ryu should not be privy to the inner secrets or kuden of that ryu. It seems unwise to share such gems with people who are not invested in the maintenance and continuation of the ryu.

Perhaps (but not certainly) this approach is best for the preservation of the current power and control structure of a ryu, but is it best for the art in general? There are any number of arts that had been held secret by a small group of people, but have profited greatly by being opened to the general public - mathematics, for example. If anything, I think that history shows that an open exchange of information has been profitable for just about any field or art that you would care to name. Is Budo the exception?


Originally posted by wagnerphysed
In addition, I think that not all students in a ryu should get all of the secrets at once. I think that there is (as I wrote before) a readiness involved in transmission of secrets. If a student isn't ready then transmission of the secret may be lost on that student or worse, interfere with their ability to properly learn the art (I'm thinking in terms of necessary prerequisite skills).

Truthfully, this is an opinnion based on a very limited point of view. I haven't been involved in Daito-ryu for very long. But as a teacher I know that certain pieces of information/knowledge/skills need to come first, before more detailed pieces (or sometimes less detailed). Further, sometimes students must struggle with something very difficult before being given the more direct route. It is a part of the necessary growth of the student. Personally I expect a certain amount of this. I can only process and apply so much information at a time.

That's certainly true. However, is there really a need to control the curriculum through "secrets"? In any scientific field the advanced theory and study is completely open and available to anyone who looks for it, and yet they seem to have no problem bringing students along on a progressive basis. I never saw a science teacher who worried that peeking at advanced calculus textbooks would somehow interfere with my algebra studies...

Best,

Chris

Nathan Scott
5th August 2003, 22:45
Hi guys,


No offense to you and your abilities, I would be interested in what you actually picked up from Kondo Sensei's seminars. I would hazard a guess that what you did pick up (if you hadn't been working on similar theories or practices I don't think you would have picked up anything) was probably due in part to your efforts in your training and the fact that your art is very similar (and won't go much further without direct instruction). This of course is only conjecture on my part. I can't say for sure because I don't know what you gleaned.

I would not have understood much of what was being performed (I only watched) if I had not been training in similar systems. But as I said, it is the people who have significant experience in similar systems that are most likely to use such information fraudulently (don't worry about me though!). A karate-ka is not likely to incorporate Daito ryu into their curriculum (O.K., maybe Mas Oyama...). It is the people who CAN steal stuff but are not in the system that are the biggest threat, IMO.

I would agree that conducting an open seminar has the potential of generating further interest in the art. But so does a demonstration, and a demonstration does not carry with it the potential for misunderstandings. FWIW, Obata Sensei used to give open seminars, and found that most people would not join afterwards. They would just continue to join the open seminars, take pictures, and use the experience to further their own efforts.

I think the idea of "open teaching" began with the formation of Judo and popularization of Kendo. Both arts don't have "secrets", and are intended to be taught to the masses in schools and what not (not to mention sports). This is quite different than the arts previous to these, but making more arts "open" in the last 100 years is becoming a popular idea, surely because of the number of people that can be reached by being open. The result of adapting an art into an "art for the masses" is that the art will spread to many people, but at a significant expense - the integrity of the "martial" art. IMO, martial arts will be destroyed if they all follow this pattern (numbers = money and fame, not strong budo).

I would agree that one valid reason for keeping the inner teachings inside the art, is for the benefit of student development. As an instructor of sword, I encourage my students to see what else there is. If they like something else better than they like what I teach, they are free to go there instead. I figure that if they are going to quit eventually anyway, then the sooner the better. Also, being aware of what is out there is also important. But, they sometimes hear about the applied versions of certain techniques and then ask me if "we do it that was as well". Often times we do, but I don't want them to think about these types of applications until their kihon is sufficient. If the students know that what they are doing is omote, or kihon, they will try to perform the applied versions instead. This is harmful for the development of a given student, regardless of the art. Proper study of kihon is critical, and external contamination is a problem in this regard.

As Chris mentioned, I really would be interested to hear the opinions of others and why they feel the way they do. I promise to play nicely. ;)

Regards,

Nathan Scott
5th August 2003, 22:58
Chris wrote:


Perhaps (but not certainly) this approach is best for the preservation of the current power and control structure of a ryu, but is it best for the art in general? There are any number of arts that had been held secret by a small group of people, but have profited greatly by being opened to the general public - mathematics, for example.

You've mentioned this before, and you have a point technically. But are Japanese budo a collection of techniques and principles, or are they individual traditions that have cultural aspects and histories? Many modern budo teach their arts more as a collection of techniques, but older arts consider the "tradition" aspect of their art to be critical. If you don't eventually "fit in" with the group, you won't learn anything from the instructor or your classmates. It is that important. Some of the Hiden magazine genre have been excavating various koryu trying to collect ancient teachings and theories, in order to "preserve" them collectively in their own teachings. They surely consider it research and/or preservation, but the arts they are borrowing from probably consider it exploitation of their property. Who is right? Are the classical arts a "science", or are they owned "traditions"?

One of the things I've maintained is that if one really loves the arts that they are interested in, then they should act in a way that demonstrates it. I've mentioned this before in regards to people who want to teach themselves swordsmanship through informal studies (books, videos, etc.). You are either assisting in the preservation of your art by protecting its best interests, or you are simply serving your own interests and creating an overall liability to the art.

If you train soley for selfish reasons, you will not be welcomed in to the classical traditions.

Regards,

Chris Li
5th August 2003, 22:59
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
The result of adapting an art into an "art for the masses" is that the art will spread to many people, but at a significant expense - the integrity of the "martial" art. IMO, martial arts will be destroyed if they all follow this pattern (numbers = money and fame, not strong budo).

I think that there's an important question here - does an "exclusive" approach actually produce an overall result that is superior to a "non-exclusive" approach? To look at mathematics, for example, the average level of mathematicians might well have been higher in a society that restricted the "secrets" to an exclusive group (for example, a priesthood) than it was in, say, the United States today, where everybody studies math, but the average mathematical ability is quite low. However, if you look at the level of mathematics practiced in the field itself I think that it should be clear that an open approach has produced great advances in total knowledge, and mathematics is in no danger of destruction.

The same goes for physical training methods - take a look at advanced sports training methods today and tell me if you think that an open exchange of information hasn't resulted in greater advances than the proprietary methods would have.

Best,

Chris

Nathan Scott
5th August 2003, 23:20
I think that there's an important question here - does an "exclusive" approach actually produce an overall result that is superior to a "non-exclusive" approach?

You are correct, but see my previous post (we're crossing posts right now). What you are postulating is that the arts can be better preserved and developed collectively, regardless of whether an individual koryu has the kind of students necessary to continue into the next generation. This is somewhat true (although without direct instruction and kuden at the highest levels you probably will not fully/correctly understand the information being borrowed).

But what you are proposing (comparing koryu to mathematics) is what we discussed earlier in this thread - creating a "super art", which everyone agreed was not practical.

Why would it have to be a super-art? Because all the koryu were developed in certain historical contexts. Daito ryu claims to have a major section of its teachings originating from self-defense methods used inside of Edo castle (in Honshu), in which standing was often not possible or appropriate, kimonos or some variation would have been worn, and the use of weapons would have been strongly discouraged. The methods reflect this context and history.

Kobori ryu To-suijutsu was developed in Kumamoto (Kyushu), and the methods were developed specifically for crossing a certain river in that area, possibly while wearing armor or fighting with the enemy. So among other things, a special stepping-swimming method was developed to suit the context the art would be used. If the art had been created near a lake in Hokkaido, it would have been completely different.

Histories and contexts such as this are not only critical for understanding the riai of the techniques, but also for understanding the culture of the given tradition.

Blending all these things together in a collective research effort would make mud, in my opinion.

Regards,

Chris Li
5th August 2003, 23:42
Originally posted by Nathan Scott

But what you are proposing (comparing koryu to mathematics) is what we discussed earlier in this thread - creating a "super art", which everyone agreed was not practical.

"Everyone" being who?


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Why would it have to be a super-art? Because all the koryu were developed in certain historical contexts. Daito ryu claims to have a major section of its teachings originating from self-defense methods used inside of Edo castle (in Honshu), in which standing was often not possible or appropriate, kimonos or some variation would have been worn, and the use of weapons would have been strongly discouraged. The methods reflect this context and history.

Well, there's another important question here. That is, to what degree should an art be devoted to preserving historically important but not necessarily directly relevant methods? Even more so, to what degree should an art limit itself to those methods? For me, if you want to preserve a certain historical authenticity then that's fine, but does secrecy really help to achieve that goal?

Best,

Chris

Nathan Scott
6th August 2003, 01:54
"Everyone" being who?

You know, everyone. :D


For me, if you want to preserve a certain historical authenticity then that's fine, but does secrecy really help to achieve that goal?

Does making an art public help preserve historical authenticity? I don't think so for the reasons I've listed. Judo became public, and aside from a very small amount of judo-ka, the older teachings that make it a martial art are lost in favor of the sporting aspect. Same with Kendo.

Aikido spread so quickly that important kuden has largely become lost. Same thing with Iaido. The practical elements of all these arts has now suffered, despite the potential for collective delelopment and preservation (and aikido and iaido are generally not distracted with competition).

So can we look at history to predict what publisizing an art will do? If all koryu were to establish a study-group system of transmission, as the aforementioned arts more or less did, what can we expect to see?

I say sports and culturally-influenced "Ways" (michi) that are not effective under the definition of "budo".

Regards,

Chris Li
6th August 2003, 02:15
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Does making an art public help preserve historical authenticity? I don't think so for the reasons I've listed. Judo became public, and aside from a very small amount of judo-ka, the older teachings that make it a martial art are lost in favor of the sporting aspect. Same with Kendo.

I think that there's a difference between becoming agressively public and not actively being secret. Does making an art not secret damage it's quest to preserve historical authenticity? Or would a free flow of information instead provide a vehicle by which authenticity might be objectively established?

How many real pure mathematicians are there, anyway? Probably a smaller percentage than the percentage of martial arts oriented Kendo folks.


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Aikido spread so quickly that important kuden has largely become lost. Same thing with Iaido. The practical elements of all these arts has now suffered, despite the potential for collective delelopment and preservation (and aikido and iaido are generally not distracted with competition).

"Lost" and "not practiced by the general population" are two different things, IMO. In any activity that is widely practiced there will only be a few top level people. That doesn't necessarily mean that the field itself is deteriorating. Out of the billions of people who dance, how many are professional level dancers who really know what they're doing? Does that mean that it would be better to restrict dancing to a small, elite group? Are the billions of people who dance in ignorance really causing the downfall of the art? If my kids take ballet for a couple of years are they really going to cause the end of the tradition?


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Can we look at history to predict what publisizing an art will do? If all koryu were to establish a study-group system of transmission, as the aforementioned arts more or less did, what can we expect to see?

First of all, I would say that not being secretive and adopting a study-group system are two different issues. Secondly, a study-group system doesn't mean that all study necessarily must be through a large group. In the first year of college you start out in a large lecture hall. By the time you're in graduate school the classes are often very small or one-on-one. Different methods for different levels and intensity of study. Doesn't have to be either/or, if you ask me.


Best,

Chris

wagnerphysed
6th August 2003, 14:37
I think that there is a preponderance of focus on the details in this discussion (I'm not saying that this is bad). Maybe a step back and a more global view are in order here?

I think Musashi wrote about the different uses of wood in his Go Rin No Sho. He said something to the effect that all wood has a place in the construction of a fine house. In his analogy he spoke of wood for framing and support, fine trim and woodwork, scaffolding, and even fire wood. This analogy holds true for people and their involvement in the arts (I think that was the whole point). Given this understanding of the people who will involve themselves in our respective arts, it is clear that not everyone should or will get everything. This doesn't mean that everything is not available (the best secrets are the ones hidden in front of your eyes).

Some secrets are controlled, and I think I have witnessed this in Daito-ryu, by the student’s ability to perceive them. This is why I keep going on about readiness. Other secrets are dictated by progression through the curriculum. Maybe, I don't know yet because of my low level of initiation into D-r, still other secrets are controlled by the head of a system? But, my point is they are there and available for the students who can recognize them. This recognition is based on the type of wood the student will become.

There is no sure way to determine what type of wood each student is until they have run their course within the ryu. To preserve the ryu however, it would seem necessary to restrict teaching licenses to either the strong timbers or the more refined and clean /straight pieces of wood. Fire wood and scaffolding are great for keeping the ryu running, but not for transmission of the art.

Now, Mathematics. While there are a great number of people involved in mathematics there are a select few who hold the secrets. There are a great number who hold nothing and are not even involved in the ryu. Those with the secrets would not waste their time giving those secrets to those who do not even understand the basic principles (i.e. not in the ryu). Those secrets, regardless of the public access to mathematics, are not available to the general public. The upper levels of this art are closed and the secrets are jealously guarded by those at the top. Being in the top is very competitive, just like any other science. Have you ever listened to the experiences of those in doctoral programs?

Even though, much of mathematics is secret, some of it (a great deal of it) is public knowledge. I'm sure there are mathematicians running around who fell like the general public butchers mathematics, in much the same way upper level practitioners of koryu feel about the general public's interest in their art. The point is, even though much of mathematics is public, there are still secrets that are not available to the general public and will never be, unless these people demonstrate the quality of their wood and further join the ryu.

Judo. There are still practitioners that are interested in the old katas and the older Kito ryu katas for dealing with armor. It is true that the vast majority of practitioners are more interested in the sport aspects of the art. The question is how many people would be practicing the old katas if Judo had not attracted such a large population of practitioners. I believe the answer goes back to the wood analogy.

One other analogy may be that of the gold prospector. He sifts through the water, dirt and muck many times before finding one or two nuggets of gold. However, if he gets a larger sifter and works a river known to have more nuggets of gold, he may be able to find more gold in less time.

Anyway, time for the disclaimer. The following nonsense has been my opinion and does not reflect the opinions of my instructors or the arts I am involved in. Theories may be the result of significant head trauma and should be discarded if they do not meet with normal thought patterns.

Eventually, I plan to publish this book through whatever publisher that is willing to deal with tangential thinking of this magnitude.

Chris Li
6th August 2003, 19:54
Originally posted by wagnerphysed
I think Musashi wrote about the different uses of wood in his Go Rin No Sho. He said something to the effect that all wood has a place in the construction of a fine house. In his analogy he spoke of wood for framing and support, fine trim and woodwork, scaffolding, and even fire wood. This analogy holds true for people and their involvement in the arts (I think that was the whole point). Given this understanding of the people who will involve themselves in our respective arts, it is clear that not everyone should or will get everything. This doesn't mean that everything is not available (the best secrets are the ones hidden in front of your eyes).

Sure, not everybody will get everything, so there are things that are, in a sense, "secret". However, I think that the kind of thing that was being originally referred to in this thread were things that are intentionally hidden - ie, not shown or shared at all (is that right Nathan?).


Originally posted by wagnerphysed
There is no sure way to determine what type of wood each student is until they have run their course within the ryu. To preserve the ryu however, it would seem necessary to restrict teaching licenses to either the strong timbers or the more refined and clean /straight pieces of wood. Fire wood and scaffolding are great for keeping the ryu running, but not for transmission of the art.

No argument there, but strict requirements for teaching licenses have little to do with secrecy.


Originally posted by wagnerphysed
Now, Mathematics. While there are a great number of people involved in mathematics there are a select few who hold the secrets. There are a great number who hold nothing and are not even involved in the ryu. Those with the secrets would not waste their time giving those secrets to those who do not even understand the basic principles (i.e. not in the ryu). Those secrets, regardless of the public access to mathematics, are not available to the general public. The upper levels of this art are closed and the secrets are jealously guarded by those at the top. Being in the top is very competitive, just like any other science. Have you ever listened to the experiences of those in doctoral programs?

Are you talking about new research? Sure, that's an element of competition. Everything else is pretty much published publicly, so wouldn't really qualify (IMO) as "secret" in the same way that secrets are often hidden from public view by some ryuha. "Secret" because you just don't get it is not the same as "secret" because it's deliberately locked away.

Best,

Chris

Arman
6th August 2003, 20:48
Chris,

I think the reason for secrets is based far more on Nathan's point about cultural traditions than it is on anything else. As we all know, the secrets in days past were designed to provide a potential lethal edge in combat against other warriors. You didn't want to risk giving up that information to the enemy. Much like our own military maintains certain training and tactical secrets.

Of course, today these are not really relevant concerns for the martial arts. Nonetheless, secrets serve another purpose. They maintain a cohesive integrity for a particular tradition. If all the information and kuden about Yagyu Shinkage ryu were made available on the internet, with diagrams and instructions, etc., for example, then all the unique things that make shinkage ryu what it is would be bled away. Anyone could use it and incorporate it, bastardize it, play with it, etc., etc., and the shinkage ryu would effectively cease to exist as a cohesive, ancient martial tradition.

You might argue that just because everyone knows everything about a particular art does not necessarily mean the art becomes diluted or watered down. But I would respectfully disagree. Nen ryu, for example, is tied very much to the farming community it grew up in. As long as you or I, or anybody who is not a member, remains ignorant about the details of Nen ryu, it can maintain its unique place. Perhaps we wouldn't threaten its structure - but why take such a chance? If you want to learn Nen ryu, move to Maniwa and become a student. Why insist that you should just be able to learn what you want of it from your home in Honolulu, or wherever, without qualified instruction?

There are martial arts today that are all about modern combative efficiency - and these are the arts that fit into what you are talking about, I believe. Like bjj, for example, submission fighting, etc. And to a large extent, these schools of combat are not secretive about their techniques. But some martial traditions, and most of the old ones, are not about martial efficiency, and so your argument doesn't apply to them.

You have to approach the old martial traditions from a different perspective than the modern ones, for the most part. Daito ryu has elements of the old and the new, and thus has a harder time dealing with these issues, hence our current discussion.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

A. M. Jauregui
6th August 2003, 22:01
Originally posted by A.M. Jauregui
Well the dojo that I train at is first and foremost a kenjutsu dojo and secondarily one of aikijujutsu. There is some historical precedent for changes in “my” art - Itto-ryu has been split and branched off more then just about anything else... What more the current dojo leader has for the most part dropped all of supernatural BS and archaic rituals. Personally I think that this was a good move for I definitely do not want my hobby to become my religion.

Even after 7 years I am far from the top of the heap, qualification wise... Anyone that would want to train under me would have to be such a fool that they would never get what little I have gotten close to perfect.

The knowledge that is found in Itto-ryu has be passed around and bled down many a time in the past. But also over the course of time additional insight has been gained. Like I said I am far from any kind of mastery (I am fairly good, don’t get me wrong) so if I wanted to start Jauregui-ha Itto-ryu it would surely fail given time - likely at inception. I am willing to generalize that even with absolutely every bit of information about Daito-ryu was given out eventually. more then likely then not, without proper instruction their branch would die out. For the vast majority of people reading about how to such techniques will not equate to useful application, necessary the receptiveness is not innately present in most.

aiki = [(biomechanics + physics) * application iff receptiveness is present] * x proper instruction.

Brently Keen
6th August 2003, 22:28
"aiki = [(biomechanics + physics) * application iff receptiveness is present] * x proper instruction."

:eek: Oops, the cat is out of the bag - the secret formula has been disclosed for all to see! ;)

What to do now, what to do? Just train more, I guess :sigh:.

Brently

Nathan Scott
6th August 2003, 22:34
Arman,

Good response. That is pretty much one of the things I've been stating, but perhaps phrased better.

If we were to compare koryu transmission to food (I believe this is an anology that Dave Lowry used once with success), then lets say we are talking about chili recipes. I have a chili recipe that has been passed down in my family for a number of generations, and what is unique about it is that the chili powder used is found locally, and has a different taste than the same chili powder found elsewhere. As such, the mixture of the powder must be adjusted correctly. Also, considering the altitude and humidity where this chili recipe has been developed, the cooking time and method must be adjusted correctly. Those not understanding these points (riai) would not be able to make the chili the way we have always made it - even if what they made was still good in its own right.

If everyone found out our recipe, and the recipe and logic behind it became public domain, the identity and history of our "tradition" would be lost because of flawed transmission to the masses over many years. Because of a lack of full understanding of the context of the development and preparation (aka: kuden), the chili others have popularized under the same name no longer tastes as good. New comers say "eh, it's alright, but pretty much the same as the other chilis by different names". Interest in the family line of chili diminishes, as well as interest in learning how to make it. The more people taught, the less the origins and details will be known and conveyed to future generations.

Look at the origins of common phrases and sayings (in any language). Until the internet and trivial pursuit games, the vast majority of us did not know what the origin of these sayings were, even though we all said them in general conversations. In other words, the teachings may survive in some form (likely a little different than the original), but the roots will eventually die out because of the greatly increased ratio of participants.

Though the collective could benefit in some way by adapting the inner-teachings of a ryu-ha into the public domain, the ryu-ha would be closer to extinction, not preservation (IMO).

When Judo was founded, there were a number of small jujutsu ryu-ha that were in fear of dying out, and as such they "gave" their teachings to Kano Sensei to preserve within his Judo. While the techniques have more or less survived (and in most cases, been heavily adapted), how many judo-ka know where the various methods originated from, or anything about the arts (outside of Kito ryu and Tenjin shin'yo ryu - and even those are not all understood all that well)? Yes, there are a few refereces in some of the old judo books, but modern judo books mostly concern themselves with the current version of judo, with only a brief overview of judo history that does not mention the smaller arts at all (in most cases).

Classical arts like orthodox Daito-ryu tend to have small student bases, regardless of the great popularity of the art. The reason is because everyone wants to claim rank and membership in the art, but very few want to make any sacrifices to get it. If there was accessible Daito-ryu (imagine Aikido, for example), would most people choose the hard way or the easy way? Would the new larger organizations try to support the root arts, or bury them so that there is nothing to compare what they are teaching against? The Aikikai wanted everyone to believe that Ueshiba Sensei "created" aikido, but resisted speaking in depth about the root arts. If it wasn't for the efforts of Stan Pranin (of which he was in hot water with the Aikikai over for a period in time), many of the Daito-ryu branches might have already died out completely. Lucky we have Stan, but not all arts will have someone like him with the desire and position to see the root arts preserved.

In summary, the reasons to justify some level of "secrecy" are (as discussed thus far):

1) Preservation of a given classical tradition.

2) Proper development of ryu-ha students, minimizing contamination and misinformation published publicly.

3) Reduce the amount of information that frauds and opportunists can use to exploit the tradition, tarnish the reputation, confuse the public, and bastardize the teachings.

**

Can the public rightfully demand that an art open up their inner-teachings so that non-members can benefit from and adapt their teachings?

BTW, further developing classical methods is a bit tricky, as far as using this angle to support collective dissemination. I'm not talking about adapting, but developing. Classical methods are obsolete, in the modern context. If you create new techniques, they are impossible to test accurately, and as such, may only be "logical dojo theory", and not, "historically accurate/tested martial methodology". If you fully understand the classical riai, then you can correctly adapt the teachings to the modern context. But to further "develop" classical methods is a little controversial. That is why they are called "classical" (koryu).

Regards,

A. M. Jauregui
6th August 2003, 22:45
Hey, Brently! Missed your reply on my Counterng touch responses and ploys (http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20039) thread.

aiki = [(biomechanics + physics) * application iff receptiveness is present] * x proper instruction.

The formula was bummed off of one that Brian Wagner (aka wagnerphysed) made in some other [i]thread (http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20406). It is far from definitive but nifty...

Chris Li
6th August 2003, 22:55
Originally posted by Arman
Chris,

I think the reason for secrets is based far more on Nathan's point about cultural traditions than it is on anything else. As we all know, the secrets in days past were designed to provide a potential lethal edge in combat against other warriors. You didn't want to risk giving up that information to the enemy. Much like our own military maintains certain training and tactical secrets.

Certainly, and it's because this situation no longer exists that we are having this discussion.


Originally posted by Arman
Of course, today these are not really relevant concerns for the martial arts. Nonetheless, secrets serve another purpose. They maintain a cohesive integrity for a particular tradition. If all the information and kuden about Yagyu Shinkage ryu were made available on the internet, with diagrams and instructions, etc., for example, then all the unique things that make shinkage ryu what it is would be bled away. Anyone could use it and incorporate it, bastardize it, play with it, etc., etc., and the shinkage ryu would effectively cease to exist as a cohesive, ancient martial tradition.

This is one of the usual explanations, and frankly, I disagree with it. There are plenty of traditions in the west that maintain continuous lineages without resorting to "secrets". In my view, if publication of the "secrets" of a tradition means the end of that tradition then there wasn't much to the tradition in the first place. If it's a deep and viable tradition than it will continue to thrive, no matter that other people incorporate some portion of its methods. In fact, that's what has happened historically, as schools split and branch. Even so, the traditions have continued.


Originally posted by Arman
You might argue that just because everyone knows everything about a particular art does not necessarily mean the art becomes diluted or watered down. But I would respectfully disagree. Nen ryu, for example, is tied very much to the farming community it grew up in. As long as you or I, or anybody who is not a member, remains ignorant about the details of Nen ryu, it can maintain its unique place. Perhaps we wouldn't threaten its structure - but why take such a chance? If you want to learn Nen ryu, move to Maniwa and become a student. Why insist that you should just be able to learn what you want of it from your home in Honolulu, or wherever, without qualified instruction?

I'm not arguing that I should be able to do anything. I'm arguing that the reasoning behind keeping "secrets" is largely faulty. If Maniwa Nen-ryu (which is effectively dead, by the way, and probably not the best example of the efficacy of secret keeping) is tied to farming or a particular community, that's fine, but does secrecy really help preserve that end?

Best,

Chris

Chris Li
6th August 2003, 23:00
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
If we were to compare koryu transmission to food (I believe this is an anology that Dave Lowry used once with success), then lets say we are talking about chili recipes. I have a chili recipe that has been passed down in my family for a number of generations, and what is unique about it is that the chili powder used is found locally, and has a different taste than the same chili powder found elsewhere. As such, the mixture of the powder must be adjusted correctly. Also, considering the altitude and humidity where this chili recipe has been developed, the cooking time and method must be adjusted correctly. Those not understanding these points (riai) would not be able to make the chili the way we have always made it - even if what they made was still good in its own right.

If everyone found out our recipe, and the recipe and logic behind it became public domain, the identity and history of our "tradition" would be lost because of flawed transmission to the masses over many years. The more people, the less they know about the origins.


If the chili powder recipe absolutely requires chili grown locally then making the recipe public or not should have zero effect, since the only way to make the recipe would be to obtain locally grown chili powder. How does secrecy protect the chili? Or could it be that by making the recipe public you could make it common knowledge that the chili can only be made locally?

Best,

Chris

wagnerphysed
7th August 2003, 01:45
Arman, your analogy of chili contains an error in logic. You have presented an "IF"..."THEN"... argument without proof of the "THEN" aspect.

Back to the analogy, if the recipe is made public and everyone starts to reproduce the chili using substandard (to the family recipe) chili powder, then there will be a flood of chili in the public market that is different than that of the families original flavor. This does not mean that the family's flavor of chili will die.

The family's flavor will only die if no one in the family wants to make chili or there are no heirs or no one steps up to take over the family's traditional art of chili making. This logic also goes for the arts as well.

If a mainline art holds true to the teachings and traditions of the art by finding suitable students to take over the transmission of the art, then the art will continue to be transmitted and will survive (regardless of the publics knowledge of the ryu). I still believe that an arts secrets should remain secret from those who are not investited in the ryu's future and that the ryu's secrets will remain secrets from some insiders by default.

Clearly, the "THEN" in your argument could be better argued as the decrease in the suitable students pool. This of course would be due to their involvement in the flood of new arts spawned from the public information regarding the mainline art. This of course would be part of human nature to get the good stuff as easily as possible. To an extent however, this has happened in Daito-ryu without ill effect. The different branches of Daito-ryu all teach different flavors of the art that Takeda Sokaku taught. Some may be different than others, but each has a following that contains different grades of practitioners. This includes Ueshiba - ha Daito-ryu, otherwise known as Aikido.

In the end, the arts have sole propriety over their individual secrets. The final decision to make secrets public or keep them safe from the public eye comes down to the individual ryu. IMO, we do not have the right to tell them what they must do with their secrets.

Nathan Scott
7th August 2003, 02:55
First of all, it was my dumb idea to start talking about chili, not Arman's. Secondly, we are not here to mandate what a given ryu should do, but rather discuss why secrets are maintained and what the problems might be if we change the precedent of "secrecy" in an art.

A more accurate chili thing would probably be to say that I had the ONLY recipe for chili, and that once it became public, you could buy chili anywhere (including in cans), which is much easier and less expensive, and less time consuming than making the effort to learn the "art" of making chili as my family has passed it down.

As I said, Aikido is not a fair example of a branch art that was popularized, since as I mentioned, Daito ryu would be all but dead if it was not for the interest of a magazine publisher who went against the grain to investigate the roots. This is an exception to the rule, not the rule. However, a popular art looking to erase the root art from their history ("Daito ryu is extinct") can be projected as being more the norm, not the exception.

Chris, secrecy protects the chili because once it is popularized and available everywhere cheaper, more conveniently, and "almost the same", people will not bother to go to the source. That combined with the possibility that the bigger groups might very well try to run you out of business, or buy up the competition (microsoft), your days become numbered. It is no longer understood as a unique commodity, even if it still is in reality.

Why fly to Japan to learn if you can go to the corner strip mall? It's the same name - how much different could it really be?

Regards,

Chris Li
7th August 2003, 03:42
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Chris, secrecy protects the chili because once it is popularized and available everywhere cheaper, more conveniently, and "almost the same", people will not bother to go to the source. That combined with the possibility that the bigger groups might very well try to run you out of business, or buy up the competition (microsoft), your days become numbered. It is no longer understood as a unique commodity, even if it still is in reality.

Why fly to Japan to learn if you can go to the corner strip mall? It's the same name - how much different could it really be?

That's exactly the assumption that I don't buy into. By that reasoning everyone would buy McDonald's and you would never be able to find a better hamburger. Even in a small town like Honolulu there are any number of places that serve up the better stuff, and they survive quite handily (and no secret sauce, either :) !).

Best,

Chris

Arman
7th August 2003, 17:57
Chris,

Well, one other point to keep in mind is the proprietary nature and concerns of a particular ryu over its techniques. You know, simply because an art form may not be suitable to modern combative encounters does not mean there are not a ton of strategic/tactical/psychological elements to a ryu's curriculum that are both unique to the ryu and quite insightful. Why make such information public?

If Nen-ryu (which is not effectively "dead" IMO - go and watch them train sometime - they are there practicing) has developed unique tactical sword skills that are the distillation of centuries of knowledge and information passed down from teachers and students, it seems to me that the ryu has an interest in keeping such information to itself. Why allow McRyu in the strip mall to read all about your hard-earned info and say, "Gee, this looks neat. Let's add this stuff to our crap, and it may look more like the real-deal." It seems rather than a ryu having to justify keeping secrets, it is up to those outside the ryu to come up with convincing arguments why such proprietary information should become public.

If you write a book, should everyone be able to copy your words and claim it as your own? If you write a song, should everyone be able to copy your music and claim it as their own? If you design a unique gadget, should everyone else be able to copy your design and claim it as their own? A ryu's curriculum is the sum total of a creative tradition. Just because you might think such secrets are not useful does not seem to me a good argument for giving everything away.

You argue that 1) keeping such info secret is not efficient, and 2) that making it public is not harmful to the ryu. Well, that aint good enough, because the fact of the matter is that the ryu developed and created their curriculum, so it is, essentially, "owned" (for lack of a better term) by the ryu. If I spend years writing a book, I'll let people read it, if I so choose. But nobody is going to convince me to let the world appropriate my work. And don't think this is exactly what happens when such information becomes public domain. Especially in the martial arts. Know one will say, "Oh, well this technique we are using is a Shinkage ryu tactic, and this one is a Nen-ryu tactic." Once such info becomes public domain, most won't even bother to find out where the info comes from.

Brian,

Once again your sloppy reading has moved you to ascribe an argument to me that I did not make. :)

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Chris Li
7th August 2003, 19:36
Originally posted by Arman
Chris,

Well, one other point to keep in mind is the proprietary nature and concerns of a particular ryu over its techniques. You know, simply because an art form may not be suitable to modern combative encounters does not mean there are not a ton of strategic/tactical/psychological elements to a ryu's curriculum that are both unique to the ryu and quite insightful. Why make such information public?

I wouldn't think that you'd have to ask, since you're one of the people that has benefited from the public opening of a once private art :).

Seriously, though, I think that there are two seperate but related questions here:

1) Why keep it secret?
2) Why make it public?

As I've said in previous posts, not actively publicizing something is not the same as actively concealing something. In any case, my arguments on this thread have primarily centered around countering the usual reasons given in favor of secrecy, although there is, of course, some overlap.


Originally posted by Arman
If you write a book, should everyone be able to copy your words and claim it as your own? If you write a song, should everyone be able to copy your music and claim it as their own? If you design a unique gadget, should everyone else be able to copy your design and claim it as their own? A ryu's curriculum is the sum total of a creative tradition. Just because you might think such secrets are not useful does not seem to me a good argument for giving everything away.

I never said that the secrets are not useful, just that the policy of secrecy is not useful. Shakespeare wrote plays and made them public, many people copied and borrowed from his work (loved "West Side Story"!), but his standing and status are still unaffected. Shakespeare himself copied from others. Now, where would English literature be today if Shakepeare had kept all his plays in a trunk in order to keep the "secrets" from flowing outside of his immediate circle of acquaintences?


Originally posted by Arman
You argue that 1) keeping such info secret is not efficient, and 2) that making it public is not harmful to the ryu. Well, that aint good enough, because the fact of the matter is that the ryu developed and created their curriculum, so it is, essentially, "owned" (for lack of a better term) by the ryu. If I spend years writing a book, I'll let people read it, if I so choose. But nobody is going to convince me to let the world appropriate my work. And don't think this is exactly what happens when such information becomes public domain. Especially in the martial arts. Know one will say, "Oh, well this technique we are using is a Shinkage ryu tactic, and this one is a Nen-ryu tactic." Once such info becomes public domain, most won't even bother to find out where the info comes from.

That's the same "preservation" argument that's been made previously, and as I said before, I don't buy into it. There are plenty of traditions with longer lineages than any of the koryu that have successfully preserved themselves without secrecy.

If someone doesn't feel like sharing something that they possess than that's fine, but I don't buy most of the usual attempts at justification and rationalization.

Best,

Chris

Brently Keen
7th August 2003, 21:54
A.M.:

Regarding the formula mentioned above (not the chili one), if that's what some chose to believe is a good definition - and it works for them, great - I'm very happy for them, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily accurate or correct.

FWIW, my tongue was planted firmly in my cheek, when I said the cat was out of the bag. I'm pretty sure the secret(s) is/are still relatively safe among some of the more experienced and skilled AJJ practitioners.

As for countering touch responses and ploys, I think there were some decent replies made by some others there, and while I might not agree with some of them I didn't have much else to add.

Frankly, I think such questions and details (about counters) ought to be addressed in person by a capable instructor. And then only after you've already reached some proficiency in using such techniques in first place should you be taught the counters. IOW it's not a bad question - BB's like this are just poor forums in which to give the right answers.

Respectfully,

Brently Keen

wagnerphysed
7th August 2003, 22:16
Hey! Who you callin Sloppy!:mad: I ain't sloppy, I just used double vision from sleep deprivation along with a few contextual cues that seemed like something you might write, and assumed you wrote it. :confused: Even after Nathan's correction, I didn't recognize my error. :( So, please don't call me sloppy. Stupid and dense...Yes! But not sloppy!:p

Nathan Scott
8th August 2003, 00:59
Not to run my point of view into the ground, but I guess I would say that I believe that making an art public will mostly likely result in the preservation of core concepts, and perhaps to some degree techniques. But will most likely not preserve the history, tradition, or culture that was once extant in the ryu-ha that originally created it. As such, publisizing the inner-teachings (core, essense) would be counter to the concept of preserving (the tradition).

Good discussion though - I'm getting hungry for chili...

wagnerphysed
8th August 2003, 19:22
I think that there are strong arguements for Ryu to both maintain and publicize their secrets. I personally am against the outright publicizing of secrets. However, I recognize how making these secrets available to people upon request/recognition might help keep an art alive. As Chris Li so aptly put,

"I wouldn't think that you'd have to ask, since you're one of the people that has benefited from the public opening of a once private art."

in a post responding to Arman's question of why a ryu would want to give away its most important inner secrets.

His statement is very true. We in the Baltimore study group have been recipients of this openess. Many other people have had this opportunity but seem to have been unable to recognize it. Additionally, other people have tried to access the same openess we have been privy to but have been rebuffed. I think this speaks to the judgement of the person within the ryu wisely managing the access to the ryu's secrets. Secrets are available to those who demonstrate integrity and an investment in the continuation of the ryu.

IMO, its a crap shoot on how sharing secrets may ultimately effect the ryu. It could keep the ryu alive through the interest generated by the details and openess. OTOH, it could sound the deathknoll for the ryu once people have raped every bit of integrity an tradition the ryu has to offer. However, one way to frame it would be to think of the ryu as a person with a terminal disease. If there are expiramental treatments that might cure the disease, the person may choose to go that route regardless of the possibility that the treatment may cause death. If you are already dying, what do you have to loose?

Nathan,
I have a great chilli recipe. It was a recipe that was used widely by cooks who worked with cattleman on cattledrives across the west in the early 1800's. Unfortunately, its a secret. :p

Just kidding! ;) If you really want it, I will entrust it to you.

Arman
8th August 2003, 19:43
Chris,

We may be somewhat talking past each other. If what we are doing at the study group is considered "open teaching" by your definition, then I would have to agree with you, at least to the extent that I have benefited. OTOH, what is open to me is based on my training under Kondo Sensei directly and his senior students. It didn't come from a book or a video (although they have proved to be good reference material in support of instruction).

I wouldn't have learned anything if all I had done was attend seminars and read the books and look at the tapes. If I didn't train with students of Kondo Sensei, and with Kondo Sensei directly, here and in Japan, I wouldn't have gotten anything worthwhile. This continues to be the case. All the "good" stuff I have learned has come from personal instruction.

Also, if Kondo Sensei had determined that I could only learn by studying 100% of the time under an official representative of the honbu, I wouldn't think this unfair or unwise.

But I see a big difference between the forum that I am studying in and the idea of not keeping any secrets. I understood your point to be that even someone who is not a member of a particular ryu to be allowed access to every bit of information a ryu contained, and that such information should be open to all. That is quite different than my situation.

And "Shakespeare" is understood as the creative work of a particular person. You can't copy Hamlet word for word and claim it is your creation. Nor could you copy any other literary or musical work and claim it as your own. The law protects this work, of course. But there is no such apparatus for the martial arts. Very few people will give credit where credit is due. If people could appropriate Hamlet, don't you think by now very few people would know where it came from and who really wrote it? Now, that wouldn't be fair to old Shakespeare, would it? And it wouldn't be fair to Nen ryu, either.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Ron Tisdale
8th August 2003, 20:01
I think the situation with the mainline and the Baltimore Study Group is an interesting one...especially since I've benefited from participating in the seminars and using the book/tape. I'm currious that the members of the group feel that they wouldn't have gotten anything of value from this type of practise. Personally, I've gotten quite a lot. I would like to participate more fully at some point, but that's just not a sacrifice I can make right now. And I don't expect to be able to attain the level of an "insider" with "outsider" effort. I'm very pleased with what I've learned, I've been able to integrate some of the principles I've been exposed to fairly well, and will continue to seek out further instruction when I'm able.

I'd be currious (taking a risk here) how the Study Group members view people such as myself. We can't dedicate to the art the way they have, yet support their efforts, and Kondo Sensei's efforts. I don't expect to get as much as they do, and am more than willing to pay top dollor (and sweat) for what I do get.

Ron Tisdale

S. Harrington
8th August 2003, 20:54
Regarding secrecy and Daito-ryu (or really any ryu) there have been comparisons to chili (hot!!!), hamburgers (mad cow disease) and mathematics. A better analogy would be nuclear physics (atom bombs go booom!)

There is a select group of men and women who have the ability to recreate these weapons. Just look at the difficulty with North Korea and the possibility that they sell to terrorists. A couple of those start going off in cities and you might see all students of advanced physics signing keppan (blood oath) on keeping this knowledge restricted or else be eliminated. Then you’d have branches like the Oppenhiemer-ha (a more peaceful group – with possibilities of leaking to the other side) versus the Teller-ha (definitely a hard-line school) and then the Neutron Bomb-ha group with miniaturized backpack nukes (very AIKI oriented ala Okamoto Sensei.)

Now, of course Daito-ryu is not as deadly as a nuclear device (unless you go up against it alone). Whatever may be debated about Kondo Sensei and lineage, I would not like to go mano a mano with him. I’ve seen him on the mat. Which brings about a current trend in the martial arts I’ve noticed – mindset.

On this website, there was a small spat about Tony (He can cut as well as Paul Bunyan) Alverez and a practitioner of Muso Shindo-ryu (I think – give me some leeway). Basically words crossed about technique and style and so on.

Now the mindset was interesting because they did not just do one thing. Get on a plane, get off, take the swords out and go at it. I personally believe T. Alverez would have cut him completely in half vertically, then done it again horizontally before the pieces started to fall (I’ve seen him on the mat too). But – perhaps the Muso Shindo ryu practitioner would have slyly stepped inside the range of that long blade and cut his wrist, then finished with a sweeping cut and a nice chiburi. Or – perhaps T. Alverez would make a subtle body shift and thrust at an angle to the throat with a delicate move, totally unbecoming his large size. Or- yada yada yada.

They debated, they had a few words, a few flames and that was that. Well, you say. We live in a civilized world (tell that to the mothers of the dead Iraqi found buried in the desert). That’s not how we settle things. Well, we might not do that with sword styles but the world certainly still uses combat to settle a lot of things.

And the more things change, the more things remain the same. Taking a look at U.S. Soldiers in combat, you see body armor, helmets strapped on just like kabuto, kneepads to drop to one or two knees under fire. Going from house to house, I bet there was some hand-to-hand combat and the ones that had more training, or secret techniques or secret principles were the ones to win.

If hand-to-hand combat were again to make a large rise, two things would happen. Governments would be paying the bills to some old guys to teach and secrecy would be the watchword. Daito-ryu is just covering their bets.

S. Harrington

Nathan Scott
8th August 2003, 22:25
I don't expect to get as much as they do, and am more than willing to pay top dollor (and sweat) for what I do get.

Not speaking about any instructor in particular, it should be noted that having an open policy with an art (especially one that is popular) does generate fame and money. In some cases, this may be the motivation.

In regards to general openness, I have another angle to consider:

If an art is truly in danger of dying off (I think Chris' comment about MNR was in reference to there not being a further Higuchi generation to succeed the art, and as such the formal continuation of the art is in danger unless someone is adopted into the family, or a Shihan-ke/So-ke type split transmission is instituted), then I think fully documenting the art for posterity makes sense. But if an art has a handful of serious students, and is more or less "healthy", the art really doesn't require the help of outsiders to preserve their art.

If one wanted to popularize a ryu-ha on a large, international scale, then they might as well convert the art into something gendai for the masses (like "aikibudo").

Regards,

wagnerphysed
9th August 2003, 00:59
Arman, Scott and Nathan, great points and for the most part I agree (I really like Scott's analogy; its fitting).

Arman, I think that what you are saying is that while much is offered and learned during seminars and through the books and videos, much more needed to be corrected during in person trainings. It was this correction that started to drive home the principles that we are learning. Without the personal trainings, seminar information and glimpses gleaned from the book and videos did not prove to be that enlightening. Is this correct? I don't want to be called sloppy anymore. It hurts my feelings.:(

Ron, I personally believe you get out what you put in. I am not at a point were I would say that I am overly protective of who shows up at seminars and dabbles in the art. I personally feel like an exploration of the root art is essential for gaining a deeper insight into Aikido (although, IMO Yoshinkan has done a good job of maintaining the teachings that are closely related to Daito-ryu). IOW, we love having you. Please keep coming. Just remember, what I choose to believe is not always correct or accurate. BLEVE HUN! ;)

Chris Li
9th August 2003, 02:02
Originally posted by S. Harrington
Regarding secrecy and Daito-ryu (or really any ryu) there have been comparisons to chili (hot!!!), hamburgers (mad cow disease) and mathematics. A better analogy would be nuclear physics (atom bombs go booom!)

This is, for me, the weakest of the "secrecy" arguments. In a world in which teenage gangbangers carry automatic weapons I think that it is important that we not overestimate the "deadliness" of this thing we do.

Best,

Chris

Chris Li
9th August 2003, 02:23
Originally posted by Arman
Chris,

We may be somewhat talking past each other. If what we are doing at the study group is considered "open teaching" by your definition, then I would have to agree with you, at least to the extent that I have benefited.

Well, open and closed is a relative thing. Compared to what the situation was at times in the past the establishment of the study group in Baltimore is a quite significant "opening", if you ask me. Just ask yourself if there would have been books, videos, public demonstrations and foreign study groups (or even foreign students) if Sagawa had stayed in as the controlling influence in Daito-ryu.


Originally posted by Arman
Also, if Kondo Sensei had determined that I could only learn by studying 100% of the time under an official representative of the honbu, I wouldn't think this unfair or unwise.

But I see a big difference between the forum that I am studying in and the idea of not keeping any secrets. I understood your point to be that even someone who is not a member of a particular ryu to be allowed access to every bit of information a ryu contained, and that such information should be open to all. That is quite different than my situation.

I wouldn't think it unfair or (necessarily) unwise either, and I've never said so. I also haven't said that such information should be open to all, in the sense that a requirement to do so ought to be implemented. What I have said is that I believe that the normal reasoning given for "secrecy" lack, IMO, justification. I said this in a previous post as well, but if someone wants to keep a certain art secret then they certainly have that right - I am simply arguing with the justifications presented (wasn't that the question that started the thread?).

Certainly I believe, and I think that historically this has been shown to be true across many fields, that freedom of information leads to greater progress.


Originally posted by Arman
And "Shakespeare" is understood as the creative work of a particular person. You can't copy Hamlet word for word and claim it is your creation. Nor could you copy any other literary or musical work and claim it as your own. The law protects this work, of course. But there is no such apparatus for the martial arts. Very few people will give credit where credit is due. If people could appropriate Hamlet, don't you think by now very few people would know where it came from and who really wrote it? Now, that wouldn't be fair to old Shakespeare, would it? And it wouldn't be fair to Nen ryu, either.

Actually, an apparatus for this does exist in the martial arts. Daito-ryu is copyrighted in Japan, so is Kyokushinkai (IIRC), just like Winsor Pilates and Tae Bo in the US. Intellectual property laws protect these things just as they protect Shakespeare (which, IIRC, has long since passed into the public domain in any case, so copy away!). Of course, it might be hard to prove your case in court if you haven't publicly established the unique curriculum of your ryuha :).

Best,

Chris

S. Harrington
9th August 2003, 03:56
Actually Chris, I totally agree with you on the analogy (sorta.) Yes, Daito-ryu in today's world is far far less lethal than other current methods. However in the environment that it was spawned, it was probably an important method to survival.

But then, I think that each ryu should probably be date-stamped from point of creation to point of 'extinction. You probably know more about this than I, but one could probably find the date that each particular koryu didn't 'keep up with the Jones' in either technology or strategy. Kept the tachi, didn't like the katana; kept the naginata, didn't like the line of yari; kept the cavalry, we can overun the muskets (bye bye Takeda clan.) I guess that's why they are koryu - antiques.

On a side note I once talked with Hunter Armstrong about this and if he knew of any ryu that were applying old techniques and strategy to modern weapons (particularly handguns) and he said yes but couldn't go into detail (Secrecy again!)

But in a way Daito-ryu and secrecy are proven just like I said. Even with today's advanced firepower, communications, and yes nuclear/biological/chemical weapons, today's Navy Seals restrict the teaching of their hand-to-hand combat instruction (currently Dieter's system - not guest instructors) from being taught outside the group. Any edge is better than none.

S. Harrington

wagnerphysed
11th August 2003, 04:59
IMO, principles are the important piece of what we do. These are the secrets that are being protected. Many of the modern techniques utilized on today's battlefield are based on old, not new principles. These principles are enhanced by modern technology and training techniques. However, they are still the same old principles. So, the principles of a koryu, that were tested and proven on the battlefield with katana and naginata etc., may have applications today that barely resemble their application in ancient Japan. Yet the principles are the same.

IMO, the only over estimation taking place here is how easily this knowledge can be converted into a weapon of mass destruction. However, make no mistake, an army can be a weapon of mass destruction when sound principles are used to develop battlefield tactics.

Sorry for ranting. However, I can see the correlation between the nuclear physics and the secrets being closely guarded by a koryu. Then again, I am not necessarily correct or accurate.:)

Arman
11th August 2003, 18:20
Chris,

Well, open and closed is a relative thing. Compared to what the situation was at times in the past the establishment of the study group in Baltimore is a quite significant "opening", if you ask me. Just ask yourself if there would have been books, videos, public demonstrations and foreign study groups (or even foreign students) if Sagawa had stayed in as the controlling influence in Daito-ryu.

Maybe not. But even Sokaku demonstrated in public seminars. But I suppose you must consider all these developments a good thing, considering your position. I don't disagree.

Actually, an apparatus for this does exist in the martial arts. Daito-ryu is copyrighted in Japan, so is Kyokushinkai (IIRC), just like Winsor Pilates and Tae Bo in the US. Intellectual property laws protect these things just as they protect Shakespeare (which, IIRC, has long since passed into the public domain in any case, so copy away!). Of course, it might be hard to prove your case in court if you haven't publicly established the unique curriculum of your ryuha

Come on, Chris. Geesh! :rolleyes:

Regards,
Arman Partamian

Nathan Scott
22nd August 2003, 20:49
But even Sokaku demonstrated in public seminars.

He may have demonstrated techniques in front of people at "public" seminars, but the seminars were, from what I understand, conducted in private, and some of the prospective members were weeded out (for any number of reasons) using a number of methods by Sokaku before beginning training. They were also generally geared towards military and police - not fully open to anyone who wanted to train under Sokaku.

Anyway, I thought I'd mention that the idea Chris Li is talking about, developing martial arts in a collective atmosphere for the good of the science, DOES exist already. Donn Draeger was the "chuko no so" of Hoplology, which is continued now by his student Hunter Armstrong (current IHS Director). FWIW, I'm fully in favor of the science of hoplology (and have been a member for years), but this is different than exploiting individual traditions to the masses.

In other words, there is a place for both.

Regards,

glad2bhere
22nd August 2003, 22:47
Dear Nathan:

"...He may have demonstrated techniques in front of people at "public" seminars, but the seminars were, from what I understand, conducted in private, and some of the prospective members were weeded out (for any number of reasons) using a number of methods by Sokaku before beginning training. They were also generally geared towards military and police - not fully open to anyone who wanted to train under Sokaku....."

I think you raise a VERY important point. It might do well for folks to work at drawing a line between what is truely secret, and what is simply restricted from general consumption or restricted to an identified aspect of the public. Had Ueyshiba not been introduced to Takeda by Admiral Takeshita, there is probably a pretty good chance Ueyeshiba's followers might have concluded that the DRAJJ techniques were secret when in fact they were simply not something that Takeda wanted to teach to the commoner. Fact is, I find myself becoming more and more selective about who I accept for a private student. It has very little to do with secrecy and a lot to do with not wanting to waste my time and energy with folks who are looking for novelty stimulation which this week just happens to be KMA. It took a while to get where I am at, and I am continuing to progress in my study and research. Hapkido is not some big secret. I am just selective about who is going to get the benefit of my limited resources of time and energy. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Alec Corper
25th August 2003, 10:26
Hello All,
Great thread, sorry to come to it so late.
To my mind there can only be 4 reasons for secrecy in an art, some of which are still valid, maybe others not. I cannot prioritize them in any significant order, since the reasoning involved is definitely dependant upon variable cicumstances.

1. Combat survival: In those days when members of different ryu might meet each other in life or death combat knowing the others "secrets" could mean survival and victory. This seems a most compelling argument, but is it still valid?

2. Economics: We've got something you can't get anywhere else, you will have to pay big time, either money, support, service, energy, and probably all. Don't teach it all at once, in case one of your students sets up a rival shop, maybe even showing that the secrets were not all that devastating, but implying possession of a few new ones! This reason is still valid today, after all, the more everything becomes available the more people will pine for the unique and the not (easily) available.

3.Purity of techniques and uniqueness of method: This one seems to be only important to The Soke and highest level practioners of a Ryu who have no interest in the economics of large organizations, and can remain inward facing. However the introvert organization tends to fossilize, with people repeating battlefield techniques that have not been ( and cannot be ) tested for hundereds of years. This can lead to stagnation and empty ritual, whilst still giving practioners a "special" feeling.

4. The Ryu as a vehicle for preserving and transmitting an inner tradition: From what I have read (therfore all second hand or worse) most Ryu claim some kind of divine origin, in other words their secrets stem from some sort of higher intelligence, illumination or spiritual insight. The Ryu only exists to act as a body within which this transmission from the Gods can be housed, therefore the preservation of the inner forms is required by these deities or else they will go elsewhere and the Ryu becomes empty and dies.

My personal take on this is simple, virtually every great MA teacher stole as much as they could wherever they could, since, unless you can make it your own, it is worthless. So the secrets are not secrets to those who can penetrate them, and those who can't can be given them all and still not understand.
Most of the great secrets are hidden in plain sight.

with respect, Alec Corper

Brently Keen
25th August 2003, 23:56
"Had Ueyshiba not been introduced to Takeda by Admiral Takeshita, there is probably a pretty good chance Ueyeshiba's followers might have concluded that the DRAJJ techniques were secret when in fact they were simply not something that Takeda wanted to teach to the commoner."

FWIW: Morihei Ueshiba was introduced to Sokaku Takeda by Kotaro Yoshida not Admiral Takeshita. In fact, Kotaro Yoshida sponsored Ueshiba's entrance into Daito-ryu and vouched for his character. In those days personal introductions and recommendations were generally required, IOW you could not train without an invitation.

Traditionally, the secrets of oshikiuchi were resrved for those "within the threshhold". IOW they were disclosed only to select individuals, ranking samurai and court ladies serving the Shogun inside the palace/courtyard. Some may dispute this version of history as fanciful for lack of extant supporting documents - but the oral tradition of Daito-ryu (and I believe other evidence supports that tradition) insists that the art was developed by the Aizu Takeda for self-defense inside the castle, and was exclusively reserved for those amongst the "inner circle".

Later, Daito-ryu was only taught to those of samurai descent, important government, police and military officials and the like. Sokaku Takeda, himself the reviver (chuko-no-so) of the tradition had some 20,000 people sign his enrollment books - that's a lot of students! And most of those I understand were from upper class (samurai descent), or a least respectable goverment, business or educational professions. Amongst all those, pehaps less than a dozen really received and/or grasped the inner-secrets of the art. Despite Tanomo Saigo urging Sokaku to teach the masses so that the art would not die, and Sokaku doing just that, I think the real secrets were still jealously guarded just as they always were - I think the real secrets were restricted to a select few that Sokaku felt he could trust because they were of decent and respectable character. Today, despite the more open approach of many instructors - I'd say that Daito-ryu secrets are still closely held and guarded in much the same way.

Respectfully,

Brently Keen

Cady Goldfield
26th August 2003, 01:53
Originally posted by Brently Keen
Today, despite the more open approach of many instructors - I'd say that Daito-ryu secrets are still closely held and guarded in much the same way.


I agree with that assessment. It seems to be a natural part of the learning-teaching cycle, not unique to koryu -- this is a human characteristic that manifests itself in many crafts, arts and trades, too.

Nathan Scott
26th August 2003, 02:06
Today, despite the more open approach of many instructors - I'd say that Daito-ryu secrets are still closely held and guarded in much the same way.

Though I don't know "all the DR secrets", I'd have to respectfully disagree with this. They may not all be on video tape, but a great deal of inner-transmission is being leaked to non-members on an increasingly larger basis, from what I can tell. FWIW.

Thanks for addressing the Takeshita point though. I meant to write back about that and forgot.

Regards,

Cady Goldfield
26th August 2003, 03:08
Nathan,
On what do you base that belief, and what do you believe to constitute "inner transmissions"? It seems to me that for the most part, those that "gots something" are still being pretty chary in their transission and dispensing of it.

Walker
26th August 2003, 07:13
Originally posted by Brently Keen
I think the real secrets were restricted to a select few that Sokaku felt he could trust because they were of decent and respectable character. Today, despite the more open approach of many instructors - I'd say that Daito-ryu secrets are still closely held and guarded in much the same way.

Hey! How’d YOU get in here!?! :eek:

Sorry Brently, couldn’t resist... :(

[must try harder in future]
[must try harder in future]
[must try harder in future]
[must try harder in future]
[must try harder in future]

Ron Tisdale
26th August 2003, 15:45
Well, I'm not so sure about secrets...these things that are being leaked, Nathan...aren't they more of items of personal transmission that are given to people who seek them out? Things that aren't written down, but are ok to pass on based on personal relationships? And so, what we have is a redefinition of what depth the personal relationship must have before such information is passed?

Before, you might study directly in the same local for a long period of time. Now, such training is available for a wider audience. But you still have to make the effort, and do the work. Is it really that much different?

Ron

Nathan Scott
26th August 2003, 19:36
Inner-transmission are things that are intended to be kept within the trusted membership. The biggest for Daito ryu, of course, are those aspects that relate to aiki. Kondo S. said that breaking the opponent's balance on contact was something that Tokimune S. didn't teach to the Daitokan students (block, atemi, execute technique - "aikibudo"), but that Tokimune passed on to him, under the title of DR AJJ, this important technical modification.

How to break the balance on contact was something that the Daitokan student were not aware of for over 30 years, because it was not intended for them to learn it. Now it is more or less common knowledge, and is being taught (at an entry level) openly.

Also, the definition of aiki, on a few levels, has been blabbed publicly by both instructors and students, as have important other technical elements. These were were most definitely not intended to be public knowledge.

There have been additional leaks that I've noticed over the years. My opinion is based on first hand knowledge. The harm resulting from such leaks remains to be seen at this point.

I don't know how to explain what is "inner-transmission" and what is open, but generally if you don't have a sense for what it is, you're better off not saying anything at all (discussions of history are typically pretty safe).

Trust in classical arts is a big deal.

Ron Tisdale
26th August 2003, 19:55
Trust in classical arts is a big deal.

Agreed. And rightly so.

RT

Nathan Scott
28th October 2003, 00:17
Hi all,

At the risk of over-saturation, I just came across some good discussion along this topic in a different thread, and would like to cut and paste it here after this post.

**

Actually, because of the earlier dates of posting, the posts I merged here ended up at the head of this thread instead of the tail. Not much I can do about that, but hopefully it will not be confusing.

:D

Nathan Scott
19th December 2005, 22:57
Very true, but it doesn't mean we can't have thought provoking and interesting discussions of a technical nature. And if incorrect information is presented, doesn't that simply help those in DR that wish to keep their art secret. Note, not all branches have this policy, some are fairly open as they feel you can hide stuff in plain sight. Only those willing to work for it will understand, hence the need for secrecy is minimal at best.

Sure, people will do what they want. However, if people who are not qualified to speak on behalf of the technical elements of a specific ryu-ha want to post their opinions, I, as the moderator, will probably continue to point out that the person posting is not qualifed to talk about the art's teachings for the benefit of those reading, since I for one am interested in promoting accurate information on this forum. Many post here about such things coming off sounding very authoratative when they are in fact not qualified or authorized to do so.

As far as some branches feeling entitled to publicize Daito-ryu teachings to non-members, yeah, they exist, and they will always be at odds with the other roughly 50% of the branches that follow their teacher's teachings regarding keeping inside information inside. I don't see any easy solution to this difference in idiology, except perhaps debate and discussion.

As I said though, if I read things in this forum that are misleading or incorrect, I will mention it. If an authorized representative of a branch of Daito-ryu contacts me and requests that I assist them with correcting a problem posted on this forum, I'll do that too. Why create another forum full of misinformation? I'd rather see less information here that is at least correct than a bunch of information that is only partially true, exploitive of Daito-ryu, or just wrong.

BTW, for those reading who think we are overly "secretive" about the teachings of ryu-ha like Daito-ryu, I think you'll find that this attitude is more the norm in classical and traditional ryu-ha than the exception. Just do a search of other forums (kenjutsu, koryu) on other ryu-ha, such as threads like these for similar conservativeness:

Jigen Ryu striking question (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31905)
Katori-Shinto ryu. (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31731)
Question on Musashi, Niten ichi ryu, & Gorin no sho (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31262)

Regards,

judasith
20th December 2005, 10:38
Being "secretive" in Daito-ryu is not an attitude, it's been like that for as long as we (my Sensei) begun practicing it.

Even now teachers and yudansha only train more advanced techniques of the curriculum during separate hours than the regular students... it remains in Daito-ryu that feeling that someone watching may "steal" a technique.

BUT I have to point out that this kind of traditional training, is in my very personal opinion, getting risky in these modern times: since people doesn't practice anymore everyday 3 to 5 hours a day, but at most will practice like 2-3 times a week for 2 hours sessions, the teachers tend to die more quickly than the new students can learn the techniques. This in general, not only for Daito-ryu, but for most of the koryus as well (except maybe for Katori Shinto-ryu, which has quite a large follower base). I believe, in the long run, more and more knowledge will die, it's a shame.

Nathan Scott
21st December 2005, 20:43
Yep, there is a lot of interest in classical/traditional ryu-ha, but very little actual participation anymore. If you give away the inner teachings more openly, then yes, you will "get it out there" while there is still a chance. On the other hand, the reasons for making a student wait are related to the student's understanding/development in the art, and perhaps more importantly, the degree of trust imparted to the student by the teacher. If you give all the goods to students too early, the majority that will quit will likely have less loyalty to the system since they haven't trained as long as their seniors, and will be tempted to "sell" the arts methods to outsiders for self-serving reasons (a little money and 15 minutes of fame). That in itself is as damaging to the longevity of an art as having the information just die.

So what is the best answer? One thing people keep forgetting about is private notes and publications. Many koryu have privately published books, detailing the important aspects of the art, that are given (or at least intended to be given) to students only. While there is a risk that these books may be circulated to some degree in the public sector, such circulation will be far less spread than publishing and advertising a book, then selling it on amazon.com to anyone in the world with a credit card.

Yeah, we need more serious students in the traditional arts, but personally I'd rather see some of the arts die a dignified death than be exploited by opportunists who clearly don't respect the arts. After an art dies, then yeah, publish everything that is/was known about it for posterity. But not before that. Each art has a right to try to preserve their teachings, regardless of their decisions as to how best to do it. Sad state of affairs, but reality is reality. It puts a heavy burden on those of us studying such arts to learn and document our training.

Regards,

judasith
22nd December 2005, 09:34
Dear Nathan,

... and that is, what we also do. Even though our Daito-ryu association is one of the largest, our students number in tens, not in hundreds. We probably COULD gain a larger number of students, and we would have if during all these years Sensei had not turned down a vast majority of "appliants". These "appliants" are people who, for instance have 4th dan Judo or Aikido, and say: "I'll give you 200 new students for Seminars and affiliation, and you immediately give me 4th dan in Daito-ryu". Even worse, when my sensei was still only 2°kyu of Takeda Tokimune Sensei and later shodan, when he came back from Hokkaido these kind of people would ask of him 8th or 9th dan, saying "but here outside of Japan, you can award all you want".

And this, unfortunately, not only in Italy: I can list you even quite famous or infamous names of guys who tried during the years to "make a sudden hop" in their diplomas: people like Miguel Ibarra (who, since he presented himself with great titles and rankings of all kind, wanted to add Daito-ryu to it, and that, eventually since he would not receive any answer, "showed" his own system) or Mr. Williams from Saigo-ha, who wanted as soon as a couple of years ago, training in genuine Daito-ryu, despite all the junk he writes in his website...

Then? We go on training like we have always done, there's just a few of us, just to make us "survive"; certainly, the tens of videos published on Daito-ryu do not help us, incredible as it may seem, there are guys out there who buy Kato Sensei videos and try to learn from them, and then teach!!! When we said that to Kato Sensei, he said "But it's impossible to learn from a videotape", but even so we asked him to please stop publishing videos, and that he did since 2002!

So it's best to let the art die, or to sell it cheaply? We probably would let it die, but that doesn't mean we should like it.

Mark Jakabcsin
23rd December 2005, 14:04
Nathan,

I thought this thread was done and headed towards the history pile, and it is probably best if it had been so. Alas it is not.


Sure, people will do what they want. However, if people who are not qualified to speak on behalf of the technical elements of a specific ryu-ha want to post their opinions, I, as the moderator, will probably continue to point out that the person posting is not qualifed to talk about the art's teachings for the benefit of those reading, since I for one am interested in promoting accurate information on this forum. Many post here about such things coming off sounding very authoratative when they are in fact not qualified or authorized to do so.

When it makes you feel good, please point out my lack of official qualification and authorization all you like, I have done so myself. As you know I no longer actively train in DR on a regular basis, at best I train 4 or 5 times per year when I visit folks who are interested. I share with them what I can.

Sorry if my posts sound authoritative, they are meant as a sharing of opinions not the definitive end-all-be-all. However, when information is presented that rings true on some level it wields a certain amount of influence, perhaps that is what you are sensing. Furthermore, as we are all aware many Authorized teachers will simply tell students falsehoods to mislead them and keep them from the truth. I know, at some later date when the student has shown his undying love and loyalty the teacher ‘MAY’ share the truth….or maybe not, either way the lack of truth at the beginning is dishonest, whether it’s ‘Authorized’ or not. Hence, being authorized to speak doesn’t guarantee truth or accuracy. In the end each listener must contemplate each scrap of information, regardless of the source, work to understand the information presented in some context and then decide to accept, reject or shelve it for future consideration as more information becomes available.


As far as some branches feeling entitled to publicize Daito-ryu teachings to non-members, yeah, they exist, and they will always be at odds with the other roughly 50% of the branches that follow their teacher's teachings regarding keeping inside information inside. I don't see any easy solution to this difference in idiology.

So roughly 50% are open, roughly 50% have a different view, interesting. How can one half be sure they are right and the other wrong? Likely both halves have some degree of correctness.



As I said though, if I read things in this forum that are misleading or incorrect, I will mention it. If an authorized representative of a branch of Daito-ryu contacts me and requests that I assist them with correcting a problem posted on this forum, I'll do that too. Why create another forum full of misinformation? I'd rather see less information here that is at least correct than a bunch of information that is only partially true, exploitive of Daito-ryu, or just wrong.

While you don’t come straight out and say it your implication that the technical information I presented is erroneous is fairly straight forward. This seems somewhat at odds with bits and pieces of your earlier posts: ‘Holy Cow’, ‘take it to PM’, etc.

As a reminder, here is the technical information I presented that you now imply is erroneous:


Aiki is more than just biomechanical, it also encompasses a knowledge of attackers minds and emotions and how to manipulate them as well as a knoweldge of one's own mind and emotions and how to protect them. You most definitely can move someone using aiki without physcial contact, heck walk down a busy street in NYC and you see people doing it constantly. This isn't mystical or supernatural, it's simply an understanding of humans. Present them with a perceived force or threat and they will make adjustments if the presentation is correct. Knowing how to create the force (physical or perceived) and then knowing how to manipulate the reaction is a large part of aiki training. Now this doesn't mean one relies solely on such motions in real confrontations, heck much of this is simply a set up for follow up work.

'Transmit it like electricity through an human chaine of people,....', this is someone not understanding the drill. I am guessing the poster has zero personal experience with this drill, he simply watched a video, didn't understand, so it MUST be bogus. The drill is simply a way to illustrate the use of a shape. By lining up and holding hands one can feel how the shape moves through his/her body and into the next person. Over time one begins to understand that these shapes must move through the entire body, even if very small. This is where much of the power is at, using the entire body to move/create the shapes. These shapes also have a great deal to do with kuzshi and the connection with the mind and emotions. Someone sensitive can feel how his/her body actually chases after a desired balance state, but since the shape provides a constantly changing force vector the body is always behind the curve and quickly it's perception of the desired balance state is thrown out of whack. This drill offers many more learning opportunities but those must be experienced first and then puzzled out, but to do this one must keep an open mind.


Nathan, while I don’t expect you to admit it in public I find it hard to believe you find anything erroneous in the information I presented for consideration. I was somewhat vague in my post because I didn’t want to get overly specific or detailed, it takes to much time and effort. If you are saying the information is wrong, as you imply, perhaps I need to stop being so lazy and be more specific. Would that help? Is that what you would like to see? I could cover infinite circle theory, circle generation, specific shapes and how they relate to balance, target displacement, breathing patterns and the relationship between breathing and specific shapes of motion, etc. Perhaps then my points would be more clear and better understood and you wouldn't label them erroneous. :) Although it still wouldn’t change my lack of authorization, but then knowledge isn’t about authorization it’s about truth…..or works and doesn’t work.

None of this is a ‘secret’ it’s all available to every person on the planet and it can be found in several different arts, although their packaging may be different. As Sagawa Sensei pointed out in the book, there may be more than one method to do aiki, and I believe that to be true. Likewise each interested person must struggle to find his/her own understanding and context for information obtained, hence I feel it is impossible to ‘steal technique’. Actually I find that argument to be absurd in nature, since each person that understands on some level has EARNED that level of understanding through contemplation, research, training, etc, it’s impossible to steal. Understanding aiki isn’t like a light switch that can be turned on with the sharing of technical information. In the end no one person or ryu owns the rights to this information as the information is simply about the design of humanity, how the parts work together and how to manipulate them. I guess God owns the rights and we just lease a small part of the knowledge.



BUT I have to point out that this kind of traditional training, is in my very personal opinion, getting risky in these modern times: since people doesn't practice anymore everyday 3 to 5 hours a day, but at most will practice like 2-3 times a week for 2 hours sessions, the teachers tend to die more quickly than the new students can learn the techniques. This in general, not only for Daito-ryu, but for most of the koryus as well (except maybe for Katori Shinto-ryu, which has quite a large follower base). I believe, in the long run, more and more knowledge will die, it's a shame.

Giacomo , good point and agreed.

Take care and Merry Christmas!

mark j.

Dan Harden
26th December 2005, 13:54
Mark

Nathans points are sound and valid. No one is trying to dictate to you what you may or may not do with your knowledge. He is suggesting that it not be bandied about on the net (or even worse-in person) too freely. There are two people and two people only, who may effect your decision. You and your teacher (or ex-teacher). You two know what you agreed too when you trained together.

As for what is secret and what is not?
You wrote
None of this is a ‘secret’ it’s all available to every person on the planet and it can be found in several different arts, although their packaging may be different.

While everyone on the planet can just swing a sword and cut things- cutting is universal after all-I am pretty sure my teacher and fellow practitioners would not be thrilled to read THEIR way of doing it blathered about on the net anytime soon. And I am very sure that this is understood by the teachers of koryu when they teach it to us in the first place. We just seem to have a mental block to it.
I am fairly certain your eyes were opened to some sophisticated methods, but further still, your eyes were opened to ways to see everything else in a different light. The first problem with internal arts like DR is that once you get the keys.....everything else starts to fall into place...Like Ueshiba said "Takeda opened my eyes to true Budo." the second problem is keeping the imaginative or talented guys who now want to take the skills and go explore.
Which brings me to your other point.
You wrote
the information is simply about the design of humanity, how the parts work together and how to manipulate them. I guess God owns the rights and we just lease a small part of the knowledge.

All I see is what we didn't know is suddenly somehow "universal knowledge" that most people in the arts do NOT know and at best know parts of. Until and unless you were exposed to them...they were a secret from you. A mystery to be revealed. Given from a trusting teacher. The good CMA teachers apparently have this dilema as well. they seem to be holding back, and holding on to proprietary information.

Furthermore, as we are all aware many Authorized teachers will simply tell students falsehoods to mislead them and keep them from the truth. I know, at some later date when the student has shown his undying love and loyalty the teacher ‘MAY’ share the truth….or maybe not, either way the lack of truth at the beginning is dishonest, whether it’s ‘Authorized’ or not.

May it forever remain this way...the more I read, the more people I meet, the stronger I feel about this.
And come on Mark!! This isn't just about you bud. Everyone is faced with the internal monologue "What to say / what not say..do I say anything? This isn't directly related.... this is....what to do, what to do."
Now, as for what you say you COULD have written about in detail-specifically the shapes and breathing? Let me be the first to thank you for NOT sharing that!
Those of us who train in the arts that remain strictly controlled all have a tacit understanding of protocol. Respecting that, even after you leave is just good manners.


Cheers, and peace
Dan

Mark Jakabcsin
26th December 2005, 22:02
Dan,
First off, nice post. Your passion for the topic and sincerity were conveyed in a most appropriate manner. I appreciate the difficulty in doing so and applaud the effort. I understand and agree with many of your points but in the end my opinion about openness is very different than yours. I don’t expect we will ever come to an agreement on this topic, and that is ok, as differences make life interesting.



There are two people and two people only, who may effect your decision. You and your teacher (or ex-teacher). You two know what you agreed too when you trained together.

If I had made a promise to my old DR teacher with regard to what is secret or not I would certainly keep it. However, no such promise was ever asked for or made, hence I don’t feel the slightest obligation. I can and will share as I see fit.


Those of us who train in the arts that remain strictly controlled all have a tacit understanding of protocol. Respecting that, even after you leave is just good manners.

I understand your feelings here but the fact is the teacher I studied under is probably the most open of any DR teacher, hence the protocol you mention is different. Nor does your agreement to keep things secret imply that I have an obligation to uphold your commitment. Your agreement is just that, yours, it doesn’t affect me. Surely you realize this even if you don’t like it.



I am fairly certain your eyes were opened to some sophisticated methods, but further still, your eyes were opened to ways to see everything else in a different light. The first problem with internal arts like DR is that once you get the keys.....everything else starts to fall into place...Like Ueshiba said "Takeda opened my eyes to true Budo." the second problem is keeping the imaginative or talented guys who now want to take the skills and go explore.

This is a very good paragraph but I don’t see it (the keys) as a ‘problem’, I see it as a wondrous event that should be shared, whenever possible. (Unfortunately it is possible to share in a meaningful way in very few situations, as you know it’s time consuming and difficult.) Furthermore I believe the sharing process helps one understand the keys you mention on a deeper level. Hence, sharing with others not only presents others with the opportunity to find the keys but it helps further the knowledge of the one sharing. Perhaps this helping others to help yourself is even a part of budo.

In the current art I study and teach we are encouraged to share and be as open as possible, although we aren’t supposed to spoon feed, as spoon feeding rarely leads to actual learning. Awhile back my teacher told me I needed to start teaching so I could learn and increase my knowledge and understanding. At the time I knew this to be true but I wasn’t interested in teaching but once I did start I was amazed at how much I learned by sharing with others. It was like opening my eyes to a whole new art and way of thinking. Not to mention the complete joy I find in sharing with individuals that are deeply interested in the topic, capable of understanding and willing to work and explore. This is very good!

Well, Dan (and Nathan and many others), in the end I don’t think we will be able to find common ground. I do understand your position and I do admire your loyalty to your commitment, if I had given the same commitment I would likewise be honoring it. I didn’t and hence I am free to hold a different opinion, hopefully you can appreciate that and understand it. If not, well…..there is nothing I can say. Take care and Happy New Year.

Mark J.

EricH
27th December 2005, 17:07
Sorry to belabor this actually very interesing (despite Mr. Humm's protestations) thread but I am dying to know...

Marc said:


Furthermore, as we are all aware many Authorized teachers will simply tell students falsehoods to mislead them and keep them from the truth. I know, at some later date when the student has shown his undying love and loyalty the teacher ‘MAY’ share the truth….or maybe not, either way the lack of truth at the beginning is dishonest, whether it’s ‘Authorized’ or not.

Dan replied:

May it forever remain this way...the more I read, the more people I meet, the stronger I feel about this.

Why on earth would you find this situation desirable?

I have only very limited exposure to classical Japanese styles but I think I have been fortunate to be exposed to very high-quality material and movement from two excellent teachers willing to share and discuss honestly and frankly. My movement/work has benefitted greatly from this limited interaction.

Is this so bad?
Is this the exception and not the rule for these styles?

Also, Marc's discussion of "aiki" rang very true to my experience (no big suprise since we train in the same style... full disclosure). There was nothing secret or earth-shattering about what he said. They were simply the reflections of someone insightful who has spent significant time reflecting and training with quality.

Additional disclosure: I have met and trained with Marc and I hope for more in the future.

Cady Goldfield
27th December 2005, 18:45
Eric,
Have you heard the fable of the five blind men and the elephant? Each felt a different part of the critter and described what an elephant is, based on their specific experiences.

When "aiki" and even "Daito ryu" are discussed on a board, it is like that. Discussing it online is fruitless and even more confusing for newcomers who really should be pursuing studies on the mats rather than trying to glean understanding via heresay or casual conversation on an internet forum.

It's better not to talk about it at all. If you read Dan's earlier posts on this forum, you'll note he refers to the "Aikjujutsu Forum" as "the formum that isn't." There's a reason for that!

EricH
27th December 2005, 19:32
Cady, thanks for your reply.


Have you heard the fable of the five blind men and the elephant? Each felt a different part of the critter and described what an elephant is, based on their specific experiences.

Not to be snotty but that is an example of exactly why people do benefit from discussion. If those blind men got together with open minds and discussed what they felt they would all get a much better idea of what exactly they were dealing with.

From my outsiders perspective it is very silly to have secrets. 400 years ago in Japan it may have had a purpose but now I believe it is totally counter-productive.

In fact I'll go so far as to say such secret keeping has been very detrimental to the development/evolution of the styles that require it and the individuals that practice it.

If anybody has an argument for such secret keeping being a positive contributor to their development, I would be very interested in hearing it.

Addendum:
I do understand and respect the role the tradition plays. And if a teacher agrees to teach you something conditional on your keeping mum then you certainly should keep your mouth shut about it.

Given that people here have made these commitments well... there really may not be much to discuss.


It's better not to talk about it at all. If you read Dan's earlier posts on this forum, you'll note he refers to the "Aikjujutsu Forum" as "the formum that isn't." There's a reason for that!

You may be right! It is the forum of no forum, I am an outsider and this has probably already been discussed ad nauseum. My apologies if this is the case.

Cady Goldfield
27th December 2005, 20:05
Eric, you're missing the point of the fable... all fables have morals, ya know! ;)
The point was, even when the blind men got together and discussed their experiences, it was impossible for each to convey to the other what his own unique experience had been, because words do not adequately explain or describe experience.

Now, don't go dissing those wise elders who created those fables to teach us young uns important lessons. :p

R_Garrelts
28th December 2005, 00:10
The point was, even when the blind men got together and discussed their experiences, it was impossible for each to convey to the other what his own unique experience had been, because words do not adequately explain or describe experience.

Ah yes, the "you'd have to feel it" response. It really is amazing to me that, in this age of such remarkable (and completely describable) technologies as cellular phones and NMRI, some people still believe something as straight-forward as unarmed fighting to be simply "too complex" to discuss.

If only this reasoning held in other walks of life...

Patent agent:

"I don't see how this invention can possibly work. In fact, it appears some fundamental physical laws would have to be violated for this to happen. Patent denied."

Applicant:

"But you just don't understand... You'd have to feeel it."

Nathan Scott
30th December 2005, 00:39
Hi all,

I'll try to make this short since most of this has already been hashed out...

Mark, I hope you realize that I wasn't trying to point fingers at any one individual in my disclaimer. It would have been easy for me to do so, but I thought it would be enough to simply inform readers of what they were reading without attacking the contributors personally. If you wish to take it personally, that is on you. If you think that something I'm saying is hypocritical or incorrect, I'd be happy to explain my point of view to your via PM or email (I'm working for the next 4 days though).

As far as everyone sharing their technical experiences on paper or verbally, I maintain that it is largely pointless if you are trying to learn a specific art under a specific teacher/lineage (perhaps not if you are just looking to stumble across interesting things you can use in your own art...), but if you WERE to do it, it would probably be best to create specific forums for each branch/teacher and have their members talk about their experiences. The various branches of DR tend to vary greatly in what is taught, how it is taught, and when it is taught. At least this way you could have a common sounding board instead of a muddle of what become misinformation about the art as a whole very quickly. As I said, I'd like to keep down the amount of what becomes misinformation here as much as possible.


So roughly 50% are open, roughly 50% have a different view, interesting. How can one half be sure they are right and the other wrong? Likely both halves have some degree of correctness.

Yeah, perhaps so. But have you ever thought about what type of agenda a teacher breaking away from their own teacher/branch might have with publicizing the art? The teachers that are publishing the teachings to the public have either ALL broken away from their teachers/branches, or are struggling with some type of legitimacy issues. The branches that are quiet are established and not involved in such issues. So if this is an accurate observation on my part, then is publicizing the internal workings of an art being done to preserve the health of the art or for various political, financial, or "fame" reasons? If we accept that Takeda and many if not most of his senior direct students/heirs preached keeping the art internal, then how is publicizing the art for the reasons I stated above by future generations showing respect to their teachers? Is this something we as students should be embracing? One of my instructors, Obata Sensei, once told me a long time ago to "copy my good parts only, not my bad parts". That was good advise that continues to help me in my budo path.

But as you say, we probably won't end up agreeing with each other, which is fine. I'm sure you have your reasons why you feel compelled to "spread the wealth" (you mentioned learning from the experience, but couldn't you learn more about your art from doing the same thing with members of your own dojo?).


If anybody has an argument for such secret keeping being a positive contributor to their development, I would be very interested in hearing it.

Eric, I've basically given some reasons before, but I'll try to sum them up briefly again here:

1) Each classical/traditional art has a RIGHT to try to preserve their teachings the way they think is best for future generations. By making the teachings public you take away the ability of the art to teach the art in the way they feel is best to those they feel are best suited to be taught. Aka: Control of information dissemination.

2) Making technical/inside art information public has proven to provide, for the most part, nothing more than money and fame for the person releasing it. It does not bring in swarms of new students. Giving away the teachings in this way hurts the art, because those interested in the art no longer have to train in the art to "get the secrets" - not that there is really any substitute for being a member of an art, but most are content just to get the goods and are not interested in hard work anyway. There are numerous ways of documenting such information if desired for future generations that do not include making it public to non-members. Aka: No benefit for the art.

3) Most classical/traditional ryu-ha have a history of "secrecy" to some degree. As I pointed out earlier, Daito-ryu is not the only ryu-ha to be sensitive about releasing information publicly. Those studing koryu fully understand this, while those coming from a gendai background/mindset have a very hard time accepting this idea. Daito-ryu has a very clear history of wanting to keep the inside information inside, and I'm not talking about 400 years ago - but the last generation of senior instructors. Nothing has changed in our society in the last few years that makes the release of all previously confidential information suddenly irrelevant, unless you count the influence the internet has had on societial expectations. Aka: Tradition.

Happy Holidays to all,

Mark Jakabcsin
30th December 2005, 13:28
In the roughly two minutes between posting my previous message, my change of heart and deleting the message, apparently several people read it. Therefore I might as well post it. Warning, this could lead to further thread drift in a whole new direction. :)



Ah yes, the "you'd have to feel it" response. It really is amazing to me that, in this age of such remarkable (and completely describable) technologies as cellular phones and NMRI, some people still believe something as straight-forward as unarmed fighting to be simply "too complex" to discuss.


Interesting point but humans aren't machines like cellular phones or NMRI. While those are complex, they are nothing compare to a human being. I once read an article about robotics and the robotics engineer inteviewed said that one of the hardest human motions to replicate is the fluid movement and senstivity of the human hand. He thought it might be possible but it would require 3 to 5 super computers (this was only 3 or 4 years ago so computing power still fairly strong), and that was for only one hand.

And that is only motion but a human's motion can't be split from their emotion since one affects the other. If you still aren't seeing this as difficult then please explain to me so I can understand exactly what love feels like, or anger or any other emotion. Explain it so we understand it and can file a patent that will be accepted and universally recognized. It just ain't as easy as you want it to be.

While many things must be felt to truly understand I still find discussion helpful. If nothing else someone says something from a different perspective that gets my mind thinking and exploring in new directions. Perhaps that exploration ends up somewhere totally different than the person that sparked my thoughts, so what, it's all valuable, even the failures.

Mark J.

R_Garrelts
30th December 2005, 16:19
In the roughly two minutes between posting my previous message, my change of heart and deleting the message, apparently several people read it. Therefore I might as well post it. Warning, this could lead to further thread drift in a whole new direction. :)

Actually, apparently anyone who signed up for email notification receives a copy of the original response. For the record, here is what I responded with via PM:

Hello Mr. Jakabcsin,

I only recently realized that email notices of new replies also contain the original message. Anyway, even though you deleted your reply, I thought it deserved a response.

You wrote:

Interesting point but humans aren't machines like cellular phones or
NMRI. While those are complex, they are nothing compare to a human being.

Absolutely. The human body (and mind) is remarkably complex. The feedback mechanisms that allow one to, for instance, hold a wrist in place while the rest of the body moves around it (as in something like tai-no-henko) make my head spin. However, replicating the specific mechanisms that allow for this sort of movement is not necessary to explain how the movement itself works (by "how it works" I am referring only to the effect it has on the opponent, why it has that effect, and what must be done to replicate that effect). In other words, sure, if I were to try to completely explain what happens when you raise your arm at the elbow, it would be pretty difficult, and, depending on where you want to draw the line on what it means to "completely explain" something, it might very well be impossible using only what is currently known about the human body (indeed, even physics). But, I can very easily say that for the arm to bend up at the elbow, a torque (about the elbow) must be applied to the forearm that is greater than the torque due to the pull of gravity, and all the more in-depth explanations must conform to this fact. Of course, I said nothing about muscles or how they are fired, and so, you could very reasonably say that I haven't explained how it works. All I'm really suggesting is a "black box" sort of "explanation" for what a technique does and how it does it. So, yes, I am being naive, but this really should be sufficient to explain how to do a technique. Even with the so-called "psychic energy" techniques, no-one actually needs to know (or be able replicate with a robot) the exact inner workings of the mind. All we need is the good old empirical "if you show someone a threat they might react in a way that can be exploited." And there we have it, a working (if a bit naive) explanation of how it works. And I can take that out and immediately start playing with the idea.

And that is only motion but a human's motion can't be split from their
emotion since one affects the other.

This is also true. But, assuming you aren't saying that one man's emotion can directly (that is, independently of visual cues, bodily contact, etc.) affect another's, it is really beside the point when explaining the technique itself. The only reason I would actually need to know your exact mental state when performing a technique would be if it were impossible to replicate the motion without being in exactly the same state of mind. This might actually be true on some incredibly precise scale, but the imprecision of human motor skills, in general, will probably completely dwarf the need to know whether or not Takeda Sokaku was in love (and what type of love it was!) when he performed aiki-sage.

If you still aren't seeing this as
difficult then please explain to me so I can understand exactly what
love feels like, or anger or any other emotion. Explain it so we
understand it and can file a patent that will be accepted and universally
recognized.

A straw man argument. Of course, I have no idea what it feels like for you (or anyone besides myself, for that matter) to be in love. Claims of anything otherwise weren't in my post, either. I was merely suggesting that, if a technique is in keeping with current understandings of physics (and this appears to be the mantra of a number of Daito-ryu people here), it should be explainable (again, by "explainable" I only mean the bare minimum of information required for another human being to replicate it, though, of course, much more beyond that level can also be explained). To suggest that a technique cannot be explained, is to suggest not only that it is not in keeping with Newtonian physics, but also that it is somehow beyond science, in general. This could even be true, but it is the position of a mystic, and it makes me wonder exactly how anyone is supposed to learn this stuff in the first place. My point was really only that you can't have it both ways: If a technique is in keeping with physics, anatomy and physiology, and psychology, (as a patented invention must be) it is explainable. Conversely, if it is not explainable, it can't be in keeping with those disciplines.


While many things must be felt to truly understand I still find
discussion helpful. If nothing else someone says something from a different
perspective that gets my mind thinking and exploring in new directions.
Perhaps that exploration ends up somewhere totally different than the
person that sparked my thoughts, so what, it's all valuable, even the
failures.

Agreed 100 percent. It really is always a pleasure to read your posts. Hope you are enjoying the holidays.

Best wishes and happy training,

Richard

szczepan
31st December 2005, 16:48
I was merely suggesting that, if a technique is in keeping with current understandings of physics (and this appears to be the mantra of a number of Daito-ryu people here), it should be explainable (again, by "explainable" I only mean the bare minimum of information required for another human being to replicate it, though, of course, much more beyond that level can also be explained). To suggest that a technique cannot be explained, is to suggest not only that it is not in keeping with Newtonian physics, but also that it is somehow beyond science, in general. This could even be true, but it is the position of a mystic, and it makes me wonder exactly how anyone is supposed to learn this stuff in the first place. My point was really only that you can't have it both ways: If a technique is in keeping with physics, anatomy and physiology, and psychology, (as a patented invention must be) it is explainable. Conversely, if it is not explainable, it can't be in keeping with those disciplines.
Richard
Not only that. S.Takeda was very obsessive not to show the techniques to outsiders. He said something like that: if someone can observe a technique, he can very easy learn it and develop a counter. It can be read in some interview I believe in AJ web site.
It will be in direct contradiction with many opinions about a difficulty to learn mysterious "explosive power of Aiki".

skylinerR32
1st January 2006, 07:21
Not only that. S.Takeda was very obsessive not to show the techniques to outsiders. He said something like that: if someone can observe a technique, he can very easy learn it and develop a counter. It can be read in some interview I believe in AJ web site.
It will be in direct contradiction with many opinions about a difficulty to learn mysterious "explosive power of Aiki".

Sokaku Takeda paranoid about not openly demonstrating techniques in public?
Yes. Historically, the general attitude of both Sokaku Takeda and Tokimune Takeda preferred little or no publicity regarding Daito-Ryu. Tokimune Takeda, however, apparently became more open than his father regarding this matter:


The late Tokimune Takeda Soke would not permit public demonstrations of any techniques other than ikkajo, and although later in his life he said that nikajo and sankajo could also be shown, he was basically opposed to public exposure. [Kondo Katsuyuki quoted in "Mainline Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu Revisited" by Ted Howell, published on-line: http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=434



He said something like that: if someone can observe a technique, he can very easy learn it and develop a counter. It can be read in some interview I believe in AJ web site.

Please provide specifics as to which article/interview contains this statment and where may it be found on the Aikido Journal website. I would be very interested in reading it. "He [Sokaku Takeda] said something like that" and "It can be read in some interview I believe. . ." does not qualify as verifiable documentation in support of a certain perspective. Let's not use the Saigo-ha approach in providing source materials for corroborating evidence.



It will be in direct contradiction with many opinions about a difficulty to learn mysterious "explosive power of Aiki".

Whose opinions provide direct contradiction? Did one of these individuals make a statement (direct or implied) about the difficulty in learing the 'explosive power of Aiki'?

Sincerely,
Jim Yang

MarkF
1st January 2006, 14:59
Excuse me for butting in, but I wanted to say something about mark j.'s posts concerning secrecy v. openess, but in a general way.

I agree with him but I also believe the following to be true: Kodokan Judo cannot be copied or learned by explanation or by looking at pictures, reading books, how-to books or watching video. One must be a member to learn "the secrets."

In the early days of the Kodokan, there was a specific rule against the teaching of technique, or even showing technique to those not a member of the Kodokan. I believe this rule to still be in effect.

But Judo is an "open" art. OK, but compared to what? Daito Ryu? Well, in a way.

As mark j. and others have been stating, you cannot truly learn something by watching or by other medium such as video and books. You still have to be a member of the club, a Kodokan Judo club, otherwise you cannot possibly understand or perform correctly without benefit of a dojo environment and a properly trained instructor. But the man or woman from whom I learn is a Kodokan Judo teacher, a sensei, even a shihan.

Still one must be a member. In private, you may indeed learn to do such technique in the way you are shown, it may appear to be the correct way to do it, but if not a member you cannot possibly learn any true effectiveness of the technique.

So is the rule still in effect? I say it is, and for the most part, it is as much like mark j. is posting concerning Daito Ryu. True, judo is widely practiced but that does not negate the one, simple truism in all this: you must be a student of a qualified teacher to learn all of it as it will take at least as long as does AJJ to learn correctly.

If Sokaku Takeda was right, that giving it away is too easy IF he was to sow a technique and by that, a person will learn a counter too easily, well perhaps he was a bit paranoid. After all, illiteracy does put a person on the edges of society and it becomes difficult to even belong to a part of it. I believe this is true with anything, but as the subject is really secrecy v. openess, it is probably just a discussion, this secrecy, so perhaps even discussing or even showing, for example, me, a DR technique, it will most likely be impossible for me to actually learn it correctly.

Perhaps the secrecy of the techniques really doesn't exist nor does it need to be. Even if shown, it will always be your way of doing it which is not what a technique is about.

Read any how-to thread in the judo forum and you will find that no one, not anyone does it precisely as discussed. Is the Kodokan secret safe then? I believe "absolutely." If you are not there and you do not feel it, you cannot do it. It must ber done over and over and over again, and even then you may be able to do the technique to your advantage, but then you may be a very poor teacher of it.

This is out of left field, but I believe that even today in a world of Olympic judo and world championships, teaching or showing, or perhaps from books such as "Best Judo" you cannot learn technique properly unless you are a member of the club. A big club to be sure, but you have to experience it with a variety of people who train you correctly and often before claiming that you can do something because you saw it and copied it.

It just does not work like that. Anyway, I'll butt out as I think this a good thread and am eagerly waiting for Nathan to separate the two subjects in the thread.

The secret is safe. Do not fall out of your chair if a person who has only seen technique appears to properly teach a technique that is a secret. If you recognize a technique being DR, but the person you see doing it has only seen it, I do not think you have much about to worry. And even if he physically does it, I still do not think there is much there to be concerned with. The secret is safe.


Mark F.

szczepan
2nd January 2006, 05:12
Please provide specifics as to which article/interview contains this statment and where may it be found on the Aikido Journal website. I would be very interested in reading it. "He [Sokaku Takeda] said something like that" and "It can be read in some interview I believe. . ." does not qualify as verifiable documentation in support of a certain perspective. Let's not use the Saigo-ha approach in providing source materials for corroborating evidence.

Sincerely,
Jim Yang
if I remember wel, it was in that with a journaliste who went to Hokkaido and was very sceptic about all those Daito ryu things.It is probably the only one interview with S.Takeda.
Presently I don't have much time to do research, but if you are REALLY interested, you will find it quite easy.

skylinerR32
2nd January 2006, 20:43
if I remember wel, it was in that with a journaliste who went to Hokkaido and was very sceptic about all those Daito ryu things.It is probably the only one interview with S.Takeda.
Presently I don't have much time to do research, but if you are REALLY interested, you will find it quite easy.

The only direct interview with Sokaku Takeda that I found on the Aikido Journal website with a journalist who visited him in Hokkaido can be found here:
"Face to Face with Sokaku Takeda" by Yoichi Ozaka (Aiki News #68, August 1985):
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=186

Was Ozaka skeptical of the 67 year old man less than five feet tall who first demonstrated his art by throwing his student around and pinning him with the quickness and ease of a man half his age? Yes.

Was Ozaka's skepticism satisfied after Takeda allowed him to experience the art first hand? Most definitey. Here's Ozaka's account of what happened when Takeda demonstrated on him:


I am a pretty large fellow and I strangled him with all my might. Then, he said, "Are you ready now?" As soon as I heard him shout, my hands, which were around his neck, felt as if they were broken. He then asked me to grab his right arm with both my hands and to push against his chest and various other things. I did as I was told and was thrown without understanding how he did it. He pinned my neck and both arms with his legs as if tying a knot. My arms felt almost like they were broken and I was out of breath.

So here's my question: if Takeda's art is easy to learn (and therefore easily counterd, as theorized), then why is it that Ozaka cannot discern the specifics as to what Takeda did to his student and to the reporter himself? Ozaka admits that he could not figure out what was going on when he was watching Takeda or experiencing his techniques first-hand.

For a more modern account, Kiyokazu Maebayashi (a high-ranking kendoka) reports a nearly identical experience when he felt the technqiue of Tatsuo Kimura, a senior student of the late Yukiyoshi Sagawa of Datio Ryu Aiki Jujutsu ("Yukiyoshi Sagawa" by Kiyokazu Maebayashi, Aiki News #84, Spring 1990).

Here's Maebayashi's account of what happened when experiencing Kimura's technqiues:


Mr. Kimura grabbed my hands and told me to raise them in any way I liked. I tried to raise them but couldn't move at all. Then he threw me freely to the back or sideways over 100 times. But I was not just being thrown during this time. I tried to raise my hands the moment I was grabbed or to alter the timing or raise my hands after pulling them a bit down in the opposite direction, but all in vain. Then after I had struggled for a while, it was my turn to grab. But, the result was the same. No matter how hard I tried to press his hands down, my arms and my body were lifted, my balance was broken, and I was thrown, without feeling hardly any power. . .I tried everything I could think of—using my force, releasing my power and relaxing, changing the direction of my attack—but it was completely hopeless. Mr. Kimura continued to smile as he faced me. At first I thought what I was experiencing was very strange and impossible, but later I became irritated, and in the end I could find nothing else to do except grin in embarrassment and be thrown.

Kiyokazu Maebayashi's report may be found at Aikido Journal.com:
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=179

Again, if Daito Ryu is so easily learned, and therefore easily countered (as you postulate), then why is it that both Ozaka or Maebayashi could not, at the very least, discern the basics of what was going on when experiencing the techniques?

So, how truly easy is it to learn these techniques? For Sokaku Takeda I have no doubt it was easy in his mind since he had practiced (hard) for nearly his entire life and dedicated himself wholly to the art.

Sincerely,
Jim Yang

Cady Goldfield
2nd January 2006, 21:55
Excellent references and good post, Jim.

glad2bhere
6th January 2006, 21:40
I see it as relating to the same matter, Chris. The "business" of charging for seminars and for per-head students signing an attendence book, was one way of monitoring who was getting taught and of Takeda getting acknowledged as the "head honcho" of the system.

Call it a fief or a tribute, of sorts. By requiring his students to pay him what always seemed to be very modest sums, Takeda maintained a subtle reminder to his students that they did not "own" the art to do with as they pleased.

Dear Cady:
I'm not sure that this is altogether the same but I share it FWIW.

In September of 2004 I had the opportunity to travel to Korea and train with Dojunim Kim Yun Sang of the YONG SUL KWAN a tradition connected directly to Choi Yong Sul. For people who may not appreciate Korean traditions this would be about the same as training under the current head of Aikido who had trained directly under Ueshiba. I mention this because the material that Dojunim Kim taught in his classes to his students was not the same as what he taught at public seminars. However, the class material was always taught with the injunction to keep such things to ourselves.

Now, the fact is that none of the secrets that we are given are incredible ju-ju for scooping victory from the depthes of defeat. Rather they are simple principles that anyone with a hunger will uncover for themselves given enough time and effort. And therein lies the rub.

In US culture the emphasis in MA is not in investment for knowlege and wisdom but in collection of information. The key words to this effort are "easy", "quick" and "Cheap". Its not that I could not divulge the information I have but I am nagged by the fact that I busted my butt and humped half-way around the world for what I learned. I fail to understand why I should simply cast my hard-won pearls before the local swine for the momentary pleasure of wow-ing the unwashed.

Just some odd thoughts and no real point. Thanks for letting me dovetail on your post.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Nathan Scott
6th January 2006, 22:55
Good point Bruce. One that those who have invested the time feel, and those who haven't don't seem to understand.


These are my questions, who has commented here and currently studies (with serious dedication, and not as a weekend warrior) in an actual true blue Daito ryu dojo under a ligit certified and recognized sensei for ... say 5 years? Which would still make that person a rookie, by any accounts.

A valid question, but out of curiousity, what would this have to do with non-technical discussions such as historical research or "secrecy"? The kinds of discussions that I encourage on this forum are the types that do not necessarily require a deep initiation into the art - which is why any kind of discussions can occur on a forum such as this in which traditional arts are discussed. As I say, not that your question is not valid, but as long as the discussions are of an "external" nature, I don't see a problem.

BTW, as you may be aware, "time in an art" is not a fool proof measure. You don't know how many hours of actual mat time has really occurred, whether the individual was a personal disciple or a distance-student, or whether the instructor trusted the individual with inner knowledge - or for that matter, even wanted them in the dojo (it happens - someone who isn't working out, but has not done anything to warrant "hamon").

Fact is there is no perfect measure, though the issuance of rank/densho in classical/traditional arts theoretically is an indicator that the student is entrusted with an amount of inner teaching and trust that is relative to the rank/densho issued. These days rank is clearly no longer an indicator of skill, or even time in the art, and yes - there are honorary ranks given in classical/traditional arts too. But unlike gendai arts (for the most part), classical/traditional arts issue ranks and densho as a means of increasing the level of initiation of the student (inner kata, inner teachings, etc.). This is a point that I think was largely misunderstood the last time I brought this subject up, and may be a somewhat new concept for those with only gendai experience.

Realistically, you would need to evaluate an individual by balancing their time in the art, relationship to the teacher, rank/densho issued, and if possible, ability level (ability = understanding). A bit tough to do over the net. All said and done, these things are ONE reason why I think it's best to avoid technical discussions on the internet.

Regards,

EricH
6th January 2006, 23:57
Bruce said:

In US culture the emphasis in MA is not in investment for knowlege and wisdom but in collection of information. The key words to this effort are "easy", "quick" and "Cheap". Its not that I could not divulge the information I have but I am nagged by the fact that I busted my butt and humped half-way around the world for what I learned. I fail to understand why I should simply cast my hard-won pearls before the local swine for the momentary pleasure of wow-ing the unwashed.

I assert that casting your hard-won pearls before the local swine would greatly enhance your local training environment. Your own training, as well as that of your training partners, would benefit significantly from this sharing. Having paid the price to get the pearls why would you hide them when you could be wearing/using them instead?

Nathan said:

Good point Bruce. One that those who have invested the time feel, and those who haven't don't seem to understand.

Perhaps because those who have invested the time are rewarded with the "sercrets" and those who haven't (the unwashed??) aren't. It is a self-sustaining culture of secrecy but one that, I believe, is far from optimal from a quality training and skill acquisition perspective.

edg176
7th January 2006, 01:16
That seems to be the crux of the discussion, isn't it?

glad2bhere
7th January 2006, 03:13
"Open source/ closed source"

If I am correct these are computer terms regarding programing code, yes?

The reason I ask is that at one time I was advocating for a minimal standard for Hapkido with an eye towards generating a common lexicon or nomenclature by which all practitioners could communicate more easily. I don't deserve kudo-s as I was stealing the idea from how the Aikido community seemed to be able to communicate so easily, despite politics, because they all approximated the same label for the same thing.

At any rate the project failed, simply because the people involved could not get their heads around something in the Hapkido community which would not need to have somebody "in charge" and for which there was no apparent pay-off.

if using the Internet has taught me anything its that the Hapkido community holds the record at raising "turf wars" and territoriality to an artform. Sheesh!

Best Wishes,

Bruce

edg176
7th January 2006, 08:56
The terms originally referred to computer programming. In one approach, "closed source" the way the program works is hidden from everyone except the creators, and the people they license (through a legal licensing process). In the second, anyone can see the source code, and anyone can take that code and alter it to do something else, as long as they agree to let other people do the same. The argument is that open source software has more developers, and benefits from allowing a more free exchange of information.

The original terms have been extended by many to knowledge generally--the idea that free exchange of knowledge leads to greater and faster development of more knowledge.

Mark Jakabcsin
7th January 2006, 13:21
Good point Bruce. One that those who have invested the time feel, and those who haven't don't seem to understand.


So everyone that disagrees with Nathan hasn't invested the time. That is why they don't understand and disagree with him. Nathan thanks this enlightened view point.

Mark J.

Dan Harden
7th January 2006, 13:39
Hi Mark

I hope and trust everyone is disagreeing with respect?

I didn't get any sense of animosity toward you from Nathans response at all.
There is a different view- but thats OK isnt it? Heck, I don't agree with you either but I'd buy you a beer and train anytime.

Erics response
I assert that casting your hard-won pearls before the local swine would greatly enhance your local training environment. Your own training, as well as that of your training partners, would benefit significantly from this sharing. Having paid the price to get the pearls why would you hide them when you could be wearing/using them instead?
expresses a goal that he may not realize that others do not share or even want. So, there is no added value for those who "can show"-" to show."

It's not a mentality or approach that many seem to understand. Not everyone cares to show their pearls. Ideally the phrase "casting pearls before swine" has ugly connotations that are unfortunately very real. But on the flip side- it was the source of all innovation.
Not everyone in the crowd is, in fact, ...a swine.

Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
7th January 2006, 14:26
Many believe that "the arts" in general would benefit and develop from going "open source". Other arts would benefit, but the problem - or at least one problem - with that is that arts such as these have cultural histories and elements that are unique and are an important part of the art itself. Going public is not in the best interest of art survival.

Regards,

glad2bhere
7th January 2006, 16:53
I apologize in advance if this post does not speak directly to the focus of the thread. Since my training is not in DRAJJ I may be missing something. But here I go FWIW.

One of the single greatest arguements that I have against "open source" training comes from my conflicted position as a kind of "innovative traditionalist".

The "innovator" side of me honestly believes that free and open discourse will raise all MA boats in quality and insight and from this point, as a teacher, I advocate for transparency in practice and communication. Having said that I must also own my traditionalist side.

The "traditionalist" side of me knows from experience that the "quick", "easy" and "cheap" issues I mentioned earlier seem to dominate the the majority of the MA population. The single greatest danger then (IMVVHO) is that "Open source" exchanges would encourage literal "short-cutting". What I mean by this is that a person might skip to investigations of advanced material, assuming that all principles are readily contained in that advanced material--- and to a greater extent they are. However, in making this jump directly into advanced throws, locks, pins etc etc the foundational information gets short shrift. For example a person might well decide that it is unnecesary to spend adequate time with White and Yellow level material, opting to jump straight to discussing and reflecting on Blue and Brown Level material. In this way I see the erosion or outright loss of the fundamental insights and principles upon which later material is based. In my own experience it is VERY common to have people contact me to learn exotic techniques and/or weapons material. Its is comparitively rare to have someone contact me who is prepared to begin at the bottom.

Does anyone else have this concern, or does DRAJJ have some sort of established safe-guards that obviate these concerns. Anyone?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

skylinerR32
8th January 2006, 22:32
Samurai Jack wrote:
"The problem lies for the "external" discussions in the cultural divide of East and West...East and West don't parallel much in culture and ideas, we place different values on different things, in different ways. The result is alot of misunderstanding reqarding the imporance of tradition and secrecy, as most readers are not well versed or educated enough in Japanese culture not place their values and culture upon the Japanese culture. Studying under a Sensei over a period of time gives you that education for understanding for why the importance of why an art like Daito ryu does adhere to it's tradition."

SJ, I agree with the first part of your statement in that cultural divides do prohibit the extent to which many Westerners fully understand and evaluate Far Eastern beliefs and social practices. It makes sense for a person to rely solely on his/her own cultural frame of context when exposed to a distinctly unfamiliar environment. Concerning your possible solution regarding the deficit in Western understanding of Japanese culture, I wholeheartedly disagree. If Westerners are indeed "...not well versed or educated enough in Japanese culture...", pursuing intensive study under a sensei (and by sensei I assume you mean a sensei of arts in question) will not necessarily provide the desired knowledge or understanding of why secrecy remains an integral part of koryu arts. Just the opposite, immersing yourself so deeply in any pursuit, koryu or otherwise, is more likely to produce a "tunnel vision" effect that restricts the practitioner from any objective third-person analysis of the fundamental logic and motivations underlying koryu traditons and standards of practice; and without honest, substantiated critique, one cannot provide well-founded arguments favoring and/or opposing the legitimacy of such practices in a modern-world context.

IMHO, if we examine the historic origins and impact of the religious philosophies, organizational tendency in koryu group structure, and the Japanese teaching processes, the reasons for secrecy in the classical/traditional arts become clearer.

I had written more to expand on my last statement for this post, but it was waaaay too long; hopefully, we'll explore this possible area of discussion later on.

Sincerely,
Jim Yang

johan smits
9th January 2006, 13:52
Just want to be part of a truly interesting discussion.

I think it may be possible that ryu, including Daito-ryu kept things secret once because they were "living entities" so to speak, trying to influence society, excert power etc. And when you want to be the strongest, the best, the most fearsome well you are not going to give away the essence of what makes you the most....etc.

However since nowadays the ryu are no longer truly trying to influence society and excert power etc, but are more groups of people with the same hobby there is a very real chance that the secrets what made these ryu so formidable will dissappear.
I wonder if people in charge of ryu are aware of this, they must be and I wonder if and if so how far the abillities of the members of the ryu have degenerated in comparison with earlier generations.

We can read about Sokaku Takeda sensei and some of his direct students and to all stories they must be or have been marvelous. But how about people of our generation?

Just some thoughts.

Best Regards,

Johan Smits

Arman
9th January 2006, 22:11
Ya know,
I've become a bit cynical about all this concern and fretting over martial arts "secrets." Seems to me it is fairly clear: if your teacher doesn't want you showing the stuff to non-members of the ryu, don't show it. If he doesn't care, then clearly, he is not too concerned with secrecy, so use your best judgment.

As for whether secrecy is "better" or "worse" for martial arts in general, I could care less. Kodokan Judo is a great art and it is open; many koryu arts are closed arts (I happen to study one - not DR, which I also study), and it is also a great art.

Im more concerned, frankly, about the ethical character of people who bastardize or utilize martial information against the explicit wishes of the ryu. But that is a case where it is clear the teacher has made it clear the art is to remain in the domain of the members of the ryu. If the teacher doesn't care, then why should I lament the decision toward openness that may, or may not, spawn greasy, slimy charlatans?

The fact is, it doesn't matter whether the art is open or closed, you can't learn it if you don't study it under a qualified teacher. Even then, a lot of people still don't get it, even if you beat them over the head with the truth.

Best,
Arman Partamian

glad2bhere
10th January 2006, 20:54
Not to disrespect your comments, Brently, but would you say this approach was any more ardent than say, the way a highly placed School would protect the play-book for its ball team? What I mean to say is that, discounting, for a moment only, the cultural implications of the Ryu-ha institution, is the desire to protect the inner teachings of a Koryu art any greater for practitioners of a traditional art than it would be for anyone else who simply does not want their material to be common knowlege? Thoughts?

I think I am hearing that there is some special energy about protecting such Japanese traditions. If this is true I would interested to hear from informed individuals where they believe this energy comes from. Comments?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

EricH
10th January 2006, 22:21
Not to disrespect your comments, Brently, but would you say this approach was any more ardent than say, the way a highly placed School would protect the play-book for its ball team? What I mean to say is that, discounting, for a moment only, the cultural implications of the Ryu-ha institution, is the desire to protect the inner teachings of a Koryu art any greater for practitioners of a traditional art than it would be for anyone else who simply does not want their material to be common knowlege? Thoughts?

A basketball team protects its playbook for competitive reasons. Likely the inner teachings of koryu arts were protected for the same reasons in the past. I suggest that this reason no longer exists and that the habit (tradition) of secrecy that developed over time and it still practiced is now detrimental to these arts.

Does anybody believe that there is benefit to the secrecy? I really do understand respect for tradition and ones teacher but will these arts still be viable fighting arts if this continues for another generation, or will they have lost all vitality? I just don't think that there is a critical mass of serious students to support these arts unless they open up a bit.

thoughts?

Nathan Scott
10th January 2006, 22:25
Mr. Robison,

If your concern is over an understanding of eastern culture and Japanese martial arts, that is another story. Daito-ryu, like many ryu-ha, has unique elements to it - but on the other hand, there are many more elements that are typical of other traditional/classical ryu-ha. As such, experience in other traditional and classical ryu-ha would give substantial insight into these related elements. I for one am working on almost 25 years in martial arts (mostly Japanese), study two koryu, and teach several other Japanese arts, and have been running a non-commercial dojo for almost 9 years. Many of our contributors here are pretty experienced budo-ka. My point about most of them not even being members of Daito-ryu was specific only to the attempts at authoratative sounding technical discussions about the art. There have in fact been many insightful and important discussions to be found in this forum.


However since nowadays the ryu are no longer truly trying to influence society and excert power etc, but are more groups of people with the same hobby there is a very real chance that the secrets what made these ryu so formidable will dissappear.
I wonder if people in charge of ryu are aware of this, they must be and I wonder if and if so how far the abillities of the members of the ryu have degenerated in comparison with earlier generations.

Hello Mr. Smits. I believe members of ryu-ha are very aware of degeneration and logevity issues, which is why people like myself waste a fair amount of time trying to encourage support and protection of these individual ryu-ha (Daito-ryu and others). Senior members and successors of ryu-ha try to the best of their abilities to make sure the inner teachings survive for future generations, sometimes through internal documentation. However, most would rather see the secrets and the art itself die before risking the spread of them to inappropriate individuals. All we've got to do to prevent the inner teachings from dying is make the effort to sincerely and humbly study them, and assist with their preservation. Sounds easy, right? ;)

BTW, not all members of ryu-ha view their studies as a "hobby". Some dedicate a very large part of their life towards seriously studying and preserving them, and many members studying also have a professional need for authentic instruction (ie: military and LE).


If the teacher doesn't care, then why should I lament the decision toward openness that may, or may not, spawn greasy, slimy charlatans?

Hi Arman, most students of the arts tend to want to go with the flow and trust the efforts of others to ensure that everything will be o.k. in the future, rather than take responsibility for such things themselves. As a junior member, this is fine, but as you become more deeply initiated into an art (and higher ranked), you are also becoming more deeply obligated to the art and should be taking on more responbilities. Ranks and densho are not "free", issued only on your efforts in attending class at the dojo. Those not willing to take responsibility and obilgation to the art should in fact NOT accept the deeper levels of initiation.

Charlatans who are un-challenged threaten the longevity of the arts. They take interest away from legitimate instruction, confuse and entice prospective students with an "easier and quicker way to the same results", and spread misinformation and unsavory politics, which further drive interested parties away from the art. In the old days, they were challenged physically. These days, for the most part the best we can do is expose them pubicly (backed by information not available to the public). With the diminishing membership in koryu dojo, many ryu-ha WILL DIE by the next generation anyway. Allowing greedy and egotistic opportunists to exploit the art is giving the legitimate line of the art HIV on top of the problems with their diminishing member base. You're a member of a tradition, senior or otherwise. As a member of the ryu, if charlatans are not your problem, whose problem is it?

As far as following your teacher's example, that is a tough decision to make. On one hand, you should follow your teacher's way. But on the other hand, if you recognize something your teacher is doing is either wrong or something that is politically based for his own personal benefit, is the art going to be best served by passing these qualities on? I believe that most who stick with the "I'm following my teacher's way" in regards to issues like this are using this approach as an easy-out to do what they personally want to do anyway, FWIW.

Regards,

Arman
11th January 2006, 00:02
Charlatans who are un-challenged threaten the longevity of the arts. They take interest away from legitimate instruction, confuse and entice prospective students with an "easier and quicker way to the same results", and spread misinformation and unsavory politics, which further drive interested parties away from the art. In the old days, they were challenged physically. These days, for the most part the best we can do is expose them pubicly (backed by information not available to the public). With the diminishing membership in koryu dojo, many ryu-ha WILL DIE by the next generation anyway. Allowing greedy and egotistic opportunists to exploit the art is giving the legitimate line of the art HIV on top of the problems with their diminishing member base. You're a member of a tradition, senior or otherwise. As a member of the ryu, if charlatans are not your problem, whose problem is it? Originally posted by Nathan.

Hi Nathan,

You raise some very good points, and I won't argue with your statement about the responsibility of senior members in a ryu. Every member has a responsibility to the ryu of varying degrees, and the more senior you are, the more you take on, if only in the accurate preservation and dissemination of the art to the junior members.

As to the other good points you brought up, I just look at it from a different perspective. As you know, most koryu are small affairs, as compared to modern arts. Most teachers are happy to teach a half dozen students, maybe less. There are six people in the group I am a member of. Of those six, one just started, and two others do not attend on a regular basis for other reasons. Most of the time there are just three of us and our teacher. Furthermore, in a lot of koryu the teacher is only going to pass the complete art on to one person.

It is my opinion that the number of fakes out there peddling their pseudo-ryu are not going to signficantly affect the number of potential students. For many koryu today, the teacher really only needs ONE quality student to pass the art on to. In fact, far more detrimental to an art's survival is finding a student of sufficient dedication and talent to pass the art to. A teacher might have 6 decent students, but not one he feels comfortable passing the art on to.

In addition to talent and dedication is the simple lack of interest in ancient arts not designed for the modern world. The lack of relevance (in many people's opinions) of koryu is a far greater danger to the survival of an art than fakes.

That's why I mentioned I had become kind of cynical about all the concern over secrecy. Henry Kissinger once said that the viciousness of the politics in academia are so strong because the stakes are so small. I think this kind of applies to koryu. Everyone wants a piece of legitimacy, and there are many people who will do unethical things to try and achieve it.

There are other reasons to fret, however, and this gives rise to something in which I think we completely agree. Namely, that the entire martial/cultural entity of which a koryu comprises is sacred to that ryu, to the extent that the group decides to preserve it that way. That is why I agree that one must worry about those people initiated into an art that decide to go against the wishes of their teacher and spread the art more openly. I do agree that members of a ryu are responsible for addressing such a situation.

But should a teacher decide to teach more openly. . .? Like I said, I'm ambivalent. First off, even teaching something more openly, as in a seminar format, does not really dilute or diminish the ryu. It may give rise to more fakes, but it also might give rise to more seriously interested students that want to learn the real thing. Thus, it might actually help preserve a ryu whose membership is dwindling. Furthermore, I do not believe that one can really learn anything substantial from a true koryu in a seminar format, primarily because anyone who has studied koryu recognizes that the art is comprised of substantially more than "technique A, technique B," etc. In fact, I find it hard to imagine what a real koryu seminar would even look like?? It just doesn't make sense to me.

In the context of DR, however, we have a rather unique situation. DR, koryu or not, is almost completely an unarmed art. This fact alone makes it far more amenable to a seminar format. It is much harder to pick up a bokuto, or a shinai, or a shinken, or any other myriad ancient weapon, and utilize it properly within the context of a koryu's strategic and tactical framework than to use your body alone within a primarily jujutsu framework. Weapons-work, in my experience, is far more difficult to master than empty hand. But we naturally know how to wrestle, to roll around, to punch, to grasp, to push and pull. We may also know how to pick up a stick and swing it, but the former is closer to the unarmed arts, in a rough way, than the latter is to traditional Japanese weapon arts. And yet even so, the finer aspects of unarmed arts such as DR are still quite difficult to grasp (which makes me question some of the practical utility of the art, but that is a different issue).

All of which is to say that even though DR is more amenable to a seminar format than most koryu, I still don't think such openess really threatens the art. You are right that people will try and steal technique and claim it as their own form of bastardized DR that was passed down to them by Sensei Cleatus, but on the other hand they won't really have learned anything, and the seminar might attract more serious students to study the real art.

As for not agreeing with your teacher's decision, well. . .I hate to say it, but you make your own bed. To a very large degree you are bound by respect to honor your teacher's wishes if you wish to remain a member of the group. That is one price of admission. You don't get to only respect those decisions of your teacher you happen to agree with. If it is something really outrageous, you are always free to publicly disagree and leave. But you can't on the one hand grant the ryu the right to determine its own fate, as per the teacher's wishes, and on the other hand demand that the teacher conform to your vision of what is right. The inheritor of an art is, by definition, the only guy who has all the goods, and who has all the perogative. If he chooses, he can just let the art die off. If he chooses, he can write a book, or hold seminars. Its his decision, not the students. Where is it written that the master MUST pass the art on? Maybe he thinks all his students aren't good enough. Too bad. So sorry.

As for me, I don't share what my teachers ask me not to, and what I can share I do discriminately with people I trust and whose company I enjoy. As for the fakes, I just do my best to ignore them.

Sorry for the long-winded reply, and I'm sure I'll be clarifying myself because I've already forgotten what the hell I wrote at the beginning of this thing.

Best,
Arman Partamian

Nathan Scott
11th January 2006, 00:53
Arman,


First off, even teaching something more openly, as in a seminar format, does not really dilute or diminish the ryu. It may give rise to more fakes, but it also might give rise to more seriously interested students that want to learn the real thing. Thus, it might actually help preserve a ryu whose membership is dwindling.

My experience and observation has been that open seminars (and demonstrations for that matter) rarely generate new students. They are to some degree good for getting the word out, but as you noted, often times that is at the expense of opportunists abusing the name. Seminar attendees typically are under the impression that they have paid for the seminar, and have a right to do what they want with the teachings, including working them into their own studies and posting them on the net. One way to reduce this is to teach a very topical seminar with stock seminar techniques, or, techniques that have been modified so that opportunists who don't join the art will be stealing incorrect methods - but then you will have attendees who will criticize the art to others as ineffective based on their seminar experience.

Unfortunately, reputation (word of mouth) is still the most effective tool for attracting the right types of students, and that is not a quick process.


As for not agreeing with your teacher's decision, well. . .I hate to say it, but you make your own bed. To a very large degree you are bound by respect to honor your teacher's wishes if you wish to remain a member of the group. That is one price of admission. You don't get to only respect those decisions of your teacher you happen to agree with.

Agreed, and that's not really what I'm suggesting. I don't expect members of such teachers to publicly disagree with their teacher's points of views. What I'm suggesting is, once initiated to a reasonable level in the art, evaluate the actions and points of views your teacher has. If your teacher tells you to "write a technical manual and sell it on e-bay", you have a choice of either doing it or quiting. What I am suggesting is perhaps to simply opt to not release teachings. Keeping quiet is not going against your teacher's wishes. If you don't agree with the idea of going public, you don't HAVE to jump out there and join in the release of inner-teachings (unless specifically directed to do so for some reason). At senior levels, close students of their teachers are usually relied upon for advice on the direction of the art, and this is the point when your own point of view becomes crucial to the longevity of the art.

**

I'd encourage those interested in this subject to have a look (or another look) at the following post at the top of page 3. It will save you surfing time, and contains a number of quotes on the subject. I just updated it with a few more valuable quotes. Reading these quotes is pretty much necessary for those wishing to discuss the issue of secrecy in Daito-ryu:

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?p=207337#post207337

Regards,

skylinerR32
11th January 2006, 03:42
Nathan,

In an earlier post, you wrote:


"...arts such as these have cultural histories and elements that are unique and are an important part of the art itself. Going public is not in the best interest of art survival."

I've enjoyed reading most of the discussions as to why Daito-ryu should or should not become more open to the general public; the only problem I've noticed is that although the title of the thread started out as "Daito-ryu and Secrecy", we're now looking back at a discussion that broadens the scope to Japanese classical/traditional arts in general. So, if the focus has moved from examining a microcosm in the case of Daito-ryu and secrecy and moved towards the macrocosm of koryu arts in general and secrecy, then I believe that your quote warrants further examination from a broader historical and cultural analysis.

The common institutional practice of secrecy in Japanese arts (and this is not limited to the martial arts but for every skilled artistic discipline) surfaces from an enormous sociological component of Japanese culture regarding transmission of knowledge within a specialized field. ("Secrecy in Japanese Arts: Secret Transmission as a Mode of Knowledge" by Maki Isaka Morinaga (http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?btob=Y&endeca=1&isbn=1403965501&itm=4)) And for a partial look at the research direction the author wanted to explore, you can read the first 24 pages of his dissertation:http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3015347/

Dave Lowry also provides an excellent overview discussing the origins, group dyanmics/characteristics, and modern day problems of attempting to learn the koryu arts: "The Classical Japanese Martial Arts in the West: Problems in Transmission" (http://www.koryubooks.com/library/dlowry4.html)

G. Cameron Hurst III has also written a concise overview of regarding how the martial arts reflect Japanese cultural traditions and social etiquette for the Foreign Policy Research Institute (http://www.fpri.org/fpriwire/0402.199609.hurst.martialartsjapan.html)

I have my opinions about what's written in each of these sources, but I hope that those who want to continue the discussion will come up with some of their own concerning how secrecy in Japanese arts arises from deeper nuances and connections than what appears on the surface.

Sincerely,
Jim Yang

johan smits
11th January 2006, 10:08
Hello Mr. Scott,

Thank you for your reply.
There must be quite a number of people who are truly concerned and dedicated to these arts and that's good.

It will probably always be a difficult situation. My thinking is the more popular koryu arts are the more people will give it a try which means more chances to find people who are "worthy" amongst them.
If an art becomes to much of a succes, well see what happened to judo, it get's watered down.
In a way people who have a professional need for those arts may be the best for the ryu. They keep a ryu living and excerting influence, etcetera.

I must say I really have doubts about "secret"s what I hear and read from most people is that those secrets are really pretty plain and common sense things. Sometimes even given early on in training only not recognized by the students.

Ah and by the way I know all there is to know about Daito-ryu, for an outsider.

Best regards,

Johan Smits

Ron Tisdale
11th January 2006, 16:06
One important piece of context....Daito ryu was originally taught almost completely IN SEMINAR FORMAT. We can debate to some extent whether or not these were "open" seminars (apparently Sogagu T. was known for kicking out people he didn't like [sorting them by aiki]), but they were indeed the major method for deciminating Daito ryu.

Best,
Ron

kokumo
11th January 2006, 17:33
Nathan,

In an earlier post, you wrote:



I've enjoyed reading most of the discussions as to why Daito-ryu should or should not become more open to the general public; the only problem I've noticed is that although the title of the thread started out as "Daito-ryu and Secrecy", we're now looking back at a discussion that broadens the scope to Japanese classical/traditional arts in general. So, if the focus has moved from examining a microcosm in the case of Daito-ryu and secrecy and moved towards the macrocosm of koryu arts in general and secrecy, then I believe that your quote warrants further examination from a broader historical and cultural analysis.

The common institutional practice of secrecy in Japanese arts (and this is not limited to the martial arts but for every skilled artistic discipline) surfaces from an enormous sociological component of Japanese culture regarding transmission of knowledge within a specialized field. ("Secrecy in Japanese Arts: Secret Transmission as a Mode of Knowledge" by Maki Isaka Morinaga (http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?btob=Y&endeca=1&isbn=1403965501&itm=4)) And for a partial look at the research direction the author wanted to explore, you can read the first 24 pages of his dissertation:http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3015347/

Dave Lowry also provides an excellent overview discussing the origins, group dyanmics/characteristics, and modern day problems of attempting to learn the koryu arts: "The Classical Japanese Martial Arts in the West: Problems in Transmission" (http://www.koryubooks.com/library/dlowry4.html)

G. Cameron Hurst III has also written a concise overview of regarding how the martial arts reflect Japanese cultural traditions and social etiquette for the Foreign Policy Research Institute (http://www.fpri.org/fpriwire/0402.199609.hurst.martialartsjapan.html)

I have my opinions about what's written in each of these sources, but I hope that those who want to continue the discussion will come up with some of their own concerning how secrecy in Japanese arts arises from deeper nuances and connections than what appears on the surface.

Sincerely,
Jim Yang


Jim:

Useful links, thank you very much!

Although it's extremely hard to find, another useful source is: FENWAY COURT: Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum 1992.

Part of a series of publications by the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston, this edition carries the subtitle Competition and Collaboration: Hereditary Schools in Japanese Culture. Many of the articles deal directly with the question of Hereditary Succession, a pattern referred to in traditional ryu as the iemotosystem.

Also worthwhile are: Allegories of Desire: Esoteric Literary Commentaries of Medieval Japan (Harvard-Yenching Institute Monograph Series) (Hardcover), by Susan Blakely Klein.

and:

The Weaving of Mantra, by Ryuichi Abe.

The former documents patterns of esoteric transmission in the poetic arts and their derivation from similar patterns of esoteric transmission in Buddhist practice. The latter documents the introduction and consolidation of those patterns of esoteric transmission, and recounts the pivotal interaction between Kukai, founder of Shingon Buddhism in Japan, and Saicho, founder of Tendai Buddhism in Japan, on precisely that subject.

As you and the sources you cite point out, this is a much larger cultural issue than one might guess on the basis of the simply thread title: Daito Ryu and Secrecy.

One might argue that the only reason there is a huge continuing interest in this particular subset of the problem is precisely because a) so many individuals practice an art derived from DRAJJ -- aikido, b) so many of those individuals are not Japanese, and thus, don't have either an experientially acquired intuitive or substantive understanding of the issue, and c) so many of those individuals are, for whatever reason, disinclined to examine other similarly "esoteric" traditions thatwere also critical parts of the experiential matrix out of which Ueshiba created modern aikido, such as Goto-ha Yagyu Shingan Ryu, Shingon Buddhist practice, Shugendo practice, Oomoto practice, or Kukishinden Ryu practices.

Fred Little

Samurai Jack
11th January 2006, 19:07
:) I lurk basically because I don't have the gift of well versed and eloquent gab, either written or verbal, as some do. I do believe it is a gift to have words represent a person's thoughts accurately. Nathan you pose a question to me that out of respect for this forum and him should be addressed the best I can. Maybe, I should send my answer privately, I am not sure.

Humans value privacy; therefore, the privacy of information. There is a huge benefit to keeping information private, away for others. The military and the government understand this well, more power to them. Businesses too are concerned with information staying private within the company, and not leaking to the competitor or others. We, in our personal and daily lives understand the importance of keeping our information private,we just don't share personal information openly and there is good reason for it. There is a serious need to keep our information private. The reason is pretty clear, there are people wanting and trying to get that info for their use. It might be they want to use against us, to benefit themselves or to harm or kill us. This is on both an individual, national and cultural scale. We just don't live as an open book. We are foolish just to trust anyone we come across with that has a friendly smile wanting our information.

In relation to Japanese arts, take the philosophy in traditional Chinese arts that prohibit the teaching of those who are of ill-will and would abuse the knowledge in criminal acts. In Chinese culture -stronger in the past then today- there is great responsibility, accountability, and shame that is placed on the art and the teacher if a student misuses the art. The art and the teacher is held responsible and gets the bad reputation. What about the Japanese arts being Military, and that culture is carried over, where you want to keep things secret so the enemy doesn't find out, because if they did it might be fatal. Or if you are learning a Japanese art for self-defense, do you want what they teach on DVD available on the self? You may face an attacker who may learn poor from a DVD, but just enough to know how to complicate your defenses. Or you are an art that wants to protect its self from commercial exploitation because you feel such exploitation cheapens the art, loses the spirit of the art, and demoralizes it and devoid it of respectability, for the profit of others-in your eyes based on your cultural values that value tradition over money. We all know about Tae Bo!

Say you have a student that breaks off after you teach him all the "secrets of the art." He opens down the streets and starts claiming he is the real expert. Or there is another dojo down the street that is less quality of your and is eager to ride your coat tails. You open up all the secrets and he capitalizes on it, then starts claiming all the lineage rights ( like a copy right or propriety issue ) to your art, he was first your second, your ripping him off. Before his technique was obviously poor, now it he has incorporated all your "secretes" into his own designed art he claims is "authentic koryu". Who gains by this?

My Chinese Kungfu instructor, would tell all the new students this. He would say, before I teach you, you have to know there is a reason for everything I do. Don't say you are a student of mine, and don't call me Sifu, for me this a very serious matter, and it isn't something easily granted. He would then follow with, criminals have guns today so they don't learn Kungfu, and no need to teach a student 10 years basic exercises to find out his character, like the old days in China. There are many unscrupulous teachers today, he would say in disgust, more then ever before, who teach Kungfu who don't care about the art. They may know much, but they lack the spirit and understanding of Kungfu. The don't care how it reflects back upon the art in how people look at them. They care little of anything except what they can gain. They care little about being good people of the community, or teacher. They only concern themselves, about their fame or wallet. I have heard very much the same thing from traditional Japanese martial art Senseis I have learned from and spoken with who are sincerely serious about they arts they love.


We in the US live in a great consumer society, let me reference the Borg here from the TV show Star Trek: Next Generation, the Borg characters are based on us. We consume and look at everything as a resource for our own benefit. This isn't so bad, we are the top world nation. Purpose of me saying this is to show that it does conflict with societies that value other things different from us, namely those of Chinese and Japanese traditional martial art. For the most part, we as Borg, get upset when we can't have our way, and thus make great efforts to get it. Part of our obtaining what we want is to change the rules, the landscape, what ever we have to, to get it. We have little sensitivity and understanding, or reverenced to the package that we see holds our gift-what we want. We by pass the option in trying to understand. We opt not to have an honest educational experience for the sake of understanding the reasons or purpose for things other cultures value that would bring to light a deeper understanding to what we have obtained. An understanding that would simply by-pass the taking parts of a culture as a resource and then the assimilation of what we find valuable out side its context, apart from the whole. By doing so, we deign our selves the reverence and reasons for their tradition, which is also of great value. Then if we are challenged in our measure, we turn it on its end and fight saying we have no use for it, we disregard it, or the use we have is strictly done from our perspective; more accurately, observing the traditional practice of privacy in the martial arts.

We work really hard at being Borg like. This rises controversy, of course in the American martial arts community, as we see on this board. Because of that, it would be respectful not to speculate or come up with our own reasons, thus judge why something like privacy is observed by some Daito ryu schools, and other koryu. Shouldn't we give Daito a fair shake, allowing those who are the ones in the know speak for themselves, without use coloring their traditions with our opinions? Who speaks for Microsoft, Linux? Who speaks for AT&T, an account manager, an ex-employee? Is the ENQUIRER the publicist of Martha Stewart? You can see what situation we can get into, misinformation and misrepresentation that results when those outside the company or those outside of the company speak for the company. It is the stuff law suits are made of. What we don't know about them we should not fill in with our own opinions or speculation. We have sport teams for that. All I am saying is, we need to step back and give each Daito ryu school or koryu arts that are more culturally complex a fair shake, and judge them according to their own values, and systems which would also include how we discussed them. No art wants the wrong reputation as a result of speculation and opinion.

Here Nathan I agree with you is to as you said once, to try the art. For me I add not a week or a year in trying it, but years, to get the feel and spirit of the art. Of course some will not, and comment anyway which their opinion is only limited, and narrow. I am sure you wouldn't want me to discuss Obata Sensei and his art on a forum of those who didn't train with him or in his art, and say he is simply another Aikido man. And because he has been in the movies assume his art is merely a "Hollywood martial art" that has no tradition really in Japanese martial arts, based on the fact I seen one of his movies. Wouldn't it be better if Obata Sensei spoke for his art instead of an outsider? Would you also be concern if there was a forum here about Obata's art it would be monitor carefully, so misinformation would not color a person's view of the art. CLEARLY HYPOTHETICAL, but what if people WRONGLY started associating your sword Sensei with Ninjitsu simply because someone seen "TMN Turtles"as a result coloring and putting to question all the traditions in his art. Worse of all bulking at the rules of his dojo all as a result of a unchecked discussion that didn't included him. . How do you fight wild and untrue rumors, and specutlation in a kind of internet telephone game, and scuttlebutt? Well, first your hear from the source and those authorized to speak. It may be such in Daito ryu's case no to choose to address such a trivial matter and ignore it here, a cultural method of defense against such things, for politically advantage and not. But, never the less allot of harm and misinformation can come about in discussion from those who are not the Officials of their organizations. In my view, discussions which are not from the horses mouth have to be watched and monitored careful, with the proper respect and care so not to fall into the lasting vaccum of misinformation that is assumed to be factual when it isn't. What is wrong with being respectful, taking care in a discussion, and combating misinformation the best we can?

Good training.

I hope my name shows up. if not Jack Robison

Ron Tisdale
11th January 2006, 20:25
Wouldn't it be better if Obata Sensei spoke for his art instead of an outsider?

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&f=43&page=1&pp=30&sort=lastpost&order=desc&daysprune=-1

Cough.

Best,
Ron

Nathan Scott
11th January 2006, 21:48
Mr. Yang, thanks for the references. Some of them are new to me - I'll check them out.


My thinking is the more popular koryu arts are the more people will give it a try which means more chances to find people who are "worthy" amongst them.

...

I must say I really have doubts about "secret"s what I hear and read from most people is that those secrets are really pretty plain and common sense things. Sometimes even given early on in training only not recognized by the students.

Mr. Smits, my observation recently has been that koryu arts ARE popular, and receive much discussion on the net. Books and videos published by koryu (and psuedo-koryu) are the most popular thing selling these days. What I don't see is an increasing membership in training. The harder the training, and the more sacrifice that is required in an art/branch, the lower the membership. As such, I don't believe popularity will help the arts survive, and in fact, the popularity seems to be doing nothing more than tempt those with varying levels of experience in the arts to publish their teachings openly.

As far as secrets goes, you are right. Many secrets in various ryu-ha are considered common knowledge - at least in this day and age. But the combination of secrets is part of what makes the art, and each secret gives hints as to how the art is intended to be performed. In other words, just because an arts secret is something well known to you does not necessarily make it o.k. to publish.


One important piece of context....Daito ryu was originally taught almost completely IN SEMINAR FORMAT. We can debate to some extent whether or not these were "open" seminars (apparently Sogagu T. was known for kicking out people he didn't like [sorting them by aiki]), but they were indeed the major method for deciminating Daito ryu.

Hi Ron, Correct - but as you noted, the attendees at these seminars were carefully screened by Sokaku, through a number of methods. As such, classifying them as "open" seminars is not quite accurate.

Apparently these seminars averaged about 10 attendees over a 7-10 day period. The seminars were organized in consecutive "steps" to those continuing (or allowed to continue) to train. An unusual way of teaching, but I think it is different than the open seminars we are seeing these days. BTW, there is NOT ONE instructor noted for having any level of understanding of aiki that learned through the seminar format. They all learned over some period of time of direct personal instruction with Sokaku, usually out of their own residence. IOW, Sokaku does not seem to have taught the inner-teachings of his art during these seminars.


Because of that, it would be respectful not to speculate or come up with our own reasons, thus judge why something like privacy is observed by some Daito ryu schools, and other koryu. Shouldn't we give Daito a fair shake, allowing those who are the ones in the know speak for themselves, without use coloring their traditions with our opinions? ... It may be such in Daito ryu's case no to choose to address such a trivial matter and ignore it here, a cultural method of defense against such things, for politically advantage and not.

Mr. Robison, thanks for your well thought out reply. Your point of view is correct to some degree. You rarely ever see senior members of classical/traditional ryu-ha publicly arguing over political matters. When they feel it is appropriate, they tend to handle such issues privately and directly with the associated parties. However, ryu-ha like Daito-ryu have a great deal of information publicized about them, and members and non-members have in the past and will continue to discuss the politics publicly. Unfortunately, prospective students and interested parties see the mess and don't know what to think of it unless efforts are made to clarify and qualify the subjects on some level. Several branches of Daito-ryu have OPTED to make their issues public, and as a result have opened public debate about them. Personally, I think it would have been better to keep it all internal, but unfortunately it has not been that way.

When a political issue is brought to the public eye, the only reasonable resolution is to attempt to solicit official responses from those involved so that the now-informed public can draw their own conclusions. Unfortunately many arts in Japan have taken the attitude of "it can't be helped", and try to ignore problems such as this. As a result, I've consistently seen the administrators of these arts saying "wow, who would have expected that to happen"? This weak approach of Japanese arts is causing serious problems for them, and in many cases they are now relying on foreign members to take initiative for them. Not taking action is one of the main things that is hurting extant ryu-ha, and I for one don't want to wait until they die off to say "oops, I guess we should have nipped the problem in the bud before it got out of control".

On this forum, you have both non-members AND members of Daito-ryu who are posting. I have learend that members of virtually all the Daito-ryu branches are aware of this forum and monitor it on a regular basis. Over the last 10 years of posting to the internet, I for one have yet to receive a correspondance from any art asking me to "thanks for the effort, but keep out of our problems". Often times the things we say are the things they in fact wanted to say, but are not comfortable with saying themselves.

Most of what we post about on this forum is in regards to historical information published openly on Daito-ryu, or, about instructors claiming to teach the art (for the purposes of informing prospective students who they are getting involved with). We have a dojo directory for those interested in training. Yes, we discuss political and ethical matters from time to time, this being a discussion forum and all, but the intent is to inform others of various points of view and encourage consideration of them.


I am sure you wouldn't want me to discuss Obata Sensei and his art on a forum of those who didn't train with him or in his art, and say he is simply another Aikido man.

Ron's last post wraps up your question with a fair amount of irony. Fact is, people have discussed everything you brought up about Obata Sensei on the forums for many years. When they do, I usually find out if those talking have any direct experience with Obata Sensei or the art. If they do, and they have a personal opinion that is negative, they have a right to express it as long as they are not slanderous. As a senior member, and authorized "spokesman", I also had a right to rebut and debate their point of view if desired. Everyone has a right to an opinion, and if they wish, to express it. But each opinion is going to carry a varying amount of weight based on the individual's own experience and reputation.

Regards,

johan smits
11th January 2006, 22:11
Mr. Scott,

That does seem odd doesn't it? With all the attention koryu are getting you would think more people would give it a try.
Maybe keppan is withholding them from entering?

Best to you.

Johan Smits

Ron Tisdale
11th January 2006, 22:18
Hi Nathan,


IOW, Sokaku does not seem to have taught the inner-teachings of his art during these seminars.

I'd have to think you are absolutely correct there. But I don't think the "inner-teachings" of the art are taught in open seminars today either, which is kind of a point in case for this system being somewhat the same. You have the open seminars (perhaps not as long or intense as previously), and in that group, the instructor, the true deshi who assist, the members of branch dojo, the hangers on (like me :) ), etc. Some of those people from each group actually really train hard and work the material. Even some of the hangers on (not me). And you see the varying results accordingly. Not so different from the past, eh? I personally wish some of the seminars were a week to 10 days long, but hey, everyone is trying really hard with what's already available. I don't know how many could commit to 10 days (even myself).

Best,
Ron

Nathan Scott
11th January 2006, 22:42
Basically, I think the lack of membership in koryu these days is based on the emphasis on today's society for instant satisfaction, money, and laziness (take the easy way whenever possible, seek luxury, etc.). Why sacrifice time, money and energy for something that is "not yours" to do with as you wish? Also factors are people's lack of understanding or acceptance of training in an art that is at all "restrictive", a concept that is not found much in society - and for that matter, in gendai budo these days. Gendai budo does make a great filter and primer for those interested and appropriate for koryu arts though.

As far as seminars, one big difference I see is the way the information is used by many attendees who do not become members. In Sokaku's time, if anyone misused the name or art, he would surely track them down like dogs and "correct them". Sagawa Sensei was apparently called on to do so at one time, though it turned out to be a misunderstanding. These days, people have a different understanding of what the seminars are for, and are more bold about abusing the teachings and making false claims. In Sokaku's time, not everyone was welcome to train at the seminars, and those that did tended to be military, police, or prominent (well off or well known). Let's face it - open seminars these days are almost always open to anyone who comes with a check book, even if they are known to have a "shakey" background or reputation.

Regards,

Ron Tisdale
12th January 2006, 14:18
Well, I can certainly say that there are people who are no longer welcome at the mainline seminars...and they don't show up anymore, either. ;) So there is still some control being exercised...

Best, and good chattin' again,
Ron

Samurai Jack
12th January 2006, 20:44
Hoping to avoid my opinion as polemic due to my lack of eloquence and inaccuracy at the key board, I will like to address Nathan Scott for one last time.
I want to go on record that I am in agreement with Nathan Scott. Be there no point in splitting hairs with the differences, and dissecting examples used to illustrate a possible common experience, and or point.

Without this being said, I am afraid, my opinions (or individual view point rather) to be misunderstood. Misunderstood opinions can be dangerous things when presented to the wrong audience; read by those who feel anyone one elses opinion other then theirs is the opposition, and should be struck down with the mentality of "hive mind-edness" proclaiming "resistance is futile." Something very predominate in our current social and bi-partisan times. Times where the art of argumentation has become a lost art.

Thank you very much Nathan in providing a very well written and composed post to me, outlining some solid points that maybe a beacon for some. I hope your training continues to be benefiticial and rewarding.


I guess that wraps it up. :)

glad2bhere
13th January 2006, 16:52
".....Despite Tanomo Saigo urging Sokaku to teach the masses so that the art would not die, and Sokaku doing just that, I think the real secrets were still jealously guarded just as they always were - I think the real secrets were restricted to a select few that Sokaku felt he could trust because they were of decent and respectable character....."

What I am about to say may come across as a bit bizarre, Brently, but in fact would the art not have died in actuality if not in fact, given the circumstances you identify?

What I mean by this is that if the circumstances and the safeguards are modified such that the public at large is taught something which was kept secret by dint of the arts' spirit, has not the art actually died already? If I may use a crude comparison imagine a priceless painting which by benefit of modern technology can be flawlessly reproduced. While every person in the world could own a copy, what can be said of the original effort, creativity and dedication to an ideal that produced the original as compared to the copies? For myself I have come to view the tradition kwan in the KMA not unlike the Ryu in Japanese tradition. I don't mean that the institutions are identical, but only that each "noble few... we band of brothers..." (to quote Henry V) has submitted to something greater than themselves. In this way it is the keeping of the secret which transcends the actual secret itself. Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Nathan Scott
17th January 2006, 22:52
Hi Bruce,

Reproducing a "frozen" piece of art is analogous to preserving for posterity (and mutal benefit) the teachings of a ryu that has already died. Ripping off a living, extant ryu-ha is more like having a lineage of artists who others have managed to learn enough about to reproduce results that are similar or seemingly identical to the orthodox transmission line. Techniques can be stolen and copied, given enough time and enough information leaks. For those who are not students of the ryu, that is all they want anyway (there are also others who simply want any type of justification to claim rights to use the art name, riding on - and destroying - the repuation of the art).

Those that love koryu/traditional arts, and wish to see them survive for future generations to benefit from, should be more concerned with preserving and passing on all the elements of the art, not just the practical elements. That is the difference between a "science" and "art". Technique junkies, self-made soke's, and opportunists are in fact victimizing the arts they claim to enjoy and respect. There are a lot of exponents of arts like Daito-ryu that could have easily gotten rich (or at least very well off) by publishing what they know about the art, or selling internal resources to the highest bidder. Exponents from Takeda Sokaku on up. They have resisted the temptation out of love for the art and respect for their teachers.

I don't know how things are conducted in Korean arts, but keeping certain elements of an art's ryugi internal (secret) is not an arbitrary desire in Japanese ryu-ha. There are a number of practical reasons for this which I have mentioned in this thread previously. One of the new quotes I put up at the top of page 3 about Sagawa Sensei refers to this subject as well.

Regards,

MarkF
20th January 2006, 06:49
Open closed, omote ura, and on and on. Close it or open it, only members of the club will ever get close to learning advanced technique, either because the road they chose does not allow them to see it all, or because, open or not, the rule is the same: "....is not to be shown or taught to anyone who is not a member."

Now can't we all admit that this is true and the histrionics will limit everyone from learning the "secrets" because they are not good enough or interested enough?
Or, perhaps, even the most talented and learned of said persons just cannot learn everything in a single lifetime in most forms of Japanese (and other) combatives?

Open it or keep it closed, whatever we like or do not like is bound to happen and, in most cases, all ready has. After all, I won't teach anyone who is not a member of my club, large or purposely kept small, for two reasons: It was the rule of the Kano-run Kodokan, and the Kodokan is still run the same way as it always has. You must be a member, just like DRAB. Heck, I'm in my 43rd year and the Kodokan will still not recognize my grade above shodan.

But most of us still play by Kano's rule: "Do not show or teach Kodokan waza to any person not a member of this hall."


BTW: Daigo is one of three graded to 10 dan at the Kodokan. And they said they would never do that again. Of course, those who said they wouldn't aren't around anymore now, are they?


Mark

glad2bhere
20th January 2006, 13:35
Thanks, Nathan:

"...Those that love koryu/traditional arts, and wish to see them survive for future generations to benefit from, should be more concerned with preserving and passing on all the elements of the art, not just the practical elements. That is the difference between a "science" and "art". Technique junkies, self-made soke's, and opportunists are in fact victimizing the arts they claim to enjoy and respect. There are a lot of exponents of arts like Daito-ryu that could have easily gotten rich (or at least very well off) by publishing what they know about the art, or selling internal resources to the highest bidder. Exponents from Takeda Sokaku on up. They have resisted the temptation out of love for the art and respect for their teachers....."

To your discrimination between science and art I would also as that there is a difference between learning a skill and investing in a culture. I mention this because it has become very fashionable here in the States to reduce the Hapkido arts to little more than a Physical Education class. In this way Korean traditions are marketed in much the same way that one would promote a class in Golf, Volleyball or Gymnastics. Instruction is parceled-out in increments of so-many hours for a specified price. Instruction can be had in books, on tapes and disks and magazine articles. What is lost is the consideration of the art as cultural artifact and an expression of a people's values and priorities. Sadly, I must report that Korean ex-pats to the US are among the worst offenders in this regard.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Nathan Scott
20th January 2006, 20:01
Hi Mark,

I'm not saying that all, or even most, gendai arts do not discriminate what or who to teach. I'm also not saying that koryu arts are "better" than gendai arts (I study and enjoy both), but rather, that koryu and gendai arts are fundamentally different (generally speaking), even though they will also share some elements in common on the surface. As such, many who study gendai arts have a hard time integrating, accepting or understanding the more conservative attitude of koryu arts - whereas koryu exponents need simply "relax" to integrate into gendai arts, which is why we don't have similar discussions from the other way around.

The secrecy/conservative attitude in koryu/traditional arts is not just a Daito-ryu thing, but a koryu thing in general. IOW, even though I'm drawing on internal references from Daito-ryu to support my point of view here (this being the AJJ forum and all), I could just as easily present equally compelling cases for most other extant traditional ryu-ha.

We could argue about whether the desire to keep internal teachings internal in ryu-ha is valid, or even practical, but the fact is that classical ryu-ha are best preserved when taught in relatively small numbers to trusted students who have demonstrated a love for the art and desire to assist with its preservation. Yes, there are some in koryu arts that use their member status as bragging rights, with the "I know something you don't" star-bellied sneeches (look it up you young bucks) attitude. But hopefully they are the exception to the membership and not the norm, as they annoy us too.

I remember Karl Friday once stated on a forum that if his teacher (headmaster of Kashima shinryu) were to move to Georgia, he would happily forfeit his dojo to him and be excited at the opportunity to be a regular (though senior) student again - even though he holds a menkyo kaiden, shihan in the art. Many were surprised by that, but I believe that this is a typical attitude within koryu arts. A dojo is often established because you yourself need a place to train and initiated members to train with, but there is not (or should not) be any great desire to be a big-shot teacher when the headmaster (your teacher) is still alive and active.

The headmaster/honbu is the trunk of the tree, where the culture and "feeling" of the art is preserved and further developed. The further you get away from it, the more out of touch you are with these elements, and as a result the further you get away from jpreserving or passing on to others the "jikiden" of the ryu.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
11th July 2008, 22:59
I thought I would post a little information about one of Sokaku's most senior students, Ueshiba Morihei. Though he popularized his version of DR (aikido) widely throughout his life, it does not seem that he "gave away" the inner transmission easily.

The following is a quote from John Steven's "Invincible Warrior", page 155:


[picture of] Morihei at the first public demonstration of Aikido, in 1956. Previously, Morihei (like all the old-time masters) had been adamantly opposed to open performances lest his techniques be stolen and misused by unsavory characters. Another initial objection made by Morihei is that only the grand master is qualified to demonstrate; his disciples are still being trained and onlookers may get the wrong impression if they witness half-baked Aikido performed by novices.

He reluctantly agreed to this performance after Kisshomaru pleaded with him to do so for the spread of Aikido. Morihei turned out to have enjoyed this experience, realized the value of such demonstrations (as a celebration of Aikido), and let himself be freely photographed and filmed. (Except, on occasion, at Iwama. There were many Yakuza in the town, and Morihei canceled several public demonstrations at the Aiki Shrine because of the presence of gangsters.)

Ueshiba was 73-74 years old before he gave his first public demonstration (visualize white hair and long white beard), and that was agreed to only because his son urged him to do so. It was at the end of his life, and he passed away only 13 years later. While it seems he had a bit of a change of mind about performing publicly after that, he still was clearly concerned about the wrong people being exposed to his methods, and according to Saito Sensei, performed different methods publicly (or perhaps the methods differently) than what he taught privately in the dojo. Even when teaching he never appears to have explained inner-teachings in concrete terms, and expected his students to "steal" his techniques in keeping with his teacher and traditional arts.

It is interesting to see that not only did Sokaku's directs senior students all embrace the same attitude about art secrecy, but that many of the second generation of students still embrace the same attitude (many of which are still alive and active) - regardless of the modern age we live in. We all imagine aikido to be a very public art, but it wasn't always so, and in my opinion there is still quite a bit about aikido that is not commonly known yet. The only book Ueshiba came close to "writing" was Budo in 1935, and this was a book privately published in small numbers and given to select students. Budo Renshu was published in 1933, but was created by his students, privately published in small numbers, and given to select students as a form of transmission document. Both books contain his poems and transcribed lectures, but neither were "written" by him, and neither were intended to be sold to the public at the time they were produced.

Just a bit more to think about...

Regards,

glad2bhere
12th July 2008, 02:15
Thank you, Nathan.

And know that the Aikido people do not have a "limit on this market". In the Hapkido community there are many of us who feel very much the same way about our own practice.

It has become very popular for various people and organizations to "bait" Hapkido practitioners with sundry arguements, in the cynical hope of getting Hapkido people to disclose core principles of the Hapkido arts. There are quite a few that "bite", seeking to address issues with information that were never actually intended to be addressed, but only to serve as catalysts for causing the disclosure of material that many spend their entire Hapkido career pursuing.

My concern is that should this continue, we in the Hapkido community run the risk of seeing our material degraded. On this point I hold the Japanese traditionalist in high esteem and fervently pray that they remain steadfast to protecting their traditions in this modern world. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Ellis Amdur
12th July 2008, 02:22
Nathan - I'm a little puzzled. There is a picture of Ueshiba in the latest book (i forget the name) which has a translation, by Stevens, of some of his religious speeches, doing a demo in 1934, looking wild-eyed, with someone pushing on him. Are you distinguishing between demos to a "select" audience from the buy-your-ticket-enter-at-will kind of thing?

Nonetheless, I agree with you. I just had a conversation with one of Ueshiba's deshi from the 1950's, in which he said that Ueshiba frequently said two things, when asked to repeat the demo of a technique.
1. "I won't do it again. You'll steal it."
2. He'd do something else and then say, "They are the same."

OTOH, those are actually clear instructions, aren't they.:)

On another matter, prewar, according to two informed, disparate sources that I've spoken to over the last couple of days, Ueshiba taught that aikido was done by GRABBING the other person and doing things to them. This was changed, after the war to tori being grabbed - and NOT by Ueshiba himself.

Best

Mark Murray
12th July 2008, 03:35
On another matter, prewar, according to two informed, disparate sources that I've spoken to over the last couple of days, Ueshiba taught that aikido was done by GRABBING the other person and doing things to them. This was changed, after the war to tori being grabbed - and NOT by Ueshiba himself.

Best

Uh, talk about a bombshell. Um, that's certainly a very important piece of information. Wow.

Mark

DDATFUS
12th July 2008, 04:07
That's quite interesting, Ellis. Now could you shake a leg on that book before we go mad with speculation? :D

henjoyuko
12th July 2008, 04:45
On another matter, prewar, according to two informed, disparate sources that I've spoken to over the last couple of days, Ueshiba taught that aikido was done by GRABBING the other person and doing things to them. This was changed, after the war to tori being grabbed - and NOT by Ueshiba himself.

This is (almost) a no brainer if you think about it. Daito Ryu was being taught to Military personnel and Police (a lot) first by Takeda sensei and later by Ueshiba sensei. Were we to think that these individuals were instructed to wait to be attacked first and then harmonize with their attackers rather than proactively protecting the public? I guess so . . .

Anyway Ellis, considering the topic of conversation and your willingness to openly share information, perhaps you should consider that there might a cup of tea waiting on a sanbo somewhere with your name on it! ;) :D

Hope you are well and enjoying the summer.

P Goldsbury
12th July 2008, 06:07
Uh, talk about a bombshell. Um, that's certainly a very important piece of information. Wow.

Mark

Hello Mark,
There is just a hint of this in the Budo Renshu volume (1933) and the Budo volume (Showa 13 = 1938).

The photo that Ellis refers to is on p.51 of The Secret Teachings of Aikido, translated by John Stevens. The demonstration was at the Japan Industrial Club in 1934.

Allen,
Ellis is in Japan at the moment and we talked by telephone a few hours ago. He is coming down to stay with me for a few days here in Hiroshima. We will probably be discussing 'issues' for at least 36 hours each day.:)

henjoyuko
12th July 2008, 07:18
Hi Peter,

Between your newly liberated self (I hope retirement is treating you kindly. I've certainly been enjoying the fruits of your leisure!) and Ellis' penchant for eloquently repaying his self-perceived, and imposed debt, to Aikido by holding up a mirror to it (or perhaps behind it), I shudder to think of the ramifications 36 x 3 hours from now.

Ellis certainly knows the best time to travel to Japan weather wise doesn't he?!?! :p Tsuyu is just nature's way of preparing one to get used to being wet . . . constantly. :cry:

Please give my kind regards to Ellis, and of course I wish you all the best as well.

Allen
(BTW, did you ever make your trip to Northern Honshu?)

Nathan Scott
12th July 2008, 09:33
Bruce,

Wow, I feel your pain. Welcome to the wonderful world of baiting and badgering!

Ellis,


Nathan - I'm a little puzzled. There is a picture of Ueshiba in the latest book (i forget the name) which has a translation, by Stevens, of some of his religious speeches, doing a demo in 1934, looking wild-eyed, with someone pushing on him. Are you distinguishing between demos to a "select" audience from the buy-your-ticket-enter-at-will kind of thing?

This was a quote from John Stevens' book, who - critiques aside - seems pretty knowledgable about Ueshiba's life. His book is not the first time I've heard that Ueshiba did not demonstrate his art publicly until much later in his life though. As far as what qualifies as a public demonstration, I dunno. Obviously he demonstrated for training participants and probably spectators who came to watch. It doesn't seem as though Ueshiba or his son considered any previous exhibitions of technique as "public demonstrations" until this one though, or they probably wouldn't have made a big deal about it. Also, after demonstrating publicly it seems Ueshiba changed his attitude a bit. I'd think he would have been influenced much earlier in this direction had he been demonstrating publicly. I think perhaps the Ueshiba's / Stevens are differentiating between demonstrating in front of select groups from demonstrating in front of who ever walks in off the street. But that's just my guess.


Nonetheless, I agree with you. I just had a conversation with one of Ueshiba's deshi from the 1950's, in which he said that Ueshiba frequently said two things, when asked to repeat the demo of a technique.
1. "I won't do it again. You'll steal it."
2. He'd do something else and then say, "They are the same."

Typical!


On another matter, prewar, according to two informed, disparate sources that I've spoken to over the last couple of days, Ueshiba taught that aikido was done by GRABBING the other person and doing things to them. This was changed, after the war to tori being grabbed - and NOT by Ueshiba himself.

Hmmm, I'm surprised to hear such a statement coming from the Ueshiba line. Very interesting, thanks for passing that on. There really is a pretty significant depth of knowledge in aikido that does not seem to get taught very widely.

I do remember arguing with an older Japanese class mate of mine once, who was nice enough to inform me (scold) that aikido was not an art in which one grabs the opponent. I suspect he may have heard something like this from our teacher. On the surface this sounds like a plausible theory, until you take into account fundamental techniques such as sankajo, yonkajo, and any number of the arresting methods taught within the art. I think my class mates point was perhaps that we didn't attack, or initiate techniques, in aikido. This is also not quite right, but it is at least closer to the mark.

One problem with talking about "aikido" - a problem that I am guilty of - is assuming everyone is picturing the same "aikido" as you. I always think in terms of pre-war aikido, but there is perhaps a majoriy of aikido-ka who are more familiar with post-war aikido. I guess it's important to make this distinction...

Regards,

autrelle
12th July 2008, 13:58
I don't recall seeing many (if any) discussions of physical priinciples on any of the other forums of this board. How many times to you see judoka discussing judo principles? Or aikidoka discussing aikido principles? Or kenjutsu or iaido folks talking about sword principles?


http://www.aikidojournal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8300

Just thought I would post this link for example's sake.

Dan Harden
12th July 2008, 14:28
Ueshiba also did the demonstration before the Emperors court in 41. I can only guess at the amount of dignitaries and others in that audience.


Secrecy and seizing techniques
I wonder if we should consider the laying on of hands in response to attacks, as well as the laying on of hands pre-emptively.
There is at least one DR teacher showing not only how to escape from being seized either through leverage and positioning (jujutsu) or through aiki. He then on many occasions shows "how to's" in doing the typical shoulder and wrist grab, or rear choke, leg attacks, hip locks, leg locks,, standing, close and moving to take the initiative, all done preemptively. this included many details for using leverage and/or aiki in maintaining a rear choke to prevent an escape.
I also think that when it comes to secrecy there is no one truth to be had. Since many of these teachers
a) Continued to develop waza on their own-even mid level teachers have.
b) Continue to blend in other influences into their understanding.
c) The art of Daito ryu being about as diverse as one can possibly imagine.
We may only arrive at their singular truth, from their own research and studies.

Are we presuming that all who are teaching at any level means they are 'teaching in full" at any level? Then take into account the modern teachers and what they are choosing to do to teach and disseminate the art- and any hope of consistency, or relevant discussions of secrecy goes out the window. It becomes singuler by style, singular by person,



Japan in July-good going Ellis. Anyone needing tips on how to get salt stains out of hakama give me ring.

Dan

henjoyuko
14th July 2008, 16:47
So . . . trying to pull the thread back to Nathan's original topic (Thanks for letting us drift a bit though!), it seems that there almost certainly was stuff thought of as secret and held in secret within Daito Ryu, shared with a select few, and this may have had some influence on what, how, and who, Ueshiba Morihei taught, AND what was considered secret and/or kept quiet may have changed for a variety of reasons over time (generational change, social/political circumstance, etc.) and probably is influential still.

I might add that since Aikido was, and to a lesser degree still is, so tightly tied to the Ueshiba family, information deemed "sensitive" would very potentially be seen as directly "sensitive" to the Ueshiba family interests and reputation as well and would, understandably, be handled carefully as such.

How's that Nathan?

Eric Pearson
14th July 2008, 19:17
I never found any of the feudal secrecy in Japan or in Daito Ryu.

The school I attended "shofukan" in Numata, Gunma prefecture was very open. Like all Budo - the real secret is to keep showing up and practicing. The secret is forming relationships with your teacher, sempai and fellow students.

It is my sincerest belief that now days honest teachers will pour forth as much information as your brain can handle. It is just a matter of practice to actually understand it.

Nathan Scott
24th July 2008, 23:44
Great discussion guys.


He really didn't want to do the break/kill of Daito ryu.

I think the "break/kill" techniques in Daito-ryu are over-emphasized. These are the methods that Tokimune seemed to emphasize, that were said to have been derived from the Takeda family Kogusoku methods. However, a parallel line of Takeda teachings were said to have been adapted within Edo-jo by Hoshina Masayuki, which emphasized basically countering and controlling would-be assassins. Apparently because assassination attempts were typically generated from higher ups, and it would be more useful to have the assassin alive to talk about it. Also, because it was against castle law to draw blood inside the castle. In any event, I've seen much more emphasis on controlling techniques/throws in Daito-ryu than on killing or breaking techniques, FWIW.

As far as Ueshiba's methods changing over the years, the biggest thing I see is not so much a difference in aggressiveness as a difference in technical focus. Daito-ryu has both kime waza and katame waza. However, post-war aikido emphasizes non-painful katame waza methods, whereas pre-war aikido includes kime waza methods (painful).

I was once told in no uncertain terms by Isoyama Hiroshi Sensei that aikido DOES NOT have kime waza!


"The term 'aiki' used up to now by people in the fighting arts and the term 'aiki' that I use are fundamentally different in content and substance. It is my hope and request that everyone teaches this".

I guess that pretty much resolves the "does aikido have Daito-ryu aiki" debate.


How's that Nathan?

Very nice Mr. Beebe, thank you.

Regards,

henjoyuko
25th July 2008, 07:07
I guess that pretty much resolves the "does aikido have Daito-ryu aiki" debate.


That's right. Aikido doesn't have Daito-ryu aiki just like "aikido DOES NOT have kime waza!" :look:


Very nice Mr. Beebe, thank you.

Mr. Beebe is what they call me at work. In the dojo they call me other names. :( Just 'Allen' would be an improvement. Anyway, you're welcome.

BTW, a certain individual from the town where you went to high school had some nice things to say about you over dinner tonight. Hope your ears weren't burning! ;)

Regs,
Allen

TimothyKleinert
25th July 2008, 15:42
I think the "break/kill" techniques in Daito-ryu are over-emphasized... Daito-ryu has both kime waza and katame waza. However, post-war aikido emphasizes non-painful katame waza methods, whereas pre-war aikido includes kime waza methods (painful).

I wanted to throw in a quick "I agree".

I do think the "drop/break/kill" character of DR is exaggerated. First off, such sentiments imply that Aikido doesn't include "drop/break/kill"; but as Nathan points out, styles (and individual practicioners) of Aikido vary.

But more significantly, I think the public perception of DR is skewed by those portions of the curriculum that are publicly available---namely, the Hiden Mokuroku, which does focus more on hard jujutsu. The portions of the Aiki-no-jutsu that I've been exposed to---which admittedly only amounts to maybe 15-20% of the section, so maybe I shouldn't be commenting on it---are all very soft and involve little, if any, pain.

Nathan Scott
25th July 2008, 18:14
Hi Allen,


BTW, a certain individual from the town where you went to high school had some nice things to say about you over dinner tonight. Hope your ears weren't burning!

Ah, that's my boy you're talking about! Glad you had a chance to spend time together. For some reason he and I seem to have almost identical perspectives on budo.

As far as aikido goes, the destructive techniques in aikido seem to be implied rather than shown more openly like in koryu arts, but judging from the reports of Ueshiba teaching police and military it is clear that he had no problem teaching the destructive versions. Therefore, it would be accurate to say that "aikido" clearly contains within it both versions (destructive and non-destructive). It is also worth remembering that there are still many law enforcement and military that train in arts like aikido and Daito-ryu as a source for practical technique. Many of them have had cause to "test" them as well, and I haven't heard any complaints yet.

In unarmed jujutsu, it seems that even destructive techniques were most often practiced as throws/controls so as to allow the student to learn more about connecting to, blending with, and controlling the opponent. In other words, flipping someone over you from a straight arm bar without hurting their elbow requires a much higher level of skill than simply breaking the elbow. It would not take many lessons in the dojo to master the art of breaking an elbow. But the skill gained from successfully controlling the opponent's body would be extremely beneficial on many levels. If circumstances dictate a destructive technique (multiple attackers, armed suspect) then it is a simple matter to "go against the connection" or alter the rotation of a throw so that ukemi is not possible. As many have become aware in recent years, aikido technique and movements can also be adapted from throws/controls into striking methods (atemi) as well. So in my opinion, there is no shortage of effective or destructive techniques, it is simply a matter of Ueshiba Sensei wishing to emphasize the other side of his art, and perhaps raise the bar of skill level through soft, connected training.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
17th January 2010, 18:05
Following is a post that was part of a thread which was deleted (10-03-08):

I just compared the translated English language text in Kondo Katsuyuki's "DR AJJ - Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo" book (AJ) with the original Japanese printed next to it. The text in question is on page 11, while the original Japanese is printed in the last paragraph of page 8.

The main statements being quoted by Daito-ryu detractors - apparently made by Tokimune to Kondo - appears to be the following. Note that the Japanese words in brackets are the romanized Japanese words I found used in the original text:


"If you teach people the true techniques [honto no waza] and the next day they leave the school, then all of the secret [hiden] and oral teachings [kuden] of Daito-ryu will flow outside the school and be known to the general public. Out of a thousand pupils, teach the true techniques [honmono] only to one or two. Make absolutely sure of those you choose, and to them alone teach what is real [honmono]. There is no need to teach the rest."

The text in question does in fact appear to be translated accurately. "Honto no waza" means "the true techniques"; and "honmono" means "genuine", or "real". However, what is not conveyed in these quotes is the intended context of the statements.

In the paragraph prior to this quote Tokimune recalls how, whenever he taught as his father's representative, if he showed a technique more than once his father would scold him as being "too soft-hearted." Sokaku himself was very strict and disciplined in how he taught the art, and apparently had an ongoing problem with Tokimune wanting to basically "spoon feed" students the teachings because he felt sorry that they weren't getting it. The previously referenced "non-verbal" traditional method (referenced also by Sagawa, Ueshiba and Horikawa) of teaching requires discipline on the teacher's part NOT to just explain to students how the techniques work. Sokaku and many of his senior students appear to have believed that only the most dedicated, serious students would rise to the highest levels of ability in the art, and that spoon feeding the teachings to students would only stunt their ability to use their own senses and brain to learn. Thus, we are back to a perspective of traditional methods of teaching, combined with the history of Daito-ryu as being a conservative art.

What are the "true" and "real" techniques? The text doesn't make reference to them specifically, but based on the prior sentence warning of "all the Daito-ryu hiden and kuden" flowing outside the school, and to "only teach one or two students the real teachings", it seems obvious to me that they are talking about the Menkyo Kaiden teachings and above. Sokaku issued ONE Menkyo Kaiden (TWO if you include Horikawa), and Tokimune issued TWO Menkyo Kaiden. That sounds a lot like "one or two deshi". Regardless, that doesn't mean that students of all levels are not exposed to various levels of hiden and kuden. For example, the senior members of the Daitokai were clearly exposed to quite a bit of it, even though they were not exposed to the higher levels. This is evidenced in the video tapes they sold, the content of their English website, and the information repeated by their students. Some of it was flat out wrong, but much of it was right. "All the hiden and kuden" is clearly in reference to the one or two students, which we know from history are those Menkyo Kaiden level or above. But a look at the amount of skilled students who have been produced through the various lines of Sokaku's teachings clearly shows that not much was being held back to the right students. There has been an increasing number with each generation who have "it" - not a decreasing number.

So while the choice of wording in the original Japanese text above may not have been the best choice of wording, I still believe that those familiar with koryu arts and able to objectively apply common sense will still come to the above conclusion when such statements are not removed from the intended (original) context.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
17th January 2010, 18:07
Following is a post that was part of a thread which was deleted (10-08-08):

I've been thinking about the questions raised in the "Art of Deception" article, and had some further perspective to share. Kondo Sensei was quoted as saying:


"Tokimune Takeda included in his lessons Aiki-Kempo, the Kendo kata, Ono-Ha Itto-Ryu and other techniques that had no relationship to Daito-Ryu-Jujutsu in order to avoid teaching Daito-Ryu techniques ... When he taught Ono-Ha Itto-Ryu--he would explain it differently from Daito-Ryu techniques. I had a question about this difference, and until that point, no one had asked him, I said, "Sensei, the things you are saying about the sword and Daito-Ryu techniques are different."

The above is phrased a bit strange, but I suspect it is not as strange as it sounds.

For example, "Aiki Kempo" is in fact a section of teachings that Sagawa Yukiyoshi also taught. There were two densho that he issued that were related to this section of teaching: "Daito-ryu Aiki Kempo", and "Katshu-ho Hidensho". Both densho refer to Daito-ryu titles in the issuing signature section.

Sagawa Sensei also taught Kogen Itto-ryu in his dojo parallel to Daito-ryu, and even issued KIR densho to those students that studied it. Some of these densho also refer to Daito-ryu titles in the issuing signature section.

Based on what we know, Tokimune obviously had a great deal of respect for Sagawa Sensei. He left Daito-ryu to his care when he joined the military, and visited Sagawa a number of times whenever he had problems. They also both traveled with Sokaku at one point to assist him in teaching seminars.

Sagawa Sensei clearly intended for his Daito-ryu to be a comprehensive bujutsu. I suspect Tokimune tried to follow his example to some degree. When Tokimune created Aikibudo, he included "Aiki Kempo", as Sagawa did, as well as a different line of Itto-ryu kenjutsu - Ono-ha itto-ryu. Ono-ha itto-ryu was the art that Tokimune's father studied, and according to Tokimune, was also the art that was taught along side Oshikiuchi during the Edo period. Sokaku only taught certain weapon work to those who had an interest in them or already had a foundation. But Tokimune indicated numerous times in various interviews that he felt studying swordsmanship in tandem with Daito-ryu was critical to understanding Daito-ryu. He even gave specific examples of how the two are similar.

In regards to Kendo Kata, Ono-ha itto-ryu was the father art of Kendo. It is not hard to believe that Tokimune may have felt the Kendo kata would be a good primer before entering OIR. Interestingly, another well respected koryu teacher uses the Kendo Kata as a foundation for his koryu sword art here in America.

So it seems to me that there is a precedent for these three methods mentioned in Kondo Sensei's article, as well as logical reason for incorporating them. Based on what the above article says, it is also possible that Tokimune viewed these additional teachings as not only a way to provide for a more comprehensive foundation for Daito-ryu, but also a way to create more time in which to evaluate the character of his students before teaching them inner-teachings of Daito-ryu. If this is the case, then the above quoted section of Kondo Sensei's article may simply be poorly phrased.

Hopefully Kondo Sensei will eventually clarify these points for us. But in the meantime, I believe the facts which I've just listed, in conjunction with Tokimune's own interviews, indicate that the "deception" is likely not what some think it is.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
24th August 2013, 03:13
[Post deleted by user]