PDA

View Full Version : Hakko ryu jujutsu



shinja
27th October 2000, 14:45
Hey guys,

Posted this question to the aikijujutsu uys. It was suggested that I post it under jujutsu.

Okuyama studied Daito Ryu and based his Hakko Ryu Jujutsu on what he learned.

What's the general opinion of those familiar with Daito Ryu and Hakko Ryu. Is Hakko Ryu considered to be aikijujutsu?


any Hakko Ryu guys out there?

Neil Hawkins
31st October 2000, 08:54
Steven

Sorry for the delay, I've been on holidays.

There are many jujutsu styles that have techniques that could be construed as aikijutsu or aikijujutsu, but that doesn't necessarily make them true aikijutsu styles.

To be honest with you and at the risk of starting an arguement, I personally don't think there is really much difference between good jujutsu and aikijutsu. (Notice I qualified the statement by saying 'good' jujutsu, I also think that there is more bad jujutsu than good jujutsu, especially some of the stuff I've seen personally.)

Jujutsu can be applied in a soft flowing manner full of aiki (as in aikido) or shortcut so the techniques are applied in a short, hard, quick way. In Daito Ryu there is a huge number of techniques that are pure jujutsu, the aiki no jutsu principles are applied to a few specific techniques from memory, 60 or so throws out of a couple of thousand unarmed techniques, though this does include variations so the actual number is much lower. (Please correct me if I'm wrong Nathan :)).

From what I've seen and read, Hakko Ryu does embrace certain aiki principles but prefers to concentrate on its wrist locks, which are quite good.

I can't really go so far as to say that Hakko Ryu or any other jujutsu style is Aikijutsu, but I don't think the differences are as great as some people would have us believe.

Regards

Neil

Richard A Tolson
31st October 2000, 19:07
What Neil said!!! :)

Brently Keen
1st November 2000, 05:03
Neil and Richard and all,

Happy Halloween!

Maybe I should give up trying to explain things and just train more. All the pre-crash aiki wars and post-crash attempts to clarify what authentic Daito-ryu aiki is seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps it's just meant to be that way.

Daito-ryu has had a rich and mysterious history, and details about the art, it's background, techniques and principles have been scarce. Myths and legends seem to comprise the bulk of the martial arts public knowledge about the art.

However, recently things have began to open up significantly. There are many more people training in Daito-ryu than ever before, and other so-called "aikijujutsu" styles too. And it's all because of the efforts of some very dedicated people. Now there is much more information available to the public as well, because of the dedication and efforts of those same people.

What doesn't help sincere seekers of knowledge about authentic aikijujutsu or more specifically Daito-ryu; is when folks outside of the tradition continue to try to define and describe what aiki is or isn't to everyone else. For jujutsu practitioners of other traditions to say what aiki is like is comparable (IMHO) to a guy saying he knows what having breast cancer feels like.

Ok maybe, it's more like a woman saying she knows what it feels like because her friend or her mother had it, but it doesn't matter. The truth is, only a woman who can say from personal experience - can really say that she knows what it feels like. And anyone who really wants to understand, and/or sympathize objectively must listen to those who've been through it, not just observed it or read about it.

Even for someone who's had skin cancer and may have a lot in common, such as having received similar treatments and ended up with similar results, it's not the same. For them to assume they understand, or presume to explain to someone else what it's like is at best speculative and/or misleading, but at worst is insensitive and damaging.

What is frustrating (but perhaps shouldn't be) for someone like myself who has made considerable efforts to describe my experiences, and share what I've learned about Daito-ryu through my direct training with an authentic master of the art, is when assumptions are made based on preconceived notions and previous experience. The problem I see is that too often people outside Daito-ryu try to use and define terms and concepts according to the way they were taught in their system of jujutsu and/or aikido. This only obfuscates things further and contributes both to the "mysteriousness" and overall confusion surrounding aikijujutsu.

When "aiki" becomes everything to everybody, then everybody has their own "aiki", and then aiki loses it's objectivity and becomes completely subjective. The real aiki then becomes nebulous and elusive because who can say what it is? If good jujutsu becomes like aiki, and flowing cooperative aikido is also full of aiki what is it? In my mind, good jujutsu might very well be soft, effortless, and flowing, but good jujutsu does not necessitate cooperation - good jujutsu is effective jujutsu. Is it not?

Two aikido practitioners may also flow together in wonderful harmony, tori may lead and uke might follow in perfect sync, and that could be very good, even great aikido, but as long as uke cooperates can we objectively consider it to be equally effective or efficient?

If you want to know whether a Mac is better than a PC you need to not only use a Mac you need to use it the way it was intended. You can't try to operate it as if it were a PC. Sure they're both computers and they both perform many of the same functions and share many features, but no matter how much Windows based systems try to copy Mac features it uses a different operating system, they're more different than they are alike. If you want to know what a Mac can do, understand and utilize it to its full potential, then you've got to learn the system, become familiar with it, you have to immerse yourself completely in it and adopt it's operating system.

Most martial systems are comprised of techniques of a certain type or style, some are based on concepts and principles as well. Aikijujutsu is a principle based art. Jujutsu and aikido both share some of those principles, and may also be based on those principles as well, but they are not to be mistaken for aikijujutsu (or even the principles themselves). The aiki no jutsu in Daito-ryu are techniques, not principles. They illustrate, use and follow certain principles, but they are not the principles themselves. In aikido "aiki" is seen primarily as a concept and sometimes as a combining force (ai+ki), likewise in some jujutsu systems, but other jujutsu systems see "aiki" as other things.

But if people want to know more about the real, authentic aiki then they should join an authentic aikijujutsu dojo and train directly with a teacher who is willing and able to teach it. But that's not all, if you really want to get it, you've also got to adopt the system, you've got to come with an empty cup and set aside everything you've learned up to that point, in order to get it undistorted from the source. And if you're unable or unwilling to make that commitment, then at least have the objectivity and courtesy to accept the word of those who have, as coming from much closer to the source than anyone outside the tradition, or just stick to commenting on what you really know.

Pardon my tirade guys, no offense was intended here, this just touched one of my buttons. I've no intention of continuing to argue about this or reigniting the old aiki wars. People can go back and read some of the older threads (mostly on the AJJ forum) for more distinctions, but if you really want to know, find a good dojo, with a great teacher, become a (beginning) student again, adopt that system and train, train, train.

To answer the main question posed by Steven:

Hakko-ryu Jujutsu is derived from Daito-ryu Jujutsu. It has a few techniques that could be considered aikijujutsu techniques, but it is definitely a Jujutsu system. Many of the techniques are virtually unchanged from Daito-ryu Jujutsu techniques, however there is more emphasis on pressure points in Hakko-ryu. From my limited experience, it's my opinion that the Hakko-ryu Jujutsu system is based on the use of the body's meridian system (via pressure points) combined with the skeletal locking aspects of Daito-ryu Jujutsu, and a self-defense oriented philosophy of No Challenge, No Resistance and No Injury.

Remember, that in Daito-ryu there is both jujutsu and aikijujutsu, and they are both completely different. Technically there's not a whole lot of difference between Hakko-ryu and Daito-ryu Jujutsu, but there is a big difference between the mindset, intent and philosophy of the two. The difference between Hakko-ryu and Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu is even greater because technically they're also completely different.

While I'm not ranked in Hakko-ryu, I did study it briefly and intensely for almost a year. This was after I'd been practicing aikido for about three years, and before I started training in Daito-ryu with Seigo Okamoto sensei.

Brently Keen




[Edited by Brently Keen on 10-31-2000 at 11:08 PM]

Richard A Tolson
1st November 2000, 05:28
Brently,
Sorry pal, but you lost me. What exactly did you disagree with in Neil's post? Was it his statement about aiki no jutsu?
Sometimes it sounds like you interpret all aikijujutsu from your Roppokai and past aikido experience. That is only a piece of the puzzle. The last I heard you were a shodan in Roppokai. Not that shodan is a small achievement. How long have you been training in Roppokai? Just curious. I don't really know much about you.
Even one intense year is not enough to judge Hakko-ryu. Though many of the points you raise were right on target.
The only thing that bothers me about your post is that you seem to think you are the only "true" aikijujutsu practitioner to respond to this thread. That is assuming quite a bit! But perhaps I just misread your intent.
BTW, Happy Halloween back at ya :).


[Edited by Richard A Tolson on 10-31-2000 at 11:32 PM]

Neil Hawkins
1st November 2000, 09:43
Brently,

Sorry, it was certainly not my intention to get you worked up. I don't think I said anything to denigrate Daito Ryu, I merely wished to put some things into perspective. I will be the first to admit that I know very little about Daito Ryu, and my interpretation of aiki is definitely based on Ueshiba's model. There are a number of styles that affect the term aikijutsu to differentiate the softer style from the hard style. I think I alluded to the fact that Daito Ryu was different from these and merely mentioned that a large percentage of the Daito Ryu techniques are jujutsu. A point that you confirmed in your post.

I apologise if you took offence at anything I said, I was merely trying to explain to Steven why some people might refer to Hakko Ryu as aikijutsu. Again, I don't want to resurrect any of the old arguements, but your contention that I cannot explain what aiki is like is erroneous. I may not be able to describe your (or Daito Ryu's) concept of aiki, but I can certainly explain my concept using aikido terms, and despite what you say, some of the aiki I have seen and felt demonstrated in aikido and jujutsu is very practical. It is this form of energy/power that I use and it is taught in a number of older jujutsu schools. Obviously the techniques or principles pre-date aikido and so who knows where or how they originated, but the descriptions used by aikido illustrate them well. There are some that would consider a well executed, powerful punch to contain aiki (body and spirit in harmony), just because it doesn't fit our concept doesn't mean they are wrong, they are just using the same word in a different context.

You are correct when you say 'good' jujutsu is effective jujutsu. But this does not have to be short and sharp, effective technique encompasses a huge number of things, but primary is (IMO) unbalancing. There are many ways to unbalance an opponent, most are physical, some are mental, but however you do it, ki plays an essential part especially when the movements are longer. The flow of ki is what keeps the opponent off-balance, this taken to its extreme in the exercise called Aiki no taiso but is manifest in many other techniques.

Regards

Neil

PS. Richard, settle down a bit will ya, that last post sounded a little confrontational, no one is questioning Brently's credentials. I have the utmost respect for Brently even if we disagree sometimes. ;)

kenkyusha
1st November 2000, 13:11
Originally posted by Brently Keen
[snip]
(IMHO) to a guy saying he knows what having breast cancer feels like.

[snip]The truth is, only a woman who can say from personal experience - can really say that she knows what it feels like. And anyone who really wants to understand, and/or sympathize objectively must listen to those who've been through it, not just observed it or read about it.
[snip]

Brently Keen
[snip]
One thing- men CAN get breast cancer. Adipose tissue is subject to cancerous tumors for guys (and while it isn't common, it does happen).

Be well,
Jigme

Walker
1st November 2000, 16:32
Jigme - Yeah I thought the same thing, but consider the psychological difference between a man losing his breast and a woman. Of course the man most likely ignored his symptoms and is dead anyway.

kenkyusha
1st November 2000, 17:11
True,

But for guys, the whole "women are supposed to get this not me..." factor seems like it could be devastating to one's self-image. This is not to diminish female breast-cancer patients at all (recently lost a close family friend to it), but the assertion that it is something that only women get is just wrong.

Be well,
Jigme

Brian Griffin
1st November 2000, 17:37
It's important to remember that some of the terminology we're discussing in these forums are used as "terms of art" within certain disciplines, but are used in a more general sense by other groups.

For example, there are the terms used in discussing the tactical implications of early- or late-initiative in combat. In a general sense, we all have an idea what is meant by "sen-no-sen" and "go-no-sen," but _within_ a given martial tradition, the terms might be used in a very specialized, even idiosyncratic way: What one _ryuha_ calls "go-no-sen" might well be described as "sen-no-sen" when using the customary language of a second _ryuha_.

As I understand it, the concept of _aiki_ has been used by many koryu for a long time. Daito Ryu has made it a particular specialty, and uses the term with a very specific meaning, but other groups may also use the term, and it may have a somewhat different meaning within those groups. There's nothing wrong with that.

Indeed, _aiki_ may not mean exactly the same thing to different Daito Ryu factions. Do Roppokai and Daitokan _really_ mean the same thing when they say _aiki_? If not, then why is it a big deal when aikido uses the term in their own specific sense?

Many experienced practitioners of Daito Ryu recognize that the broader, more general concept of _aiki_ can be honored by traditions far outside the Daito Ryu lineage. On the kamiza at my dojo hangs a piece of calligraphy that reads (wait for it)......AIKI! I'm sure some people, seeing it in a Judo club, figure we probably don't know what it says & just hung it up 'cause it looks so good :)

We received it as a special gift, in honor of the opening of our new dojo. It was sent from Japan by Inoue Yusuke, menkyo-kaiden of Daito Ryu Aikijujitsu Kodokai, who brushed it in our honor, and was presented to us at the opening by Kiyama Hayawo sensei.

We treasure it, _and_ the concept it represents.

Nathan Scott
1st November 2000, 19:42
Hello,

First of all, I wouldn't look forward to trying to squash me breasty in a mamogram machine. I'll pass. :)

Secondly, I'm all for using the terms "Aiki" (as used by most traditions that coin the term aiki in their system) and "DR Aiki" for the unique definition used by exponents of Daito ryu. What DR aiki is, and whehter it is everything DR students say we'll never know unless we join a ligit dojo and train very hard for most of our lives (even then it's a bit iffy, from what I've heard!).

The general public should and will likely have to settle for "DR aiki is defined differently than all/most known traditions", because those that know (senior DR exponents) are probably not going to be inclined to explain it to outsiders, being one of the higher core principles of their tradition. If they did, they would (at this time, at least) be chastised by their peers and perhaps fired from the tradition.

So lets avoid aiki wars by simply qualifying the concept as "aiki" or "DR aiki". No need to have a war about it, or disagree on it's usage. I think it is within the right of DR exponents to say that they have not seen aiki as defined by DR in other styles yet, as long as its stated in a similar way to this to avoid ruffling feathers of those that define aiki in the more general/classic sense.

Fair enough?

Regards,

Richard A Tolson
2nd November 2000, 06:31
Nathan,
Good suggestion! I can live with that.

Brently Keen
2nd November 2000, 06:58
Richard,

I just reread my post, and I think I was being clear about what I meant. I certainly begged everyone's pardon for my "tirade" and even stated that I meant no offense. I was just expressing a frustration of mine, it wasn't personal.

I am not one to go around advertising the ranks I hold in the martial arts that I've studied. Rank in fact means very little to me. Instead it is the aquisition of skill that matters more to me. I have never asked for or sought out rank promotions for myself. IMO, years spent training in a martial art are also not much of an indicator of skill or expertise either. It is not the years of experience that matter nearly as much as the depth of of that experience.

I've only been training in Daito-ryu for eight years, and I'm the first to admit that's not a very long time, (Heck, I'm even a slow learner), but that means absolutely nothing because those years are entirely relative and subjective. Some of my students have grasped in months what took me years to figure out. It's enough that Okamoto sensei has granted me the responsibility and priveledge of representing the Roppokai as a shibu-cho.

I can only share my perspective based on what I have been taught and have learned from my experience. My point was that it only obfuscates the issues when people outside of a tradition try to define or describe something that stems from that tradition. Especially when their own experience derives from a different system or systems altogether.

I certainly was not judging "Hakko-ryu", I simply stated some of the characteristics of the art, based not only on my own admittedly limited experience, but also on what the founder, and some other top teachers have said about the art.

Jigme,

I stand corrected. I'd never heard of men getting breast cancer. I think my point is unaffected though, and that is: In order to truly understand and know what it feels like, you'd have to have gone through the experience yourself. Barring that, if you wanted to know more you'd best ask someone who had been through it to tell you what it was like and how it made them feel. Their perspective is gonna give you the best idea short of going through it yourself.

Neil,

It seems that you pretty much understood the intent of my post (thanks), and you certainly caused me no offense. I simply think that a lot of misconceptions about (Daito-ryu) aikijujutsu stem from perspectives outside of Daito-ryu.

Since these perspectives seem to come primarily from aikido and other jujutsu systems, they naturally reflect the interpretations and biases of those those systems, which are quite different from the Daito-ryu perspective. Although aikido is derived from Daito-ryu, it's interpretation and definition of aiki still differs significantly, IMO.

I don't really disagree too much with the actual points you made (such as what constitutes good and bad jujutsu, and that while Hakko-ryu may contain some ajj techniques it's still a jujutsu system), as much as I object to some of the assumptions you made along with them, like:

"I personally don't think there is really much difference between good jujutsu and aikijutsu." and "I don't think the differences are as great as some people would have us believe." and that soft flowing jujutsu (or aikido) is full of aiki.


Everyone,

The question of this thread was:

"Okuyama studied Daito Ryu and based his Hakko Ryu Jujutsu on what he learned. What's the general opinion of those familiar with Daito Ryu and Hakko Ryu. Is Hakko Ryu considered to be aikijujutsu?"

It seems clear to me that while the perspectives and definitions of terms also used in aikido or other jujutsu systems may be valid in the context of those other systems, they do not apply to discussions of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu (because discussions about Daito-ryu AJJ should use the terms as they are defined and understood in Daito-ryu).

If you ask a Daito-ryu AJJ practitioner if Hakko-ryu Jujutsu can be considered aikijujutsu, he'll say, "No, Hakko-ryu is jujutsu." If you ask Hakko-ryu practitioners the same thing most would say, "No, it's Hakko-ryu Jujutsu not Hakko-ryu Aikijujutsu."

Now some might want to think that they're learning aikijujutsu just because Hakko-ryu descends from Daito-ryu, but even though Okuyama sensei taught Daito-ryu for some time before he created Hakko-ryu (as did Ueshiba before he created Aikido) it would be incorrect to say that Hakko-ryu is (a form of) aikijujutsu, not just because the Daito-ryu definition is different, but also because Shodai soke himself named the art Hakko-ryu Jujutsu, and described it as a jujutsu system.

It's also a misnomer to replace the "do" in aikido with "jutsu" and call it 'aikijutsu' just because you emphasize practical technique over philosophy and self-development. Because that's nothing like Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu or aiki no jutsu. Likewise a lot of people like to mix judo or jujutsu with a little aikido, throw in a few kicks and strikes for practical measure and presto, call it "aikijujutsu"! But it has nothing to do with authentic aikijujutsu at all.

Once again, it's not my intent to offend, or provoke further argument with anybody here. For what it's worth, I don't claim to be anyone special, or to be any kind of authority, or even to be an expert at all, only that I have a perspective from within Daito-ryu's tradition rather than from without.

Brently Keen






[Edited by Brently Keen on 11-02-2000 at 01:14 AM]

Richard A Tolson
2nd November 2000, 16:39
Brently,
Thanks for the clarification! No offense was intended. Hopefully none was taken. :)
I do have one major difference of opinion though with you and several others from another thread concerning whether rank is important. Now realize that I am from the old days of martial arts. In other words, B.M.D. (before McDojos). Back when eight year olds were not running around with black belts and testing was not based on where it fell on the calendar. Rank was earned through blood, sweat and tears (no, not the rock group).
Rank meant your instructor validated your skill. Shodan was the beginning and nearly killed you. Anyone who stopped after shodan/nidan/sandan was considered a loser! Though few people had the stones to make it to shodan.
I witnessed many friends fight this uphill battle for their instructors substatiation of their skills. And since most styles today do use the belt system, it is the only way someone across the Internet can even get an idea where you may be in your instructor's eyes.
I am not including you in this statement, but I usually find that those who do not think rank is important are the ones with little rank/outward physical validation of their instructor's confidence in them.
Just an old man's opinion. :)

shinja
2nd November 2000, 20:09
Thanks for the input!

I have recently taken up study in Hakko Ryu. I asked my instructor about this very question and he did say that Hakko Ryu does not consider itself Aikijujutsu.

I do actually agree that even though aikido and Hakko Ryu both decended from aikijujutsu they in fact are not aikijujutsu.

I am an american with both american indian and irish ancestry but that doesn't make me either irish or american indian.

Yojimbo558
3rd November 2000, 19:57
Hi Steven,

So how are you enjoying Hakko Ryu? I used to study it along time ago, and enjoyed it before moving on to another style.

It was rather ammusing to see the ruckas that followed your simple innocent question of comparing the differences between Daito Ryu & Hakko Ryu.

I've met Brently and enjoyed working out with him in a seminar ( one of Don Angiers ) and a class I taught along time ago using the Hanbo in Monterey. During these occasions he was open minded and we shared some ideas, so I was surprised at seeing his ire and lack of patience at some of the people who tried to answer your question.

I don't come to this post often, but I have to admit that rather than giving someone details on the differences of these two styles it was really disappointing to see such a thread drift initiated by Brently.

With all due respect, Brently lighten up....After reading your post I think I see why you're beating your head against a wall unable to convince others as to the difference between jujutsu & aikijujutsu...simply put your examples are all philosophical and on top of that rely on symbolic representation...Simply put, take some waza and explain the differences in how aikijujutsu based off of your experience conducts these in comparrison to how some form of jujutsu you've experienced conducts these. As long as you remain philisophical or if you state that you can't verbally compare...then you'll continue to beat your head, in which case you need to invest in some asprin or other such product.

By now Steven, unless your instructor does so on their own initiative, you've discovered that Hakko Ryu is based off of Katas, no randori etc. << this is a very simplified explanation >> When Ryuho Okuyama created this system, one of his reasons for its set up was the idea that if you were to focus on kata. << when I read the number of weapon systems that Shodai Soke had learned I was disappointed that he had not chosen to bring them solidly into his system >> The student would achieve a proficiency and ability to move onward much faster than other systems because this was their sole focus. As a result after learning the Shodan Kata, it was time to move directly to Nidan, etc....Had I seen this post earlier I would have elaborated that while one can do randori or henka, it's not part of this styles curriculum. I would however pointed out that Hakko Ryu teaches you shiatsu, which can have great theraputic effects on either yourself or your loved ones...or when doing your waza's make everything so much more painful than before.

While Aikijujutsu is often heralded as being more hidden or less obvious in its use than jujutsu. Hakko Ryu means the 8th light school ( infrared -- the reason he chose this is because you can't see the infrared spectrum and the waza are supposed to be done in such a manner that is so small as to be unseen ).

Unfortunately Hakko Ryu's experienced alot of problems lately. When Irie Sensei left, most Hakko Ryu dojo's left Nidai Soke and went with him. Now there is another rift brewing...which organization are you apart of Hakkodenshin Ryu or Kokoro Ryu?

Eric Bookin

shinja
3rd November 2000, 21:36
Hey Eric,

Thanks for the input.

I'm really new so I haven't really figured out the dynamics of the group yet.

I'm actually new to Hakko Ryu. My intstructor is Shihan William Thurston. His instructor was Dennis Palumbo, San Dai Kichu (Hakko Ryu Martial Arts Federation). We actually do randori as part of the curriculum at the club I practice at. I have dan ranking in both Kempo and Aikido but I have to say I am really drawn to Hakko Ryu. I like the straight forward yet subtle approach of the techniques.

I think of all the waza the shodan wrist bind has been most challenging. The rest are similar to what I had learned in Aikido.

I had heard that Irie Sensei and LaMonica Sensei had left. Whoa! What other rift is brewing? Man, how much more can Hakko Ryu take?

Hanbo? now there's something I'd like to learn. I'd really like to learn the Kukishin Ryu bojutsu. Tantojutsu would be cool too.

jzimba
6th November 2000, 16:12
Thanks for the input.

I'm really new so I haven't really figured out the dynamics of the group yet.

I'm actually new to Hakko Ryu. My intstructor is Shihan William Thurston. His instructor was Dennis Palumbo, San Dai Kichu (Hakko Ryu Martial Arts Federation). We actually do randori as part of the curriculum at the club I practice at. I have dan ranking in both Kempo and Aikido but I have to say I am really drawn to Hakko Ryu. I like the straight forward yet subtle approach of the techniques.

I think of all the waza the shodan wrist bind has been most challenging. The rest are similar to what I had learned in Aikido.

I fail to see why Brently should "lighten up" He expressed a very well explained position about why by the definition of a practisioner of a particular art (daito-ryu) he does not consider Hakko-ryu to be aikijujutsu.
As I recall, he spelled it out quite clearly in my mind, and did it before anyone else. I find nothing wrong with that.
It's clear he has some strong feelings on the subject, but it is also clear where his biases come from and why. I wish other people would explain their background and position on things nearly this well when they attempt to explain something.

thanks,

Joel

Yojimbo558
6th November 2000, 17:47
Hi Steven,

Ooops! I just re-read my earlier post and and saw that I asked whether you were part of Hakko Ryu or Kokoro ( I was tired, I ment to type Kokodo...sorry about that ).

Hakko Ryu's alot of fun, and is extremely painful, when your wrist gets sore invest in tape...I'd go to Long's or Thrifty and get their value pack of athletic tape ( usually 4 rolls for $10 ). Tape them well so that you get full support and you can still keep training and receiving techniques without occuring further injury. One of the most common mistakes is just receiving waza with your good hand which just leads to that one getting injured. So when your wrists get sore either invest in tape or back off during training.

I used to train in Hakko Ryu with Julio Toribio, in Monterey, Ca. in 1993 he left Hakko Ryu and launched his own system ( Seibukan Jujutsu, which he based off of Hakko Ryu ).

While various people from time to time leave whatever system they are apart of and create their own. The big blow to Hakko Ryu came when Irie Sensei left and most of the Hakkor Ryu dojo's around the world went with him. The big guns in the states rushed into changing the name of Hakko Ryu to Hakkodenshin Ryu. This was before Irie Sensei renamed his art...which is why it flies under the name of Kokodo in Japan. It was decided that Hakkodenshin is what it would be known elsewhere and Kokodo in Japan.

With this type of a setup it was only a matter of time before someone would eventually fly under Kokodo in the states as opposed to Hakkodenshin Ryu. This has not been well received so far. We'll see what happens. My advice would simply be to not say anything abrasive that would cause you to be unwelcome at either ones seminars so that you can skip the politics and further your training.

Best of luck,

Eric Bookin

Yojimbo558
6th November 2000, 17:58
Hi Joel,

I agree with you that anyone has the right to state their opinions. The reason I said that I thought Brently should "lighten up" was simply because he knows Julio and as a result has been exposed to Hakko Ryu. The fact that he's expressed frustration at people not catching his meaning means he needs to do the same thing he does when one of his students doesn't under a waza or henka, and use a different explanation to get his point across.

Because Brently's been exposed to Hakko Ryu...perhaps I'm reading to much...but I thought it would have been more effective to say something to the effect of...

"Hakko Ryu, unlike the various teachings of Daito Ryu is based entirely around kata. While Okuyama may have studied Daito Ryu and excelled at it, he left several aspects behind. Hakko Ryu doesn't do randori...you learn the Shodan Kata...that's it and then move to the nidan kata...that's it and then Sandan." In the west instructors tend to add additional material but that's not how it's taught in Japan. It may utilize some Aiki principles but do to its set up the founder chose to categorize it as a Jujutsu system."

What makes this different than his post...is that its brief and answers a new prospective students questions without going into a series of self complaints. Which when looking for answers to a new system to study is more helpful.

Eric Bookin

Brently Keen
7th November 2000, 08:54
Hi Eric,

I hope you've been doing well, please give my regards to Julio sensei when you see him.

I agree that kata geiko is a distinguishing characteristic of Hakko-ryu (as it is with most branches of Daito-ryu too). However, the question posed at the start of this thread was, is Hakko-ryu considered to be aikijujutsu? This question is more about the techniques that make up the curriculum, rather than the method of training (such as kata vs randori or oyo waza).

I'm not going repeat my tirade, or continue to try and explain it (too much) further, because I think it's rather pointless. I do believe my posts were clear enough (read them again if you like).

I will admit I that I often tend to be long-winded, especially with my opinions, but I think I was brief and to the point with regard to the question specifically about Hakko-ryu and aikijujutsu.

Part of my frustration, I suppose stems from the nature of an electronic BB. It's not like in the dojo where I can actually demonstrate what I'm talking about and easily adapt different approaches for each each student to help them understand better. There's only so many explanations I can give in writing, and this is why aikijujutsu can only be taught in person, transmitted from teacher to student. This is more of a digression here though, because now we're talking about teaching methods again, as opposed to technical content (jujutsu or aikijujutsu).

My appearent lack of patience stems from having tried, and tried for years on this forum (both BC and PC), and in other forums to explain to people that Daito-ryu aiki is different. I think I'm still open-minded in that I have been exposed to both jujutsu and aikijujutsu, in addition to a lot of other stuff, and I continue to seek out new experiences and try other things all the time. What frustrates me is when people who do not have much exposure to authentic aikijujutsu make assumptions about it and try to (re)define what it is or isn't.

If I were to go online for example, and say that there's really not much difference between Escrima and Kukishin-ryu hanbojutsu. And that what Hatsumi sensei teaches is more or less a form of kali, arnis, or escrima (they're all just stickfighting), then that'd be inappropriate on my part (not to mention displaying my ignorance of the subjects).

Although I've got few books and videos on Philipino martial arts, and I've also sparred and trained with a few practitioners, and I've also read most of Hatsumi's books, seen his video's, and attended a few classes and seminars as well - I'm hardly qualified to make such an assumption.

Well, I did it anyway - I just tried to explain myself further (sorry folks). :o I did follow your suggestion though and tried to use another example that you might be able to relate to better.


Brently Keen

Just for the record, if anyone out there is interested in a truly excellent jujutsu teacher, Julio Toribio in Monterey CA would be an outstanding choice, IMO.

[Edited by Brently Keen on 11-07-2000 at 02:59 AM]

Arne Oster
7th November 2000, 09:14
Hi,
From having seen parts of the Daito Ryu Hiden Mokuroku,
which is essentially Jujutsu, I can see where many of the more public kihon waza are coming from.
As I'm not qualified enough, I don't know what to think
about a few of the limited number of Shihan waza that I
have seen as far as them being defined as aikijujutsu or
not is concerned, though.

While henka waza are not emphazised at the Hakko Ryu Honbu, as far as I've been told, it is not unheard of. The first Honbu manual mentions the possibility of creating a large number of henka (variations) from the principles taught in the kihon waza (Kata) and the Nidai Soke apparently taught variations during his recent visit to Hawaii, according to reports.
Regards
Arne

shinja
7th November 2000, 15:39
Originally posted by Yojimbo558
Hi Steven,

Ooops! I just re-read my earlier post and and saw that I asked whether you were part of Hakko Ryu or Kokoro ( I was tired, I ment to type Kokodo...sorry about that ).

Hakko Ryu's alot of fun, and is extremely painful, when your wrist gets sore invest in tape...I'd go to Long's or Thrifty and get their value pack of athletic tape ( usually 4 rolls for $10 ). Tape them well so that you get full support and you can still keep training and receiving techniques without occuring further injury. One of the most common mistakes is just receiving waza with your good hand which just leads to that one getting injured. So when your wrists get sore either invest in tape or back off during training.

I used to train in Hakko Ryu with Julio Toribio, in Monterey, Ca. in 1993 he left Hakko Ryu and launched his own system ( Seibukan Jujutsu, which he based off of Hakko Ryu ).

While various people from time to time leave whatever system they are apart of and create their own. The big blow to Hakko Ryu came when Irie Sensei left and most of the Hakkor Ryu dojo's around the world went with him. The big guns in the states rushed into changing the name of Hakko Ryu to Hakkodenshin Ryu. This was before Irie Sensei renamed his art...which is why it flies under the name of Kokodo in Japan. It was decided that Hakkodenshin is what it would be known elsewhere and Kokodo in Japan.

With this type of a setup it was only a matter of time before someone would eventually fly under Kokodo in the states as opposed to Hakkodenshin Ryu. This has not been well received so far. We'll see what happens. My advice would simply be to not say anything abrasive that would cause you to be unwelcome at either ones seminars so that you can skip the politics and further your training.

Best of luck,

Eric Bookin

Eric,

No chance of me getting abrasive. I'm sure each who have left have had their reasons. That is their path. Heck, I made the decision to abandon the aikido dojo I was studying at in favor of Hakko Ryu. I personally do not pay much attention to politics. I do hope to eventually attend a seminar with Irie or LaMonica. The chance to work with instructors of that caliber would be way cool.

Thanks for the tip on taping the wrists (I'll certainly share that with the other members of the dojo). So how far did you get in the Hakko Ryu curriculum? I was working out with a guy working on sandan waza. Man! As if shodan tekagami didn't hurt bad enough, sandan tekagami is absolutely brutal!!!! I thought I was going to crap in my pants! I'm really having fun with Hakko Ryu. (pain is good!)

Thanks again for the tip.

Devon Smith
12th December 2000, 23:29
Hi folks, interesting thread! Sorry I came by so late.

Is there "aiki" in Hakkoryu? What's the definition of "aiki"? I think that subject's been thrashed about quite a bit, no? ;)

If you believe that aiki has at least one definition, in being a means to defend oneself by creating a moment of control during an aggressive situation (off-balance, surprise) or by taking advantage of a aggressor’s own moment of "weakness", then yes, there is aiki in Hakkoryu.

Compared to Aikido, many of Hakkoryu’s techniques might seem quite abrupt, and more often than not the aggressor is pinned rather than thrown away. Where I see "aiki" in the techniques is within the manner of inducing a state of off-balance in the aggressor, especially within Sandan and higher techniques. Often, rather than relying on body movement to challenge the aggressor’s balance, Hakkoryu delivers pressure and/or strikes to tsubos, points along the body's keiraku (meridians). The prime effect is that pain is induced, which causes that state of imbalance that gives a defender a chance to take control. So, if a moment of imbalance is induced via pain versus physical motion, is there a difference in whether or not "aiki" is there?

Thanks,

Devon

Arne Oster
19th January 2001, 12:45
Hi,
The study of pressure points and meridians in Hakko Ryu is very interesting, both for self defense techniques (latest information coming my way are a few ideas concerning Hakko Ryu kasadori) and for healing.
Unfortunately I have very little really practical information about Koho Igaku Shiatsu, as I have only been exposed to it very briefly. Does this system include any methods for self treatment?
Regards
Arne Oster

Devon Smith
19th January 2001, 16:30
Hi Arne,

I probably can't help too much with specific answers regarding shiatsu. I wanted to take Soke's shiatsu course last year, but it looks like I'll be waiting on that until 2002.

I'm sure self-treatment is possible, but obviously limited somewhat to whatever you're able to reach. ;)

As a young teen I suffered from migraine headaches a lot, and got some instruction from a Chinese doctor regarding various pressure points on the face, head and neck I was able to press which offered me some relief. I don't know if specific self-help techniques are taught in Koho Shiatsu, but I'll ask some questions myself.

In the meantime, take a look at http://members.aol.com/Yotsume/YotsumeAnma.html, where Bill Ristuccia offers some info regarding various traditional Japanese massage and other works.

Devon

Brently Keen
24th January 2001, 03:10
Since this thread was revived, I thought I'd pick up on Devon's 11/7/00 post here, so please allow me to expound a little further on this old subject.

Devon wrote:

"What's the definition of "aiki"? <snip> If you believe that aiki has at least one definition, in being a means to defend oneself by creating a moment of control during an aggressive situation (off-balance, surprise) or by taking advantage of a aggressor’s own moment of "weakness", then yes, there is aiki in Hakkoryu."

The definition of aiki has been debated to no end, but the term "aiki" has come into popular use primarily because of the influence of Daito-ryu, and arts derived from Daito-ryu such as Aikido and Hakko-ryu. Therefore it stands to reason that if you want the proper definition, you should look to it's source (Daito-ryu) for clarification.

I agree that aiki can be a "means" of taking control, and that aiki always takes advantage of an aggressor's weaknesses. It very well may also result in off-balancing, or surprise (among other things), but the means are not to be confused with the end (results). Nor are all means with similar results the same.

Many arts incorporate the strategy of taking advantage of an opponents weaknesses, using kuzushi (off-balancing) and surprise, and those things are all ways of accomplishing objectives in a conflict, but those things are not aiki. In Daito-ryu, aiki is a special technique - something specific that you apply as a means to off-balance, surprise, and take advantage of your opponents weaknesses.

Other arts employ other techniques/methods to accomplish these ends, but Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu uses aiki. Hakko-ryu Jujutsu primarily uses jujutsu techniques (kansetsu waza/skeletal locking techniques) along with painful pressure point techniques to accomplish these objectives, not aiki. Some of the results are similar (or at least appear to be), and many of the principles are the same, but the means of obtaining those results are quite different. In fact, when aiki is applied, the actual results are more often than not quite different too, but that's another whole topic, best reserved for the dojo.

Brently Keen

Devon Smith
24th January 2001, 04:18
Hi Brently, I'm glad to have been here while you made your post.

Forgive me, I don't know if you if you've watched or practiced Hakkoryu. You are quite correct when you said "Hakko-ryu Jujutsu primarily uses jujutsu techniques (kansetsu waza/skeletal locking techniques) along with painful pressure point techniques".

Aiki principles, as you describe them (even though the description of which makes most sense in the dojo, as you say) are briefly presented in the basic waza, shodan to yondan, but the waza is very, very basic indeed.

I was pleasantly surprised when I had the opportunity last year to take my next "step", that the small "aiki" seeds that were planted earlier in my study seem to have sprouted a bit!

Devon

Arne Oster
24th January 2001, 08:52
Hi,
I was many years ago exposed to a few of the Shihan level Hakko Ryu waza, which does seem to involve more 'aiki' elements than the kihon waza. Could be wrong, though ;-)
Regards
Arne
P.S. Looking for useful material on Hakko Ryu, such as
seminar videos, etc. Can anyone help?

Nathan Scott
24th January 2001, 17:56
Hi Brently-san,

You wrote:


The definition of aiki has been debated to no end, but the term "aiki" has come into popular use primarily because of the influence of Daito-ryu, and arts derived from Daito-ryu such as Aikido and Hakko-ryu. Therefore it stands to reason that if you want the proper definition, you should look to it's source (Daito-ryu) for clarification.

I'm afraid I can't agree with this statement.

I do agree that we wouldn't be talking any more about concepts like "aiki" than we would concepts like "suigetsu", or "zanshin" if it was not for Daito ryu's popularity.

And I also concede that Daito ryu may in fact be the most advanced system to research aiki currently, and as such a good place to consider focusing your effort.

However, Your conclusion: "Therefore it stands to reason that if you want the proper definition, you should look to it's source (Daito-ryu) for clarification." Seems a bit strong to me.

I've been collecting sources of Aiki-references for an essay I'm working on (which in unfortunately mostly in me head still), and it is quite clear that there are ligitimate older systems besides Daito ryu that use the term. Therfore, Daito ryu's use of Aiki is technically one of several valid applications of a theory called Aiki.

Many systems seem to use the term (at least from the limited amount that I've been able to document) in a more broad, general sense. But systems like Kashima shin ryu and Yanagi ryu (under Angier Soke) explain they're appliacation of aiki as a more complex and subtle tactic than many I've heard.

It appears at this point that most if not all definitions I've come across at least have major elements in common.

I look forward to completing the essay and getting feedback from yourself and others.

Regards,

Aaron Fields
24th January 2001, 19:29
Bahhhh,

This post may stray but Mr. Keen's post pushed my button....You say tomato I say tomato. I get suspicious anytime something's history is called mysterious. Aiki this aiki that, who's got a corner on aiki is up for debate. If a ju-jutsu guy cannot know aikijujutsu, then how can an aikijujutsu guy know ju-jutsu. Semantic you say, why yes I agree. Most ju-jutsu out there is a hodge podge of junk, most aikijujutsu out there is a hodge podge of junk. Good budo/bujutsu is going to have more in common than they do different. Secret techniques and the like are hog-wash.

One of the reasons I like history is the dose of humility. You figure out quickly that nothing is original everything has been done before. Eventually I quit trying to be original and begin striving to just be good.

Of course, this is only the opinion of a simple ju-jutsu guy.

Devon Smith
24th January 2001, 23:00
I have to say I think I know where Brently's coming from, for the most part, and in regards to Hakkoryu specifically, he's right.

If I sat here and said that I understood the concept of "aiki" becuase I was taught a Hakkoryu shodan technique called "Aiki Nage" (a very simple off-balance throw), then I think a lecture on the bigger and better aspects of aiki would really make me think.

I've been fortunate enough to have had converstaions/hands-on work with people I believe to have been "in-the-know" who have made me realize that what I am learning in the upper studies of Hakkoryu really does embrace aiki, maybe the same way Daito-ryu does. That was my point. I am told that in my next step in Hakkoryu, this will become even more pronounced.

The best conversation I had in this regard was with Shogen Okabayashi (Hakuhokai) with the help of a translator. We had a really big laugh at the end, concluding that even between both languages at our disposal, we were doing a terrible job of describing the concept. Another very interesting conversation I had regarding aiki was with the late Walter Todd. It was great to get a westerner's view, especially one with such experience.

Devon

Brently Keen
25th January 2001, 03:29
Nathan,

You wrote: "I'm afraid I can't agree with this statement."

I don't think we're really disagreeing over all that much. But neither do you have to agree if you don't wan't to. :)

You said,

"I do agree that we wouldn't be talking any more about concepts like "aiki" than we would concepts like "suigetsu", or "zanshin" if it was not for Daito ryu's popularity."

Herein lies most of my frustration as expressed in my first several posts on this thread. That is, despite my on-going insistence that in Daito-ryu there are certain distinctions that are important for understanding terms such as "aiki" and "aikijujutsu".

One such distinction that people still don't seem to get is that in Daito-ryu, "aiki" is a special or unique technique AS OPPOSED TO simply just a concept, theory, or approach. Hence the terms "aiki no jutsu" and "aikijujutsu" as used and popularized by Daito-ryu. (Jutsu here, refers to "the technique(s) of".)

Most other arts that I am familiar with, including Aikido, and Hakko-ryu define "aiki" not as primarliy a technique in itself, but primarily as a concept. Some arts describe it as an attitude or spirit as well. The concept of 'aiki' is common to many arts and systems. The technique(s) of aiki, and aikijujutsu techniques of Daito-ryu however are not common to other systems, so I call them unique.

For example, Karl Friday defines aiki in Kashima-Shinryu as a 'reciprocal spirit'. It seems to be both part of a concept and an attitude/approach. Ie: part of the omote of 'Hoyo Doka', or acceptance and resorption, and the ura of 'suigetsu no gokui', or the 'moon on the water' axiom. Aiki, he says represents the spiritual and psychological aspects of Gontaiyu which is the physical balance of power that maintains a warrior's physical equilibrium, and is the omote of the moon on the water axiom. The broader meaning of hoya doka is contained in it's ura teaching which is that a warrior must always approach combat from a position of absolute impartiality and moral rectitude. This is an approach or attitude that is neutral and detached, uncolored by emotions, prejudice and morality. Don Angier refers to this as the principle of "emotional detachment". I quote from Dr. Friday's book, "In it's widest sense, then, hoyo doka represents an approach to life and to social interactions of all forms." Aiki then, as defined by Kashima-Shinryu appears to be part of an over-all approach to their philosophy and science of combat.

In Daito-ryu though, "aiki" is more than just a component of an over-all approach to combat and/or life's interactions. It's also more than just a conceptual, philosophical or theoretical base upon which the tradition is built. In Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, "aiki" is also the actual technical base of it's curriculum.

Concepts such as suigetsu, zanshin, and emotional detachment are common to most all martial arts, whatever terms they use to describe them, but I've yet to see, nor has anyone ever shown me 'aikijujutsu' or 'aiki' techniques from another art not deriving from (or significantly influenced by) Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. Therefore, I have to conclude, until shown and convinced otherwise that Daito-ryu "aiki" is unique, because of it's distinctives. Anyone who would like to better understand what this kind of aiki is, what it's distinctives are, and how and why it differs from other art's interpretations should then go to it's source (in this case, Daito-ryu AJJ).


"And I also concede that Daito ryu may in fact be the most advanced system to research aiki currently, and as such a good place to consider focusing your effort."

It may be, but that was not the point I was making. I've always insisted that Daito-ryu aiki is unique and thus special, and I agree it's certainly a good place to focus one's efforts if you're interested in aikijujutsu, but I'm not really so arrogant to insist to everyone that the art I practice is the most advanced system!


"However, Your conclusion: "Therefore it stands to reason that if you want the proper definition, you should look to it's source (Daito-ryu) for clarification." Seems a bit strong to me."

Maybe my use of the words 'proper definition' is what's offensive. But 'clarification' is really the key word here (and in my previous post). The context of this whole thread was based around these questions: "What's the general opinion of those familiar with Daito Ryu and Hakko Ryu. Is Hakko Ryu considered to be aikijujutsu?" and, "What is the definition of aiki?". So as someone familiar with both arts, I've attempted to clarify the difference between the common interpretation of aiki by most styles as primarily a concept, with my perspective as a Daito-ryu practitioner which defines aiki more as a special technique. I apologize for being repetitive, but I still insist that if anyone would like to learn the 'proper definition' then it makes more sense to go to Daito-ryu, which is the source of this technical perspective, or unique definition of aiki.


"It appears at this point that most if not all definitions I've come across at least have major elements in common."

I also agree that there are many elements in common, but it's the elements that are distinct that make up the differences that I'm always talking about. Understanding these distinctions I think is crucial for gaining a good understanding of what constitutes aiki and therefore aikijujutsu from the Daito-ryu perspective.

I certainly look forward to reading your essay when you get it finished.

Regards,

Brently Keen

[Edited by Brently Keen on 01-24-2001 at 09:32 PM]

Nathan Scott
25th January 2001, 18:13
Hi Brently-san,

Basically, as I mentioned before speaking with authority about what "aiki" is and saying that Daito ryu is the source of aiki is inaccurate and misleading. You've just stated that you feel Daito ryu aiki is unique, which reinforces this point.

There are many styles using the term aiki in the general concept of "non-resistance" (which could also be attributed to "ju"), "turning when pushed, entering when pulled", and "using the opponent's energy/power against them". This seems to be the most basic, fundamental level of aiki shared by most if not all styles that use the term. They have more in common with their usage than Daito ryu does with their one unique definition, despite how popular and influential it is.

Does Aikido use aiki in the same way that Daito ryu does? Maybe it was supposed to, but now it follows the more general usage found in many styles. What about Hakko ryu? Doesn't sound like you think so.

Why not simply refer to the aiki used uniquely by Daito ryu as "DR aiki" or something so that there is no misunderstanding?

I understand that you were speaking within the context of this thread on Hakko ryu & Daito ryu, but I really believe many readers will take your comment the long way, and basically, I don't think it's fair to say when so many other styles use the term "aiki" in the application of their style. I think I know what your saying, but it's just something to think about when writing publicly about it.

As far as Kashima shin ryu, obviously we're not qualified to discuss it properly, but Professor Friday does mention in his book "Legacies of the Sword" that the way they use aiki is physical, in that they sort of blend with the opponent's speed and power in order to produce a neutral, "0" position in the attack (literally neutralizing the attack?) at which point the opponent is sort of floating and minimal effort can be used by the proponent to control/down the opponent. It sounds far more subtle than most applications, and much closer to Daito ryu (at least one main principle of it).

Anyway, I'll try to put it all in words and will look forward to your comments.

Regards,

Ron Tisdale
25th January 2001, 22:25
Brently,

I have to say that while in the past I have never quite understood or aggreed with your aiki statements, you expressed yourself *very* well in your last post. The distinction between a philosophy and a distinct set of actual techniques is an important one, and will give me something to consider as I continue to pursue this subject. Thank you for your perspective.

Ron Tisdale

Dean Stewart
25th January 2001, 22:50
Nathan,
i agree that daito-ryu should be labled as dr aiki if it is unique! i think we have to look at aiki as it relates to concept,principle and technique. brently refers to aiki as a technique, because that is the way the roppokai teaches principle.

aikido and daito-ryu teach that you have to get kuzushi(chip away the posture) before balance. both arts teach circular movements to take balance. i think the issue is not that aiki is special in one art and not the other in respect to prinicple, just concept and technique.
respectfully,
dean Stewart

Nathan Scott
25th January 2001, 23:13
Hello Mr. Stewart,

Thanks for your input. I've got no problem with all the different interpretations of aiki, but it seems that to be fair we should either talk about it in it's most general sense (the context of which all/most arts have in common) or in it's specific sense (DR aiki, KSR aiki, etc) to avoid misunderstanding.

I'll take your word that there are aiki techniques in Roppokai - it's a little foggy as to what the seperation is between a concept/tactic and a technique to me though. But I won't inquire further here since this might be information that DR would prefer to keep discreet.

To me, techniques are the physical manifestations of principles, concepts and/or tactics. The technique is the result of the principle being applied. If you keep within the logic and confines of the principles of your style, there is an unlimited amount of techniques and variations that can be performed - and they will all be "right".

In the aiki buken, we apply our definition of aiki to "capture" the opponent's physical, mental and spiritual initiative. Then, we can choose to use kansetsu, kuzushi, taiho, nage or any comination of the above to conclude the technique. At higher levels, the ending is incidental compared to the initial contact & set-up. I believe this to be the same in most arts, since if you blow the set-up it is very difficult to continue with the same technique without significant adaptation.

Anyway, we don't call these aiki techniques, just techniques done with aiki. Perhaps this is the point that yourself and Brently-san are trying to make in regards to the Roppokai approach?

Regards,

Mark Jakabcsin
26th January 2001, 13:24
"One such distinction that people still don't seem to get is that in Daito-ryu, "aiki" is a special or unique technique AS OPPOSED TO simply just a concept, theory, or approach. Hence the terms "aiki no jutsu" and "aikijujutsu" as used and popularized by Daito-ryu. (Jutsu here, refers to "the technique(s) of".)"

Mr. Keen,

Aiki is a technique not a concept but a technique……ahhh……your teacher teaches the exact opposite. Perhaps you don’t really believe what you wrote and are just being a good intelligence officer.

Intelligence Officer Creed:

“Admit nothing,
Deny everything,
Make false counter accusations.”

This is one of two possible explanations for your post; the other is not very PC and doesn’t need to be written.

Your teacher specifically trains people to see the principles and NOT get hung up on technique. Indeed, he rarely even teaches the names of the techniques and states that the names and individual techniques are not nearly as important as a solid understanding of the concept/principles which make the techniques work.

You seem to be very stuck on “no-shi” as a unique technique, which defines DR aiki instead of ONE part of the overall concept that makes up DR aiki. Your teacher states that aiki is made up of: 1) controlled breathing, 2) circular motion, and 3) conditioned response. “No-shi” is one part of circular motion it is not even the entire concept of circular motion let alone aiki.

(No-shi is the specific shape that Mr. Keen’s teacher uses in all of his techniques. It is shaped like a question mark (?), more or less. Aiki-age and aiki-sage both use this shape when properly executed. This is a very important aspect of the aiki as defined by Mr. Keen’s teacher but is by no means the sole defining aspect. Fact is this shape can be found in ALL aiki techniques that Mr. Keen’s teacher teaches, thereby making it a principle and not just a mere technique. Actually, another equally important aspect of circular motion is the concept of “infinite circles” which start from the feet. One’s entire body makes the ‘no-shi’ shape when doing any/all of this style of aiki technique.)

When you write “aiki is a special or unique technique AS OPPOSED TO simply just a concept, theory or approach” you are implying that a technique is more important and critical than a concept or principle. Since techniques are made up of principles and not the other way around I find your statement hard to swallow.

Along the same line, on the numerous visits of your teacher to our dojo he frequently made his view very clear that none of the techniques were as important as the concepts and understanding how to apply the concepts. He stated that when one fully understood the concepts they would be able to transcend technique and simply apply the basic concepts to any given situation in a limitless manner. Furthermore, his training with us was geared in that direction. After the first few visits he started to set aside time during each visit when tori was required to be creative in applying the principles. He didn’t show a technique, he had uke attack tori and tori attempted to apply the principles. Each time he stated that eventually the principles would just flow and unique technique that perfectly fit the situation would appear. Having trained with you and your teacher at your old dojo, the last time you hosted him almost 2 years ago, I realize that he was not training you in that method yet.

mark

Dean Stewart
26th January 2001, 19:53
Nathan,
let me clarify ! DR Aiki is no different than the aiki of Aikido. there is no secret, although some would disagree.
in sports we create the same movement when hitting a baseball or throwing a basketball(circle line concept).The concepts of these movements are diferent, however prinicpially the same. the mystery is finding where the circle and line(no-shi) can be applied. in the roppokai the circle line concept is applied as you are attacked by leading(misdirection), circling and pushing at a weak angle.
(sound like Aikido?)
i do not think that one group can take credit for a principle of nature(no-shi).

respectfully,
dean stewart
http://www.shochoh.com

Nathan Scott
26th January 2001, 20:17
Hello Mark & Dean-san,

Thank you for your contributions - too bad all of this aiki stuff is being logged in the Jujutsu forum, since it would be valuable to have it archived in the AJJ forum for future reference.

Anyway, I finally had a chance to view Okamoto Sensei on tape recently, and found his approach interesting. As Mr. Stewart pointed out, there were lots of circles; not unlike Aikido and many other arts, and in fact generally similar in many ways to what Angier Sensei teaches (at least in his seminars). However, I should point out that, while there are similiarities of general principles, the application and depth of application are quite different from Aikido as seen commonly today.

I recognize the No-Shi motion a bit more, and have seen it used in other branches of Daito ryu Aikijujutsu. However, at least one branch does not seem to use this specific "shape" as their main principle. I mention this because Okamoto Sensei was originally a senior in the Kodokai branch, and is now ackowledged as teaching "Daito ryu Aikijujutsu including some of his own innovations". While there may be more in common in regards to the principles/methods of employing aiki in the various Daito ryu AJJ branches, it may not be totally objective to draw conclusions about "Daito ryu Aiki" assumed from experience in any single branch of DR AJJ.

That's not to try to put anyone down, just point out that some of the AJJ branches may specialize in slightly/considerably different aspects of Daito ryu aiki.

Thanks for the interesting perspective!

(PS. Nice to meet you finally Mark-san!)

Regards,

6th February 2001, 00:22
Hi Guys,

I didn't mean to get to the pile on Brently party late but..... I've been busy. :)

Just kidding Brently.

Anyway, you stated:

"The definition of aiki has been debated to no end, but the term "aiki" has come into popular use primarily because of the influence of Daito-ryu, and arts derived from Daito-ryu such as Aikido and Hakko-ryu. Therefore it stands to reason that if you want the proper definition, you should look to it's source (Daito-ryu) for clarification."

Brently,

Nathan commented on this statement earlier and I must agree with him that statements like this are cause for much of the confusion and consternation directed towards you. It's easy to interpret you as saying that Daito ryu is "the source" of aiki not just aiki as manifested in Aikido or Hakko ryu.

Aiki as a technical/principal existed in kenjutsu long before Daito ryu. Your teacher stated this fact directly to me when he and I discussed this over dinner several months ago. Daito ryu may have developed a "distinctive" manifestation of aiki principles within the framework of empty handed conflict but Daito ryu is only the "source" of these very specific manifestations. Daito ryu borrowed , co-opted, appropriated, lifted, (whatever you want to call it) it's fundamental principles from kenjutsu and then chose to focus and adjust them so they applied technically to taijutsu. That may make them unique but so what! Strictly defining unique within the framework we are discussing here is virtually impossible.

I would argue that DR aiki is much less decisive in jujutsu than it would be or is in kenjutsu, its true source. This is due to the inherent lethal consequences associated with its subtle & proper execution while on the receiving end of a katana. In my experience thats where aiki really shows its stuff and why it was originally developed within the framework of various kenjutsu ryuha and not within jujutsu.

The source of aiki in Aikido or Hakkoryu may well be Daito ryu. But the source of aiki in Daito ryu is not Daito ryu itself. It is various kenjutsu ryuha stretching back too far to document. Simply stated, the true source of aiki existed long before Daito ryu and is ultimately unknown.

I think much of this misunderstanding is semantics compounded by the inherent fallability associated with our wonderful English language. And heck, add Texan in to that and I'm suprised I can even read my own writin'

Tobs

Ron Tisdale
6th February 2001, 19:39
In view of Toby's last post, I wonder if there are any Ono-ha Itto ryu practitioners who could speak to the use of aiki in that ryu. Since that ryu has been paired in many ways with Daito ryu, and for a significant period of time, I'd be surprised if there wasn't some mention in the ryu of specific aiki related techniques or strategies. Anyone out there have any info?

Ron Tisdale

John Lindsey
2nd July 2002, 21:36
I have heard rumors that it is fairly easy to obtain rank in hakko-ryu these days in Japan, one person mentioning 9th months for menkyo kaiden! Now, I might have thought that this might be some splinter ryuha, but I have also heard that the hakko-ryu name is now copyrighted by the main organization. Anyone know the facts behind these rumors?

Chris Li
3rd July 2002, 08:58
Originally posted by John Lindsey
I have heard rumors that it is fairly easy to obtain rank in hakko-ryu these days in Japan, one person mentioning 9th months for menkyo kaiden! Now, I might have thought that this might be some splinter ryuha, but I have also heard that the hakko-ryu name is now copyrighted by the main organization. Anyone know the facts behind these rumors?

No idea, but a menkyo kaiden in 9 months? Maybe I should head over there - it sure would look snazzy on my resume :) !

Best,

Chris

Arman
3rd July 2002, 19:57
John,

I've heard similar rumors, but I don't have any first-hand knowledge. As for 9 months, I would doubt it. However, I have heard of individuals gaining menkyo licenses in Hakko ryu within five to six years. A ridiculously short amount of time for any art.

Respectfully,
Arman Partamian
Daito ryu Study Group
Maryland

Finny
4th July 2002, 10:04
They have copyrighted the term, so I doubt its got anything to do with any splinter group(s)

Chris Li
4th July 2002, 13:49
Originally posted by Finny
They have copyrighted the term, so I doubt its got anything to do with any splinter group(s)

Of course "Daito-ryu" is trademarked as well, but the Seishinkai still seems to be in business...

An interesting story - Yukiyoshi Sagawa hears one day about a Daito-ryu student who's split off and calling what he does something else (Ryuho Okuyama, founder of Hakko-ryu). Sagawa and Kotaro Yoshida (IIRC) go up to Okuyama's house to "set him straight", but he's not at home so they give up and go away. A little while later Tokimune Takeda visits Sagawa and tells him that Okuyama is one of his students and asks Sagawa not to bother him. Dojo-breaking crisis narrowly averted :) !

Best,

Chris

RDFittro
8th July 2002, 18:38
I heard the same story except it was Okuyama, a student of Sogaku and Matsuda, who went to Ueshiba's. Anyone else have some unsubstantiated gossip to throw into the mix? :smash:

Don Cunningham
8th July 2002, 19:37
I heard it was Rod and it was a sokeship in Hakko Ryu. :D
Brought to you by the purveyors of quality unsubstantiated gossip...

Chris Li
8th July 2002, 22:49
Originally posted by RDFittro
I heard the same story except it was Okuyama, a student of Sogaku and Matsuda, who went to Ueshiba's. Anyone else have some unsubstantiated gossip to throw into the mix? :smash:

The story I quoted was a published account of Yukiyoshi Sagawa's recollection of the incident from "Tomei na Chikara". Whether Sagawa was lying or not I have no idea :).

Best,

Chris

RDFittro
8th July 2002, 23:20
Boy do I feel silly..... :shot:

My info came from someone who's teacher studied directly with Okuyama. But I have no way of knowing which version is true either.... However, I've never heard that Okuyama was Tokimune's student. Any info about this?

Chris Li
9th July 2002, 00:02
Originally posted by RDFittro
Boy do I feel silly..... :shot:

My info came from someone who's teacher studied directly with Okuyama. But I have no way of knowing which version is true either.... However, I've never heard that Okuyama was Tokimune's student. Any info about this?

As I recall (without checking the book) that's what Tokimune said, but I believe that it was more in the sense of "I am responsible for him", since Sagawa mentions Okuyama and Matsuda a little bit in another section.

Best,

Chris

Yojimbo558
10th July 2002, 08:29
Hi John,

Shodai Soke, when he created Hakko Ryu set it up his creation in a form that vastly differed from the styles that he had learned and trained in. Put simply, Ryuho Okuyama felt that if by stripping a style down to kata a martial arts practioner could achieve an understanding and skill at an accelerated rate.

To get your Shodan...you learn one kata...to get your Nidan you learn one kata...this repeats itself all the way up to 7th Dan.

The downfall of this system came in the form of Ryuho Okuyama turning the system over to his son. The reason I say that this was the downfall, is due to the fact that the son never wanted to inherit the system. On top of this the father upon making him Nidai Soke, gave him his name...now the son not only had something fostered upon him that he didn't want, but had lost his identity as well in taking his father's name.

Unlike other Soke's who've studied several ryu's before creating their own systems, Hakko Ryu is the only school Nidai Soke has studied, and even then it was done so reluctantly.

Irie Sensei was seen as the most competant amongst the senior individuals, and it was felt by many that he should have been the one to inherit the system. Mainly due to the fact that he didn't agree with how Hakko Ryu was being taught, Irie Sensei left the organization & most of it's International structured left Nidai Soke to go with him. Curiously Irie's style is known by two different names...in Japan it's referred to as Kokodo Ryu Jujutsu & outside Japan it is referred to as Hakkodenshin Ryu Jujutsu. Nidai Soke had been known saddly, for selling rank...I've heard other instructors refer to the way Nidai Soke conducted business as being "Money Jutsu" where in some cases an individual had purchased a higher rank & learned the kata that went with it...but had bi-passed some of the kata's that had preceeded it.

That's all for now,

Eric L. Bookin

Abu Maryum
19th July 2002, 03:20
Does this also apply to Hakko Ryu outside of Japan?

Yojimbo558
19th July 2002, 05:11
Hi Abu,

Hakko Ryu outside of Japan has become extremely mired in politics. When I was in Puerto Rico a few years ago, I met a shihan who had moved there recently. Like most styles an instructor is allowed to promote their students up to a certain level, usually 4th dan...after which further progression comes soley from being promoted by the Soke. Some groups outside of Japan have taken to promoting their students to Godan in Nidai Soke's stead.

Some of the groups stick to the just kata curriculum of Hakko Ryu, while others have added to the curriculum at their schools.

When Irie Sensei left, there had been a great deal of unhappiness with Nidai Soke...and as I had stated earlier when Irie left, the majority of the organization went with him.

Irie waited awhile before coming up with a new name for the system. As far as he was concerned, he was bringing the detail & precision that was supposed to be there. In the meantime the various groups that left with him began calling what they were doing Hakkodenshin Ryu. When Irie settled on Kokodo Ryu it was decided that this is what it would be called in Japan & the other every where else.

While this set up had many happy, Irie opened a bag of worms which has left room for more political up heaval.

When you represent your Soke, things umbrella out ie. you get promoted by your instructor and eventually open your own school. In the scheme of things, you both do the same thing, but your instructor is still the next higher representative of your art, just as students that you promote who open schools would still be under you.

Where the can of worms opened up, was when Irie gave permission for a student who eventually wanted to teach Kokodo here in the States. Irie didn't think at the time what would be the response of the Shihans who defected with him as to what their reaction would be. As this student wouldn't fall under their umbrella, but would have a direct line bypassing them to Irie...as would any of this individual's students who chose to open a school.

There's a few other details that have led to everyone becoming upset, but time will tell whether the anger felt will lead to the system fragmenting yet again or if things will cool.

That's it for now,

Eric L. Bookin

Qasim
19th July 2002, 06:34
What does this mean in terms of the system on a whole? It sounds like it's been watered down and may not stand the test of time unlike the Classical systems which continue to be practiced after hundreds of years (ie: Sosuishitsu Ryu).

Geoff
11th February 2003, 19:19
Can someone explain a little about Hakkoryu? Is it koryu or some new form? I've bumped into the name a few times in some literture and also among tournament particpants who are usually associated with karate schools.

This isn't a troll or anything. I'm just not sure where to start looking for credible sources on the style.

Thanks,

Geoff

Charles Choi
11th February 2003, 23:22
Geoff,

You might find some useful information from the website here (http://www.hakkoryu.com/display/dsp_main.cfm?page=introduction). This site would be a good place to start your search for credible instructors. The site seems to indicate that the birthdate of the method was 1941, as well as indicating that the Hakko-ryu method is the founder's synthesis of techniques from older martial curriculums (including Daito-ryu).

I'd say Hakko-ryu is a modern art (based on its birth date). I will qualify by saying that I am not a practioner of the method and my response comes only from knowledge available off the net. Hope it helps! ;)

__________________________________
Charles Choi
http://hontaiyoshinryu.tripod.com/

Geoff
12th February 2003, 11:44
Thanks for the site address. My suspicion is that those I've met of the Hakko ryu style would be discounted by the promoters of that site. Such is the state of traditional bujutsu in my area, though. Thanks for the link.

Geoff

PS I'm embarassed by the atrocious spelling of my first post. I'm not illiterate, just illegible.

GCP
31st October 2004, 13:34
I'm hoping to start training in Hakko Ryu, in England, soon. I've read that many instructors have been disassociated by the hombu. I'd be grateful of any advice on Hakko Ryu, and the implications of the break with the hombu ect.

Graham Pluck

Nathan Scott
2nd November 2004, 01:58
Hello Mr. Pluck,

Though Hakko-ryu does have an historical relationship to aikijujutsu/Daito-ryu, I moved your question to the jujutsu forum instead of the aikijujutsu forum because I think you'll find much more educated responses there. You also might try searching the forum as well, as I'm sure there have already been numerous discussions about Hakko-ryu here.

Regards,

giles
2nd November 2004, 13:20
To the best of my knowledge, there's nobody teaching Hakko Ryu in the UK who is still affiliated with the hombu.

The closest would probably be Dentokan, set up by Roy Jerry Hobbs when he left the Hakko Ryu. Some background at http://www.jujutsu.org.uk/articles/history for those interested.

There's active Dentokan groups in Oxfordshire (http://www.jujutsu.org.uk) , Suffolk and the Midlands (http://www.dentokan.com).

Katsujinken
2nd November 2004, 23:38
Graham,

It is also my understanding that there are no Hakko Ryu groups affiliated to Hombu in UK, the style was introduced by Kirby Watson, who is now and has been for some years involved with another style, and R J Hobbs Sensei back in the 1980's.

There are also some groups in Essex that have spun off from the group in Suffolk, I believe that they are also part of Dentokan.

The Dentokan break with Hombu I understand occurred after death of the founder when the line was passed to the son who had some slightly more dogmatic ideas about governship of the style.

It is also my understanding that it was not so much former Hakko Ryu groups were disassociated with Hombu, they disassociated themselves but one of the senior hombu instructors went with them.

However be wary as I have come across a few so called Hakko Ryu Sensei in the UK that are shall we say are less than real, but these were definitely not Dentokan people though.

Regards

GCP
3rd November 2004, 21:41
Its a Dentokan place that I'm planning to study with.

Graham Pluck

giles
3rd November 2004, 22:59
Just to declare an interest: I run the Oxfordshire (http://www.jujutsu.org.uk) group.

Graham, I think we've exchanged a few emails: did you have any luck in finding contact details for the Midland's group?

GCP
4th November 2004, 11:48
Yes, well, I've been in contact with a group in Yorkshire. However, starting training is dependent on me relocating to Sheffield, which has been delayed. But I should be able to start soon. Does anybody know about the Hakko Ryu books by Dennis Palumbo? I've seen them mentioned here and there, but they appear very difficult to get hold of.

Graham Pluck

nuhaj
4th November 2004, 16:50
Mr. Pluck,

Those books are very hard to find. I have all 3 copies, that I bought from a used book store for like $5 each. Amazon and ebay are the best bets on finding those books. here is a link for you.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=Palumbo%2C%252520Dennis%252520G./002-7105498-3744055

hope this helps.

Good luck,
Jahun

Katsujinken
5th November 2004, 00:35
Graham,

Try Blitz they seem to have 2 of them, link is:

http://www.blitzsport.com/books/jujitsu.htm

Foyles in London have the third one, sure I saw a few copies last time I was there.

Regards

GCP
17th November 2004, 10:36
Thanks for the tips. Got a couple of books from Blitz. If anybody is interested, Hakko ryu is being attacked on a MartialArtsPlanet.com forum at the moment:
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23455

Graham Pluck

GCP
23rd September 2005, 16:02
... the style was introduced (in the UK) by Kirby Watson, who is now and has been for some years involved with another style, and R J Hobbs Sensei back in the 1980's.


I know a bit about Jerry Hobbs involvemnt in the UK. Anybody know anything about Kirby Watson's training? Did he learn in Japan or elswhere? Who introduced Hakko ryu to the UK first, Kirby Watson or Jerry Hobbs?

giles
23rd September 2005, 16:28
Kirby gives a brief biography here: http://aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6567

GCP
27th September 2005, 09:27
As there seem to be a few Hakko ryu related folk about, here is a very Hakko specific question. I've read that Okuyama learnt Daito Ryu. Can most of the Hakko ryu corpus be found in Daito Ryu, or is Hakko distinctly different?

I've also read that Okuyama additionaly studied: Kito Ryu, Takeuchi Ryu and Tenshin Shin'yo Ryu. Anybody know any more about this? Did these have much influence on Hakko Ryu?

In short, what are the rooots of Hakko Ryu?

giles
29th September 2005, 13:06
As there seem to be a few Hakko ryu related folk about, here is a very Hakko specific question. I've read that Okuyama learnt Daito Ryu. Can most of the Hakko ryu corpus be found in Daito Ryu, or is Hakko distinctly different?


I've not trained in Daito Ryu myself, so cannot compare directly. But I've had two students from different Daito Ryu lineages. Both recognised techniques at a superficial level. There were differences in execution and emphasis though. How much of that is due to differences between Daito Ryu and Hakko Ryu and how much due to differences between teachers is hard to say.

Another way of seeing the Daito Ryu influence is to compare Hakko Ryu with Aikido - another Daito Ryu influenced art. Again at a superficial level the techniques are very similar.