PDA

View Full Version : Article: "Daito-ryu", by Kent Moyer (BB Magazine May 2006)



Jose Garrido
31st March 2006, 19:33
Hi all,

I have just heard that there is an article in Black Belt Magazine on Kondo sensei. Has anyone heard about it or read it. BBM is not a magazine that I normally pick up so I cannot find it. My Garden State News guy is out of them, go figure :rolleyes:

I would appreciate any feedback, thanks.

Jose Garrido

Kendoguy9
31st March 2006, 20:03
It's excellent! There is also a great article on Donn Draeger, too!

rickfine
31st March 2006, 20:09
Chris,

Which month's issue is it in?

Jose Garrido
31st March 2006, 20:49
Chris,
I am glad to hear that it was a good one. Who was the author of the article?

Jose'

Kendoguy9
31st March 2006, 21:55
Mr. Fine and Mr. Garrido

By the time I get back to you guys, you'll probably have it, but I'll check this weekend and reply on Monday. I only have internet access at the office right now. The front cover has a Wing Chung guy in red on the front, and I think the Draeger article was by Nurse (sic?) or something like that.

rickfine
1st April 2006, 00:37
The new May issue is the one to look for. The article on Kondo Sensei is the interview Kent Moyer did with him during the last Aiki Expo (with Scott Vogeley translating), and it includes several historical photos.

P.S. It's "Rick", please, Mr. Covington. :p

Mark Murray
1st April 2006, 01:45
Hello all,
I just picked up a copy. It's Black Belt for May 2006 Vol 44 No. 5. It has William Cheung on the cover in a red outfit.

I haven't read the articles yet. Will do that tonight.

Finny
1st April 2006, 11:28
Thanks for the heads up guys.

Nathan Scott
3rd May 2006, 20:51
[Post deleted by user]

judasith
4th May 2006, 13:34
Yes, these are pretty strong statements. I also read the article yesterday evening.

I believe that with this article Kondo K. S. actually lost some more credibility than before. I say this not out of a sterile polemic, but on these simple considerations, which are logic and documental:

1. Saying that he is the only one to have ever received an higher grade than Shodan (first degree black belt) is so big a falsehood, and so easy to prove wrong, that I almost hope it was a misunderstading in the translation. We, for instance, have documental proof (big detailed photo) that Kato Shigemitsu Sensei received the Godan from Takeda Tokimune Soke. I'm not posting it here only because it's already in the book we're publishing this fall and I cannot, but I can tell you without problems also the exact date: the 15th of July of Showa 58 (1983). But of course I know that also many others received Nidan and especially Sandan, since it was awarded to open a branch dojo as Shibucho (head of a branch dojo).

2. Then he says he only recognizes the Takumakai and the Kodokai, besides himself. This also is very strong and unfair, since it leaves out the Roppokai, the Hakuho-ryu, the Soke association in Tokyo, the Daitokai (but that's no big deal, since it's from the old Soke's death that he and out teachers feign complete ignorance of one another), and others which ARE legitimate as much as he claims to be.

3. The third point is both completely false, fantastic in thought, and with deep logic problems: the box in the article called "Art of Deception". In this box he theorizes that Takeda Tokimune Sensei taught to ALL his students besides HIM techniques which were made DELIBERATELY wrong for some reason (he says because he was always ASKING questions, while the other just practiced; on this I bet than any of you with experience with Japanese teachers and martial arts know that usually it's actually the opposite: you train a lot and make few questions.).

Not only that, the box says Takeda Tokimune introduced the practice of kenjutsu (kendo no kata and Onoha ittoryu) not because he learnt them from Takeda Sokaku and thought they ARE necessary to the learning of the entire art, but just to keep all his students besides Kondo occupied with something else! So this means that Takeda Sensei in all the interviews with Mr. Pranin, in all the YEARS of continuos enbu and practice, of WRITTEN articles about the importance of Onohaittoryu was always in an INNUENDO. I do not know your thoughts, but this is so wrong, so illogical and so easy to prove so that it sounds just for what it simply is: finding an artistical and fantastic explanation to why he himself (Kondo) never learned or practiced Onoha ittoryu, which the Soke himself stressed in every occasion! Also it's not true they are different: many principles are the same, and Ippondori is very similar to the first kodachi technique of Onoha (hitotsu gachi).
For blind followers of Kondo, I quote here some parts of Mr. Pranin's book, which is not exactly "unbiased", to prove the extreme nonsense of these declarations by Kondo: page 48, interview with Takeda Tokimune:
"Would it be correct to say Daitoryu is based on sword movements?"
-YES. The first short sword technique in Onoha Ittoryu is the same as the first technique in Daito ryu.
page 52, "Ippondori is reffered to as kogusoku in Onoha Ittoryu and a kodachi is used."
page 75, "I teach the Onoha Ittoryu techniques only to leading members of the Dojo. [...] You are not practicing the art properly unless you practice both sword and jujutsu, that is to say, unless you practice both Daitoryu and Onoha ittoryu."
page 150, Keisuke Sato interview: "[Takeda Sokaku] once said to me: I will teach you the Onoha ittoryu sword".
So does this means that this fantastic deception theorized by Kondo for covering his ignorance of Onoha extends ALSO to Takeda Sokaku???

This incredible box also implies that we (seishinkai/daitokai), Okabayashi (hakuho-ryu), Ishibashi (Soke !!!.), Mori (Takumakai, that instead in another part he recognizes!!!!) we all do an hiden mokuroku that is wrong, and deliberately so, while he is the only one to know the truth. At least, by his view, Takeda Sensei was very good to practice his deception also on the hiden mokuroku practiced by the Takumakai (which is the EXACT same, as ours!!!!!!!). Maybe also this part was said by him to justify why he is doing, in his dvd, Yonkajo in idori, when Yonkajo is made by ALL the other associations only as it is, stately 15 tachiai (standing) techniques.

4. About Kondo S. NEVER having practiced Aikido: this also is illogical, he said so many times, he repeats it after an express question in the article, while in the beginning he says: "[Hosono] taught daito-ryu aikijujutsu, karate, AIKIDO, and judo. [...] You could train in EACH of the arts that Hosono taught, AND I DID.". Now, are our legs being pulled or it's just another "error" "misunderstanding" in the translation?

After this article, he will lose more and more credibility, because he went really overboard with falsehoods and imagination that even Mr. Pranin himself could prove him wrong! In my opinion now he clearly shows his colors.
Please note, before flaming the post, that I did not ever say here things blindly and based on assumptions or circles, just facts and simple logic. I strongly believe the really unbiased people is now able to pierce the veil and see what really lies behind the advertisements.

Best regards,

Giacomo Merello

Nathan Scott
5th May 2006, 08:01
[Post deleted by user]

judasith
5th May 2006, 08:22
Dear Nathan,

I appreciate your post and your invite to calm, and especially the fact that you considered rationally what I wrote in my usual straight-forward way ;) but trying not to be offensive.

These are documental issues, difficult to counter.

I do agree with you probably it was BB Mag's error regarding the Shodan issue, but I cannot really say. Maybe some of Kondo S. students can shed light on this if they know.

Another problem can be in the translation, not made by a professional, but by a student, as I understood.

The box, which is the most contested, and in my opinion absurd and illogical part of the article, is written in a form that seems direct talking by Kondo S., which is quite dire.

Takeda Sokaku *did* teach to his successor Onoha Ittoryu and he taught his students as a fundamental part of the art. He passed a great deal of his time practicing hard it and showing some in demonstrations, mainly with Shimpachi Suzuki and Arisawa Gunpachi. To say he did that only to not teach Daitoryu is quite offensive to his memory, I believe. I invite the students of Okabayashi S., for instance, to ask him if he believe what Kondo S. says about their teacher.
Please also remember that Daitoryu was made by Sokaku a quite open koryu, and Tokimune passed his entire life developing it; teaching wrong or faulty techiques on purpose is completely absurd, because if they were not convincing, or effective, there wouldn't be any students.

It is clear to me that the main reason for that box is to justify in front of critics that he doesn't know Onoha Ittoryu and maybe also not only that, while ALL the other students agree Onoha was very important for the Soke.

In any case I thank you Nathan, and also other people who sends me private messages, to try and keep an open mind.

Regards,

Giacomo Merello

glad2bhere
5th May 2006, 13:59
OK. I think I am understanding what folks are saying but as an outsider to DRAJJ I am still having trouble here. Its not that I am not familiar with the dynamics as we have many of the same issues in the arts in which I train and teach-- Hapkido.

Where I am having considerable trouble is on a very simple level. I am having difficulty reconciling what I read of Kondo Senseis' views in the article with the constant representation of DRAJJ as a very tightly controlled and structured practice. Perhaps the best example is the representation of the KODOKAI which is apparently the single most conservative of the DRAJJ lineages. Does anyone have thoughts along these lines or is this simply one of those "image" or "political" questions best left alone? Thoughts? Comments?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

MarkF
5th May 2006, 16:31
A quick comment from another outsider: Consider the source! It is BB magazine, after all. BB has long-been in the entertainment business and left budo a long, long time ago if it ever arrived there. I've read a handfull of issues since my subscription ran out in 1969. The source, as I hope everyone is reading, is Black Belt Magazine, their topic of interest is in the name of the magazine. Black belts sell, and is the name of the game.
Accuracy is immaterial.

Mark

Arman
5th May 2006, 22:29
Do we really want to re-hash all the old arguments again?

Giacomo, I understand your position and where you are coming from. I understand that you don't agree with a lot of what Kondo Sensei says or represents. I thought we basically decided to agree to disagree on these issues. After all, they won't be resolved by us arguing over it.

Whatever you might think about this issue, the fact of the matter is that Tokimune awarded Kondo Sensei not only the highest dan rank among his students, but also a kyoju dairi and a menkyo kaiden. He also awarded Kondo Sensei all the DR scrolls (which I have personally seen). I know your group claims this is all forgery and lies. I respectfully submit that anyone who examines the evidence will think otherwise.

I've seen your groups demonstrations of the hiden mokuroku and I've compared it to what I have learned. I see a lot of very profound and subtle differences that I don't think are mere coincidence.

But the point is, if we start arguing now, we will just go round and round again. This is really such a small debate in the greater scheme of things because the interested parties are so small. There is more than enough public information and access to schools and teachers for people to make an informed decision about all of this.

How about we just go back to training?
Just a suggestion.

Best,
Arman Partamian

judasith
6th May 2006, 17:18
Dear Arman,

I'm just providing some "food for thought", which I believe many people will at least consider, if they can and want to just scratch the shiny surface. If that is wrong, and if that means "going in circles" then please I ask of the Moderators to tell me.

I believe that challenging the absurd statement that all that Onoha training, practice, demonstration, and precise stressing the importance in his art by Takeda Tokimune was all a fraud and deception, is a must for every serious practitioner of Daitoryu. Kondo could have just said "I do not know it because I was less at the Daitokan than my fellow students", but he can't say that, can't he, since he is the new and only "inheritor" of the art?
It's not me going back on dead problems and being polemic, it's he himself who is going a little too overboard to be credible still, in my humble opinion.
And if you ALSO need documental evidence for my "ramblings", you'll find plenty in our book, like an interesting charter of the Daitoryu Aikibudo in 1973, both in translation and in the original japanese.

I also cannot remember having seen you at one of our demonstrations. Come to our next seminar in the US and you will be accepted as a friend, and you'll also have the opportunity to train, that we never miss.

Jose Garrido
7th May 2006, 01:51
Giacomo,

I also would like to invite any US members of the Daitokai to attend this years Kondo seminar for the same reasons that you invited Arman. I was told years ago to study what all of the DTR branches have to offer.

And I agree with Arman...let's all just train and agree to disagree.

Respectfully,
Jose' Garrido

Arman
7th May 2006, 05:45
Giacomo,

You are, of course, free to provide whatever food for thought you like. I was merely suggesting that it will most likely turn out to be unfruitful. But do as you like.

Regards,
Arman Partamian

judasith
7th May 2006, 12:07
Naturally I would not expect Kondo's direct students to believe what I say (with proof) or even consider it; this is especially common since people won't admit even on evidence, after having spent more than 2-3 years practice. Like in the Kaze Arashi case of some two months ago, they will try to actively defend their teacher regardless.

So I do not believe any of the Shimbukai association students will change ideas or even use the brain to think also after the publishing of our book.

What I do hope is that the other people, the one interested in Daitoryu and not practicing it yet, or scholars, and educated people woud at least consider there MAY BE another truth to Daitoryu than the Pranin-sponsored one.

One time one of you told me to use Ockham's Razor principle, now what is more plausible? That one signed himself a paper, taking advantage of an old and ill man, or that a teacher who dedicated his life in developing the art would deceive everyone and himself adding new false curriculum parts on purpose and teaching the techniques wrong so that no one can do them right?

Jose Garrido
8th May 2006, 14:24
[QUOTE=judasith]Naturally I would not expect Kondo's direct students to believe what I say (with proof) or even consider it...

So I do not believe any of the Shimbukai association students will change ideas or even use the brain to think also after the publishing of our book. QUOTE]

Giacomo,

Words like the ones above is probably why the Kondo students like myself do not reply to you often. We should try to keep things civilized and not sling mud (sort of speak).

Good luck with your continued training in Daito-ryu.

I will now bow out of this thread.

Jose Garrido

DarkThrone
9th May 2006, 01:11
I may be very out of line here, as I only have about 1.5 years of training in Daito Ryu, but shouldn't we all be working together to root out the fakes and frauds that try to lay claim to our heritage? As I understand it, through this very forum thread, there are only a very select few of us that can legitimately lay claim to the Daito Ryu tradition.

Raff
9th May 2006, 07:49
How come the name of Sagawa Sensei is nowhere mentionned in this interview? Mr Kondo does imply that his previous teacher did not truly understand what Aiki was, but also seems not to recognize Sagawa Sensei Dojo either!!!!!!!! When talking about Aiki, it seems quite weird to me to say the least.

George Kohler
9th May 2006, 18:05
or even use the brain to think

5. Treat your fellow E-Budo members with respect

Nathan Scott
9th May 2006, 20:38
[Post deleted by user]

judasith
10th May 2006, 00:06
I apologize for the little "overboard" statement I made above.

I mostly agree with you Nathan, but we're not talking about Omote and Ura here... the Daitokai teachers received training in all the mokurokus of the school, and also in the Ura version of the techniques, where there are Ura. They also made of Ikkajo and Nikkajo Ura a video, then we (the Overseas branch of the association) asked Sensei to stop publishing videos since it was very damaging; he laughed saying "no one can learn from a video", but he agreed to stop.

This is why, I REALLY hope there was some problem in translation, because like it is written it says that Tokimune taught on purpose wrong techniques and added Onoha to keep people occupied with false activities. It is quite plain that the article means this. I hope Kondo Sensei doesn't mean this, it would be really without sense, and delegitimizing for himself.

I do believe Kondo had a great influence on the Soke, mostly because Kondo had friends in Tokyo and in the big kobudo associations and helped a lot in developing the art.
I do believe that Tokimune Sensei may have given him some titles as honorary gifts, rewards for his help, which was both economical and of organization/promotion.
I don't believe Kondo has all the knowledge of the art, and articles like the one in BB, as well as other declarations he made, only prove it more and more.

The highest dan story I believe it's a misunderstanding: I never seen him publish the 7th dan, neither claiming it directly. This 7th dan thing was an equivalent degree his students say would compare to his kyoju dairi.

In any case, I'm quite certain the error was with Takeda sensei, who probably thought, regardless of titles, that it was obvious his direct students were more prepared; unfortunately while this is very japanese, it's not very westerner, where we look at titles first, then at technique.

Just remember the Soke gave to Floquet a Sandan after ten days practice to promote the art in France, since Alain was a political and influent man, while he gave only a kyu per YEAR to my teacher, Antonino Certa Sensei who studied with him and the others everyday for 3-5 months a year until the Soke's death.

Nathan Scott
12th May 2006, 06:19
[Post deleted by user]

judasith
12th May 2006, 08:13
There will be a section regarding history and principles of Ono-ha, as well as technical part with photos of some kata.
The differences between Takeda-den and the Soke's school, will be explained to a certain extent, since having not received direct instruction in Sasamori's Ono-ha we cannot really tell; of course, though, I've seen many demonstrations of Sasamori, and some of the teachers in the old Seishinkai practiced his Ono-ha Ittoryu, so in those kata I've seen from the mainline I can tell the differences.

Raff
16th May 2006, 09:18
Just remember the Soke gave to Floquet a Sandan after ten days practice to promote the art in France, since Alain was a political and influent man

I have a nice story about that and still in connection with the so called video issued. A couple of month ago, I was approached by several would be former students of Alain floquet. They wanted to join the Daitokai and meet Certa Shihan.

The first question I asked was “if your teacher is that good and knowledgeable, how come you to join our little association? They mumbled that “we left Floquet’s organization and want to try something new”.

After a little while, on of them told me that the “leaders” of that organization had purchased the whole set of videos in which we see Arisawa, and Kato Sensei and that they were actually learning from them probably because of their lack of knowledge. So, there are actually quite a lot of people using our tapes to self proclaim themselves teachers of Daito-Ryû. You might remember Manchester, Giacomo and the “performance” made by one of the participant :) !!!

Videos are killing the Art, not only Daito-Ryû but the whole World of MA.

Mateo
27th May 2006, 07:20
Takeda Sokaku *did* teach to his successor Onoha Ittoryu and he taught his students as a fundamental part of the art. He passed a great deal of his time practicing hard it and showing some in demonstrations, mainly with Shimpachi Suzuki and Arisawa Gunpachi. To say he did that only to not teach Daitoryu is quite offensive to his memory, I believe. I invite the students of Okabayashi S., for instance, to ask him if he believe what Kondo S. says about their teacher.
It is clear to me that the main reason for that box is to justify in front of critics that he doesn't know Onoha Ittoryu and maybe also not only that, while ALL the other students agree Onoha was very important for the Soke.
Giacomo Merello

I just want to echo the statement that in this instance Kondo-sensei is not consistant with the published words of the headmaster as to the importantance of the Ona-ha Itto-ryu to his system.

I could point out the instances from AikiNews interviews but they are numerous enough that it is not really necessary to do so. Any cursory look over them would yield such examples.

http://www.daito-ryu.org/tota1.html