Stealing Technique

[Cady Goldfield]

Here's an interesting Aikido Journal blog post by Stanley Pranin, with some equally interesting follow-up commentary related to aiki training. Stanley put the article up on Facebook today, but he originally posted it on AJ in April 2013.
Enjoy!

http://blog.aikidojournal.com/2013/04/07/is-stealing-really-the-best-policy-by-stanley-pranin/

[WVMark]

Hi Cady,
I disagree that "stealing the technique" is a valid approach. It isn't and never will be. There are numerous examples of why this is the case in more ways than one.

Here are some fairly blatant clues:

Iwama lineage:
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=333111&postcount=1

Honest opinion: I learned more about Aikido this past weekend than I have in all of my 23 years of practice. Being given access to this training model is simply transcendental.
Shown a specific training model and learned more in one weekend than in 23 years of practice.

From Nishio's lineage:
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=331632&postcount=114
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=333474&postcount=26

It's not magic either. Mr. Harden with explicit detail explains, demonstrates, and then teaches exactly how to achieve aiki.

There are numerous examples in the Chinese Martial arts where one or two students were separated and taught differently than the rest of the class. The rest of the class worked on forms/techniques only. Ken Fish, I believe, actually wrote an article about his experience of this.

The secret to the arts was not in the techniques, let alone stealing them. There's an interview with Tohei where he comes to the US to teach a seminar. A few students show up that had no teacher. They learned everything from books. Tohei said they did well with learning the techniques.

There's an article with Kisshomaru who states that it should only take a couple of years to learn techniques.

One student was specifically taught internal training principles that were not shown at the Tokyo or Iwama dojos. No need to "steal". It was shown and taught directly.

According to Kondo, Tokimune Takeda said this:

What will you do if you teach people the true techniques and the next day they leave the school? The oral and secret teachings of Daito-ryu will flow outside of the school.
followed by

Out of a thousand people, only one or two are genuine students. Find them out and teach them what is real; there is no need to teach such things to the rest.

Then Kondo himself states this:


When my teacher Tokimune was still active and in good health, many of his students from all over Japan came to Abashiri once a year to take part in the annual Headquarters meeting. Several times, when I came to participate in the headmaster direct transmission seminars (soke jikiden kai) that were always held on these occasions, the meeting was divided into two groups, one taught by Tokimune sensei himself, the other taught by me acting as his instructional representative. Naturally, the day before these my teacher would go over with me in detail about what he wanted me to teach on his behalf, and he always told me that I must not teach the true techniques that I had learned from him. Even in regard to the very first technique taught in Daito-ryu, ippondori, I was strictly prohibited from teaching the real version I had learned directly from Tokimune sensei, and was told to teach only the version of ippondori he always taught in his own Daitokan dojo.

Even if you wanted to believe the techniques contained the secrets, in Kondo's lineage, both he and his teacher, Tokimune, stated that they do not teach the "real" versions to the masses. So, what are these students going to "steal"? False teachings.

No, Cady, this idea of "stealing the technique" to get anywhere near the founders' or masters' level of skill is a myth. It should be completely erased from all schools. That and the "20 year technique". It is another myth. Without those rationalizations to fall back on, students can begin the path to becoming another Ueshiba, Takeda, etc.

[gavinslater]

Hi,

Are they doing the same thing?

Chinese Martial Arts

There are numerous examples in the Chinese Martial arts where one or two students were
separated and taught differently than the rest of the class. The rest of the class worked on forms/techniques only.

Daito Ryu

Out of a thousand people, only one or two are genuine students. Find them out and teach them what is real; there is no need to
teach such things to the rest.


I think it can be problematic when people quote Daito Ryu teachers, I think alot of the time they get taken out of context.

What if Ueshiba's skill level was attributed to the way he learnt and understood Daito Ryu? You cant be taught everything, real
understanding only comes from your own effort.

Why did Ueshiba say it would take 20 years in 'aikido' to learn something? Something to do with a lifetime pursuit?

Here is an interesting article;

https://www.aikidojournal.com/article?articleID=695

Gavin

[Dan Harden]

Why did Ueshiba say it would take 20 years in 'aikido' to learn something? Something to do with a lifetime pursuit?
I think it can be problematic when people quote Aikido teachers, I think alot of the time they get taken out of context.

[gavinslater]

Touche...

Your probably right, I should have added I have never done aikido so I shouldn't really comment on it. Perhaps others could do the same in regards to Daito Ryu.

Regards,

Gavin

[Dan Harden]

Touche...

Your probably right, I should have added I have never done aikido so I shouldn't really comment on it. Perhaps others could do the same in regards to Daito Ryu.

Regards,

Gavin
Most people who comment on DR do have experience with it.
Daito ryu practitioners, past and present -like most other budo- don't always agree and various branches and even individuals critisize the efforts of other styles and teachers pretty heavily.

I think this whole martial arts dogma of outsiders not being capable of commenting on movement and the value of certain martial tactics has very limited value. There are certainly things that are hard to see and must be felt to appreciate, others are purposeful misdirection, but on the whole I would say there is a lot of overly detailed, peace time, dojo invented, highly questionable stuff ( both old and new) being offered to the average suburban hobbyists who don't know any better.
There is an excellent book out written by a series of PHD researchers (some who are also menkyos) who discovered that most of the koryu arts were considered anachronisms in their own time and on the whole, had little to nothing to do with training of samurai. A modern equivalent would be a modern sport shooting hobbyist being magically equal to either a seasoned Marine grunt or a Spec ops operative.

A Daito ryu friend of mine who spent a lot of time in Japan had an interesting view; that there are a lot of men in the martial arts who like playing dress up and go starry eyed at anything eastern, who can be taken apart quite easily by experienced freestyle players.

It doesn't take thirty years in some art form to see that or be the one doing that to them. I soon as I hear "Oh you don't understand the depth of what we do..." I say "Great. Try it on me." I am rarely impressed with any depth they supposedly have.