PDA

View Full Version : Beware of Propaganda and Hype



Nathan Scott
2nd October 2008, 19:43
To those following the recent threads here, and on Aikido Journal and Aikiweb:

Beware of Internet Propaganda

For some reason, there are a handful of mixed martial artists who have been trying to strip mine the inner teachings out of arts like Daito-ryu, and then *intentionally* attempting to discredit the current generation of Daito-ryu members as well as instigate infighting and political drama. On one hand they give props for what Daito-ryu *was* in prior generations, while on the other hand doing everything they can (sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally) to undermine the efforts of the current generation of the arts in their attempt to preserve their teachings for future generations to benefit from.

Many have wondered why Daito-ryu appears to have so many political problems associated with it. Well, its clear that due to the undying interest and popularity of the art, many outsiders have exploited the art to serve their own agendas. Some unethically use the name to market their own teachings, while others use the name of the art and its instructors as a means to qualify their own teachings. Some do it for money, while others do it for fame and ego. But the game is the same.

Why exploit Daito-ryu? We can only assume that Daito-ryu and its current membership are the only things that stand between them and spreading their own interests. They use internet forums such as these as a free place to spread infomercials about themselves and their own teachings, while at the same time tearing down the "competition". If what they have to offer is so great, why can't it stand on its own merit? While Daito-ryu has had internal political issues in the past, there are many members of the various branches of this current generation that are on friendly terms. Any "political" issues being spread right now are being manufactured by those who don't have deep knowledge of the art, and are in the vast majority of cases, outsiders. Members answer their questions only to be disregarded (by them at least) as naive, ignorant, or stupid. But think about it - who is more likely to know about the internal workings of an art? Outsiders with superficial or no formal exposure to an art, or long term members in good standing? Who is more likely to know the full story, or at least, the other side of the story? Who is more likely to have *first hand knowledge* of certain "unnamed" people being referenced in these threads? If the art did not have so much to offer the current generation of Daito-ryu members, then why would they still be studying it? Tricked by mass hypnosis?!?

I write this post in hopes of warning the public reading these threads of a growing trend I'm seeing on the internet. Posters using unnamed people and senior instructors to back up their unsupported opinions, while at the same time discounting feedback from those who might be in a position to know the situation better. Daito-ryu is apparently the source they wish to destroy, and aikido is the market they wish to sell to:

"Tired of your techniques not working right? Want to perform aikido the way the founder did? Fix it with our brand of mixed martial arts that 'they' don't want you to know about. Let's call it Daito-ryu aiki, and trust me - aikido is supposed to have the 'Daito-ryu aiki' we are talking about. Don't let the name change of the art or the Founder's evolution of aikido fool ya. We know what's best for you."

Just something to think about. If you're still curious about Daito-ryu, ask those who are members in good standing what their experience has been. If people writing these posts are hinting around to you through private phone calls or emails about their formal involvement with Daito-ryu, contact the branch they claim to have trained/train with and VERIFY IT FOR YOURSELF. Hell, I'll even help put you in touch with a representative if desired. Like everything else in life, apply common sense and recognize propaganda and hype for what it really is. All those picking at the art have a vested interest in seeing it discredited. Arts don't survive if the instructors don't transmit the teachings, and the art doesn't benefit from having a student base that sucks.

Regards,

Kendoguy9
2nd October 2008, 22:09
Nathan,

"Tired of your techniques not working right?"
Yes I am!

"Want to perform aikido the way the founder did?"
You bet I do!

"Fix it with our brand of mixed martial arts that 'they' don't want you to know about."
I don't know who "they" are but how could "they" withhold this information from me? I'm willing to attend a seminar, maybe two!

"Let's call it Daito-ryu aiki, and trust me - aikido is supposed to have the 'Daito-ryu aiki' we are talking about."
I knew there was something missing in my training. Daito-ryu aiki! Thats it!

"Don't let the name change of the art or the Founder's evolution of aikido fool ya. We know what's best for you."
How can I sign all my worldly possessions over, to you, to teach me?

But hold on, is it still Daito-ryu aiki, if we aren't practicing it within the context of Daito-ryu? I thought there was a LOT more to Daito-ryu and aiki besides some body conditioning and IMA stuff? How do I know what you're selling me really is Daito-ryu aiki? How long did you study Daito-ryu for, to learn this?

Nathan your offer is interesting but I think I see some flaws with your claims. You seem unwilling to be honest when simple questions about where you learned your skills are asked, and then attack me on a public forum. I don't want to call you a liar, but where I come from...

I think I'll have to pass. Maybe I should invest my time with a Daito-ryu teacher who can place my training in a better context.

This was fun!

Finny
3rd October 2008, 03:10
But hold on, is it still Daito-ryu aiki, if we aren't practicing it within the context of Daito-ryu? I thought there was a LOT more to Daito-ryu and aiki besides some body conditioning and IMA stuff? How do I know what you're selling me really is Daito-ryu aiki? How long did you study Daito-ryu for, to learn this?

Nathan your offer is interesting but I think I see some flaws with your claims. You seem unwilling to be honest when simple questions about where you learned your skills are asked, and then attack me on a public forum. I don't want to call you a liar, but where I come from...

I think I'll have to pass. Maybe I should invest my time with a Daito-ryu teacher who can place my training in a better context.

This was fun!

Did I miss something?

Or did you just not read his post.

Or was that sarcasm?

Josh Reyer
3rd October 2008, 03:58
Well, this has all the makings...


Did I miss something?

Or did you just not read his post.

Or was that sarcasm?


It was sarcasm.

Finny
3rd October 2008, 05:25
hahahaha

Damn this deadpan computer - always tricking me

Nathan Scott
3rd October 2008, 18:29
BTW, in regards to the handful of people in America that have been judged to have "it" by the chosen few, here is something else to consider:

There is one branch of Daito-ryu that has been represented and trained consistently here in America for over 35 years. The North American Headquarters is, and has always been, based here on the west coast. That means there are very senior members (and former members) of this group that non-members have never heard mention of. They hold high ranks/levels of initiation, and many have had sigificant training and experiences in Japan. Some have been training since the art was first introduced to America 35 years ago.

As such, using the common sense meter, I propose the above is one example of how it might be possible that there are in fact skilled budo-ka that have "it", but simply do not out involve themselves with self-promotion or open seminars.

Just something more to think about.

Nathan Scott
3rd October 2008, 23:07
I just compared the translated English language text in Kondo Katsuyuki's "DR AJJ - Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo" book (AJ) with the original Japanese printed next to it. The text in question is on page 11, while the original Japanese is printed in the last paragraph of page 8.

The main statements being quoted by Daito-ryu detractors - apparently made by Tokimune to Kondo - appears to be the following. Note that the Japanese words in brackets are the romanized Japanese words I found used in the original text:


"If you teach people the true techniques [honto no waza] and the next day they leave the school, then all of the secret [hiden] and oral teachings [kuden] of Daito-ryu will flow outside the school and be known to the general public. Out of a thousand pupils, teach the true techniques [honmono] only to one or two. Make absolutely sure of those you choose, and to them alone teach what is real [honmono]. There is no need to teach the rest."

The text in question does in fact appear to be translated accurately. "Honto no waza" means "the true techniques"; and "honmono" means "genuine", or "real". However, what is not conveyed in these quotes is the intended context of the statements.

In the paragraph prior to this quote Tokimune recalls how, whenever he taught as his father's representative, if he showed a technique more than once his father would scold him as being "too soft-hearted." Sokaku himself was very strict and disciplined in how he taught the art, and apparently had an ongoing problem with Tokimune wanting to basically "spoon feed" students the teachings because he felt sorry that they weren't getting it. The previously referenced "non-verbal" traditional method (referenced also by Sagawa, Ueshiba and Horikawa) of teaching requires discipline on the teacher's part NOT to just explain to students how the techniques work. Sokaku and many of his senior students appear to have believed that only the most dedicated, serious students would rise to the highest levels of ability in the art, and that spoon feeding the teachings to students would only stunt their ability to use their own senses and brain to learn. Thus, we are back to a perspective of traditional methods of teaching, combined with the history of Daito-ryu as being a conservative art.

What are the "true" and "real" techniques? The text doesn't make reference to them specifically, but based on the prior sentence warning of "all the Daito-ryu hiden and kuden" flowing outside the school, and to "only teach one or two students the real teachings", it seems obvious to me that they are talking about the Menkyo Kaiden teachings and above. Sokaku issued ONE Menkyo Kaiden (TWO if you include Horikawa), and Tokimune issued TWO Menkyo Kaiden. That sounds a lot like "one or two deshi". Regardless, that doesn't mean that students of all levels are not exposed to various levels of hiden and kuden. For example, the senior members of the Daitokai were clearly exposed to quite a bit of it, even though they were not exposed to the higher levels. This is evidenced in the video tapes they sold, the content of their English website, and the information repeated by their students. Some of it was flat out wrong, but much of it was right. "All the hiden and kuden" is clearly in reference to the one or two students, which we know from history are those Menkyo Kaiden level or above. But a look at the amount of skilled students who have been produced through the various lines of Sokaku's teachings clearly shows that not much was being held back to the right students. There has been an increasing number with each generation who have "it" - not a decreasing number.

So while the choice of wording in the original Japanese text above may not have been the best choice of wording, I still believe that those familiar with koryu arts and able to objectively apply common sense will still come to the above conclusion when such statements are not removed from the intended (original) context.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
8th October 2008, 19:24
On another thread that was just closed, I was accused of issuing "put downs and lectures" by opening this thread. In this other thread, Dan Harden, believing this thread was directed at him, stated it was "not too friendly". I agreed that it was not the intention of the thread to be "friendly" about the subject, by posting that it "wasn't supposed to be too friendly". However, my response to Dan should not degenerate the intent of this thread into a personal attack on Dan.

I didn't mention anyone's names in this thread. My intent was simply to advise readers of what I see as a new, growing trend. I decided to post an "open letter" style announcement about it because the tactics being used in these "discussions" are of such a nature that many readers will only walk away confused and irritated. So I advised readers to use *their own* common sense, and to verify claims of training and affiliation independently. If Dan decided to take ownership publicly of this issue for his contribution to this growing trend, then that is on him. But I thought it best to clarify the intent of this thread lest others again warp what I've said into something else.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
8th October 2008, 21:51
I've been thinking about the questions raised in the "Art of Deception" article, and had some further perspective to share. Kondo Sensei was quoted as saying:


"Tokimune Takeda included in his lessons Aiki-Kempo, the Kendo kata, Ono-Ha Itto-Ryu and other techniques that had no relationship to Daito-Ryu-Jujutsu in order to avoid teaching Daito-Ryu techniques ... When he taught Ono-Ha Itto-Ryu--he would explain it differently from Daito-Ryu techniques. I had a question about this difference, and until that point, no one had asked him, I said, "Sensei, the things you are saying about the sword and Daito-Ryu techniques are different."

The above is phrased a bit strange, but I suspect it is not as strange as it sounds.

For example, "Aiki Kempo" is in fact a section of teachings that Sagawa Yukiyoshi also taught. There were two densho that he issued that were related to this section of teaching: "Daito-ryu Aiki Kempo", and "Katshu-ho Hidensho". Both densho refer to Daito-ryu titles in the issuing signature section.

Sagawa Sensei also taught Kogen Itto-ryu in his dojo parallel to Daito-ryu, and even issued KIR densho to those students that studied it. Some of these densho also refer to Daito-ryu titles in the issuing signature section.

Based on what we know, Tokimune obviously had a great deal of respect for Sagawa Sensei. He left Daito-ryu to his care when he joined the military, and visited Sagawa a number of times whenever he had problems. They also both traveled with Sokaku at one point to assist him in teaching seminars.

Sagawa Sensei clearly intended for his Daito-ryu to be a comprehensive bujutsu. I suspect Tokimune tried to follow his example to some degree. When Tokimune created Aikibudo, he included "Aiki Kempo", as Sagawa did, as well as a different line of Itto-ryu kenjutsu - Ono-ha itto-ryu. Ono-ha itto-ryu was the art that Tokimune's father studied, and according to Tokimune, was also the art that was taught along side Oshikiuchi during the Edo period. Sokaku only taught certain weapon work to those who had an interest in them or already had a foundation. But Tokimune indicated numerous times in various interviews that he felt studying swordsmanship in tandem with Daito-ryu was critical to understanding Daito-ryu. He even gave specific examples of how the two are similar.

In regards to Kendo Kata, Ono-ha itto-ryu was the father art of Kendo. It is not hard to believe that Tokimune may have felt the Kendo kata would be a good primer before entering OIR. Interestingly, another well respected koryu teacher uses the Kendo Kata as a foundation for his koryu sword art here in America.

So it seems to me that there is a precedent for these three methods mentioned in Kondo Sensei's article, as well as logical reason for incorporating them. Based on what the above article says, it is also possible that Tokimune viewed these additional teachings as not only a way to provide for a more comprehensive foundation for Daito-ryu, but also a way to create more time in which to evaluate the character of his students before teaching them inner-teachings of Daito-ryu. If this is the case, then the above quoted section of Kondo Sensei's article may simply be poorly phrased.

Hopefully Kondo Sensei will eventually clarify these points for us. But in the meantime, I believe the facts which I've just listed, in conjunction with Tokimune's own interviews, indicate that the "deception" is likely not what some think it is.

Regards,

Cady Goldfield
8th October 2008, 22:10
Coulda fooled me. Aside from the original (and subsequent) post's complete inaccuracy, misinterpretation and twisting out of context of the intent of that "handful of mixed martial artists," it sure sounds like a thinly veiled screed aimed specifically against one individual.

Anyone who has followed the abundant threads on the topics of internal training/aiki over the years will likely see through the veil.

Nathan Scott
9th October 2008, 00:24
Well Cady, you would be wrong.

This thread is not focused at "one person", since there are a "handful" of people (which is what I wrote in the opening post) that are involved.

There is no inaccuracy or misinterpretation in this thread. That is the whole purpose of posting it, in fact. Attempts at "discussion" resulted in responses of subterfuge. So rather than continue bickering, I figured we'd let people use their own brains.

Woody
9th October 2008, 15:05
Well, one of these "handful" of people has generously offered customized training regimen's to many other martial artist's, free of charge, and without secret initiation rites. That sounds good to me. I am not much impressed with "high ranks/levels of initiation." I recently received an email from an aikido dojo advertising some event they were having. Something at the 'bottom' of the email caught my eye.

"The only private Dojo offering authentic Aikido instruction in San Bernardino County?"

Since my dojo happens to be in San Bernardino County I replied with;
"Are you sure about that?"

Dojo-cho's response follows;
"Are you sure that's not true? If it isn't, i.e., if there are other privately-owned Dojo in the county being run by an authentic 4th Dan or above from Hombu, Yoshinkan, Tomiki or Ki No Kenkyukai, I would be glad to include their names. It would be great to see some of the people claiming authority to teach Aikido at our regional seminars with people like Saotome Sensei etc. too.

I really don't want us to be exclusive here, but as far as I know, we are. A practice club is not a Dojo - I know, I had one for years as nidan and sandan. There is a Dojo in Palm Springs run by a 2nd Dan who is a former student of mine, so I suppose I should include them...

Do let me know if you know of any others."

Wow, color me impressed.:rolleyes:

These "handful" of people you may be referring to have certainly opened my eyes to some things that I should have been considering for a long time. I for one am grateful to them.

Nathan Scott
9th October 2008, 21:52
Ricky,

I'm sorry you recently had rank thrown in your face, but please don't project that on me. Perhaps if you were on the other side of the issue you might see things differently.

Anyway, all I've been talking about is:

1) Training under qualified instructors (which means they are ... qualified) in traditional arts. A serious student in good standing has access to generations of information that has been passed down, and are thus in a position to build upon this knowledge and hopefully develop to an even higher level than their teachers. That's not to say every one of them is skilled, but rather, that the accuracy and depth of teachings in regards to the given art should be reasonably reliable.

2) Others that claim to teach the *same* things openly based on superficial exposure to various arts, and appear in some cases to be completely unranked in any art despite decades of claimed training. As I've said repeatedly, its not really the rank that is important (outside of an indicator of the level of initiation), it is the fact that either a teacher never thought to issue them rank, or, they never trained formally under anyone long enough to be offered any rank/license. That's not to say these people are UN-skilled, but rather, that they are not in a position to state with authority how their teachings relate to other arts they are not initiated in. They should desist on referring to arts with regards to their own training in which they do not have a right to claim ownership to, and simply call it something else.

But train however you like. Classical/traditional arts aren't for everyone. Many don't have the patience and long term interest to pursue these arts. I happen to think it is good to jump around a bit and try different arts when starting martial arts. Most of the people I train with have also gone through this phase, and having gotten burned a number of times along the way, it just made finding the older, established bujutsu all the more gratifying.

I don't know how much the aforementioned applies to you specifically, so take what I wrote in general context. FWIW, there are quite a few people that approach me about training that I refer to MMA based on their stated purpose for training and attitude.

Good luck with that,

DDATFUS
9th October 2008, 22:31
That's not to say these people are UN-skilled, but rather, that they are not in a position to state with authority how their teachings relate to other arts they are not initiated in.

To me, this is the key point of the entire discussion.

In his essay "Renovation and Innovation in Tradition" Ellis Amdur makes a comment related to people who try to "modify" a koryu school before they have attained a menkyo kaiden-equivalent level of understanding of the school.


For example, an illegitimately innovative individual might eliminate a move in a kata because they imagine itputs them off balance, not realizing that it is supposed to put the person off balance in a form that is a training in recovery of balance, or that a form is really a precursor, designed solely to produce some level of somatic organization and reflexes to carry out the "real" combative method, which will be taught later. (Keiko Shokon, p. 154

To me, this is the same issue that is currently coming up in these Daito Ryu discussions. You might have individuals-- and I won't beat around the bush; one of the folks that I'm thinking about is Dan Harden-- who have a phenomenal and well-developed understanding of internal power. Everyone I've talked to that has met Dan has testified that he has some really impressive body skills, and I'm prepared to believe that. Heck, I'll be prepared, for the sake of argument, to believe that Dan is leaps and bounds ahead of anyone else on this board in terms of internal power skills. But I've never been very clear on how much, if any, Daito Ryu training Dan has, and from time to time I've seen him make some fairly sweeping statements regarding internal power and its role in Daito Ryu. Now, this immediately raises the question of how much Daito Ryu he actually knows and how qualified he is to make pronouncements on how internal power fits into the overall scheme of Daito Ryu.

When I see a post that Dan has made on the subject of Daito Ryu, my mind automatically adds the caveat that Dan's opinions on Daito Ryu have to be appreciated as the opinions of someone who is probably a very skilled martial artist with very advanced knowledge of internal principles, but who may or may not know much about Daito Ryu as a system. This is a disclaimer that I haven't seen Dan add to his posts, and there have been a few times when he's seemed to speak very authoritatively on the subject of Daito Ryu. If he has the Daito Ryu training to back that up, I'd love to hear it-- I've always been a bit unclear about how much Daito Ryu Dan has done. If he doesn't have much Daito Ryu background, then he might want to throw in that as a disclaimer when sharing his opinions. And as far as I'm concerned, that's all there is to it. After all, this is the internet-- we all have to make our own decisions when we evaluate which sources we value, and how much authority we ascribe to them.

As far as exploitation goes, I'm reminded of something my sword teacher said about one of his sensei, Yagyu Nobuharu. He said that Yagyu Sensei wasn't at all concerned about people joining Shinkage Ryu in order to exploit it, to steal its secrets and go off on their own. "Shinkage Ryu was around for centuries before they were born, and hopefully it will be around for centuries after. Let them pillage its secrets if they can; better men than them have tried." I think that we as Daito Ryu practitioners should keep this in mind-- no matter what hype or trends occur today, we have a ryu. If the people who practice the ryu treat it as something to be guarded, to be treasured, to be passed on to those who prove themselves dedicated to it, then what do they have to fear from people on the outside?

Anyway, that's just my opinion on the matter; y'all can check the subject line below for its value.

elder999
9th October 2008, 22:58
and I won't beat around the bush; one of the folks that I'm thinking about is Dan Harden--<snip!>......Dan is leaps and bounds ahead of anyone else on this board in terms of internal power skills. But I've never been very clear on how much, if any, Daito Ryu training Dan has, and from time to time I've seen him make some fairly sweeping statements regarding internal power and its role in Daito Ryu. Now, this immediately raises the question of how much Daito Ryu he actually knows and how qualified he is to make pronouncements on how internal power fits into the overall scheme of Daito Ryu. .

Of late, and more than once, Dan has said something to the effect of, "I don't do Daito Ryu; I do mixed martial arts.....

Nathan Scott
9th October 2008, 23:11
Mr. Sims,

Exactly. I'm glad to see my logic has reached someone.

There are some instructors who are not worried about outsiders mining their arts for information; either because they don't believe most will correctly understand the information (which could very well be), or because the art will survive regardless of the "small puddles" that result from splits from the main stream. Both make sense to me.

On the other hand, Daito-ryu has a clearly conservative perspective, and has only been opened to the public in the last +100 years. Even after being taught openly, Sokaku and many others focused their efforts primarily on military and police since they had a "need to know". Sokaku clearly wasn't comfortable with accepting all students who applied for training, and was furthermore guarded with his inner teachings. It seems to me that there is a great deal of inner teachings in Daito-ryu, perhaps more than most/other ryu-ha, and quite a bit of it has never been released publicly. Some are developing whole arts around only superficial exposure to Daito-ryu. So I don't know if making the teachings public would completely kill the art or not, but it sure wouldn't be doing it any favors. One of the biggest problems Daito-ryu has is with prospective students being overwhelmed with misinformation or fraudulent claims to teach Daito-ryu, then either getting burned, or giving up because it is too hard to know who is real and who is not. What a pity.

Regards,

Woody
9th October 2008, 23:25
Ricky,

I'm sorry you recently had rank thrown in your face, but please don't project that on me. Perhaps if you were on the other side of the issue you might see things differently.
Nathan,
Forgive me if I seemed to be projecting onto you. That was not my intention at all. In fact, I don't recall you ever mentioning your own rank at all. Regarding the gentleman throwing rank in my face, you certainly don't need to apologise. I have trained many times at his dojo. If he could throw me as quickly or as well as he throws rank, I would be much more impressed and more likely to be insulted.

Anyway, I hate to see us drawing up sides on this issue. I like training with all kinds of folks.

Nathan Scott
9th October 2008, 23:26
Mr. Cuffee,


Of late, and more than once, Dan has said something to the effect of, "I don't do Daito Ryu; I do mixed martial arts.....

What he claims is that his methods are the same methods used in Daito-ryu aiki, and until recently, he used to claim that his internal conditioning WAS ITSELF the same thing as what Daito-ryu calls aiki. Some of us have been following his posts for a period of at least 10 years now.

For the record though, I'm not interested in making this a bash-Dan thread, or specifically bash-anyone thread. Those that are behind the campaign (we'll call them the "Neigong-gumi") know who they are, and those that are reading need only understand that the most aggressive detractors of Daito-ryu have an agenda behind their repeated attacks.

Ricky, agreed, and no harm done.

Regards,

Mark Murray
10th October 2008, 00:49
On another thread that was just closed, I was accused of issuing "put downs and lectures" by opening this thread. In this other thread, Dan Harden, believing this thread was directed at him, stated it was "not too friendly". I agreed that it was not the intention of the thread to be "friendly" about the subject, by posting that it "wasn't supposed to be too friendly". However, my response to Dan should not degenerate the intent of this thread into a personal attack on Dan.

I didn't mention anyone's names in this thread. My intent was simply to advise readers of what I see as a new, growing trend. I decided to post an "open letter" style announcement about it because the tactics being used in these "discussions" are of such a nature that many readers will only walk away confused and irritated. So I advised readers to use *their own* common sense, and to verify claims of training and affiliation independently. If Dan decided to take ownership publicly of this issue for his contribution to this growing trend, then that is on him. But I thought it best to clarify the intent of this thread lest others again warp what I've said into something else.

Regards,

Nice attempt to backpedal, Nathan. But, your next post sort of sums it up -- yet again.


Well Cady, you would be wrong.

This thread is not focused at "one person", since there are a "handful" of people (which is what I wrote in the opening post) that are involved.

There is no inaccuracy or misinterpretation in this thread. That is the whole purpose of posting it, in fact. Attempts at "discussion" resulted in responses of subterfuge. So rather than continue bickering, I figured we'd let people use their own brains.

Anyone following the threads could see that you crossed a line and started trying to undermine those "handful" (For everyone else that would be defined as Dan and me) with this "not too friendly" thread.

It's amazing that you keep saying *other* people are spreading propaganda and hype, but you have yet to answer the question about *your* direct experiences with Tokimune, Kondo, and the Seishinkai. So, if others that don't have that experience are spreading propaganda, how then can we determine where your posts lie?

Mark Murray
10th October 2008, 00:54
Mr. Cuffee,



What he claims is that his methods are the same methods used in Daito-ryu aiki, and until recently, he used to claim that his internal conditioning WAS ITSELF the same thing as what Daito-ryu calls aiki. Some of us have been following his posts for a period of at least 10 years now.

For the record though, I'm not interested in making this a bash-Dan thread, or specifically bash-anyone thread. Those that are behind the campaign (we'll call them the "Neigong-gumi") know who they are, and those that are reading need only understand that the most aggressive detractors of Daito-ryu have an agenda behind their repeated attacks.

Ricky, agreed, and no harm done.

Regards,

Huh, well, Nathan, how about you detailing your direct experience with regards to Dan and his training so that all of us reading will know *exactly* how it is that you know for sure that Dan's methods aren't Daito ryu aiki? You'd have to have training experience with Dan over years to understand what he is doing *isn't* Daito ryu. Especially since if you do the research you can find where, when, and with whom Dan trained. Unless you only have 10 years of reading his posts as your research?

And I like how it's always the other side that has "attacks", but what you and Brian have done is really okay and fine. You crossed a line and still aren't admitting it.

Mark

DDATFUS
10th October 2008, 01:00
Of late, and more than once, Dan has said something to the effect of, "I don't do Daito Ryu; I do mixed martial arts.....

Hi Aaron,

That's very true. On the other hand, you'll notice that he's not posting on a forum for mixed martial arts. My complaint isn't really that he's claiming to do Daito Ryu now-- he very clearly makes no claim to be practicing/teaching Daito Ryu. However, there seems to be a suggestion somewhere in there that despite not currently practicing Daito Ryu he knows all that there is to know about it, and what he teaches/practices is based on his complete understanding of the principles of Daito Ryu. Leaving me to wonder how he is so certain that the internal principles that he knows are the principles of Daito Ryu.

Of course, maybe I'm reading things into Dan's posts that he doesn't intend for me to read into them, but I'm not the only person who has gotten that impression from his posts. Perhaps a little clarification on his part wouldn't be a bad idea?

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to condemn or criticize Dan; I've actually found many of his posts to be interesting and informative. I'm partly trying to articulate a complaint about his posts that I've heard both online and off-line from more than a few people and partly trying to show some of the questions his posts have raised with me when I have read them. I've got to say that I'd have a much better idea of how much credence to give his posts on the subject of Daito Ryu if I had a clearer idea of how much Daito Ryu he had practiced.

To backtrack slightly, there seems to be this idea that the "secret" of Daito Ryu is internal power. While Daito Ryu clearly uses internal power generation as one facet of its training, I haven't seen any evidence one way or the other regarding whether or not internal training is one of the real "guiding principles" of Daito Ryu. All that's beyond me at the moment, of course; I've only been training for a year or so. However, if anyone is going to start suggesting that they know for sure what the core principles of an art are, I'll wonder how long they studied it to get that certain understanding.

Oh, and Nathan, I'm sure that I've told you this before: Mr. Sims is my father. You won't find him on this forum. :)

lucky1899
10th October 2008, 03:31
David,

Excellent commentary. Thank you for saving us minor posters and lurkers the trouble of having to hold that opinion back any longer.

All,

A student of mine had mentioned that this thread got a bit out of hand and I hadn't really read much because I was on jury duty this week. I logged in to read it and I started to think how an outsider would see e-budo; a "community for Japanese Martial Arts and Culture", wow. I agree with Dan that there is a lot of animosity and maybe a lot of the animosity is "understandable" but hopefully not condoned. The issues that have been brought up will NOT be settled in any forum on the internet! So as not to bore anyone with long-winded posts rife with my own opinion, let me repeat what many before me and many after me have/will state: less talking/writing, more training.



Hope to see you on the mat.

Yours in Budo,

Andrew De Luna
Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu

Nathan Scott
10th October 2008, 04:47
Mark,

I can only assume you saw a couple of posters express an interest in looking at an alternate perspective to yours on this IMMA/DR conflict, and decided it was time to try to confuse my comments and position again. Tell you what. If you don't have anything constructive to add, then as I said before - keep it to yourself or take it offline. I've had enough of the Neigong-gumi throwing out accusations every time logic rears its ugly head.


Nice attempt to backpedal, Nathan. But, your next post sort of sums it up -- yet again.

Anyone following the threads could see that you crossed a line and started trying to undermine those "handful" (For everyone else that would be defined as Dan and me) with this "not too friendly" thread.

Well, allow me to front pedal then. First of all, a handful of people does not consist of just you and Dan. I am aware of what happens outside this little world here on e-budo. "Not too friendly" means I've had enough of the subterfuge disguised as "friendly" discussions, and that this thread is pointed at calling the issue for what it is - propaganda and hype. Hopefully you understand where I'm pedaling, because I'm not going to keep repeating myself.


It's amazing that you keep saying *other* people are spreading propaganda and hype, but you have yet to answer the question about *your* direct experiences with Tokimune, Kondo, and the Seishinkai. So, if others that don't have that experience are spreading propaganda, how then can we determine where your posts lie?

You're missing an important point. I'm not going around the internet claiming to know what Daito-ryu aiki is. My comments are and have always been based almost exclusively on research of DR publications and personalities. I AM claiming that Dan (and others) continuously makes *authoratative* statements about Daito-ryu and aiki, but has not been able to support any of them with anything outside of implied statements supposedly made from unnamed big shots who have unknown experience. While I do have some direct experience with Kondo Sensei and the Seishinkai, it is not I, who am making any claims. Interestingly, I do happen to have extensive formal experience in aikido and other arts, all of which I am easily able to recall the names of my teacher(s) and levels of initiation.


Huh, well, Nathan, how about you detailing your direct experience with regards to Dan and his training so that all of us reading will know *exactly* how it is that you know for sure that Dan's methods aren't Daito ryu aiki? You'd have to have training experience with Dan over years to understand what he is doing *isn't* Daito ryu. Especially since if you do the research you can find where, when, and with whom Dan trained. Unless you only have 10 years of reading his posts as your research?

Dan and I have previously talked privately about some of our training and experiences. I know who Dan states he has trained with. But if he is not willing to state what we talked about publicly, then it's not for me to state it for him. Differences aside, I'm not going to publicly reveal statements I know were made to me in confidence. He hasn't stated them publicly yet, so I guess there must be a reason. But I've got a better idea - why don't you ask him yourself, or verify his claims directly.

Whether I know what Daito-ryu "is" or not is irrelevant. As I've mentioned numerous times before, there STILL is not anyone with senior rank/initiation in Daito-ryu chatting on ANY of these internet forums - though some do have far more formal experience than others. My position is not that I necessarily know more (or less) about Daito-ryu than Dan, my position - as clarified one or two posts ago by someone else - is that Dan is not in a position to state that what he is doing is Daito-ryu. It's really very simple. Stop trying to make it seem like this is some kind of personal attack.

Mark, I hope you enjoyed this last post, because it is the last of its kind I will entertain here. If this is the only type of fodder you have to offer, I suggest you resign yourself to simply dropping veiled put-downs about me on other forums ("the certain e-budo moderator" I believe) like Mike and Dan have.

Cady Goldfield
10th October 2008, 04:51
I would caution against attempting to condemn people whose personal motives, background (saying that one does not "do" Daito-ryu doesn't necessarily mean that one has not "done" Daito-ryu) and depth/breadth of knowledge one has not even attempted to explore or understand. Instead, why not look past individuals, and consider the possibility that the source of internal power in Daito-ryu may actually NOT be proprietary to Daito-ryu. The "flavor" of the application may be Daito-ryu, but not the skill and body conditioning itself. Open your minds to explore a wider world. Get to know the genuine internal Chinese arts, and Daito-ryu with its aiki, and then tell us whether you can discern any great difference between, say, aiki-age and peng-jing. Then we can have some truly interesting and engaging exchanges on these forums.

Nathan Scott
10th October 2008, 05:23
Cady, thanks for a more tempered reply.

You're right about the age old opposing points of view between traditionalists and modernists. I don't believe that is the specific problem in this current case, though I'm sure it is a contributing factor. I am happy with acknowledging that traditional training is not for everyone. No problem. The problem I have is with others CONSTANTLY picking at traditionalists.

Has anyone else noticed that myself and others have NEVER gone over to a CMA or MMA forum and asked them why they do things the way they do, that it is flawed, that this or that teacher is the laughing stock with my buddies, or that our way is better? People in traditional arts, and Daito-ryu people in particular, have been on the defensive against hecklers for many, many years. You are in our forum - we are not in your forum marketing our products to you. This is a key point nobody wishes to acknowledge.

Hapkido? MMA? "Internal Aiki" (whatever that term means)? Great! Enjoy yourselves. But if you can't resist strip mining and "us against them", then make your own forums (speaking generally right now, not specifically at Cady).


The irony is that those who synthesize and innovate nearly always pay homage to the traditional arts from which they received their foundation skills.

You call it "paying homage". But I can tell ya - it comes off as being nothing more than using historical, respected arts, as a base to obtain credibility in an art someone has just created. Also, paying homage to an art while at the same time attempting to discredit the current generation of members (aka: the competition) is not going to make a lot of new friends in said group.

As far as exotic sources, sure, nearly ALL Japanese budo has some degree of roots in China. So what? That doesn't make Japanese arts the same as Chinese arts. Personally, I already went through my Chinese martial art phase. Fun stuff, but I decided to specialize in Japanese methodology.

For those that can't respect the wishes of the current generation of members in the traditional arts to maintain control of their own teachings, o.k. We'd prefer that people would just extend the courtesy to those in historical arts to let them preserve them the best way they see fit. But if you have to bait and badger members, strip-mining extant arts of their inner teachings, at least have some kind of ethics and call it something else that is not proprietary terms/names used in other arts. Even if you are truly convinced it is the "same".


I would caution against attempting to condemn people whose personal motives, background (saying that one does not "do" Daito-ryu doesn't necessarily mean that one has not "done" Daito-ryu) and depth/breadth of knowledge one has not even attempted to explore or understand.

First of all, that goes both ways. But let's stop with the endless implications of training and experience if we're not going to talk about it. From looking around the net, it sounds like everyone is tired of it.

Personally, I'm not closed minded. I find all of it interesting on varying levels. However, I'm also deeply driven to delve further into the arts I study. There is a point where you have to specialize in something if you want to get good at it. Unless you intend to make up your own MMA, sampling a little bit of everything will eventually end up being a distraction from the tradition that is sitting right in front of you staring you in the eyes.

Are the Neigong-gumi internal methods the *same* as Daito-ryu? Do they represent the Daito-ryu teachings the *same* way? None of us knows for sure. They may be a little close, or a lot of close. Maybe the methods being advertised really are more Chinese IMA than Japanese. Furthermore, some may also be mistaking what the principles actually are as being something else when trying to talk about the same methods. But what we do know is that we are not qualified to make such a claim without being deeply initiated into the system. That's just common sense. Just call it something else and don't worry about what Daito-ryu is or isn't doing.

Regards,

Mark Murray
10th October 2008, 13:38
I've had enough of the Neigong-gumi throwing out accusations every time logic rears its ugly head.

"Not too friendly" means I've had enough of the subterfuge disguised as "friendly" discussions, and that this thread is pointed at calling the issue for what it is - propaganda and hype.

You're missing an important point. I'm not going around the internet claiming to know what Daito-ryu aiki is. My comments are and have always been based almost exclusively on research of DR publications and personalities. I AM claiming that Dan (and others) continuously makes *authoratative* statements about Daito-ryu and aiki, but has not been able to support any of them with anything outside of implied statements supposedly made from unnamed big shots who have unknown experience. While I do have some direct experience with Kondo Sensei and the Seishinkai, it is not I, who am making any claims. Interestingly, I do happen to have extensive formal experience in aikido and other arts, all of which I am easily able to recall the names of my teacher(s) and levels of initiation.

Dan and I have previously talked privately about some of our training and experiences. I know who Dan states he has trained with. But if he is not willing to state what we talked about publicly, then it's not for me to state it for him. Differences aside, I'm not going to publicly reveal statements I know were made to me in confidence. He hasn't stated them publicly yet, so I guess there must be a reason. But I've got a better idea - why don't you ask him yourself, or verify his claims directly.

Whether I know what Daito-ryu "is" or not is irrelevant. As I've mentioned numerous times before, there STILL is not anyone with senior rank/initiation in Daito-ryu chatting on ANY of these internet forums - though some do have far more formal experience than others. My position is not that I necessarily know more (or less) about Daito-ryu than Dan, my position - as clarified one or two posts ago by someone else - is that Dan is not in a position to state that what he is doing is Daito-ryu. It's really very simple. Stop trying to make it seem like this is some kind of personal attack.

Mark, I hope you enjoyed this last post, because it is the last of its kind I will entertain here. If this is the only type of fodder you have to offer, I suggest you resign yourself to simply dropping veiled put-downs about me on other forums ("the certain e-budo moderator" I believe) like Mike and Dan have.

Logic. It's, well, logical. So, if you have never trained with Dan and don't know what he's doing, then you can't understand if what he is doing is Daito ryu or not. That's simple logic.

If you're stubbornly calling what Dan does as "body skills" and not "aiki", then you are claiming to know what Daito ryu aiki is. You'd have to know it to know what others are claiming really isn't aiki. Logic.

If "there STILL is not anyone with senior rank/initiation in Daito-ryu chatting on ANY of these internet forums" as you say, then you can't know if any of what we're talking about is propaganda or not. It's pretty simple logic.

And if you don't have in depth experience with Tokimune's organization, Kondo, or the Seishinkai, it's really hard to tell people what is or isn't hype about the situation.

As for the veiled put downs ... If you recall, E-Budo banned Mike, so he doesn't have a say here. You can take pot shots at him all you like and he can't reply. Who do you think is the better man -- the one who invites someone onto a private, personal forum to let that someone have a voice -- or someone who posts negative things about the other when the other doesn't have a voice? I would imagine it to be nice to be King and be able to shut down threads one didn't like and ban people who didn't agree.

Woody
10th October 2008, 15:00
If you recall, E-Budo banned Mike
But he's such a charming guy.;)
Actually, I have learned a lot from Mike's post's. I'm sorry he's banned.

George Kohler
10th October 2008, 15:56
The moderators, not just me, came up with some guidelines for Mike and he did not want to accept those terms. End of story. Let's not bring his name up anymore about any banning.

Nathan Scott
10th October 2008, 16:40
Mark,

I don't have to know what Dan is doing. Dan has to support his claim that what he is teaching is what he claims it is. The same as other arts. He claims it is the same as DR aiki, and the missing element of aikido. Support it. The burden is on him, not me. I hope this sinks in this time. Unsupported authoratative claims and repeated posts that are unwaiveringly argumentative and inflamatory, crafted in order to cause doubt and confusion, IS propaganda.

Here, let me help you out:

Propaganda:

1 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

2 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause ; also : a public action having such an effect

Hype:

1 : put on , deceive

2 : publicity ; especially : promotional publicity of an extravagant or contrived kind

Sound familiar to anyone else?


And if you don't have in depth experience with Tokimune's organization, Kondo, or the Seishinkai, it's really hard to tell people what is or isn't hype about the situation.

If you'd read my posts, you'd realize that what I am posting is mostly from published interviews. Some is also based on documentation provided by Kondo Sensei to me or based on the debates we had with the Seishinkai that I spearheaded on their old forum back in 2000 (that may have been before your time, but ask around). None of it, except for those statements I post as opinions, is based on my own training and experience. Good job on your research.

As far as attacks on people who are no longer here, I didn't attack him. I posted a link to someone else who had a valid sounding critique of something he is teaching. Others clearly didn't want to talk about it and felt it was in poor taste to acknowledge the critique somewhere he couldn't reply to, so I deleted it.

Time to move on Mark. You're just talking in circles.

DDATFUS
10th October 2008, 17:30
Logic. It's, well, logical. So, if you have never trained with Dan and don't know what he's doing, then you can't understand if what he is doing is Daito ryu or not. That's simple logic.

Hold on a second, Mark. How far are you willing to take that? Every time we run across the website of some guy who is clearly teaching an eclectic fusion of Taekwando and Hollywood-fu under the name of "Miyamoto-ha Uber Daito Ryu," are you going to say, "Well, guys, they claim to be practicing the same principles of Daito Ryu under the guise of what looks like Taekwando-movie-fu, and unless you've trained with them, there's no way to know if what they are doing is Daito Ryu or not. We have to believe them." Do you really want to go through every post in Baffling Budo and say "we can't judge this guy's claims since none of us can provide documented evidence of his entire training history, and none of us have gone to his home to see if he can really levitate?" The burden is on the guy making the claim to prove himself to his audience, not on the audience to debunk him.

Dan is making the claim that what he does is the same as Daito Ryu. Now, I can't force Dan to tell me anything, but if he wants me to give that claim full weight, then he'll at least need to convince me that he's had enough exposure to Daito Ryu to make an informed decision on whether or not what he's doing is the same.



consider the possibility that the source of internal power in Daito-ryu may actually NOT be proprietary to Daito-ryu. The "flavor" of the application may be Daito-ryu, but not the skill and body conditioning itself.

While admitting that I don't have enough experience to know for sure, I suspect that you are 100% correct on that point. The issue is that I also suspect that there is a lot more to Daito Ryu than just internal power, and I'm not entirely convinced that the term "aiki" refers to anything related to internal power. I think that people are putting way to much emphasis on the internal aspect of Daito Ryu, and an outsider might think that this is all that the art is about.

Ah, well. I probably speculate too much, and I definitely train too little. I should work on that.

Mark Murray
10th October 2008, 18:32
Mark,

I don't have to know what Dan is doing. Dan has to support his claim that what he is teaching is what he claims it is. The same as other arts. He claims it is the same as DR aiki, and the missing element of aikido. Support it. The burden is on him, not me. I hope this sinks in this time. Unsupported authoratative claims and repeated posts that are unwaiveringly argumentative and inflamatory, crafted in order to cause doubt and confusion, IS propaganda.

Here, let me help you out:

Propaganda:

1 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person


You mean like posting a defamatory post, one that was not meant to be good, and pointing fingers at a small group of people and yelling the sky is falling, er, I mean, they're spreading misinformation? Sort of like this thread? Because if you, or anyone, wants to go over to the original source for this thread, you are more than welcome.

http://www.aikidojournal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12000

I think anyone would notice that between your posts and my posts, my posts were 99% questions and yours were 99% authoritative information. Going back to your definition of propaganda, well, it certainly does seem like a couple people were spreading information to injure the cause of others.



2 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause ; also : a public action having such an effect


You mean like your post on Aikido Journal that defines how koryu work, members in good standing, etc and then close with this line, "Often times we hear more from the disgruntled students, who only present their side of the story, than the members in good standing. I hope others take this in to account when listening to apparent second hand gripes."




Hype:

1 : put on , deceive

2 : publicity ; especially : promotional publicity of an extravagant or contrived kind

Sound familiar to anyone else?


put on, deceive. Sort of like posts on Aikido Journal, where this all started, about knowing how koryu works, how Daito ryu works, that others are arguing from outside perspectives, when the poster himself revealed that he didn't have deep experience with Tokimune's organization, Kondo, or the Seishinkai. Yeah, it does sound familiar.



Time to move on Mark. You're just talking in circles.

I'm done here, Nathan. Hammer away.

Nathan Scott
10th October 2008, 19:13
Mark,


I'm done here, Nathan. Hammer away.

O.K., thanks.

Please do go read the AJ thread. It was a very disappointing thread, but there was some good information posted in there.

My posts regarding Daito-ryu were based on documents and first hand information, as I stated previously. My comments about Koryu were based on my research AND first hand experience with studying koryu arts (again, good job on that research). If you and some in the Neigong-gumi choose to disregard it, then fine. But it's funny that the members of Daito-ryu agreed with me (just luck I guess), Toby Threadgill of Takamura-ha Shindo yoshin-ryu agreed with me, and Stan Pranin used one of my posts discussing koryu structure as a blog on his website:

“Succession in Koryu” by Nathan Scott (http://www.aikidojournal.com/blog/2008/09/13/succession-in-koryu-by-nathan-scott/)

Also, thanks for re-posting that quote of mine from AJ. Its worth repeating:


"Often times we hear more from the disgruntled students, who only present their side of the story, than the members in good standing. I hope others take this in to account when listening to apparent second hand gripes."

George Kohler
10th October 2008, 20:08
This thread seems to be going around and around. I'm closing this thread too.