PDA

View Full Version : Shinden isshin-ryu jujutsu / Kunishige Nobuyuki



Nathan Scott
2nd January 2008, 22:16
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
3rd January 2008, 01:00
Hmm...you seem to be a man on a mission. "Disavow any knowledge of Aiki that could even remotely be compared to anything in Daito ryu."
"Warning this tape will self-destruct in ten seconds." :)



Following is an overview (adapted from a post of mine in another thread) of a reference that is gaining popularity from E.J. Harrison's 1955 book "The Fighting Spirit of Japan" regarding an "aiki master" Kunishige Nobuyuki.

BTW, from what I read in Harrison's book, it appeared that Kunishige was demonstrating "resistance" to attacks rather than countering methods using "aiki". Ueshiba apparently referred to some of his "resistance" methods as being aiki as well, so perhaps this is a defensive application of the principle.
Well, anyone who can actually do these things will tell you that "resistance" has nothing to do with it. It is the first and guaranteed for sure, step to fallure.
What Kunishige did and what Ueshiba was demonstrating is the pen ultimate of "matching energy" by receiving into a supported body. A body supported by contradictory forces (in,yo) within it. The next step by choice is manipulating that same captured energy.
To those who can do-and there are more than a few reading here who can- they'd not ever use or even think of using the word "resistance."
To quote Locutus "resistence"...is futile.;)

Anyway, how it relates to any notion of "defensive application" of any sort is lets say, an interesting observation.
Why and how Ueshiba, a Kyoju Dairi of the art, considered it to be "Aiki" is another, perhaps more interesting one.

FWIW, I would be quite shocked to see any, even moderately trained, student of Daito ryu who could not do the same things sited here with his body. The means to do so are in the art, er... arts, er...personalized, individual, expressions of the...er...different versions resulting from research which speculatively altered and created new versions of the same er, but different ...art. :D



However, there isn't any evidence to support that any "aiki" system existed that predates Takeda Sokaku's use of the term - and as he defined it.
Just thought I'd post this for further discussions on this subject.


Nathan, I don't play these "qualification" cards - but since you seem to do so repeatedly- then contradict your own standards.
Doesn't your statement:
a. First presume that you fully understand what Sokaku meant aiki to be "as he defined it? Even what other Menkyo in Daito ryu mean by the term "Aiki?"
b. And secondly that you fully understand and know that what every other Koryu may have that is unstated, and that what may be Aiki in their art...is or isn't what Sokaku said Aiki was?

It appears no one- under your terms in the other thread- was really doing Daito ryu aiki anyway, at least to include: Ueshiba, Sagawa, and Kodo, since all three stated they changed Takeda's teachings.

How about just talking about body skills? Like how and why this type of display can have relevance to what-some- might perceive as Aiki? Since you can obviously understand what Ueshiba was doing enough to talk about it- why would it apply?


At the end of the day anyone really either can, or can't do unusual things with their body. Things that people instantly peg -as one teacher was want to often say..."different."
Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
3rd January 2008, 03:17
Dan,

I gave you your own thread to do your thing in. One of two actually. I don't plan on sparring with you in circles in every thread in this forum. I split this post off from the "Dan Harden" thread in hopes of archiving another subject of discussion, not creating hundreds of Dan Harden thread.

I know you have to have the last word, but I'll address your post anyway to save others from possibly (now) misunderstanding my intent:


Hmm...you seem to be a man on a mission. "Disavow any knowledge of Aiki that could even remotely be compared to anything in Daito ryu."
"Warning this tape will self-destruct in ten seconds."

No, I'm giving credit where credit is due, instead of allowing others to take the teachings and make them public property. You and I have both seen the sword arts develop from a state in which almost NOBODY was test cutting (tameshigiri), here or in Japan, to where now EVERYBODY is test cutting and claiming their art has been doing so all along. Nobody gives credit to Nakamura Taizaburo or other pivotal instructors who re-introduced such methods after WWII. That is the kind of thing that happens when you don't stand up and call things for what they are, and point sources out when others attempt to say it is open source. Don Draeger mentioned in his trilogy repeatedly that "TSKSR was the first to have [fill in the blank]". Was he bragging or documenting?

Feel free to present me with historical evidence to the contrary if you think anything I've said is not true. The fact is that Sokaku was hugely influential, and taught all around Japan during his life. There is very limited use of the term prior to his popularizing it. That's just a fact.


Nathan, I don't play these "qualification" cards - but since you seem to do so repeatedly- then contradict your own standards.

Doesn't your statement:
a. First presume that you fully understand what Sokaku meant aiki to be "as he defined it? Even what other Menkyo in Daito ryu mean by the term "Aiki?"
b. And secondly that you fully understand and know that what every other Koryu may have that is unstated, and that what may be Aiki in their art...is or isn't what Sokaku said Aiki was?

Outside of a few quotes, I don't know how Sokaku defined aiki. But based on how other arts prior to his lifetime used the term, they don't have much in common with the aiki definitions and techniques preserved in Daito-ryu. It is not necessary to state what aiki "is" to form the conclusion that what is known is adequate to suggest that there is at least a substantial difference. Maybe there is some cross over from older definitions, but other terms, such as "myojutsu", appear to be used for the techniques similar to what Daito-ryu refers to as aiki techniques. I don't have to know how Sokaku defined aiki to reach the conclusion that however he defined it, it sounds like it is different - or at least far more expansive - than what is documented in the pre-Sokaku references.


It appears no one- under your terms in the other thread- was really doing Daito ryu aiki anyway, at least to include: Ueshiba, Sagawa, and Kodo, since all three stated they changed Takeda's teachings.

We're not in that thread, we're in a different thread. If you are referring to Sagawa Sensei still, he clearly stated HE felt what he was doing at the end of his life was DIFFERENT from Daito-ryu aiki. I later posted that despite that I also believe it is POSSIBLE (but not likely) that what he did was a natural evolution of DR aiki, but based on what I've heard and read from him, it appears that he drew from other experiences and research to develop himself after that initial discovery of a fundamental method at 17 years old. All Sagawa talks about is his discovery of Sokaku's fundamental aiki technique at 17 years old, doing his own R&D for many years and teaching everyone, and then discovering something completely different at 70 years old. That's pretty much it, and 53 years is a long time to be doing your own R&D based on something you discovered as a teenager.

Ueshiba and Horikawa? Who knows? Ueshiba gained an unclear level of understanding from Sokaku, and continued to developed it throughout his life. Horikawa is credited with being taught aiki specifically, and receiving the most direct instruction from Sokaku. He also continued to develop throughout his life. My comment about Sagawa was based largely on HIS OWN point of view of his aiki. Argue it with him if you don't like it.


How about just talking about body skills? Like how and why this type of display can have relevance to what-some- might perceive as Aiki? Since you can obviously understand what Ueshiba was doing enough to talk about it- why would it apply?

I'm not interested in having technical discussions on the internet, or being baited into giving away inner-teachings to non-members. I have nothing to gain from doing so, and get more insights than I know what to do with from simply training in a dojo, with my training partner, under the direction of a qualified instructor.


At the end of the day anyone really either can, or can't do unusual things with their body. Things that people instantly peg -as one teacher was want to often say..."different."

Interestingly, Sagawa thought he was the only one who could do such things too. They say ignorance is bliss...

Dan Harden
3rd January 2008, 05:20
I’m not trying to one up you, Nathan or have the last word. If it’s getting snippy or petty I’ll bail.


Dan,
I'm giving credit where credit is due, instead of allowing others to take the teachings and make them public property. You and I have both seen the sword arts develop from a state in which almost NOBODY was test cutting (tameshigiri), here or in Japan, to where now EVERYBODY is test cutting and claiming their art has been doing so all along. Nobody gives credit to Nakamura Taizaburo or other pivotal instructors who re-introduced such methods after WWII. That is the kind of thing that happens when you don't stand up and call things for what they are, and point sources out when others attempt to say it is open source.
Well, -very- good point.


Feel free to present me with historical evidence to the contrary if you think anything I've said is not true. The fact is that Sokaku was hugely influential, and taught all around Japan during his life. There is very limited use of the term prior to his popularizing it. That's just a fact….snip…Outside of a few quotes, I don't know how Sokaku defined aiki. But based on how other arts prior to his lifetime used the term, they don't have much in common with the aiki definitions and techniques preserved in Daito-ryu.snip…..

Ok -straight from the hip
First, when you make assertions in a thread that Kunishige and Ueshiba were dissimilar in approach to DR Aiki, it is unsupported conjecture. Your attempt to sideline them without any analysis or comparison didn’t fit your own guidelines for discussion, and seemed uncharacteristically shallow for you. By your own definitions-which I do not support-you have to be menkyo or Shihan in any two things you compare- in order to compare them. None of us here are. So no one knows, and the guys that are - don’t agree and never have anyway. It’s why I opted for personal ability. Not for petulance, but as the only means for any evidentiary support under your guidelines.
Second
I think your approach to the topic of a “Daito ryu Aiki” is a bit pedantic. When you address the written and expressed innovation and R&D on the parts of Ueshiba, Sagawa, and Horikawa, there is an expressed absolutism in your writing that would prove to be too rigid in the final analysis. Specifically due to the fact that the unknowns, outweigh the knowns. Since Tokimune, Sagawa, Kodo, Ueshiba, and Hisa were really the teachers who brought the art into the modern age we can make some comparisons.
1. Their syllabus and approach does not line up, one to the other.
2. Three of them openly stated they modified their “aiki” from Sokaku.
So, since they are all we have or see or know and they are so diverse, stating we ”know” what Sokaku’s art is or that there even is –A- Daito ryu Aiki, to compare anything to-has become unrealistic as a model.
Instead of that being a negative I see it is a profound positive. There is only one logical reason for such diversity among the top guys, with all still retaining a source of power,
Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
3rd January 2008, 05:54
I can see that your purpose for posting is to try to heckle me for insisting you qualify "authoratative" statements in some way (experience and/or training). As I said on the other thread, if you want to post an "opinion", then state it as such. But don't say "this is how it was and you're wrong" with nothing to back it up. I don't know what's gotten into you recently, but it isn't washing here.

I'll close this thread for a while so that we don't kill a potentially interesting subject of discussion with off-topic bickerings.