PDA

View Full Version : Succession from Sokaku to Tokimune?



Nathan Scott
30th July 2008, 20:45
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
31st July 2008, 00:16
Nathan
Everything I have seen is that Sokaku's "overall" teaching method was to travel and teach in groups in seminars.
He taught in seminar fashion with "stays" in various places all over the country, including teaching out of Inns, asking his local students to round up other students, doing seminars at police stations all over. When Stan was asked to clarify this years ago in an open Question and answer session he stated much the same thing-that Takeda's method was by and large seminar fashion with locals practicing with each other till he came around again. At various times Tokimune, Sagawa, Kodo etc., traveled with him.
If my memory serves correctly, Takeda was quoted as stating (when asked why he did it that way) "It was the only way to spread the art."
I think of that with the current state outside of Japan by percentage in the Roppokai, Kodokai, Takumakai Mainline etc. With master level teachers doing quarterly or semi annual trips and the students training with each other or with seniors till the next time.
There are currently several Koryu trying that model as well. In the future that could lead to some possible changes.


Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
31st July 2008, 01:59
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
31st July 2008, 02:15
I think that's interesting. Not that it matters much, it would still be interesting to see the dates supporting the idea that the big 5 got-as you said-the meat of their training in private or semi-private days of instruction as opposed to what actual "degree" their counted days in seminars were precentagewise. Not for any type of point to have or make, but out of curiosity in what Takeda and the big 5 were actually doing.

Much has been stated and published about him teaching in seminars. It would be worthwhile to see how any differentiation panned out, say between the "time" spent with the big 5 as opposed to others-even with the time spent by the big 5 in counted days in the eimoroku.

Cheers
Dan

henjoyuko
31st July 2008, 06:17
Hi Dan,

Maybe I'm misreading your post, and certainly this isn't as inclusive or detailed of an answer as you are seeking (You wanted results for the "Big 5.), but I am sure that I recall Stan having counted up all the entries in the Emiroku and stating that of all the entries Ueshiba comes out the 'big winner' as far as total time 'punched in' goes.

FWIW, and not a lot, as I can't even remember where I read Stan stating this.

Back to my hole,
Allen

Richard Elias
31st July 2008, 16:32
(I'll also note it's interesting that the only overtly "principle-based" traditional JMA I'm aware of---but take that with a grain of salt, I'm no an expert---is [Yoshida-ha] Shidare Yanagi-ryu, which has a historical link to Takeda.)

It should be noted that Shidare Yanagi ryu teaches its principles through a strict kata curriculum, as do most JMA. The only overt aspect to its principles is that they have been shared openly. Within most ryuha such information is proprietary based on levels of initiation.

It has been my experience that JMA in general are principle based, taught through kata. It’s just that most people don’t truly understand kata, or stay with the training long enough to go beyond it as is intended. Even many of Don Angier’s own students never progressed beyond kata to the freeform application and expression of pure principle. Few do.

henjoyuko
31st July 2008, 16:57
Hey Rich,

After 35+ years in the martial arts I think I'm finally beginning to reach the level you describe. I suck at kata, I suck freely in application, and my expression of principle purely sucks! :cry:

Perhaps this isn't quite the state of pure "void" yet but is the state of pure vacuity coming close? :look:

Allen

Nathan Scott
31st July 2008, 21:56
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
3rd August 2008, 20:59
[Post deleted by user]

henjoyuko
4th August 2008, 00:19
I wonder upon what evidence he based that assertion. Being an academic, I would assume that he had some credible source. At the very least we can know that Tomiki was aware of Horikawa Kodo as a student of Takeda Sokaku!

Dan Harden
4th August 2008, 04:06
It certainly remains a puzzle as to how one teacher could supposedly teach one set syllabus, never repeating waza over these ten day seminars (according to many witnesses), and then end up with 5 big teachers with arts that have syllabus that are so different-and yet are all approved with the same scrolls.
The soden remains interesting in that it shows the day to day teaching style of both Ueshiba and Takeda as late as 1939 yet it does not line up with the Hiden Mokuroku.


With Kodo you had something line 7 years doing (who knows what with his dad). Then three years of training 10 days a month. That's 360 days of training.
If you compare that to a more modern 2 days a week (as an example) then a modern student would get 104 days of training a year and would equal that training time in 3 ˝ yrs (of course we can argue all manner of things like intensity, and what that day consisted of).
Then you have Hisa training for 3 yrs under Ueshiba-by the way, just what was Ueshiba teaching(that folks in Aikido call prewar aikido) that Takeda could look at it and say "Since Uehsiba taught you the basics I will go from there." ?
Basics in what? Again his noma dojo pictures at the time sure don't show waza that is in line with the Mainlines waza. So what was he teaching that Takeda could say was correct? Step one; Ippon dori, step two...
Or was it Aiki as a principle based method that was not really ever dependent on defined waza in their mind?

Isn't it then interesting that Kodo trained for three years (on top of 7) and then for an unknown and undisclosed amount of time over a 17 yrs and got a menkyo
Hisa trained for 3 yrs (on top of 3) and that was it…and got a menkyo.
Sagawa trained for an undisclosed amount of time over 19 yrs and apparently received more scrolls than anybody. Kodo went to him to ask him about some basic jujutsu waza. Which it appears Sagawa liked to blow up out of proportion. But isn’t it interesting that the larger question remains unanswered. Why did a Menkyo Kaiden have to go to someone else to get some basic waza? And secondly could it have been waza taught differently elsewhere but by the same name?
And Ueshiba? By Kondos statements trained with Takeda more than anyone, but only a Kyoju Dairi license to teach as an assistant instructor.
An to add more odd logic- how was it that Ueshiba -the lower ranked (if you want to call it that) guy was being asked to take over?
I'm beginning to suspect a few things.
a) That the big 5’s training times over those long years were no where near what anyone suspects or cracks them up to be. I seem to recall Kondo publishing (through Stanley) that there were huge-gaps in years then you would see someone training for ten days again. That the bulk of the training was going back home to practice.
b) That Takeda never taught a defined and set syllabus in all places. He himself said he would teach aiki to one, and jujutsu to others. And that perhaps he awarded rank for time in and the ability to express aiki more than anything else. And not for a step by step matching set of catalogued waza from place to place.

All that said, Where did the all Mokuroku come from before Kodo? Why were all the scrolls of this supposed Koryu all destroyed. Why did the Menkyo Kaiden "appear" later? And is anyone still holding to the "all records were destroyed in Aizu argument?

I really don't have much of a point to make other than it's hard to get a handle on what was being taught, and who did what. I mean the skills of the players speak for themselves right?
Maybe the incredible diversety in the waza does as well. And tells an even more interesting story.

It certainly is interesting .
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
4th August 2008, 05:09
Nathan
It seems personal testimony states that Takeda taught randomly and not in order, so did some of his Big 5. When you add what the next generation states they were doing it really begs the question of any semblance of consistancy. When we add the statements Takeda himself made about "aiki being taught to this guy, jujutsu to that guy" I think the idea of linear teaching in "steps of initiation" doesn't hold up.

It may be that on any given day in any given "group" what was taught as -shoden-might have been highly selective and transient. So a "step" in seminar progression may have just as much to do with time-in as with material covered. That being, the material covered may have been all over the map. Anything else just doesn't line up with what most were saying, and with the results of what most were later doing.

Again, I say the skills of the players speak for themselves right?
The incredible diversety in the waza does as well.
Cheers
Dan

henjoyuko
4th August 2008, 17:10
Its an odd thing really, on the one hand we have Ueshiba saying, "There is no kata (form) in Aikido." But then we see him performing a recognizable pattern of kata throughout his entire documented martial career. Beyond whether or not they have "Aiki" or not, most of Ueshiba's students, and their students, and their student's students, etc. are recognizable as Aikidoshi because they practice similar . . . kata.

Both Takeda and Ueshiba's students are quite diverse in their approaches and teachings. Both Takeda and Ueshiba are said to have taught randomly and have been unwilling to repeat the same technique twice in the same venue. Nevertheless, there is a recognizable Daito Ryu-ness to the kata that ALL of Takeda's students (including Ueshiba throughout his recorded martial career) display, and of Takada's student's students.

So, regardless of whether or not this is the essence of Daito-Ryu or Aikido, there seems to be a recognizable pattern (kata) consistent over time and across the globe. Not just jujutsu but a particular flavor of jujutsu no matter how it is served.

Then we, understandably, have folks trying to recreate the "original" Daito Ryu or Aikido, failing in that we have folks trying to recreate the "essential" Daito Ryu or Aikido.

Looking for the "original stone tablets" or the "essential truth" is going to be fraught with peril it seems when one realizes that Takeda, as did Ueshiba, taught different things to different people at different times and didn't worry too much about the structure organizationally and/or pedagogically.

It seems to me that both Dads kind of made a creative pile, their sons tried to make something out of the pile.

Maybe. Just random thoughts.

Allen

wagnerphysed
4th August 2008, 22:09
Dan, you have a lot of very good and deep questions! Almost makes ya want to put on a white belt and train for the asnwers! Don't it make you want to put on the ol' white belt and train?

Nathan Scott
5th August 2008, 02:00
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
5th August 2008, 16:24
Brian
If you think training where you are at now or in any single DR art will answer the questions I oultined above-all I can say is...good luck with that.
Your lines history states openly that is not Sokaku's art. Only that it descended from it. It also states and grandly demonstrated that it does not teach true technique to everyone. Imagine putting on a white belt training for decades, being part of a whole group of men paying money, forming bonds, giving their trust, being a teachers representative in front of people, and then finding out they in fact were not being taught all those years?
So to answer your question. I wonder on the day they were told, how many still thought "putting on their white belt to get answers" was a smart choice.
Here's hoping you are "the" one Brian. I guess you "pays ya nickle and ya takes ya chances." I might add-what art are you training in?

Some interesting talk on Aikido journal. Some of which is germain to any notion of answers here. So this is a modied version of that.

I had always thought the whole Kondo seihinkai/daitokai thing had nothing at all to do with Sokaku's art. That what they were doing was all-by Tokimunes own words-a different art. I never expected to Hear Kondo speaking about Sokakus students and what they were doing.
He certainly spoke about what Tokimune as doing as a different art in person years ago with Stanley there.

Of further interest is that fact that he is NOT the only one to have received a Menkyo Kaiden from Tokimune. Tokimune gave a menkyo in Daito ryu aikijujutsu to Kodo Horikawa-which in itself is odd. Its "different" in that Kodo claims Takeda Sokaku told him to prepare it and he would sign it but he died in the interim. So Tokimune, apparently trusting Kodo, granted it.
Now, further still confusing is that Horikawa's Menkyo is in Takeda Sokaku's Daito ryu Aikijujutsu. What is Tokimune's authority to grant a menkyo in his father art?
And isn't it the only one he ever gave?

Kondo
The copy of the Soke Dairi given to Kondo by Tokimune States it is in Daito ryu Aikibudo a system that he invented that has a syllabus that is unknown to all other students of Takeda Sokaku's.
I would add they were Kondos superiors in the art. But I think that would be misleading. Apparently they trained in an entirely different art. Takedas Sokaku's Daito ryu Aikijujutsu.
But here now we have a quandary.
If Kondo had nothing to with Daito ryu Aikijujutsu, but trained in a different art. What is he the representative of?
Again trademarks mean nothing to me (were the art a koryu it would be embarrassing to even be talking about it in legal terms) but it does seem odd to read Kondo stating that the Kodokai and the Takumakia are "all right" but other lines of Daito ryu aikijujutsu descended directly from Takeda Sokaku which are totally different arts then his own are even mentioned by him at all. Outwardly it appears he is taking on a mantle of authority of a line of transmission he himself has no part in.

As I stated above I had assumed he was narrowing his focus on the art he trained in- Tokimune's Daito ryu Aikibudo. Self admittedly and obvious in style to be different from what his dads other students were doing. Thus the whole seihinkai/daitokai thing. It appears the trademark supersedes Tokimune's clear distinction of his own art from his dads.

And last and most unusual of all
Takeda never called himself Soke of Daito ryu aikijujutsu any where I have seen. Nor did Tokimune. So how can anyone or any of their children be called a soke or a successor in the first place? Tokimune is clearly soke of a different art.


Dan

From Kondo's site -the bold test was my choice
" In November of 1970 Kondo created his own dojo. Four years later, in 1974, Takeda Tokimune certified Kondo as Representative Instructor of the Headmaster (soke kyoju dairi of Aikibudo). In October of 1982, Kondo relocated his dojo to the third floor of his company's new building and named it "Shimbukan" (the name of the dojo was actually bestowed by Omori Sogen, a renowned Zen monk and Jikishinkage-ryu swordsman). In 1988, Takeda Tokimune appointed Kondo Katsuyuki, then the head of all Tokyo Daito-ryu Aikibudo Branches, to be both Representative of the Headmaster (soke dairi) and Director of the Overseas Headquarters (kaigai hombucho) in regard to Daito-ryu Aikibudo. That same year, Tokimune granted Kondo the menkyo kaiden (license of full transmission) certificate in Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu?, thus formally passing on the Main Line Daito-ryu(what) tradition."

Dan Harden
5th August 2008, 19:39
Asking around as to who had the most experience training under someone like Takeda Sokaku would be in the top ten list of questions to ask when trying to evaluate the 1st generation instructors of Sokaku's. Yeah, it would be almost impossible to establish now, but perhaps Tomiki (and probably others) asked this question at a time when it was not impossible to ascertain...
Yep, it is interesting. Sokaku didn't teach from the scrolls. Possibly because he couldn't read them (!). The scrolls do contain technical information that is clearly Daito-ryu though. It seems Sokaku used teh scrolls primarily as transmission/authority documents since he did not use the dan/kyu system....
Which Hiden Mokuroku - the Aikibudo version or the Aikijujutsu version? If you mean to say that both Sokaku and Ueshiba did not teach from the scrolls, that is correct and has already been established.
Interesting isn’t it. There was some talk of him teaching and people writing down what he was doing and creating them and that he had some advice how to organize "an art." And it was early on. Also interesting is that so many alluded to the fact that he 'seemed" to be just free flowing when he taught. At least one person wondered and asked if there was any established waza and was told “Aiki has no techniques.” And then they continued to study waza while not repeating them. More interesting to wonder about is just what were they doing there for thousands of hours if waza was not repeated with him in the room? Did he show, sit down and watch? Did other practice what he showed. When there were no more “others” as was frequently reported, did he act as your Uke? There’s a thought huh? “Sokaku was my uke.”
The Takumakia reported that he started to repeat himself. It would be fascinating to know the nuance around that statement.



Actually, you have 360 days of training, each day of which included 6 practice sessions. Even if each session was only 1 hour, that's still 2,160 hours of keiko one-on-one with Takeda Sokaku! Sounds nice to me...

If you compare this amount of hours of training to your example of a modern student who trains 2 days a week (one hour each day), you have 192 hours a year. If they don't miss any classes, they would still need to train for more than 11 years to equal the same amount of hours Horikawa Kodo logged in 3 years! Ouch.

Fun? Well ya!! I thought it was interesting to play and put some numbers together to see how it could look either way.
It’s not so simple though. To make another point, if you swing the pendulum the other way to compare the scale in an extreme on both ends.
a) Not every modern student trains for just an hour or two per class. An example would be we train for 3-6 hours when we train, not counting off-day training, personal, solo and other pursuits.
b) there is nothing stating how a day with Sokaku (love how that sounds) would have panned out. That the daily training sessions with him were not that continuous- as 6 one hour sessions- we have to allow for breaks and long lunch breaks etc.
Also of interest is that it appears in these sessions people faded and didn't come back. There is a whole raft of speculation as to why. Again not that it matters. It's just interesting to think about and speculate. Either way the idea of training with Sokaku one on one for that long is thrilling.
So just for fun we can speculate back and forth between an equal three years, eleven or somewhere in the middle.


Just to be clear, when you refer to "mainline" waza, you are referring to "Aikibudo", the art that Takeda Tokimune created and designated himself Soke of. The structure and methods of Aikibudo are not identical to the structure and methods of Aikijujutsu.
See my above post. I’ve never considered them the same art. There was official recognition of Kondo given at a certain time. That recognition was "qualified" from what I was remember. It was thee only reason I went to see him. I was expecting, and indeed saw, a different approach to the art.


As far as issuance of ranks go, I've yet to see an art that awards ranks and licenses "fairly". Some are issued based more on social position, some more on skill, some more on time served, some based on politics (usually butt kissing). Standards are an ideal, not a reality. The goal of koryu arts is to survive to the next generation. Ranking those that will help them attain this goal is in their best interest. Bottom line. Rank is an important consideration, but in and of itself is not an indicator of anything outside of initiation and authority.
No disrespect, but duh!
If we made a list of arts that were passed down to lesser men we'd need a lot of paper. It's why you have heads of arts all over teaching (or openly not teaching), with smart people going elsewhere to train to get there's;). Sometimes the more talented ones stay, other times they leave, sometimes they sneak out and don’t tell anyone. I know one DR branch where the more senior guy was passed over for a family friend who then headed up the art. The senior guy left, formed a new group, was formally recognized, then later snubbed. It's just budo. I'm not really interested in the politics. Men tell the truth, then deny it and state a completely different public face, then lie again. Instead of trusting in people, it’s more interesting to find as many facts as you can, digest it and form your own opinions.



Ueshiba was awarded the highest ranks and licenses available at that time, as was Sagawa. They simply did not opt to pursue the NEW "menkyo kaiden" when it was created.
Thats what I was leading too as well. It seems that in many aspects he was making this stuff up as he went along. Not that there's anything wrong with that. He was arguable the most capabe man of his time.


I don't recall coming across a quote from Sokaku himself stating that he taught aiki to some, and jujutsu to others, but it is acknowledged that this was the case.
Me either, but the statements offered were of personal testimony of what he had stated. It's all we have. Once again Stan’s good work of corroborating facts with different peoples interviews.


From what I understand, it seems that Sokaku realistically understood that no one person was perfectly suited for all aspects of the art he was teaching. Or maybe more correctly, his Daito-ryu offered the potential for amazing skills to literally students of all types. Smaller students would not be as competitive in the jujutsu realm, but bigger students more times that not lacked the subltly to apply aiki. Perhaps Ueshiba was as talented at DR jujutsu as Horikawa was at DR aikijujutsu?
Well this gets to the heart of the speculation doesn't it?
So many private and published views, so much commentary that can only exist because;
a) you are talking about an art that simply does not have a set syllabus from one place to the next.
b) has an amazing capacity for effectiveness and fluidity once you grasp aiki.
That said isn't it odd that Sagawa and Ueshiba were the ones approached to be the head of the art at various times. And were your speculations that Ueshiba was the "jujutsu" guy and your earlier posts about Sagawa being sort of "out there" (my words to try and capture the nuance, not yours)…why would Takeda approach them and not Kodo? There is a film of him. I was told exponents who saw the film of Sokaku stated that what he was doing didn't look like the art they were studying-it was much more free flowing to the pins and that it was an eye-opener. And maybe that had nothing to do with how he taught or maybe it was exactly how he taught. I am merely pointing out that speculation can and should go both ways and then we look for back up.


Sokaku seems to have been of the point of view that it would be a waste of time to force a certain type of student to learn "everything" when training time was limited and certain methods would be of limited use for the different extremes of students. All this tells me is that Sokaku must have felt that passing on real ability was his main priority, which coincidentally, is the same requirement Tokimune stated in regards to his own successor. Both Sagawa and Ueshiba were concidered for succession of Daito-ryu, and both were very talented in practical application. Military and law enforcement require certain types of techniques and training that is different from civilian self-defense. Sokaku offered all of the above in one art.
Good point and its still just a view. We can speculate all day how successful Sokaku's jujutsu really is outside of his aiki. Certain branches with more jujutsu oriented waza have a body feel that is stiff as boards compared to other DR branches who are far softer. And again if passing on “real ability was his main priority” than it is certainly clear who he thought was the most effective. What does that say about aiki, or about aiki and its place in a complete art?
All we are left to do is to put two and two together.


Sokaku couldn't have written them himself. Based on the sophistication of the scrolls, some believe Hoshina Chikanori may have created them. It appears that the name "Daito-ryu" was coined by Sokaku, so there wouldn't be scrolls containing this art name prior to his generation. If there were Takeda family scrolls, I don't know. If the art was a Takeda family art, and it was "secretive", the art may not have been preserved through transmission documents (scrolls) previous to Sokaku. Or, they were and were destroyed at some point. Aizu was a hot spot during the Meiji Restoration, and fires were pretty common in Japan. John Stevens wrote in one of his books that Sokaku used to carry a duffle bag full of his scrolls, but that he at some point lost it somehow. It's not clear if these were only his DR scrolls to issue to students, or if they included the scrolls issued to him.

A "menkyo kaiden" level of initiation was probably created either because the term was becoming more commonly used to indicate full transmission in a system, and students wanted to be able to claim they had "menkyo kaiden", or, Sokaku may have become pissed off at one of his senior instructors and decided to create a level above what they had been issued in order to push other students above them.
I think you made another good point and one that is just now being looked into that it may have been intact as aiki training in principles and just not written down as is normal in kata forms on a scroll. Again, it would give Sokaku so much more credence to have made that advancement. Particularly as an "in your face" to his dad. In that he had others write out the scrolls of his skills, and mosre firmly establish the art. Or not!

As for pedagogy by name
Tokimune stated the name was from Yoshimitsu. I have to go back and look it up , but it was something like he stayed at a place called Daito or came from there, and then there was-the pronounciation of the name-I thought it was a suggestion of Yoshida’s, that it was alternately pronounced Daito. We have to weight that against the scrolls giving a purported lineage going way back, and up to Sokaku' grand father. Which may shortly prove to be rather interesting.
The rest of what you offer pretty much lines up with my views-including the speculation of how the Menkyo came into being. I looked at it as an “in your face” to Ueshiba when Sokaku took over the Osaka dojo at Asahi. Although it would have been interesting to have a cup of tea wth Kodo and Sagawa at the time when they heard a six year student was handed the highest honor and passed them by. Sort of sounds like the Seishinkai. Thank goodness they had their own schools and a place to go. Also interesting would be the notion of the matching of the evolution or progression of his art to the evolution and appearance of additional scrolls, and then to the differences between the schools.

I'm not sure anyone knows, but a headmaster - especially one who clearly has no issues making changes to his system - can do pretty much anything they think will best suite their goals.
Not sure anyone knows??? Well I wouldn’t go that far, Nathan. Viewing the members list at the bottom of the page will reveal a readership with many members in various Koryu, others living in Japan to study them, and others I happen to know who are VERY well read in the Japanese arts. In short there are many people reading- like you and I- who are versed in Koryu, are in Koryu and understand transmission and what ultimate authority means in the Japanese arts.


I believe that Sokaku created a large amount of the "kata" he taught either spontaneously in response to various attacks, or, as a way of demonstrating that the main goal is to absorb the theory of the art into your operating system and remain flexible. Sagawa believes that Sokaku could not have learned 2,880 techniques from Hoshina in the time they spent together, and that is it more likely he learned the principles of the art instead. Since DR aiki contains a great deal of internal aspects, maybe it is more useful to drill the theory through numerous kata/techniques rather than become distracted with the less important outer aspects of a handful of kata? circumstance.
Again, this restates my views of the kata, their origins and their intent. For various reasons I think that were he alive today, he would be far less concerned with step one, step two, kata and would be willing to step-up and address questions in a manner that would probably surprise most purist.

Since DR aiki contains a great deal of internal aspects, maybe it is more useful to drill the theory through numerous kata/techniques rather than become distracted with the less important outer aspects of a handful of kata? That would explain "There is no kata (form) in Aikido.", and is consistent with my theory. Aikido teaches a similar viewpoint. Train in a handful of basics repeatedly to absorb the operating system, then create spontaneous technique based on each
I agree substantively with that as well- it was why I was arguing much the same thing with a certain person on another forum. I saw you do much the same on AJ. Oh I wish I had seen that debate before it got locked. Where you and I may part is just what that kata may have to be, and just how long you have to train before you start to get it. I do not believe that the kata -as a form- have to look the same to impart aiki or need even be one-step, stop, start again, waza. Further still that there are numerous solo methods to gain it faster than through paired kata. And they exist in the art. And what is no surprise they appear to differ between schools. So we are left to wonder where they came from. At one point I was taught a series of three, and then watched the teacher show others- hand forms to train- and then later denied they existed. Sagawa denied it and stated Takeda told him to deny it. I also know you can walk up to any cross section of people who have trained for any number of years and they do not all ‘have Aiki.” Some got it and others-not so much, but again, that's just budo.
Interesting and complicated history. Back to work
Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
5th August 2008, 21:37
[Post deleted by user]

Mark Murray
5th August 2008, 21:55
One thing that I agree is different between the branches is that not everyone was *taught* aiki. A good example is Sagawa. Sagawa was *taught* jujutsu and weapons. Horikawa was *taught* aiki. This is important, and surely telling as to why the approaches to aiki and certain methodology is different.


Hi Nathan,

Just a quick question. Are you saying that you don't believe that Sagawa was taught "aiki"?

Mark

Kendoguy9
5th August 2008, 21:59
Brian, Dan, Nathan, et al,

Brian: you're on vacation in Italy and you're still posting to E-budo?!? Should have stayed home and gotten some work done around the house. Would have been cheaper ;)

Dan:
"I had always thought the whole Kondo seihinkai/daitokai thing had nothing at all to do with Sokaku's art."

Seriously? See below.

"What is Tokimune's authority to grant a menkyo in his father art?"

From Remembering Takuma Hisa
by Stanley Pranin

Now in his late 70s, Sokaku’s thinking seems to have changed and he began to take steps to insure that the matter of succession in Daito-ryu was settled. To this end, he started grooming his son Tokimune to follow in his footsteps. Not only that, for the first time Takeda awarded Daito-ryu’s highest certification—the menkyo kaiden—to two persons in March 1939 in Osaka. One was Hisa, a serious practitioner, and the other Masao Tonedate, a higher-up in the Asahi organization. Tonedate did not train very much and therefore his menkyo must be considered to be an “honorary” diploma. On this occasion, Tokimune Takeda joined his father in Osaka and his seal appears along with that of Sokaku on the kaiden, clearly indicating his father’s intention of making his son his successor.

"If Kondo had nothing to with Daito ryu Aikijujutsu, but trained in a different art. What is he the representative of?"

Seriously? You're kidding, right? See above.

:confused: Are we really having this discussion?

Dan you're all over the place here lately. All your aiki power may be cutting off blood to your head or something.

Dan Harden
5th August 2008, 23:36
Dan,
I believe Tokimune attempted to retain what he knew of Sokaku's art in his Aikibudo, but supplemented gaps / added methods as needed to form a complete art - designed to be taught more as a modern budo. In other words, some techniques and methods are shared, while others are not.
The reason Kondo Sensei is talking about other branchs of "Aikijujutsu" as formed by students of Sokaku is because the Menkyo Kaiden he received is issued in "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu", not "Aikibudo". I read the menjo myself. I believe all the other ranks and licenses are under Aikibudo, but I'm not sure. Kondo Sensei definitely has a keen interest in the methods of Takeda Sokaku, so perhaps this is why Tokimune issued it.

Takeda Tokimune used the title "Soke" when referring to the Aikibudo art he created, but used the titles "Honbucho" and "Somucho" when referring to the Aikijujutsu of Sokaku Sensei. While Kondo Sensei is not claiming to be the Soke of Aikibudo, he IS claiming to be the Honbucho and Somucho of DR Aikijujutsu. The only thing that is awkward about that is the rank/license menjo issued to him prior to the MK were in Aikibudo.
Again, I am just questioning or asking about Tokimune's ability to award a Menkyo in his fathers art to Kondo, in the first place.
His creds were glossed over or assumed. And were it proved that he could do so. the lack of consistency in his doing so by ranking Kondo in his own art throughout his career than switching to his Dads is curious.
If it proves Tokimune were qualified-Was there a dual training that took place where Kondo was taught Sokaku's art and awarded scrolls in both systems?
In the former case it disqualifies the Menkyo in its entirety- as it would need to be re-written.
In the second place if there were no prior certificates to back up the later. it more than likely disqualifying it yet again.
Since he stated publicly that Mr. Kondo was to succeed him-can we only assume it was in Aikibudo; his art, and not his Dads?
So why the different Menkyo from the Soke Dairi in Aikibudo?
Why the trademark to include both names?

Other than trademarks and lawyering up- doesn't either of the above leave him as just another menkyo holder? Thus leaving him out of having an opinion about the doings of Sokaku's students and thier lineages?

And lacking a Soke, why all the talk of a candidate? In lue of a soke, who can address anything other than their own school?
Is there some information Kondo can offer that brings a more solid case for unity?

Kodo
I think we agree on that being from Sokaku. It wasn't my point though.
The fun and curious part was whether or not Tokimune could have given it? What a puzzle it must have been for him. How do you turn down a long time student who comes to you with this dilema? Would you be compromised in using your dads Hanko? Are you compromised in using your own?
So much has been recorded and made public that its curious that Tokimunes role is sort of glossed over maybe because it is assumed. It is a bit of a puzzle and it will be interesting to see how it unfolds and is received. It leaves the entire issue of soke unaddressable.
Sokaku was not a soke of DR aikijutsu
Tokimune was not a Soke of DR aikijujutsu
Since his death no one can become a soke of Dr aikijutsu

Tokimune created DR aikibudo and made himself Soke, he named no one soke. He awarded a Soke Dairi in Aikibudo to Kondo, then ranked him in his father arts which eh never studied.


Menkyo
In any event, obviously all the other branches of Daito-ryu issue their own ranks and licenses, and teach independent of Kondo Sensei. Kondo Sensei may be able to enforce the legal aspects, but I think it would be hard for him to teach aspects of the arts to other branches which he has not learned himself!
Agreed


I'm not sure I follow you. If you are referring to ranking and licensing, the only thing that is clear is who he felt was most appropriate to pass on the art. There is no guarantee that Sokaku equated how he taught with who would pass on his art. Ranking and transmission authority is often more politically biased than skill based.
Someone some where had to make choice. It was clear that on two occasions Ueshiba was selected, and Sagawa was selected. Kodo was not, Hisa was not.


Minamoto Yoshimitsu and his brother Yoshiie grew up in a mansion referred to as the "Daito Yashiki", and much of the R&D that became the foundation for Sokaku's Daito-ryu is said to have occurred there. As such, Yoshimitsu is considered the founder, even though there are earlier methods that are credited as having been passed down from Emperor Seiwa.
Again you seem to be restating my points-not that I mind.
I looked it up and Yoshimitsu referred to himself as "Saburo of Daito."

Yoshida is said to have been the one to suggest the name change from "jujutsu" to "aikijujutsu".
Not that I have read. I think that was Deguchi to Takeda in 1922 after seeing what he could do. However. The use of the term aiki in the waza was recorded as far back as 1913 by Sagawa's father(Kyojo Dairi 1914).


However, the often repeated idea that Yoshida suggested a different pronunciation of the art name is wrong. The earliest Daito-ryu makimono known to exist dates 1899, and (from memory) ...snip...It is possible that some kind of conversation happened in regards to this subject, or that Sokaku had been mis-reading the kanji as "Yamato-ryu". But the kanji for the art was the same long before Yoshida came on the scene.
I never mentioned the Kanji. I said it was a different pronounciation. Are you restating my points back at me for a reason? Once, again restating what I said is fine. Thanks.


As far as my perspective, I believe the art was structured to be learned a certain way, using progressive levels of techniques. There are no shortcuts for developing an understanding of the art through correct (and introspective) repetition of the methods. This takes as long as it takes - not necessarily a long time or short time. Sometimes it takes a long time based on developing a level of trust with the instructor, or any number of other factors, including attitude and behavior issues.
Solo exercises and conditioning can accelerate this process, but in my opinion is not the most important aspect of training. Everything is important. One thing that I agree is different between the branches is that not everyone was *taught* aiki.
Well I think its a stretch to say
"The art was meant to .....anything."
Or even more accurate it may be incorrect to even say
"The art is...."
I think its all over the place and schools have their own methods. I agree with the rest though


A good example is Sagawa. Sagawa was *taught* jujutsu and weapons. Horikawa was *taught* aiki. This is important, and surely telling as to why the approaches to aiki and certain methodology is different.
Interesting opinion. Both state they developed aiki on their own after stealing it from Takeda. Interestingly enough I know a teacher from the Kodokai who told me to my face that Sagawa's Aiki was far better than anybody or anything he ever felt in the Kodokai. I also know two other students from the kodokai who trained with Kimura who considered his aiki skills superior to what they experienced with teachers as well.


As far as secret solo methods people teach and then say they didn't, I haven't run into that anywhere. They either exist or they don't, but obviously your experience has been different. As I've said before, for most people the only thing preventing them from learning aiki is themselves. Sure there are a lot of people studying Daito-ryu, but not everyone is willing to make the sacrifices necessary to get the gold. It really just comes down to desire and the willingness to act on it.

Well its the one thing we will not resolve. In your view the art takes care of its students and all are taught fully if they are loyal and all will be revealed to them. I think the published material, the hundreds of written words of its teachers, the ability of the students and its own publicly shown actions have proved that not to be the case. I still think it has some of the finest skills in the world. But as a cohesive art? Its screwed.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
5th August 2008, 23:45
"What is Tokimune's authority to grant a menkyo in his father art?"

From Remembering Takuma Hisa
by Stanley Pranin

Now in his late 70s, Sokaku’s thinking seems to have changed and he began to take steps to insure that the matter of succession in Daito-ryu was settled. To this end, he started grooming his son Tokimune to follow in his footsteps. Not only that, for the first time Takeda awarded Daito-ryu’s highest certification—the menkyo kaiden—to two persons in March 1939 in Osaka. One was Hisa, a serious practitioner, and the other Masao Tonedate, a higher-up in the Asahi organization. Tonedate did not train very much and therefore his menkyo must be considered to be an “honorary” diploma. On this occasion, Tokimune Takeda joined his father in Osaka and his seal appears along with that of Sokaku on the kaiden, clearly indicating his father’s intention of making his son his successor.

Dan you're all over the place here lately. All your aiki power may be cutting off blood to your head or something.

Check the posts on AJ. If you think I am the only one asking these things-you've really been out of touch. These things have been brought up since his first visit but no one wanted to talk about it openly. It's just questions. I hope there are good answers and a resolution to unify, partcularly in light of recent events. Everything would get wrapped up nicely.
Chris
Don't let it escape your attention that I was the only guy in DR who accepted the invitation to show up at his fist visit. I also slammed down and fielded some bad accusations and questions thrown at him in the public Q and A. With Stan sitting right next to me and intoducing me. Also lets remember he went arounf to train himself with everyone in Sokakus student groups who would have him.
Don't mistake questions for doubts. He was positioned-by his own efforts and Tokimunes to do a difficult job. I hope it all goes well for him
Dan

Nathan Scott
6th August 2008, 00:16
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
6th August 2008, 06:31
Every branch of Daito-ryu shares the above stated exercise, but not all were *taught* aiki. That is what I'm saying.
ooh...I think that's a pretty difficult assertion to make and maintain.
I think a better statement is "That not all students were taught aiki. I would find it difficult to assume that Sokaku would ever give advanced rank without a students understanding of aiki. Whether or not some were to develope it deeper later may be a separate issue. He certainly did not appear to be casual in his affairs.
It is a reason I wonder about Tokimunes role.


One school of thought says Deguchi suggested the name change, the other school of thought says Yoshida Kotaro suggested it. Nobody is sure. The fact that the *term* aiki was used prior to Yoshida meeting Sokaku does not mean Yoshida did not suggest Sokaku change the name of his art to "Aikijujutsu". They are two different points.
That is correct. I stated it that way. I brought it up to clarify that at least its usage was accounted for in the art prior to the later suggestion of either Deguchi or Yoshida.


BTW, the more I think about it I think Yoshida may have met Sokaku in 1913 or 1914 when Sokaku first got to Yubetsu (roughly the same time Sagawa's father began training).
No Sagawa started training with Sokaku when he was 11 yrs old in 1913. His Father, Nenokichi received his teaching certificate in March, 1914. I would assume had been training for a while to get that.
Curiously Sagawa states the daily training sessions given at the dojo his father built lasted something like 3 hours. It leaves yet another doubt as to what he was really doing; teaching in the morning, lunch, teach in the afternoon. Who really knows. It's mostly old men trying to remember.


Well that is your point of view. You seem to think that just because none of Sokaku's students seem to have the full curriculum, not to mention the same curriculum, that Daito-ryu never had any type of structure. My point is that I believe Daito-ryu under Sokaku did have structure, but that it was somewhat unconventional in extant koryu terms based on the emphasis on training internal elements. In my opinion this aspect incorporates a different approach to training that would probably have once been common for arts teaching internal aspects. I think if you look at if from this point of view there is structure, but it doesn't look the same as most koryu structure.
Hmm, I don't think we are too far apart here. Re-read my points. I never said it didn't have structure. I said the waza and the method of study were all over the map. And that it's common bond was aiki and its internal principles. You more or less just agreed with that.
Lets go on to the next.
I have stated, as Kodo did and Sagawa and many others that Sokaku more or less free wheeled it. Sagawa states that Sokaku never taught forms or kata that his art was practical and Sagawa taught in the same fashion.
It was the students who were so hell bent on recording them. Sokaku didn't even want to repeat them.

I have contended, and argued that those same waza were sort of, on-the-spot waza, with perhaps favorite repeats, but that essentially the art is formless based on aiki. THAT is why its waza-the result of each body method-is so different style to style with a common bond. Thus I believe -that Sokaku believed- that Sagawa, and Horikawa, and Hisa and Ueshiba had aiki-because he taught it to them.
Calling it a "non-structured sort of structure" by way of aiki and applied principles is just another way of you more or less saying the same things I have stated. That's been my contention in this thread from the very begining. That body conditioning is paramount, Aiki happens because of it, and applied principle in-use govern it.
But you stated it so clearly I couldn't have said it better myself.
Kata were the "result" of a training method. Kata as a rote or fixed training tool is secondary and need not be used as a method to gain aiki. Something which I have stated for a very long time. It appears rather obvious that Sokaku, and Ueshiba his first chosen successor according to Stan. and Sagawa, his Second choice- clearly agreed.
Cheers
Dan

Mark Murray
6th August 2008, 14:04
So, with Allen's post that there is a particular "flavor" of jujutsu to Takeda's art and his students' art.

With Nathan's post that Takeda taught his art differently because he taught based upon internal terms. It isn't a stretch to see that Takeda used a form of jujutsu to give an outward expression to this kind of training.

And from Dan's post that Takeda didn't teach many techniques in a repeating fashion. It isn't a stretch to see that this brought forth thousands of techniques that filtered down through his students' art.

So, the one question that many have asked is where Takeda got his internal skills. We have a possible answer to that question when Ellis publishes his book.

But, the other important question and possibly related, but possibly not, is where did Takeda get his jujutsu curriculum?

henjoyuko
6th August 2008, 17:00
Hi Mark,

What makes you think that Ellis's book will answer the source of Aiki question rather than the source of Jujutsu question? And what makes you think that they had to be mutually exclusive? (My understanding is that there was an influx of continental [including IMA and medical] influence right about Takeda's lifetime that was broadly influential.)

I'm not arguing against you BTW, I just want to read where you found your hint. I could wait for Ellis's book, but you know how patient I am! ;)

Allen

Mark Murray
6th August 2008, 17:22
Hi Mark,

What makes you think that Ellis's book will answer the source of Aiki question rather than the source of Jujutsu question? And what makes you think that they had to be mutually exclusive? (My understanding is that there was an influx of continental [including IMA and medical] influence right about Takeda's lifetime that was broadly influential.)

I'm not arguing against you BTW, I just want to read where you found your hint. I could wait for Ellis's book, but you know how patient I am! ;)

Allen

Well, it could answer one, the other, or both.

Check out this thread:
http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36078

Posts #37, #39 and #40. So, I just made a leap that Ellis had found something interesting in regards to what made Takeda powerful. There were quite a few jujutsu schools out there, so I don't really think Takeda's jujutsu was *that* important. And, I didn't think Takeda's jujutsu skills were all that renowned when he first started becoming known. I thought he was more renowned for his swordwork.

Hence, my guess that it's possible Ellis found a link of some sorts to the internal development. Would it tie in with Takeda's jujutsu? Yeah, it could. But, I'm just guessing here. :) And waiting for the book.

henjoyuko
6th August 2008, 17:53
FWIW, I was taught a rather large series of solo body movement exercises (and a meditation) and a few (there were more to come later) partner exercises before I was ever taught a waza. These exercises teach one what to do with the body, mind and breath and also develop the body, mind and breath. [One starts externally and proceeds internally. Of course this is a conceptual expediency because in order to start externally the impetus comes internally.] The lessons learned from the solo body movement exercises inform the waza not vice-versa. The waza can be done in a jujutsu manner or an aiki manner or a combo. [Once one "knows" and can do both.] The waza are exemplary of certain tactical principles, which are in-turn reflective of certain "universal" principles. There is quite a collection of particular waza that exemplify a progression of jujutsu principles (progressive study of anatomy and its usage) and progress to seemingly "defying" the jujutsu principles learned earlier by usage of "Aiki." The waza increase in number to such a degree that one is virtually forced to see the forest for the trees. At this point one begins to see that "there are no waza (kata) and that simply be-ing is (or at least can be) an expression of Aiki.

This BTW, is taught immediately in the context of weaponry. In fact, there are a large collection of solo body movement exercises that employ the use of weapons as well and proceed from there in an identical progression outlined above.

This all can (and does) neatly correspond with certain cosmological perspectives and can be used profitably as shugyo towards that end if one so desires. In other words, if one "gets right" there are certain seemingly miraculous by products. BTW, within certain cosmological perspectives these "by products" can result in a divergence from the "greater path" if one obsesses over them or allows them to become the sole aim of one's practice.

FWIW,
Allen

(BTW, my students will testify to the fact that I, with some regularity, "discover" BLATANT lessons taught by the solo body movement exercises, EXPLICITY taught to me by my teacher and sempai. It is a never ending source of wonderment to me, the power of my own IGNORANCE! :cry: )

henjoyuko
6th August 2008, 17:58
Thanks Mark,

I'll read the posts.

Allen

henjoyuko
6th August 2008, 18:13
Hey Mark,

How about standing in a River, Ocean (Horizontal), or Waterfall (Vertical) current to "receive" power from that source? One might even find that certain physical mannerisms, imagery, and chants (breath) might enhance the "reception," and accruement of, that power.

Nah! That's just silly.

Back to the drawing board! :D

Allen

henjoyuko
6th August 2008, 18:25
Ah,

I remember reading those posts but I didn't interpret them the way you did. All I see is Ellis saying there is no substantive Yoshin Ryu/Daito Ryu connection and that he has a MUCH stronger candidate for the roots of Daito Ryu.

I didn't pick up a clue as to whether that "Much stronger candidate" was, or wasn't, martially related.

Geez, we're starting to sound like a couple of Potter fans before the release of "the next book."

OK, enough thread drift.

Fading out,
Allen

Mark Murray
6th August 2008, 18:33
Ah,

I remember reading those posts but I didn't interpret them the way you did. All I see is Ellis saying there is no substantive Yoshin Ryu/Daito Ryu connection and that he has a MUCH stronger candidate for the roots of Daito Ryu.

I didn't pick up a clue as to whether that "Much stronger candidate" was, or wasn't, martially related.

Geez, we're starting to sound like a couple of Potter fans before the release of "the next book."

OK, enough thread drift.

Fading out,
Allen

Oh, geez, now you're raining on my parade. Er, or is that bursting my bubble? Peeing in the wind? ;) Guess I'll go back to the drawing board and find another cool theory about Ellis' book -- you think maybe Ellis found that it was Tengu that taught Takeda? Nah, who'd ever use that silly explanation? :laugh:

Mark

henjoyuko
6th August 2008, 18:36
The nose knows!

wagnerphysed
6th August 2008, 23:36
Dan, thank you for wishing me luck! am I the one? If you didn't read
Chrises post correctly, the ONE will learn the MK curriculm associted with that scroll. As far as he rest of the art is concerned, I am content with learning what I am capable of learning. Clearly you are misunderstanding much of how the curriculum is taught in my line. You need to go back and read the interviews again and then discuss it with Kondo Sensei. Once you have done this, then we can talk more accurately. As far as Kondo Sensei's rank/ scrolls are concerned, here again I think you are confused! All of Kondo Sensei's scrolls state Diato-ryu Aikijujitsu...not Aikibudo. On this point, you are wrong.

As for the rest, please clarify...are you saying Takeda Tokimune Sensei was not in a position to award a Menkyo Kaiden to anyone? Please explain! Because, if you are accurate, this would have major implications for other organizations besides the mainline. In your explanation, please include credible references besides posting to a forum on AJ. I believe there are similar forums that discuss the reality of the holocost as well. Yet it is a clearly documented event...it happened!

As far as the content of Mr. Amdur's next book is concerned, I can't wait to see what theories he comes up with. His work is always well thought out and well written. As far as its accuaracy is concerned with regards to DR, well...who knows? If it were about Araki-ryu there would be no question. As far as I know, Mr. Amdur's thoughts on Datio-ryu are merely well thought out conjecture...maybe based on the same literaure that Dan Harden is misquoting? Who knows? However, I am thinking that there is little if any inside insight tha comes from the current MK holder included within the pages. Mr. Amdur, can you clarify?

I am sorry if I am confusing people,I am not speaking on behalf of the mainline. On the other hand, as a pactitioner and student of the mainline, there are certain things that I have the privilege of knowing and as it would seem, others do not. To me these pieces of knowledge seem like common sense. Becausd oters refues to put on white belts and train,
Brian
If you think training where you are at now or in any single DR art will answer the questions I oultined above-all I can say is...good luck with that.
Your lines history states openly that is not Sokaku's art. Only that it descended from it. It also states and grandly demonstrated that it does not teach true technique to everyone. Imagine putting on a white belt training for decades, being part of a whole group of men paying money, forming bonds, giving their trust, being a teachers representative in front of people, and then finding out they in fact were not being taught all those years?
So to answer your question. I wonder on the day they were told, how many still thought "putting on their white belt to get answers" was a smart choice.
Here's hoping you are "the" one Brian. I guess you "pays ya nickle and ya takes ya chances." I might add-what art are you training in?

Some interesting talk on Aikido journal. Some of which is germain to any notion of answers here. So this is a modied version of that.

I had always thought the whole Kondo seihinkai/daitokai thing had nothing at all to do with Sokaku's art. That what they were doing was all-by Tokimunes own words-a different art. I never expected to Hear Kondo speaking about Sokakus students and what they were doing.
He certainly spoke about what Tokimune as doing as a different art in person years ago with Stanley there.

Of further interest is that fact that he is NOT the only one to have received a Menkyo Kaiden from Tokimune. Tokimune gave a menkyo in Daito ryu aikijujutsu to Kodo Horikawa-which in itself is odd. Its "different" in that Kodo claims Takeda Sokaku told him to prepare it and he would sign it but he died in the interim. So Tokimune, apparently trusting Kodo, granted it.
Now, further still confusing is that Horikawa's Menkyo is in Takeda Sokaku's Daito ryu Aikijujutsu. What is Tokimune's authority to grant a menkyo in his father art?
And isn't it the only one he ever gave?

Kondo
The copy of the Soke Dairi given to Kondo by Tokimune States it is in Daito ryu Aikibudo a system that he invented that has a syllabus that is unknown to all other students of Takeda Sokaku's.
I would add they were Kondos superiors in the art. But I think that would be misleading. Apparently they trained in an entirely different art. Takedas Sokaku's Daito ryu Aikijujutsu.
But here now we have a quandary.
If Kondo had nothing to with Daito ryu Aikijujutsu, but trained in a different art. What is he the representative of?
Again trademarks mean nothing to me (were the art a koryu it would be embarrassing to even be talking about it in legal terms) but it does seem odd to read Kondo stating that the Kodokai and the Takumakia are "all right" but other lines of Daito ryu aikijujutsu descended directly from Takeda Sokaku which are totally different arts then his own are even mentioned by him at all. Outwardly it appears he is taking on a mantle of authority of a line of transmission he himself has no part in.

As I stated above I had assumed he was narrowing his focus on the art he trained in- Tokimune's Daito ryu Aikibudo. Self admittedly and obvious in style to be different from what his dads other students were doing. Thus the whole seihinkai/daitokai thing. It appears the trademark supersedes Tokimune's clear distinction of his own art from his dads.

And last and most unusual of all
Takeda never called himself Soke of Daito ryu aikijujutsu any where I have seen. Nor did Tokimune. So how can anyone or any of their children be called a soke or a successor in the first place? Tokimune is clearly soke of a different art.


Dan

From Kondo's site -the bold test was my choice
" In November of 1970 Kondo created his own dojo. Four years later, in 1974, Takeda Tokimune certified Kondo as Representative Instructor of the Headmaster (soke kyoju dairi of Aikibudo). In October of 1982, Kondo relocated his dojo to the third floor of his company's new building and named it "Shimbukan" (the name of the dojo was actually bestowed by Omori Sogen, a renowned Zen monk and Jikishinkage-ryu swordsman). In 1988, Takeda Tokimune appointed Kondo Katsuyuki, then the head of all Tokyo Daito-ryu Aikibudo Branches, to be both Representative of the Headmaster (soke dairi) and Director of the Overseas Headquarters (kaigai hombucho) in regard to Daito-ryu Aikibudo. That same year, Tokimune granted Kondo the menkyo kaiden (license of full transmission) certificate in Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu?, thus formally passing on the Main Line Daito-ryu(what) tradition."


Dan, here again you speak as if you hold significant rank in Daito-ryu Aikijujitsu. You are not backing up your assertions with credible sources or entries from those sources that lead to the conclusions you are drawing. Is there some experience or rank, that we need to know about that you have yet to make public? If so, please state it now. As far as I know, you have stated that you do not practice Daito-ryu. I take this to mean that you hold no rank or experience that would enable you to discuss the oral traditions or any other knowledge, outside of texts available to the general public, with any degree of accuracy! Is this understanding incorrect? Inquiring minds want to know! Why don't you just drop the fence and tell everyone exactly what your experience with Daito-ryu consists of? What qualfies you to stand beside Stan Pranin and defend Kondo Sensei? What qualifies you to make qualitative statements that go beyond the information available in texts with regards to who knows what and who was taught what?

Kendoguy9
7th August 2008, 00:07
Hey Brian,

I think you mean Chris' not Chrises. Too much wine? :D

I wish I had the time to reply to all of this but between work and irregular internet access I can only touch on a few things at any given time.

Dan wrote:

"Your lines history states openly that is not Sokaku's art. Only that it descended from it."

You're right it can't be Sokaku sensei's art, because Sokaku sensei has been dead since 1943, and it's no longer Tokimune sensei's art because he died 50 years after that. It is now Kondo sensei's art.

If we look at quotes from other groups what they were doing wasn't Sokaku sensei's art either. Sagawa sensei stated he made changes to the art and developed it in a different direction than what Sokaku sensei was doing. Horikawa sensei stated the same thing. Hisa sensei admitted much of what he did came from Ueshiba sensei, and we all know what Ueshiba sensei did to the art.

After the old man died each group tried to organize what they knew into some sort of syllbus. Tokimune sensei took an orthodox koryu approach with the densho. Sagawa created gen. I'm sure the Kodokai has their own way (don't know enough about them to say). Hisa had the soden. If they don't teach in a seemingly haphazard way they aren't teaching Sokaku's art?

Now, who is the rightful heir to Daito-ryu? Tokimune? Sagawa? Ueshiba? Hisa? Horikawa? My vote is on Tokimune. Horikawa went to him to get his menkyo kaiden, not to Sagawa. Clearly Horikawa thought Tokimune was the correct person. Mori sensei of the Takumakai refered to Tokimune as "the headmaster" so clearly he thought Tokimune was the right person. Tokimune gave the job to Sagawa, but as far as I know, Sagawa gave it back to him, just before he opened the Daitokan. So clearly Sagawa thought it was the rigt thing to do. Was Tokimune sensei the most talented of Sokaku's students? I have no idea since I've never met any of them. We can speculate but that's a lot like talking about who would win in a fight Superman or the Hulk.

Best regards, (I think Superman, unless the Hulk found some Kryptonite)

Dan Harden
7th August 2008, 15:36
Interesting reactions
Chris you are once again calling Kondo the successor and that “it is his art.” You also ask who is "the heir?"
There is no Soke involved here, there is no heir, it is not Kondo's art to have. He is attempting to do-through trademark-what he could never pull off as a budo man.

The question of soke-Aikibudo
Tokimune made it a point and made it clearly, that he established himself as Soke of an art separate from his father. He then handed out a Soke Dairi in it to Kondo further memorializing it. Is Kondo then restricted to just that branch?

The question of soke-Sokaku's art of Aikijujutsu
Sokaku declared publicly that he was NOT the soke. Since no one can change that posthumouslyt there is no soke and no inheritor-including Tokimune. Woudn't that mean-the entirety of the art is reduced to extent menkyo's given by him, and then those who recieved their menyos from menkyo holders?
Was Tokimune one of those recipients?

In either event doesn't that mean that Kondo cannot be an heir to anything, not aikibudo, and certainly not Sokaku's Aikijujutsu which he never trained in?
You might want to Check with him,Chris and Brian. Because he denied what you are saying-the ability to inherit- in front about 200 people when he first came to America it in person. He denies it to Stan, he denied it in print. If he is he now claiming title to Sokaku Takeda’s art -Daito ryu Aikijujutsu and Tokimunes Daito ryu Aikibudo as well that would be interesting to hear.

I don't know why these questions are viewed as unsettling. Kondo put the family laundry on the table and in the public court system, and is now making public statements about who is or isn’t doing the real Daito ryu.
I mean, my God man...in a reply to a direct question reported on AJ, he left out Sagawa dojo, and the Roppokai from being allowed to use the name Daito ryu. That would then include all those with rank from other schools. These actions literally beg questions.
I’m just asking what grants him authority to act like a soke in addressing the other schools at all- when he is nothing more than another Menkyo from another branch (again I am not talking about the courts. Involving the courts in Budo transmission matters is unspeakable).
If unity is the issue raised by Kondo and the goal he himself stated- authority is the natural question that follows. I think it’s a great chance to answer the questions-out in the open.
But that’s all they are.

So, if he is acting with authority in addressing other Menkyo’s and tell them what they can or cannot do;
1. Under what office is that?
2. What instrument grants it?
3. And where did it come from? By way of training? By a figurative title?
4. And did the one issuing it have the authority to do so?


Speaking of Aikibudo and Aikijujutu. Which art did Kondo train in? Tokimune never claimed to teach aikijujutsu. In fact he publicly denied it.
So what's up with that?
a) Is Kondo’s authority, after all, in Tokimunes art-which he trained in? Does that give him authority to address the Menkyos in Sokakus art.
b) Or if his menkyo is in Sokaku's art, and Tokimune did not teach it-how did that happen. And if THAT were the case. Does that give him authority to address anyone teaching or wanting to teach Aikibudo?
c) Or did Tokimune grant him title and rank in both arts- without training in both arts.
d) Did he have the authority to do so. Even if he could (which we still don't know)- and gave him authority in both, it kind of makes the whole thing sound strange in a way doesn't it?
So which is it a menkyo in?
Tokimune’s Aikibudo?
Sokaku’s Aikijujutsu?
Or both. Are there dual Menkyo’s as yet undisclosed?
And what DID he train in to get both? What scrolls and syllabus were used?
And all that said...isn't he just another menkyo holder with no claims to the art itself?

Since there was no direct transmission and there is no soke in either case, this all sounds a bit like an Aikido 9th dan from the Aikikai telling and Aikido 9th dan from the Yoshinkan that they cannot call it aikido.

It seems these questions are very obvious and perhaps very easy to answer and resolve, and thus no big deal. Regardless of the outcome isn't it safe to say that the idea of "succession" in Sokaku's art is off the table? There are just the big 5 and their schools?
Again, this only came up because he is now talking about who can use the name of the art(s). I think everyone assumed he would at least honor his fellow Menkyo holders and seniors and then all their students efforts by default, and pick up from there.
Anything else just begs questions.

Mark Murray
7th August 2008, 16:25
The question of soke-Sokaku's art of Aikijujutsu
Sokaku declared publicly that he was NOT the soke. Since no one can change that posthumouslyt there is no soke and no inheritor-including Tokimune. Woudn't that mean-the entirety of the art is reduced to extent menkyo's given by him, and then those who recieved their menyos from menkyo holders?
Was Tokimune one of those recipients?


As someone we know would say, "huh". :D

Well, if Daito ryu were koryu, I guess it'd sort of follow what happened with Shinto Muso ryu jodo. No successor but menkyo's.

Of course, if Daito ryu weren't koryu, anything is fair game. Just as we saw with Kisshomaru trying to get Tomiki to not call his art, "aikido".

Either way, Dan, that post seemed to put things into a nice perspective. I don't know why you say you can't write like Ellis. :laugh:

Mark

TimothyKleinert
7th August 2008, 22:44
I'm back from a bit of traveling and trying to caught up. Here are a few quick comments...

Dan,

On the latest issue of Tokimune's credentials, you're misrepresenting the facts. I don't know if Tokimune was ever "formally" granted the licenses, or whether he shared the same level of skill as the other "big 4" teachers, but it's clear that Sokaku meant for Tokimune to succeed him on an organizational level, at least.

Here's more info from Kondo's site:
Around 1925, Sokaku began grooming Tokimune to be his successor, training him strictly in both swordsmanship and Daito-ryu...

In time, Tokimune began accompanying his father as his Representative Instructor (kyoju dairi), and in 1939 he became the Director of General Affairs (somucho) under Sokaku. Tokimune accompanied his father to Osaka that same year to award the menkyo kaiden certificates to Hisa Takuma and Tonedate Masao. The Eimeiroku entries written by Hisa and Tonedate state that these two were "taught the menkyo kaiden techniques by both Takeda daisensei and Mr. Takeda Tokimune." Also, Tokimune's signature appears alongside that of his father as "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, Director of General Affairs" at the beginning of this Eimeiroku. Moreover, the then twenty-three year-old Tokimune appears in commemorative photographs taken on that occasion.

If Tokimune was signing menkyo alongside his father, clearly that meant Sokaku had granted him some sort of organizational authority.

As far as Kondo is concerned... I can't find where I read it right now, but I remember something about how his earlier menkyo were in "Aikibudo", but that the Menkyo Kaiden was actually in "Aikijujutsu"... But I'm not going to claim any type of authority on that topic.

TimothyKleinert
7th August 2008, 22:57
Kondo... is now making public statements about who is or isn’t doing the real Daito ryu.
I mean, my God man...in a reply to a direct question reported on AJ, he left out Sagawa dojo, and the Roppokai from being allowed to use the name Daito ryu.

One more quick comment---I make no judgment about who should or shouldn't use the name "Daito-ryu", but I believe Kondo's thinking is that only Menkyo Kaiden holders can "legitimately" call themselves Daito-ryu. And that only leaves the Takumakai, Kodokai, and mainline.

Dan Harden
7th August 2008, 23:01
Go back and read Tim
I misrepresented nothing-not the least of which are any proven facts. I asked questions. First of all about whether Tokimune got a menkyo. I asked for specific reasons relative to Sokakus own authority and position.
Simple question really.
In lue of a menkyo, I questioned him granting ranks across the board. Then made allowance and asked questions if he could. I did so for a reason.
There are several follow ups regarding Takeda himself.

Further I covered the two different possible conditions of Kondo's menkyo and authority; Aikibudo or Aikijujutsu, or both all of which can cause dilemas for what he is trying to control. And in any case are certainly not clear.
Questions Tim.
Try not to..."exaggerate" when trying to make your point will you?;)

Dan Harden
7th August 2008, 23:11
One more quick comment---I make no judgment about who should or shouldn't use the name "Daito-ryu", but I believe Kondo's thinking is that only Menkyo Kaiden holders can "legitimately" call themselves Daito-ryu. And that only leaves the Takumakai, Kodokai, and mainline.

I make no judgment either, but
He's not the Soke, there is no Soke there can be no soke
These are not menkyos they are menkyo Kaiden. Those teachers could do what they want and grant the use of their students teaching as well. That would usually include anyone they say it does-not him. He is not and cannot be, part of their line or lineage.
So why would Kondo-just another Menkyo kaiden holders- opinion of the doing of other Menkyo Kaidens and what they have chosen to do with them and their student lineages, matter at all?
Other than lawyering up?
Just asking.

Dan

TimothyKleinert
7th August 2008, 23:28
Don't be disingenuous Dan. You keep questioning Tokimune's authority to grant menkyo. Here are a couple easy quotes:



Now, further still confusing is that Horikawa's Menkyo is in Takeda Sokaku's Daito ryu Aikijujutsu. What is Tokimune's authority to grant a menkyo in his father art?

Again, I am just questioning or asking about Tokimune's ability to award a Menkyo in his fathers art to Kondo, in the first place.
His creds were glossed over or assumed...

Kodo
I think we agree on that being from Sokaku. It wasn't my point though.
The fun and curious part was whether or not Tokimune could have given it?

In my earlier post I posted evidence that Tokimune was signing menkyo alongside Sokaku. If Sokaku thought Tokimune was qualified to sign Takuma's Menkyo Kaiden, doesn't that show Tokimune's organizational authoriy?

Dan Harden
7th August 2008, 23:55
"disingenuous" "Exaggerating" whatever Tim.
I am asking questions-most of which I have the answers to
already for several reasons. The questions are valid none-the-less.



If Sokaku thought Tokimune was qualified to sign Takuma's Menkyo Kaiden, doesn't that show Tokimune's organizational authoriy?
As what?

Dan

wagnerphysed
7th August 2008, 23:57
First of all, Chris, its not too much wine. The key board on this computer has tiny keys and its difficult to type without striking two keys at once. Also, there is noe spill chech!

Dan, if you believe you have the facts correct, then no one will be able o convince you otherwise. So, then what follows is clearly not for nor directed at you. No need to read any farther then...right?

The titles that Takeda Sokaku Sensei, Takeda Tokimune Sensei, and now Kondo Sensei use(d) are Shomucho(sic?) and Shibucho for the art of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. It is true that Takeda Tokimune developed Aikibudo and was the Soke (founder) of the system. The title of Soke Dairi then would mean the representative of the founder of Aikibudo; I believe (I may be incorrect) that Kondo Sensei held a 7th Dan in this system. Also, I believe that the Seshinkai (sic?) all held rank in only Aikibudo. However, true to the interview that Dan references (but uses in a factually twisted manner = misrepresenting facts) is that Takeda Tokimune issued menjo in Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu to one person, outside of Kodo Horikowa, and that person was Kondo Sensei. We are talking about two different arts here, it's not that complicated!

On to Dan's interpretation of a translated speach made by Kondo Sensei in 1997(is the date correct here?). Kondo Sensei most likely would have clarified that he was not Soke Dairi of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu as there is no Soke of this art and therefore there can be no representative of a Soke when one does not exist. Would a statement like this preclude Kondo Sensei from holding any license in Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu? Clearly not. I don't think Tim was exagerating his point at all. I think he is merely pointing out how badly the facts are being represented. How can this be when you were there? Maybe Japanese is a very difficult language and culture to understand, especially for people from a very different culture and a very different language system based on very different contexts? Just maybe, Dan, you misunderstood a statements meaning? Maybe you read it a little too concretely?


You might want to Check with him,Chris and Brian. Because he denied what you are saying-the ability to inherit- in front about 200 people when he first came to America it in person. He denies it to Stan, he denied it in print. If he is he now claiming title to Sokaku Takeda’s art -Daito ryu Aikijujutsu and Tokimunes Daito ryu Aikibudo as well that would be interesting to hear.


Dan, I have no reason to ask Kondo Sensei this question because he has already told me (us) the answer. That is one of the great things about a teacher. If you study under them, you can ask them questions and clarify things that are confusing. As a student you get one of two things. Usually the one is an answer. Sometimes, usually on the technical questions you get the train and try. Yes, I understand why you don't do this. Teachers will not give you the straight answers and it takes a long time to win their confidence to get them to answer you straight. After giving a significant effort and making some contribution to the ryu (not talking about cash), as in most relationships the world over, trust can be established. Between trust and ability, a teacher will give you what they believe you can be trusted with and what they believe you can handle. Isn't this what most relationships boil down to? Are you trustworthy? Can you understand/ are you ready for the next piece? This is a two way street. Expecting anyone to just give you the goods because you hold yourself in high esteem is called entitlement.

As far as any factual information concerning Daito-ryu is concerned, personaly (IMHO) I would cross reference anything stated on this forum and in particular this thread with as many factual references as can be obtained. Things have a way of geting a bit sideways here. This includes my posts.

I've pretty much had my fill of this stuff. There are only so many ways to say something before it all becomes extremely redundant and we have done this all before with the Seishinkai group which is now defunct. It should also be pointed out that those at the top had an angle, something to gain through their use of misinformation. Is something being gained here and now?

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 02:03
The titles that Takeda Sokaku Sensei, Takeda Tokimune Sensei, and now Kondo Sensei use(d) are Shomucho(sic?) and Shibucho for the art of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. It is true that Takeda Tokimune developed Aikibudo and was the Soke (founder) of the system. The title of Soke Dairi then would mean the representative of the founder of the Aikibudo; I believe (I may be incorrect) that Kondo Sensei held a 7th Dan in this system. Also, I believe that the Seshinkai (sic?) all held rank in only Aikibudo. However, true to the interview that Dan references (but uses in a factually twisted manner = misrepresenting facts) is that Takeda Tokimune issued menjo in Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu to one person, outside of Kodo Horikowa, and that person was Kondo Sensei. We are talking about two different arts here, it's not that complicated!

I think you are being defensive and losing your ability to read and comprehend (BTW he was a 7th dan). I wrote"

He then handed out a Soke Dairi in it to Kondo further memorializing it. Is Kondo then restricted to just that branch? The later was a question not a statement
Further on I write and stipulate exactly what you stated above, that we are talking about two arts. But I went into conditions that covered both-you, Brian, haven't covered the options. The answers of which can be positive.


Speaking of Aikibudo and Aikijujutu. Which art did Kondo train in? Tokimune never claimed to teach aikijujutsu. In fact he publicly denied it.
So what's up with that?
a) Is Kondo’s authority, after all, in Tokimunes art-which he trained in? Does that give him authority to address the Menkyos in Sokakus art.
b) Or if his menkyo is in Sokaku's art, and Tokimune did not teach it-how did that happen. And if THAT were the case. Does that give him authority to address anyone teaching or wanting to teach Aikibudo?
c) Or did Tokimune grant him title and rank in both arts- without training in both arts.
d) Did he have the authority to do so. Even if he could (which we still don't know)- and gave him authority in both, it kind of makes the whole thing sound strange in a way doesn't it?
So which is it a menkyo in?
Tokimune’s Aikibudo?
Sokaku’s Aikijujutsu?
Or both. Are there dual Menkyo’s as yet undisclosed?
And what DID he train in to get both? What scrolls and syllabus were used?
And all that said...isn't he just another menkyo holder with no claims to the art itself?

As is fairly oovious in the quote above, I covered
a) The condition of him being awared menkyo in Aikaibudo
b) The condition of himbeing awarded the menkyo in Aikijujutsu
c) The condition of him being awarded menkyo in both


On to Dan's interpretation of a translated speach made by Kondo Sensei in 1997(is the date correct here?). Kondo Sensei most likely would have clarified that he was not Soke Dairi of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu as there is no Soke of this art and therefore there can be no representative of a Soke when one does not exist. Would a statement like this preclude Kondo Sensei from holding any license in Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu? Clearly not. I don't think Tim was exagerating his point at all. I think he is merely pointing out how badly the facts are being represented. How can this be when you were there?

No it does not preclude him being a Menkyo Kaiden in AIkijujutsu. Which I never said. What I stated was very simple Brian. Try to follow along.

I stated, here and on AJ this week that Kondo stipulated that he could not be the soke. And Stan agreed.
Why did I ask again Brian _______________________?
Because he is acting in a manner that is more consistent with those of a soke, not a fellow Menkyo holder.
Try to follow along again.
A fellow Menkyo Kaiden holder (a newer one at that) does not typcially tell older Menkyo Kaiden holders what they can do with their own art. It's not his to discuss. Soke, soke rep, menkyo Kaiden holder or Business man with a Lawyer. Menkyo Kaiden are not menkyos. They are independant and can do what they wish...down to their own students.
Got it?


Maybe Japanese is a very difficult language and culure to understand, especially for people from a very different culture and a very different language system based on very different contexts? Just maybe, Dan, you misunderstood a statements meaning? Maybe you read it a little too concretely?

Well, one of us is having trouble with simple statements. and questions. English to English


I've pretty much had my fill of this stuff. There are only so many ways to say something before it all becomes extremely redundant and we have done this all before with the Seishinkai group which is now defunct. It should also be pointed out that those at the top had an angle, something to gain through their use of misinformation. Is something being gained here and now?
No, you haven't done this before, because these questions were not raised. I have no trouble whatsoever with what he has said in the past. Not one. Nor did I need to hear the recent apologies. I am far more concerned particualty with some choices facing me, of what he plans to do in the future. What he is doing -right now-are different issues, that can have a pretty serious ramifications or a good ending, depending what he does.
Again, you only "read" negative. I didn't respsond to the 'ask your teacher" sarcasm as your fellow students are now stating it is Kondos art right here in this thread....uhm...good luck with that.
Dan

Dustinacuff
8th August 2008, 03:01
Wow, step away for a couple months to find that it has evolved again.

We have gone from questioning the legitimacy of DRs teaching methods and the uniqueness of DR aiki to expounding on these methods of using non-DR paths to aquire DR aiki to why you can't get DR aiki from DR instruction and kata to the legitimacy of Sokaku's credentials as Soke or not and the legitimacy in rank of Tokimune, Kodo, Kondo, and others and now we are debating the legitimacy of Tokimune to issue MK to Kodo - by proxy of Sokaku - and Kondo.

Dan, I have to ask, why do you care so much about this? You deny being an active practitioner of DR and claim that all your training is your own. Why do you care so much about something you actively deny being a part of? How many hours do you have on the mat under a(n) legitimate DR instructor? Which ones? Why did you stop? Have you gone back to your original group to compare yourself to your peers from the past to see how you measure up? You claim you have gotten the internal skills that everyone raves about, how comfortable would you be saying how you measure up to your old sensei?

I've been lurking and while I won't question what you can or cannot actually do, what you have or haven't learned, or what the people who have trained with you say, I would at least like to know what your actual level of exposure to the art was and which branches/instructors you were exposed to.

DDATFUS
8th August 2008, 04:01
Chris you are once again calling Kondo the successor and that “it is his art.” You also ask who is "the heir?"
There is no Soke involved here, there is no heir, it is not Kondo's art to have. He is attempting to do-through trademark-what he could never pull off as a budo man.


Dan, I think that you might be mis-interpreting what Chris said. If you'll recall, you had originally said something about Kondo Sensei's line not teaching/practicing Takeda Sokaku's art. Chris responded by pointing out that of course Kondo Sensei wasn't teaching Takeda Sokaku's art. He's teaching his own art, just as Sagawa, Tokimune, and all of Takeda Sokaku's other students did-- if you want to be very technical, the only person teaching Takeda Sokaku's art was Takeda Sokaku. I think that the Japanese term for personal style is ganju; look at a video of any koryu style a generation ago, and compare it to the students of that teacher today. Each student who passes through shu and ha and eventually achieves ri will be different from his teachers. He will have, in a sense, his own art-- not exactly his teacher's, not exactly his teacher's teacher's art, but his.

I believe that this is what Chris meant when he said that the art taught is Kondo Sensei's. If you are reading his words to say that Kondo Sensei has exclusive control over all of Daito Ryu and that the Kodokai and other such groups are by extension illegitimate, then I think you are reading meanings into Chris's words that he never intended. I could be wrong, of course; when I talk with him in an hour or so I'll double-check.

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 04:45
Dan, I think that you might be mis-interpreting what Chris said.

Hi John
I don't. I reread it again and again. But Chris can clarify.
To be clear, yet again, I don’t think Chris and Brian are hearing the typical transmission ideas I am addressing. I think they are "hearing" critisisms. I am avoiding their use of sarcasm about training and “learning” under a teacher. Case in point is some of the things that have been stated here by Kondo’s own students ‘learning” from him.
I think Chris was pretty clear both in context and in intent.

Sokaku sensei has been dead since 1943, and it's no longer Tokimune sensei's art because he died 50 years after that. It is now Kondo sensei's art.
And then again –in context - here

Now, who is the rightful heir to Daito-ryu? Tokimune? Sagawa? Ueshiba? Hisa? Horikawa? My vote is on Tokimune.
This was meant to address transmission of course but it confuses two separate issues. Transmission through inheritence, transmission through the awarding of rank up to the complete art.

There is no “heir to the art” without a soke. and in all those teachers there is no "best bet" for Chris on who will be it. An heir is for a soke. the others are Menkyo Kaidens (and or the highest version until Takeda decided to invent the Menkyo Kaiden. Thus they already -HAVE- the art. Done...ba bye now. Live long and prosper.
Where Chris is confused in mentioning Sagawa, Uehshiba, Hisa and Horikawa in a discussion of "heirs" is that his teacher obviously didn't explain the differences of hereditary heirs and Menkyo Kaidens. Traditionally, and most typically the Menkyo Kaiden is the finish. It is not just a Menkyo. It means you have the whole art, to do with as you see fit. Right down to your students, students.

Soke's pass on to family-usually but not always- and it is a different thing entirely. Sometimes it can be passed trusting that the younger man will get trained by sniors in the dojo. Other times it is even passed and "held" as an executive postion by a son who doesn't even train. Regardless the new Soke would not go tell a previous Menkyo Kaden holder, or his students, or their students what to do with their art. Unless they wanted to try and back it up with a blade in their hands. Why? Its none of their business.
It’s why I am having two different discussions regarding Kondo that are not negative as much as confusing because they are as yet not definitive.
Next Kondos other student -the Itallian fellow- asked his teacher. He came on to AJ to tell us Kondo Stated "it’s okay for the Kodokai and the Takumakai to use the name, but no one else."

That is why I asked Stan
‘Didn't Kondo say he was NOT...the soke?” and could never be?

I think the two of them are defensive, completely misreading the intent of the posts, are not understanding both the material and the nature of some of the questions, all while throwing out smart ass remarks. Perhaps this is due to years of them hearing all the crap given Kondo. Brian himself throws it all together “ I’ve heard all this stuff before”
Well I was reading, dealing, hearing all kinds of insider stuff looong before he came along. Since I was the only one from a branch of Daito ryu to meet his teacher, in support of him, when he arroved in the states- pissing off my own teacher, not too mention the battles on AJ in the early years-I find him lumping me in with the former naysayers to be both humorous, and quite sad.
Its just people these days.

Anyway, I think Kondo can accomplish his goal, and I hope he does. This may just not be the wisest, or even kindest way to go about it. The art is big enough and spread out to prove a daunting task.
No matter what, in the end, the Menkyo Kaidens and the loyalty they engender per style -passed down now to hundreds, must be honored. To not do so may put his entire plan at risk if not legally, at least morally.

Cheers
Dan

DDATFUS
8th August 2008, 04:53
Hi John
I don't I reread it again and again.

Hi Dan,
well, maybe you're right-- like I said, I'll ask Chris when I see him. But I still think that you might want to start reading things a bit more closely; for instance, I think you just called me John ;)

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 05:02
Hah
I have a friend named John Sims:(
Sorry about that.
I'm tired

Mark Murray
8th August 2008, 13:04
Dan,

Moderator hat on -- watch your language in the posts.

Mark

Mark Murray
8th August 2008, 13:47
Wow, step away for a couple months to find that it has evolved again.

We have gone from questioning the legitimacy of DRs teaching methods and the uniqueness of DR aiki to expounding on these methods of using non-DR paths to aquire DR aiki to why you can't get DR aiki from DR instruction and kata to the legitimacy of Sokaku's credentials as Soke or not and the legitimacy in rank of Tokimune, Kodo, Kondo, and others and now we are debating the legitimacy of Tokimune to issue MK to Kodo - by proxy of Sokaku - and Kondo.


Yes, I'd have to agree. It's spun off so many off-topic threads, that I wonder why it's all been kept here in the Body Conditioning thread. Nathan, thoughts?



Dan, I have to ask, why do you care so much about this? You deny being an active practitioner of DR and claim that all your training is your own. Why do you care so much about something you actively deny being a part of? How many hours do you have on the mat under a(n) legitimate DR instructor? Which ones? Why did you stop? Have you gone back to your original group to compare yourself to your peers from the past to see how you measure up? You claim you have gotten the internal skills that everyone raves about, how comfortable would you be saying how you measure up to your old sensei?

I've been lurking and while I won't question what you can or cannot actually do, what you have or haven't learned, or what the people who have trained with you say, I would at least like to know what your actual level of exposure to the art was and which branches/instructors you were exposed to.

That's kind of weird to ask, don't you think? I have yet to see other people post those same kind of answers. Particularly when most view Daito ryu as a koryu. Why would anyone in a koryu start asking those kinds of questions of another person?

Not trying to be rude here, since I don't study a koryu. But, one thing that I've noticed is that people in a koryu don't ask those questions of other people. And people not in a koryu, when asking those kinds of questions, usually either get silence or answered that they aren't the proper questions to ask. :)

But, of course, if they're fair questions, then I don't really see any reason why everyone here can't answer them, too. Chris C., Brian, Nathan, Timothy, you, me, etc. So, who wants to start first? I've already given mine. :)

Mark

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 21:27
Hi Mark
I had to look back to see that you were talking about. It was late, sorry about that.

Dustin
I won’t directly answer your questions, but here are some outlines. From TKD, wrestling, judo and a few Indonesian arts I went on; to Aikido and to two DR teachers in two different styles of Daito ryu, and three Koryu. I don't talk about it. I have many good things to say and some negative. I left DR years ago for personal reasons. What I have learned, and developed speaks for itself. My understanding is in my own hands.
While some cannot see it, and others try to understand but struggle with me, I remain a staunch friend and advocate of Daito ryu in places they themselves either cannot, will not (because they don't care), or are unable to go due to respectively; propriety, lack of interest, or a lack of real ability to do what I do at the level I do it at. I have stood in many places, with teachers from Judo, Aikido, Koryu, Grand masters of the ICMA, as well as MMA and BJJ, with well known men right here on E-budo who privately held a very low opinion of Daito Ryu and it’s “aiki”-as internal- mostly from dealing with its adepts and teachers. I have successfully changed their minds, every time. There is no man that has met and trained with me that would dare to say a word about the effectiveness of Daito Ryu “Aiki” on any board, in person, or more importantly behind closed doors.
That is a well marked and very different opinion from the mid nineties when certain guys felt certain very famous teachers-up close and personal and publicly expressed their findings and doubts on the boards and very vocally talked about DR aiki right here on Ebudo in its "aiki wars" threads. It is rather interesting and someone ironic to take note of who those well known men were then, and then to see and know how that view has changed now.
I believe that Daito ryu aiki is among the finest skills in the world. I will not speak to the issue of how I "stack up" to former teachers. There are people who felt the top teachers in the world, as well as the lessor ones on a regular basis and then trained with me who can address that quite vocally in private.
Many times DR's finest teachers, are restricted to representing the art, and have not been able to “speak the language” or go to places needed to make the inroads across the board. There is one other guy out there, who unlike me, has remained in the art and is a teacher, but is going places and also playing with people in a free form environment. He is willing to test his stuff-on the spot, without kata. I find him intriguing as well, and will meeting him soon.
Now, were I you, I would not believe a single word stated above. Ask around behind the scenes, that’s what good budo men do. From what I have seen you will encounter two different mindsets. One from those who have trained with me-and the others. Again, I remain a staunch supporter for the art, and point to certain of its schools almost on a weekly basis. I do think it could do better in preserving its rather colorful history by doing what it’s founder did (Yes I believe Takeda was its founder), that is to go out there and deliver under serious pressure, outside your dojo and outside of kata. For some guys, budo is an intellectually stimulating hobby and past time. They collect arts and waza like stand alone bodies of knowledge in a closet. You can spot then a mile off. They will never be able to stand next to the hard men of Budo-guys who put it out there and test themselves. It’s a different language. And while aiki can exist in both mind frames it will only “shine” like the finest mirror, under one set of circumstances-being polished under pressure. And it doesn’t take twenty years of deep initiation under a teacher to get it. I still believe most men in it -don’t get it-and probably never will. If you see a bunch of guys doing stiff arm extended frame jujutsu waza, keep walking. The power of Daito ryu, as taught by Takeda Sokaku, is in it’s aiki, not in its jujutsu. And it’s Aiki will work in anything, anywhere.
Regards
Dan

Aikilove
8th August 2008, 21:40
Hey Dan, why are you consistantly avoiding some things stated?

It has been stated many a times that Takeda Sokaku was not soke, that Tokimune was not soke and that Kondo is not soke. Daito ryu aikijujutsu simply didn't use that title (at least from Sokaku and forward). Did that mean that there was no head?
No!

The head was Sokaku (shomucho)
The head was Tokimune (shomucho)
The head is Kondo (shomucho).

Yes there were more with Menkyo Kaiden. So what! There was still only one shomucho at the time who would license these Menkyo Kaidan (if you exclude the fact that Sagawa was for a short while, when it was unclear if Tokimune would survive the war). It seems that it was clear to the people involved (Sagawa, Kodo etc.) who the head was. Why would Kodo go to Tokimune to verify his Kaidan? Why would Sagawa return the head-ship to Tokimune?

Kondo is not Soke. He is Shomucho of Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu. No one else is. What's unclear about that?

/J

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 21:50
Jakob
Avoid them?
I brought them up and defined the difference that-that office is different from a soke.
Whats unclear about that?

Care to address certain norms in Koryu of Menkyo Kaidens not telling other Menkyo Kaidens what they and their students can do with their art? Its no big thing, and although there have been bumps here and there its just not the normal thing to do.

Why do you keep avoiding that question?
Cheers
Dan

Dustinacuff
8th August 2008, 21:56
Mark, point taken, but I think Dan took my questions more in the intent they were given.

It is my belief that if one is to step forward as an authroity figure, in any realm, credentials need to be given. I have never seen a formal answer from Dan about his qualifications. Most of what I have seen - on this forum, the only one I regularly follow - has been him talking as an authority figure and in some cases blantly saying that one person or another has no idea what they are talking about. I simply wanted an explination to substantiate his level of authority in a public forum as this is where he is acting as one. Without the context Dan just provided some of his posts were begining to resemble a personal vendetta against DR for unknown reasons.

Dan,
Thank you for responding. My questions in no way were intended as a personal attack. It was important for me to put your motives and background in context. If it seemed in any way disrespectful, you have my apologies. I will take your advice, ask around, and meet other teachers and students.

I have just read most of the past 37 pages to put everything in context and I find that I have somehow managed to end up agreeing with you and Nathan simultaneously.

Thank you,

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 22:23
Dustin
Nathan and I would probably agree on most things regarding budo that I have seen. Sometimes we don't.

I do feel that there are people in budo who just can't deliver. Their length of study / in proportion to demonstrable skills - can prove to be almost meaningless. Some get it, some don't. Its just the way of it. On the whole you are not going to find me speaking negatively about Daito ryu aiki. I think it is one of the finest skills in the world of Marti arts. Chinese or Japanese.
I regularly practice with students of both from all over.
Cheers
Dan

Aikilove
8th August 2008, 22:59
Dan, since you so classicaly avoided the Q's by asking one yourself, let me do the same. In the most simple terms.

Do You Dan not agree with that Kondo is the legitimate acting head of (Shomucho) of mainline Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu?

If not, why not?

And since you asked. What Menkyo Kaiden in Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu have been

telling other Menkyo Kaidens what they and their students can do with their art??

/J

DDATFUS
8th August 2008, 23:14
Hah
I have a friend named John Sims:(
Sorry about that.
I'm tired

No worries.

However, after discussing this thread with Chris Convington face-to-face, I can confirm that I was correct in my interpretation of what he was saying.

Just to recap, in one of your posts, you pointed out, and I quote:
"Your lines history [Kondo Sensei's line] states openly that is not Sokaku's art. Only that it descended from it."

Chris responded by basically saying that this should only be taken to mean that Kondo Sensei is not Takeda Sokaku, and cannot teach Takeda Sokaku's art. Neither could Sagawa, or Kodo Horikawa, or Takeda Tokimune-- each man taught his own art. The art we study is Kondo Sensei's, and it is descended from Takeda Sokaku's by way of Takeda Tokimune's. That was all that Chris was trying to explain; he was not asserting that Daito Ryu is the exclusive property of Kondo Sensei or that Kondo Sensei has any right to control other menkyo kaiden from other lines. We don't claim that. Period.

Now, Dan, you've brought up the issue of Kondo Sensei's court battles regarding the licensing of the Daito Ryu name. As I understand it, that was more in response to people who had no claim to Daito Ryu-- people who not only were not menkyo kaiden, but had never even really trained in the art-- suddenly claiming to be soke and Takeda Tokimune's heirs. This was to prevent them from claiming legal rights to the name and excluding those who did have a real right.

Mark Murray
8th August 2008, 23:31
No worries.

However, after discussing this thread with Chris Convington face-to-face, I can confirm that I was correct in my interpretation of what he was saying.

Just to recap, in one of your posts, you pointed out, and I quote:
"Your lines history [Kondo Sensei's line] states openly that is not Sokaku's art. Only that it descended from it."

Chris responded by basically saying that this should only be taken to mean that Kondo Sensei is not Takeda Sokaku, and cannot teach Takeda Sokaku's art. Neither could Sagawa, or Kodo Horikawa, or Takeda Tokimune-- each man taught his own art. The art we study is Kondo Sensei's, and it is descended from Takeda Sokaku's by way of Takeda Tokimune's. That was all that Chris was trying to explain; he was not asserting that Daito Ryu is the exclusive property of Kondo Sensei or that Kondo Sensei has any right to control other menkyo kaiden from other lines. We don't claim that. Period.


Well, that's kind of weird. Over on Aikido Journal, this was posted:


This should foster Daito-ryu's unity around the only legitimate individual that has legitimacy to do so: Katsuyuki Kondo Sensee. All other ryu-ha are illegitimate once the evidence surfaces as Daito-ryu is NOT as Karate, Aikido, etc i.e. a public art but a family transmitted art.

This question was asked:


All other ryu-ha are illegitimate? Isn't that a bit strong? Are you including the Takumakai, Roppokai, Kodokai, Sagawa dojo and Hakuhokai in this?


And the answer was:


The other night I asked the same question to Kondo Sensei, since he is the LEGAL OWNER of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, as granted by the Japanese Government... he said the Takumakai and the Kodokai are okay, everything else no.


So, is there some miscommunication going on somewhere? Because you're clarifying things one way and over on Aikido Journal something completely different is being clarified. What gives?



Now, Dan, you've brought up the issue of Kondo Sensei's court battles regarding the licensing of the Daito Ryu name. As I understand it, that was more in response to people who had no claim to Daito Ryu-- people who not only were not menkyo kaiden, but had never even really trained in the art-- suddenly claiming to be soke and Takeda Tokimune's heirs. This was to prevent them from claiming legal rights to the name and excluding those who did have a real right.

Huh. Again, really weird. I have seen, many times, where koryu were sprouted without legal basis, but I have yet (except here) to see where any of the koryu responded with legal action. Now, granted, I don't study a koryu, but if I take into account all the actions I've seen other koryu take, well, Kondo's actions with the legal system seems really weird. Like it actually isn't a koryu but a gendai fighting for a trademark or something. Again, I don't study a koryu, so this is all from an outsider's perspective. YMMV.

Mark

Dan Harden
8th August 2008, 23:41
Dan, since you so classicaly avoided the Q's by asking one yourself, let me do the same. In the most simple terms.

Do You Dan not agree with that Kondo is the legitimate acting head of (Shomucho) of mainline Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu?

If not, why not?

Hey buddy. I don't know you from a hole in the wall. . If you don't agree just ask me and don't tell me what I am or am not doing. I'm not interested in playing "cute" with you. If you have something to ask, ask me and I'll try to answer or not. We can agree or disagree straight up. Telling me I am being cute and avioding answering you assumes I'm a coward, or you're somebody important enough that I won't answer directly. Knock it off.
While we're at it, what I "think" and what you "think" doesn't matter one bit.
I'm asking questions so folks can get some definitive answers about what WhatKondo is stating that Tokimune told him he was. That's what I am after. Then we can go from there.

Whats interesting is how everyone keeps 'phrasing things. Most probably because thay are as unsure as I am about just who he is representing
Why did you differeniate between "mainline" Daito ryu and others?

What's preventing you from saying.
Kondo is the legitimate acting head of (Shomucho) of ALL of Daito Ryu...period.
Why?
If not why not?

If you knock of your tone and just ask I'll try to answer you, about how It appears to me. It appears that Tokimune -certainly and for sure-meants him to be the director until someone else was found.

the someone else "terminology" becomes important.
a)If he asked him be the director until the next soke appeared, and that is in writing- then it would appear he meant him to be the director of Aikibudo.
b) If he asked him to be the director until the next heir was found, then that gets fuzzy and wierd in the classical sense

And than there is the issue of the Menkyo Kaiden. Since we now now its in Aikijujutsu-his Dads art (Thanks Nathan) Where and when did his training in that art happen when he was training in Aikibudo?
was it a figurative Menkyo kaiden?
Yur last question was in regards to the use of the Daito ryu name. Any and all Menkyo Kaiden or its equal and there lineages are there own business. Right down to who teaches, where, and when. Its none of Kondos, or any ones elses business.'It is also why some arts donlt grant Mankyo Kaidens. They grant menkyo's only. That way you are subjet to Hamon at any time and can be written off.
Even then some continue to teach. At that point the head guy either ignores them, or has the balls to go do something about it face to face. But everyone in the community more or less knowns he's hamon. Not beause it need be said. After your years of service and friendship, someone will ask the head guy about you and he will say "Who? I don't know anyone by that name. He may have trained with me for four hours once";) you're written off.
If the Mankyo Kaiden is Issued, and there are many examples of Westerners in the U.S. who have these, they may do with the art, and their teaching as thay see fit. Another Menkyo Kaiden may try to tell them what to do, but it isnlt going to very far. Also, were a new kid to rise to the head of the art and be soke in Japan and tell all the prevous Menkyo Kaidens they canlt use the name, he would be in for some interesting times. Were he to lawyer up, he would most likely be subject to derision and scorn.
This came up because of this exchange on AJ

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

All other ryu-ha are illegitimate? Isn't that a bit strong? Are you including the Takumakai, Roppokai, Kodokai, Sagawa dojo and Hakuhokai in this?

*********************
Judasith says

Joined: 07 Jun 2001
Posts: 124
Location: Milan, Italy
Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:44 pm

The other night I asked the same question to Kondo Sensei, since he is the LEGAL OWNER of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, as granted by the Japanese Government... he (Kondo) said "the Takumakai and the Kodokai are okay, everything else no.

I was stunned. I am hoping it is as Dave thinks. That Kondo would NEVER think to deny Kimura or Okomoto or ANY of their students "rights" be either trademark or lineage.
Contrary to what some think here, as I have said, over and over. I am hoping for the best.

Cheers
Dan

P.S. Dave I am editing on the fly since you wrote when I was writing. Thanks for asking Chris

Aikilove
9th August 2008, 00:55
Dan, Tone it down a notch will ya! Where the h*ll did I call you "cute"?!? And why do you find it ok to put words in my mouth?

If not, why not?

Hey buddy. I don't know you from a hole in the wall. . If you don't agree just ask me and don't tell me what I am or am not doing. I'm not interested in playing "cute" with you. If you have something to ask, ask me and I'll try to answer or not. We can agree or disagree straight up. Telling me I am being cute and avioding answering you assumes I'm a coward, or you're somebody important enough that I won't answer directly. Knock it off. I did ask you a question! Straight out! No nonsence. It went like this:

Do You Dan not agree with that Kondo is the legitimate acting head of (Shomucho) of mainline Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu? And after some rude remarks you actually did answer what you thought:
It appears that Tokimune -certainly and for sure-meants him to be the director until someone else was found. Now that is established!


Why did you differeniate between "mainline" Daito ryu and others? Because within koryu systems it is a common usage implying the direct heritage of the school from one head (soke or acting director etc.). Especially since it was not that uncommon for someone recieving menkyo kaiden (or its equivalent) to separate and teach in his or her name. What usually (but not always) happen then is the addition of "Menkyo Kaiden Reciever" + ha (or den) + school name or a completely different name all together to separate it from the "Mainline".
Because being bestowed Menkyo Kaiden does not necessary imply anything but a complete transmission. Sokaku Takeda might have bestowed people with Menkyo Kaiden. He was still the head (not soke!) of the school.

/J

Jim Sorrentino
9th August 2008, 03:23
Hello Dan,


There is one other guy out there, who unlike me, has remained in [Daito Ryu] and is a teacher, but is going places and also playing with people in a free form environment. He is willing to test his stuff-on the spot, without kata. I find him intriguing as well, and will meeting him soon.

Who would that be? It sounds like Howard Popkin, but I was under the impression that you had already met him. I would have asked you this by PM, but your inbox never seems to empty. If you would prefer to reply by PM, please do so. Thanks in advance!

Regards ---

Jim

Mark Murray
9th August 2008, 04:33
Jakob,

PLEASE watch the language and that includes stealth cursing.

Thank you,
Mark

Aikilove
9th August 2008, 11:30
Sorry about that Mark.

/J

Nathan Scott
9th August 2008, 20:58
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
9th August 2008, 21:26
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
9th August 2008, 21:39
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
9th August 2008, 22:05
[Post deleted by user]

DDATFUS
10th August 2008, 00:41
Hi Mark,
sorry for the delayed reply. I want to address a couple of the questions that you raised. First, let me block of the parts of your quote that I want to address:



This question was asked:

All other ryu-ha are illegitimate? Isn't that a bit strong? Are you including the Takumakai, Roppokai, Kodokai, Sagawa dojo and Hakuhokai in this?

And the answer was:
The other night I asked the same question to Kondo Sensei, since he is the LEGAL OWNER of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, as granted by the Japanese Government... he said the Takumakai and the Kodokai are okay, everything else no.


Now, I haven't been following the conversation over at aikidojournal lately-- things have been a bit busy. However, I am assuming that these are statements made by Giacomo and can make some guesses as to the general context of the conversation.



So, is there some miscommunication going on somewhere? Because you're clarifying things one way and over on Aikido Journal something completely different is being clarified. What gives?



All right, let me put in some disclaimers: First off, while I am a member of Kondo Sensei's organization, I am not a spokesperson. Nor have I claimed to be in this thread-- the only thing that I was originally trying to clarify were some things said by Chris Covington, my senpai. Originally, Dan had miscontrued a statement that I think originated on Kondo Sensei's website, and Chris tried to explain the actual meaning of the statement. However, Dan misunderstood Chris as well (I'm not trying to knock on Dan; some of this stuff is a bit convoluted). I knew what Chris was trying to say, and tried to clarify things. So I don't speak for Kondo Sensei, and the views of this program do not necessarily reflect the views of this station.

With that said, I think that it is very important to keep the origin of the quotes that you picked out on aikidojournal in mind. Just from the quotes that you gave me, I interpret what is being said in a totally different way from how you seem to be interpreting it-- in other words, I don't see that the two points of view necessarily contradict. However, I think that you are again dealing with statements that are being filtered through other people-- not necessarily official spokesmen of the school-- and to actually know what Kondo Sensei is saying, you should probably go to the source.




Huh. Again, really weird. I have seen, many times, where koryu were sprouted without legal basis, but I have yet (except here) to see where any of the koryu responded with legal action. Now, granted, I don't study a koryu, but if I take into account all the actions I've seen other koryu take, well, Kondo's actions with the legal system seems really weird. Like it actually isn't a koryu but a gendai fighting for a trademark or something. Again, I don't study a koryu, so this is all from an outsider's perspective. YMMV.

Mark

This is something that I feel I really need to address. Mark, do you recall a thread we had over in the sword arts section maybe a year or so ago, when a Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu instructor down in South America-- maybe Brazil?-- trademarked the name of MJER with the local courts and then sued other legitimate MJER instructors who were using that name? One American instructor found himself in a pretty difficult situation thanks to that little trick. At least partly as a result of that, some people have wised up and trademarked their own school names before some charlatan can beat them to the punch. Look at what Brian Stokes has down for Suio Ryu as an example.

When people do that, it is purely a matter of self-defense. How would you feel if some jerk trademarked the name of some arts that you have been studying for years-- arts that existed for centuries before either of you were born-- and then tried to sue you for using the name? It might not affect you personally, but what if you plan to write a book on the art you study? Let's say that you are a legitimate and recognized successor to a particular art. Let's say, hypothetically, that this art is named Daito Ryu. Now let's say that the son-in-law of your late teacher declares himself the new head of the family-- a dubious claim-- and the legitimate head of the school, despite the fact that he has
1) never trained in it and
2) was not recognized by the previous headmaster, who actually recognized you as his successor.
What if this shady son-in-law trademarks the name of the school and sues you when you try to publish a book for your students in America? That might be a serious problem. Hmm... maybe, as the legitimate teacher, you ought to act first. If you, as a legitimate teacher, trademark the name and have yourself recognized by the courts, you'll be sure never to abuse that privilege-- you would never, say, sue another legitimate menkyo kaiden's line if they published a book. And now you can make sure that no one does the same to you.

Now, the question is, is this bad for budo? No, of course it isn't. Two centuries ago, if someone used the name of a sword school without permission, you would use a legal remedy to solve the problem. Now, in the 1800's a legal remedy might involve filing the paperwork to apply to have a duel with the person in question. Or, if you are an otome-ryu, maybe complaining to the local powers that be. The world has changed, and smart budo teachers change with it, at least to a certain extent. This means taking the steps they need to in order to protect their own schools.

Nathan Scott
10th August 2008, 01:19
[Post deleted by user]

DDATFUS
10th August 2008, 02:48
Hi Nathan,

thanks for telling me about the article-- I actually haven't read it before, and you're certainly right to suggest that I should probably be better aquainted with those facts.

Just to make something perfectly clear, I don't know a great deal about the legal issues surrounding the Daito Ryu name; I'm simply trying to address some of the ideas that have cropped up here. Some of Dan's posts seemed to imply that Kondo was trying to use the legal system as a way to gain power over the rest of Daito Ryu. As an occupational hazard, I'm used to thinking in terms of counterfactuals, and my previous post was meant along those lines.

The broad point is that in today's world, it shouldn't seem strange to us that a koryu instructor might have good reasons to become involved in legal maneuvers.

Dan Harden
10th August 2008, 04:35
Some of Dan's posts seemed to imply that Kondo was trying to use the legal system as a way to gain power over the rest of Daito Ryu.
I "implied" what ______________?
When asked directly-by a student in your organization the following exchange oocured



All other ryu-ha are illegitimate? Isn't that a bit strong? Are you including the Takumakai, Roppokai, Kodokai, Sagawa dojo and Hakuhokai in this?

******************************
Judasith replied (this week) "The other night I asked the same question to Kondo Sensei, since he is the LEGAL OWNER of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, as granted by the Japanese Government... he said the Takumakai and the Kodokai are okay, everything else no."
I implied what_____________-?????

Now he stated yet again views that corroborate the previous statement:

the Takumakai in Osaka and the Kodokai in Hokkaido; we have a good relationship. I do not recognize the other Daito-ryu organizations. I have a copyright and intellectual property rights to the ledgers, training videos, DVD's, books and the [art of] Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu under Japanese law.

Nothing need be implied. He was asked questions- his answers are explicit.


The broad point is that in today's world, it shouldn't seem strange to us that a koryu instructor might have good reasons to become involved in legal maneuvers.
His students (you guy's) had stated he only means to use the trademark to fend off the pretenders to Daito ryu. You didn't "imply it." You said it. Obviously there are mixed messages being sent -even to you.
He, on the other hand while explaining the reasons for the legal battle, then made it clear he is considered the LEGAL owner of Daito ryu (by the government of all things). I think it may prove interesting that he also stated the government recognized “his organization” It may be interesting to see just what that means. At any rate he offered that as a caveat to than stating just who he will recognize. No one, other than himself, the Kodokai, and the Takumakai.
Maybe his words mean something entirely different than how "they" sound as well.

Your comments on Koryu ring hollow to me, and I would suspect most others in Koryu as well.. It would -indeed- be embarrassing for a Koryu to let a court decide anything. It was done before and was treated with scorn. Then again, I do not believe Daito ryu is a Koryu anyway, it just –used- to act like one.
For –modern- martial arts business people, maybe it's a cool business move, I dunno. He did mention training videos, DVD's, books etc. Maybe he wants to market his property and make money. It workd in Korean arts.

On face value, his own words are going to prove rather interesting to his seniors in the art.
Cheers
Dan

Howard Popkin
10th August 2008, 06:00
Hello Dan,

Who would that be? It sounds like Howard Popkin, but I was under the impression that you had already met him. I would have asked you this by PM, but your inbox never seems to empty. If you would prefer to reply by PM, please do so. Thanks in advance!

Regards ---

Jim

Jim,

Nope, never met Dan in person, but we have spoken and we have many friends in common. I'm sure we will, its a matter of logistics.

I guess Roppokai doesn't matter anyway :) At least, that's what I read above.

FWIW I met Kondo Sensei in NJ last year. He was very nice to all who went to meet him.

Be well,

Howard Popkin

Nathan Scott
10th August 2008, 16:41
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
10th August 2008, 17:46
[Post deleted by user]

Kendoguy9
11th August 2008, 01:42
Dan,

I really don't have the time to reply to all of your numerous posts. I am really curious though why you have such a strong interest in this topic? You admit you have nothing to do with Daito-ryu, other than strip mining some of your "tanren exercises" out of the Kodokai (well you never admit that, but come on dude, we all know). In fact I thought the whole point of your Tanren/Dan Harden post was that titles and ranks don't mean anything unless someone can demonstrate the skills that you have. Since, the group you have experience with is the Kodokai, I don't see why you have so much concern over what Kondo sensei says, since he isn't talking about the Kodokai. Since you don't do Daito-ryu why are you so concerned? Next time I see sensei I will try to ask him for more information.

You clearly have an agenda with statements like, "Maybe he wants to market his property and make money. It workd in Korean arts?" and "Other than lawyering up?" and "He is attempting to do-through trademark-what he could never pull off as a budo man." It sounds like you mean to attack Kondo sensei with your implications. "I don't need or mean to 'imply' anything here. I am asking questions The answers are becoming explicit." You aren't simply asking questions, you are making implications with statements like these. So, what is your agenda?

Best regards,

Dan Harden
11th August 2008, 07:20
Dan,
I am really curious though why you have such a strong interest in this topic? ... Since, the group you have experience with is the Kodokai, I don't see why you have so much concern over what Kondo sensei says, since he isn't talking about the Kodokai. Since you don't do Daito-ryu why are you so concerned? Next time I see sensei I will try to ask him for more information.
You clearly have an agenda with statements like, "Maybe he wants to market his property and make money. It workd in Korean arts?" and "Other than lawyering up?" and "He is attempting to do-through trademark-what he could never pull off as a budo man." It sounds like you mean to attack Kondo sensei with your implications. "I don't need or mean to 'imply' anything here. I am asking questions The answers are becoming explicit." You aren't simply asking questions, you are making implications with statements like these. So, what is your agenda?

Best regards,
It seems you want Kondo and his students to be able to make any sort of statement he or they wish, and any negative response or reaction is then considered "an attack!"
The next defensive reaction is to attack or question the motives of the one asking questions. This is done corporately all the time. If you can't speak to the issue- attack the person. Typically this is best done by casting suspicions and suggesting they have an agenda. I’m really not concerned with your -off topic- personal opinions of me, Chris.
Now, If –you- don’t have an agenda? How about just taking a little of that time you just mentioned- and sticking to the questions- and answering them?

I am talking not only to you, but past you to others reading who are more neutral and may be reading Kondo’s comments at face value like I am. I think the agenda is starting to be laid out by Kondo himself. I am just asking what “it” is? I have no interest in attacking Kondo, just discussing the statements and potential actions. I am only concerned with what Kondo is thinking with these recent statements. It sounds different from his earlier stated goals. That’s why I asked Stan if they had changed. It appears to me that Stan is a bit surprised (confused) as well!
The implications of his statements are his own. They are implicit in suggesting an agenda of their own.
Case in point

Gavin Asks
All other ryu-ha are illegitimate? Isn't that a bit strong? Are you including the Takumakai, Roppokai, Kodokai, Sagawa dojo and Hakuhokai in this?
Judasith responds

The other night I asked the same question to Kondo Sensei, since he is the LEGAL OWNER of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu, as granted by the Japanese Government... he said the Takumakai and the Kodokai are okay, everything else no.


the Takumakai in Osaka and the Kodokai in Hokkaido; we have a good relationship. I do not recognize the other Daito-ryu organizations. I have a copyright and intellectual property rights to the ledgers, training videos, DVD's, books and the [art of] Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu under Japanese law.
Your answer_______________________

I'll keep repeating them until you care to answer all THEY IMPLY as to agenda and intent. Instead of attacking me for apparently having the audacity to question it, try answering.

It is disingenuous for you not to acknowledge these statements are bombshells, That they are explicit by intent and nature to cause a reaction. Therefore, it is either ignorant (perhaps innocent, perhaps purposefully) or arrogant to not “expect” a reaction. I don't know which it is with you. Any organization worth its salt would have planned for one. I don't find it organizationally credible to feign surprise at the response or to question those asking the questions.
Your answer_________________________________

Current students and lines
1. If it appears as it sounds. Students from all over can be challenged. After ten, twenty, or thirty years their training may be stamped as illegitimate by some lawyer guy with a cease and desist order in his hands. FWIW, this is what I meant by "Kondo doing with a lawyer what he could never do as a Budo guy." He would have to face a collection of diverse budo men who would never stand for someone having the audacity to show up and tell them they were not approved and their teachers, teachings were negated as being real ‘Daito ryu”. That was the more traditional manner in which it handled by Budo men.
Your answer_______________________

Tokimunes trademark and not Kondo’s
2. I asked about the trademark, as the first explanation seemed at least plausible, although protection against pretenders was something usually handled quietly among themselves. Now that we see it was Tokimune’s court battle and the “intent” was to make safe against family members and the Aikibudo groups- things seem even more bizzare. It seems outlandish to be seeing it possibly used for a big stick to wave in the faces of the Menkyo Kaidens lines. I would love to read Tokimune’s views on trying to control other Menkyo Kaiden’s lines forcibly (in his own words, not from Kondo). Since he himself asked Sagawa to take over in case something happened to him, would he feel comfortable being told that Kondo doesn’t approve of or recognize Sagawa’s school?? How odd.
Your answer_____________________________

3. The Korean versus Japanese Budo comment
Once again the commercialism was implicit in the statements made by Kondo with the mention of his "rights" to DVD's, and Tapes, books, and use of the name. It was an oddly motivated direction to take and seemed entirely in keeping with the fights and commercialism of the Korean arts rather than Japanese Budo, Never mind Koryu! Sorry, it’s the only thing it brings to mind.
Your answer_____________________
Rather than DVD's and books and tapes I was expecting to read far more of other things in the interview more in keeping with concerns I have heard from Koryu heads facing similar dilemmas. They stress very real concerns of a love of their art and wanting to keep authentic teaching and accurate transmission of it. But were Kondo's fears to be more in line with truth in transmission questions, then he doesn't have a leg to stand on does he?
The lines through the previous Menkyo Kaidens are all true and sealed- down through their lowest practitioners. It's absolutely none of his business. His opinions of what they do, may be expressed, but that’s all they are-his opinions.
Your answer____________________________
If Sokaku Takeda came back tomorrow he cannot “take back” the Menkyos. So now you have all of the ranked guys, as well as those who split off in an approved manner all covered under the Menkyo lines of transmission. This would by default then include just about everyone in Daito ryu. Again, oddly Tokimune seemed to always have positive things to say about other schools.

Sokaku, himself, least of all Tokimune and Kondo…cannot take back the Menkyo Kaidens he issued. Thus Kondo is trying to do with a trademark, what he could never pull off as a budo man.
Your answer__________________________
My questions are simple and direct responses to some pretty powerful statements outlining his agenda, and may lead to some rather strange answers. Did you really expect everyone to just rally round and agree, and ignore any controversial implications. Are you passing out the kool-aid, Jim?
I am hoping he is going to shy away from more of these statements, and leave -all- extent lines under Sokaku's Menkyo Kaidens alone. It is the only course humility and propriety would suggest.
Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
11th August 2008, 17:26
[Post deleted by user]

DDATFUS
11th August 2008, 18:47
I think the answer is obvious - world domination!

Shhhh!

Darn it, Nathan, now you've tipped them off! :mad:
Sigh. Well, too late to do anything about it now. We'll just have to bump up the timetable accordingly.


On another note, I assumed that the reason that Ueshiba wasn't credited with founding a legitimate line is simply because the line that he left behind doesn't really claim to be Daito Ryu in the first place. That logic wouldn't really apply to Sagawa's line, though, so I have no idea why they didn't make the list.

bwhite33
11th August 2008, 19:14
by saying if Sokaku Takeda showed up tomorrow he could take back anything he wanted, a zombie doing aiki, uggh! Now that's scary.

Dan Harden
11th August 2008, 19:59
by saying if Sokaku Takeda showed up tomorrow he could take back anything he wanted, a zombie doing aiki, uggh! Now that's scary.Actually my point was just the opposite. He couldn't. He could try. Nothing is absolute, but the idea of full transmission is obvious enough.
For Kondo to try and cirmumvent it, when Sokaku's wishes are so well known is going to prove to be embarrassing and sad. I don't expect it to go well. In the end, contrary to what many may think, his reputution is going to suffer if he tries what he is suggesting. He may lose his own credibiltiy in the effort, in that others may just not take him seriously anymore.
Again, the reason for the suits.
It is what it is.
Cheers
Dan

lucky1899
11th August 2008, 21:15
Since we're playing make-believe; I imagine if Sokaku came back to life, he'd be more angry than when he was alive and we'd all be in for some pain. I'd be first in line. :D


Yours in budo,

Andrew De Luna
Daito Ryu

TimothyKleinert
11th August 2008, 21:47
Thinking about Kondo's statement... I can't say what Kondo's thinking was, but I would think that the Roppokai and Hakuho-ryu would fall under the (recognized) jurisdiction of the Kodokai and Takumakai, respectively. If so, than I'm not sure if they were intended to be included in that statement.


The only thing I find interesting is the fact that lines that had earned the *equivalent* of MK at the time they were actively studying (Ueshiba and Sagawa) are not credited with founding legitimate lines. Perhaps it was Sokaku's intention by creating the Menkyo Kaiden level for the older students to continue their training and maintain the relationship with Sokaku (although issuing MK would have "graduated" them from being under his control anyway)?

Can we really say that Ueshiba and Sagawa earned the "equivalent of [Menkyo Kaiden] at the time"? Has that really been established? Even though the Kyoju-Dairi was the highest possible rank prior to 1939, I'm struck by the fact that the title still only means "representative instructor". Are we sure that Sokaku meant for the Kyoju-Dairi to act as independent agents, or were they expected to act as, well, representatives, without any real (organizational) authority of their own?

I'm reminded of the incident with Ueshiba in Osaka. I know there are varying opinions on the relationship between Sokaku and Ueshiba, but many people think that Takeda wanted to bring Ueshiba (and his students) back under his wing, hence Sokaku showing up and taking over instruction of the Abashi News dojo.

The issue with the Sagawa-ha is tricky. I certainly think that they hold a "moral" claim to legitimacy, but if Sagawa declined the MK, doesn't that kinda kill any "legal" argument?

Nathan Scott
11th August 2008, 22:38
[Post deleted by user]

skylinerR32
11th August 2008, 23:20
Prior to the website revamp in 2007, the official webpage for Mainline Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu (www.daito-ryu.org) posted the following statement under the FAQ Section:


What is the relationship between the Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu General Headquarters and other Daito-ryu organizations such as the Kodokai and Takumakai?

These organizations were formed around the teachings direct students of Takeda Sokaku, namely Horikawa Kodo and Hisa Takuma. As such the Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu General Headquarters recognizes their validity as representing portions of the Daito-ryu tradition and is on friendly terms of mutual respect with them and many of the individuals teaching under their auspices. Other groups include the Roppokai, founded by Okamoto Seigo, and the Sagawa Dojo, founded by the late Sagawa Yukiyoshi

SOURCE: http://web.archive.org/web/20060808193639/http://daito-ryu.org/faq.html#q2

Did this information intentionally get left out for the new website or was it merely a webmaster decision for the purpose of streamlining and relaunching completely anew?

Jim Yang

DDATFUS
11th August 2008, 23:49
Actually, now that I think about it, just what are people getting worked up about? I'm curious. There seems to be a lot of curiosity about whether or not Kondo Sensei "recognizes" the Roppokai and such. Now, I have no idea what he thinks of that organization, and I think that it is probably ill-advised for people to draw too many conclusions from the relatively little information that we have. Having said that, what does it matter? The day that Kondo Sensei uses Japanese intellectual property law to keep the Roppokai from publishing a book, people will have something to get worked up about. But he has made no move to do something like that so far; as I recall, the Seishinkai, who once actively fought him over the title to Daito Ryu and against whom Kondo Sensei had a very specific court ruling granting him exclusive use of the title, recently published a book in Japan without Kondo Sensei ever once trying to block them that I'm aware of. So far, this all seems like a tempest in a teapot.

TimothyKleinert
12th August 2008, 01:09
As you may be aware, the Roppokai and Hakuho-ryu were both started by Shihan level instructors, not Menkyo Kaiden. This is the point that is being implied by Kondo Sensei.

BTW, this doesn't affect those in Hakuho-ryu any more than it affects Hakko-ryu. Okabayashi split from Daito-ryu he stated he chose not to use the Daito-ryu name for his art in hopes of avoiding further political entanglements.
I know that Kondo was implying that only those branches founded by Menkyo Kaiden holders were "legitimate", I tried making that same point a little earlier in the discussion. I was just hypothesizing that maybe the Roppokai was lumped under the Kodokai, but after seeing that old quote Jim posted, I guess that's not how Kondo views it.

I realize that Hakuho-ryu isn't technically Daito-ryu, but Dan mentioned the school along with the Roppokai & Sagawa-ha at some point earlier, so I threw it in along with the Roppokai.

And since we're talking about it, though Hakuho-ryu isn't really relevant to this discussion, in technical matters it's still 95-98% Daito-ryu. That's why I usually lump it in with DR generically.


Anyone who has received the Kaishaku Soden in the original art structure was considered to have received the equivalent of Menkyo Kaiden...

Kyoju Dairi is not a rank, it is a license. The license indicates that the recipient has formal permission to teach the art in the absense of the chief instructor... When the chief instructor passes away or retires, the license is technically void since you can't substitute for someone who no longer exists. The new chief instructor would then either honor the previously issued Kyoju Dairi issuance or consider the license to be expired, depending on their evaluation of the person issued the Kyoju Dairi... Sokaku's licensing structure was clearly designed to allow for him to maintain control of his teachings...

On the other hand, the later addition of the Menkyo Kaiden level grants full transmission in the art and permission to use the art name and issue rank/licenses independently.
First, quickly, I understand Kyoju Dairi is a license, not a rank. I was just being sloppy.

But that, along with your later comments, is what I was trying to get at. Menkyo Kaiden is a license that basically grants full independence, Kyoju Dairi does not. So how can you say that Kyoju Dairi is "equivalent" to Menkyo Kaiden?

I brought it up because there's an underlying assumption to Dan's (and others') argument that all of the Kyoju Dairi under Sokaku (and maybe also later Kyoju Dairi under those instructors) have some sort of inherent right to continue teaching and carrying on their own branches after Sokaku's death. Certainly the "big 5" all had the technical know-how to teach, but that wasn't the point of the license, was it?

It's kinda just about the rhetoric of this discussion. There are a number "legal" arguments being made about Tokimune's and Kondo's authority to regulate the greater Daito-ryu. But if you're going to look at the "legalities" of Tokimune and Kondo, you also should look at the "legalities" of Sokaku's direct students, particularly the non-Menkyo Kaiden holders.

(And just to be clear, this is just internet chatter for me, I make no judgment about who is or isn't "legitimate".)

Nathan Scott
12th August 2008, 01:45
[Post deleted by user]

skylinerR32
12th August 2008, 03:09
Kyoju Dairi were/are in effect what is now commonly known as "Shibucho" (Branch Head / Director).


Sorry Nathan, I know you must be close to kyoju dairied out at this point, but I ran across the following excerpt struck me as relevant while perusing over daito-ryu.org's old webpages


Therefore, receiving the kyoju dairi qualification means that a person may begin giving instruction as the representative of Sokaku Sensei or Tokimune Sensei. The branch dojo (shibucho) heads are qualified to teach only within their branch dojos under the umbrella of the headquarter's director, who is the headmaster. For example, the head of the Yokohama branch dojo cannot go to Saitama and teach. However, a holder of the kyoju dairi certification may do so. One can teach anywhere in Japan if he has received the kyoju dairi certification. The organization today is the same as in the past and one can instruct in place of the headmaster, currently Tokimune Sensei. This qualification is called either kyoju dairi or dairi kyoju. -Katsuyuki Kondo

(Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu: Conversations with Daito-ryu Masters, pg. 172, Stan Pranin, ed., emphasis mine)

Jim Yang

Dan Harden
12th August 2008, 05:20
.... there's an underlying assumption to Dan's (and others') argument that all of the Kyoju Dairi under Sokaku (and maybe also later Kyoju Dairi under those instructors) have some sort of inherent right to continue teaching and carrying on their own branches after Sokaku's death.
Do you actually read before you comment?
I have never said that...e-v-er.
I clearly and repetitively (ad nauseum) keep stating MK or equivalent grant an independent line. Then I defined it and explained it in context with other examples in Koryu and the potential ramifications, I used charts and graphs, and center pieces and gave out door prizes.
It's sad to see this level of dissonence. Is it purposeful?



....
Certainly the "big 5" all had the technical know-how to teach, but that wasn't the point of the license, was it?
Well the "Big 5" is certainly my line, but you missed the entire reason they are the "big 5" in the first place.
They are all Menkyo Kaiden or equal at the time. Thus they had full transmission rights.

It would "help reduce the rhetoric" you mentioned- if we began reading what each other writes before we misquote it and go on to use it to disseminate even more misinformation.
Oh well.
Dan

Dan Harden
12th August 2008, 17:17
Therefore, receiving the kyoju dairi qualification means that a person may begin giving instruction as the representative of Sokaku Sensei or Tokimune Sensei. The branch dojo (shibucho) heads are qualified to teach only within their branch dojos under the umbrella of the headquarter's director, who is the headmaster. For example, the head of the Yokohama branch dojo cannot go to Saitama and teach. However, a holder of the kyoju dairi certification may do so. One can teach anywhere in Japan if he has received the kyoju dairi certification. The organization today is the same as in the past and one can instruct in place of the headmaster, currently Tokimune Sensei. This qualification is called either kyoju dairi or dairi kyoju. -Katsuyuki Kondo

(Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu: Conversations with Daito-ryu Masters, pg. 172, Stan Pranin, ed., emphasis mine)
The important distinction is that your license is "held" by the head master. That is NOT the same as a Menkyo and THAT is not the same as a Menkyo Kaiden or its equal.
And here is another interesting point. How is it that there are Kyoku Dairi in all other branches?
Because they each have THEIR own headmaster and line of transmission. One which Kondo has no part in, nor control of under any standards normally accepted in the History of Koryu Budo....except now through a lawyer.
I refute the statements made were some discuss lawyering up in this instance as a validation for what is being suggested by him.
For validation against fraud? At least that's more understandable if you don't want to hande it face-to-face.
This isn't a case of fraud. If it happens-and it may not- its a case of reaching back and stealing the art out from under his seniors; Sokaku's Menkyo Kaidens and their approved lines of transmission. It would be shameful to do so.

Nathan Scott
12th August 2008, 20:02
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
13th August 2008, 16:25
It seems a little weird for a headmaster of a honbu/shibu structured organization to give full authority for one of their instructors to go anywhere in the world and teach. That would typically be reserved for themselves or specifically appointed Honbu Shihan. But who knows, maybe I'm wrong.
I think the distinction some folks may be forgetting is that the Kyoju Dairi give them permission (that may help more clearly define it) to teach all over Japan. That permission is conditional. You can be kicked out or dissavowed as having any more "authority" or persmission "to represent" at will by the head master.


BTW, some arts simply use "menkyo", or "kaiden" to indicate their final levels of transmission. It's my understanding that these terms are usually as an alternate reference to "menkyo kaiden". Some arts use a totally different term for full transmission. It depends on the specific art.

Regards,

Arts can use menkyo as a level of rank but it is STILL conditional. Hamon can still happen. You are licensed under the Soke or the Menkyo Kaiden and may or may not be allowed to teach at all!
So for some arts menkyo and Menkyo Kaiden are in fact NOT interchangable at all.
I think the other points we agree on are more relevant to the discussion, in that while not all arts are the same, it is pretty much a done deal that Menkyo Kaiden or it's equivelant in other arts is normally the "finish" and hence a new line. Thus, and yet again, no future soke or soke rep or other Menkyo Kaiden-particularly from an entirely dfferent lineage has a damn thing to say about what you can or cannot do with yourself, your students, or your students, students. So a brand new student with 6 months in could tell Kondo to step-off
Now, It is important to note Kondo has thus far only stated he CAN impose the trademark. He hasn't that I am aware of.
It is just troubling and unfortunate that he also keep choosing to use terminology in public like "I do not recognize any other arts."
In a classical sense, and daito ryu does like to act that way, He has no authority or position to make such statements as anything but personal opinion. And to an informed audience would sound very pompous in doing so.
With the trademark as a whip, he sounds like just another TKD busniess man you read about in the martail art rags
The sad thing is he is so highly qualified that he could speak louder by just teaching. So with action and humility would both gain and maintain support from most everyone. We'll just have to see.
Cheers
Dan

bwhite33
13th August 2008, 18:42
Is there any censure that a Menkyo Kaiden recipient can receive from the Menkyo Kaiden giver?

(The following is for example purpose's only, none of this happened)
If, after Hisa was given his menkyo kaiden and while Sokaku was alive, Hisa made disparaging remarks about Tokimune, was dojo storming the only recourse? Or could Sokaku hamon Hisa? I'm assuming from Dan's last post that Tokimune couldn't but that is an assumption.

Dan Harden
17th August 2008, 15:43
Is there any censure that a Menkyo Kaiden recipient can receive from the Menkyo Kaiden giver?

(The following is for example purpose's only, none of this happened)
If, after Hisa was given his menkyo kaiden and while Sokaku was alive, Hisa made disparaging remarks about Tokimune, was dojo storming the only recourse? Or could Sokaku hamon Hisa? I'm assuming from Dan's last post that Tokimune couldn't but that is an assumption.

For the umpteenth time. The awarding of a Menkyo Kaiden establishes a permanent and inpependant line of transmission under the recipient on down to his lowest student. No other menkyo has authority over them.
You dont get to "hamon" someone who was awarded the Menkyo Kaiden. He'd tell you to kiss off, and you would be generally laughed at for the attempt.
Were Sokaku to come back from the dead he would have no authority over a Hakuho or Roppokai white belt for any reason. Yes, dojo storming was the answer. We're all nice and suburbanized and frankly were we to meet the founders of most of these arts we would be appalled and probably kick them out of the dojo and talk about them on E-budo.

There is some confusion-well maybe only by his students- that Kondos Menkyo Kaiden somehow trumps all others. Its a false assertion. And his general affairs director title really just grants him the duties of keeping the mainline intact under his menkyo. In fact he could be the General affairs director and not have spent a single day training. He would just have to hire someone to teach. Since he is a Kaiden holder he can chose to teach independently of the mainline, or preserve the mainline. Those are tow separate choices. Apparently he is choosing to teach the mainline.

The trademark is virtually meaningless in traditional budo. Everytime he brings it up I think it sullies his otherwise substantial reputation. There is at least one Koryu Menkyo Kaiden holder who has slammed him-to his face- for daring to even bring it up. With any luck he will back off from trying to do with a court order something he could never do as a budo man.

Cheers
Dan

bwhite33
18th August 2008, 01:26
Thus, and yet again, no future soke or soke rep or other Menkyo Kaiden-particularly from an entirely dfferent lineage has a damn thing to say about what you can or cannot do with yourself, your students, or your students, students.
Dan

Thanks Dan, it was this quote that made me wonder about the "Bequeather" of the MK if they had any recourse. All others seemed to be addressed except them

Mark Murray
19th August 2008, 18:01
Can anyone say for certainty that Tokimune received a menkyo kaiden?

Dan Harden
19th August 2008, 18:10
From Hisa...to make a copy of it for Kondo.
But it gets stranger and stranger.
Were this the bad budo section a whole bunch of things are fishy and strange.
Where is Sokaku's scrolls and authority since he wasn't a soke?
Where is Tokimune's -in Sokaku's art- before he "became" a self described soke of his own? Beyond what he stated-Why did he himself choose to differentiate what he did from his dad?
Why did Tokimune grant dan ranks in an art he was soke of and then give Aikijujutsu mokuroku to those same students; most or all of the senior deshi, not just Kondo? Then grant Kondo authority to succeed in what? Aikibudo? Aikijujutsu?
And there they both were doing national demonstrations with the Daito ryu aiki-budo sign right behind him, and other times aikijujutsu.
Did he not take the difference seriously? Did he and there were different syllabus for the two arts?

OF course there he was teaching and signing a Menkyo Kaiden to Hisa along side his dad-only to find out he didn't have one himself and asked for one to copy to give to KONDO!!!
So what in -thee- hell were these waza he was supposed to be teaching that were the Kaiden waza? New ones? Modified ones? A section of the older scrolls split off and re-classified? Same ones just re-labeled?

It's all very strange. It may have been clearer if Sokaku made it all up on his own, but for some reason didn't to claim it as his own. But contrary to his oft stated..."Leave no openings," there sure is a whole lot of questions that can be asked since he stated he wasn’t a soke.

Does it matter much-not really. Its seems most figure Sokaku made it up and have no trouble with the Sokaku / Tokimune / Kondo thing. It just gets messy with Tokimunes own public delcarations of Aiki-budo and being a self declared soke and such.

Under such conditions, I just hope Kondo doesn't do what his students and his own quotes suggest. It would be a sad and embarrassing day to see a business man storm a Menkyo Kaiden's turf and their student’s rights to lineage transmission under such dubious means as a trademark, lacking any credibility to do so by more tradtional means.
Cheers
Dan

Howard Popkin
19th August 2008, 18:41
Hey Dan,

I hope all is well.

I asked this question to Stan Pranin years ago. Got no answer.

Look - http://www.aikidojournal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4795&highlight=kondo&sid=6f838cfe9a976ddd1b975f1e21e67556

Thought it was fitting in this discussion.

Of note, I guess when you change your signature on Aikido Journal it updates it with all your posts, because I wasn't that rank when I posted those.

Take it easy !

Howard

Kendoguy9
19th August 2008, 18:59
Dear Mark, Dan, et al,

Nope he didn't. As far as I know he didn't receive any ranks, he just issued them (I'll try to double check this next time I see Kondo sensei). If memory serves he got a copy of the menkyo kaiden scroll from Horikawa sensei. All of the other scrolls he had were the un-issued blank ones Sokaku sensei carried with him (now Kondo sensei has them, in fact I think he showed an old blank hiden ogi scroll at one of the Aiki Expo). The situation is very simillar to the Aikikai Doshu I think. The doshu issues rank he doesn't get ranked.

I think the real issue here is that Daito-ryu was/is a small family ryu of little importance until Sokaku sensei started teaching to the public. It was a Sei system (consanguine lineage of headmasters). Since Sokaku sensei and Tokimune sensei issued menkyo kaiden and Tokimune sensei never had a consanguine heir it has picked up elements of a Dai system (non-consanguine lineage of headmasters). The art in it's past did not conform to a lot of the standards other ryu did, such as a clear soke system (why would you have a soke? Dad is soke til he dies then you're soke, pretty simple), issuing menkyo kaiden ranks (Hisa sensei suggested the idea to help the ryu conform to the norm), etc. I think Tokimune sensei trying to standardize it (adopting the title soke, a clear 1-2-3 mokuroku, etc.) is just one more step in this direction.

As to Dan's comments/questions whether Kondo sensei can pull rank on menkyo kaiden from other lineages, I think it is a moot point since there were only two menkyo kaiden: Hisa sensei and Horikawa sensei. Kondo sensei has no probalem with those two groups so really it's a non-issue. He's not pulling rank on fellow menkyo kaiden. Until I can speak with him further I have no idea about other groups and we probably shouldn't jump to any conclusions. He may simply lump Roppokai in with the Kodokai (I have no idea), and he did state organizations. Since Sagawakai is a very small group I doubt that counts for an "organization." I'll ask him next time I have the chance to speak with him.

As for the trademark I beleive other ryu are doing the same thing. Suio ryu uses a copyright. If memory serves Maniwa Nen-ryu had some legal issues with their name and a brewery or something like that. Maybe someone with more knowledge about this can chime in. Copyrights do more then allow someone to "lawyer up" and try to shut down rival dojo. If some corporation copyrighted the name Daito-ryu I don't think Kondo sensei or anyone could "budo man" their way out of that.

As for Kondo sensei selling Daito-ryu like some Korean arts have done, he hasn't produced a DVD or book in several years now that I am aware of. If he has and I don't know about it please let me know so I can pick it up. And as I'm sure anyone who's been to the Shinbukan knows there aren't that many students. So this really isn't a profit making gig. Maybe some other menkyo kaiden ranked people in other arts have issues with the way he's done things, but he is doing the best he can to protect the art he loves. They may want to consider similar actions, because swords blazing into offices just won't do anymore.

Best regards,

Dan Harden
19th August 2008, 19:28
Thanks Chris
FWIW I do not think he is selling it. I said he talked about it DVD, books, use of title etc like a korean art.

I hope you can see I am not doubting any of the other garbage from years ago. The main issue...well the only issue really was the very recent mention of these so called approved schools he will "recognize" that was just over the top.
One heads up, when you ask him. Just because Sokaku created a menkyo later, does nothing to reverse the fact that Sokaku awarded Sagawa more scrolls than anyone, and awarded Kodo, and maybe Uehsiba with the highest "finshing ranks" that were available until he invented the Kaiden. Also worthy of note is that he asked both Sagawa and Ueshiba at various times to succeed him.
For Kondo to "not recognize that" in use of the name- particularly since it is so widely known- isn't going to go over very well anywhere in the world. Not just in Japan.

Trademark
I can see you are looking at it as two different issues now. Thats all I was stating in the begining of all this. That lines of transmission isn't fraud or illegal use. They are two different topics. A case in point would be Okomoto wanting to sell DVD's and books, or if Kimura decided to open up the school.

The other stuff; added Menkyo Kaidens and scrolls and aiki-budo VS aikijujutsu and dual ranking and why is curious but really doesn't change the current state of affairs any. Damn weird though.

Good luck in your training
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
20th August 2008, 15:43
One other question I had regarding the Issuing of the trademark and the Japanese court recognizing “My organization” statement made by Kondo.
I'd like to see what a Japanese court would issue differently from the U.S. and EU regarding a trademark grant of a name that has been in us for years and years by other organizations. In the U.S. you would never get a trademark on a name that was so commonly used DR by so many different schools. There would be no way to support or defend it legally. I can’t imagine an informed Japanese court issuing a trademark on a Budo name currently in use by such diverse groups.

Since Kondo is forthcoming and has produced documents before – can we get a look at that. I am curious about a Japanese court issuing such a trademark for budo. The court system must be well aware of transmission lines and prior use so what allowances or provisions were attached to it. How would they justify an action against groups currently using the name for two generation under different schools. It may help clarify what the court meant and what Kondo meant by recognizing “his group.”
Lines of transmission are given by rank or title. What instrument was used to give legal rights by trademark by the legal owner-say a company-to someone else? Is it sold and re-recorded. How would the court recognize the passing of hands? Is there something more to this that would make it sound more legally plausible and logical?
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
20th August 2008, 17:48
Lines of transmission are given by rank or title. What instrument was used to give legal rights by trademark by the legal owner-say a company-to someone else? Is it sold and re-recorded. How would the court recognize the passing of hands? Is there something more to this that would make it sound more legally plausible and logical?
What I meant here was that the trademark was given to Tokimune-not Kondo- correct? So. how does it transfer to Kondo under Japanese law? Under what legal instrument?
Was it sold?
Rights to it given and recorded by the court?
Most here have time limits as well. What about Japanese law?
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
20th August 2008, 23:27
Stan just replied to the sister thread of this one on AJ. The following is his reply in full.


Stan Pranin replied:
I find this discussion of the supposed intention of Kondo Sensei to enforce a copyright title against groups using "Daito-ryu" in their name as pointless.

I spoke with Kondo Sensei on the phone yesterday and gave him the gist of this thread and he just laughed. He has no intention of using the court system to enforce a copyright against any group so far as I can tell.
While it doesn't explain his response in his interview, and is confusing in light of the answers he gave his student who posted it-it certainly answers the main question.
Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
22nd August 2008, 19:55
[Post deleted by user]