PDA

View Full Version : What did Ueshiba Morihei really know?



Nathan Scott
10th October 2001, 23:52
[Post deleted by user]

Cady Goldfield
11th October 2001, 01:35
Aaaaaaggghhhh!!! Noooooo!!!!! Not again! Don't go there, Nathan. STAY BACK!!! [Holds out wreath of garlic] Back, I say!!!!! :smash:

P.S. Do you think that Ueshiba had a lot of muscular strength? Is that what it was?:confused:
P.P.S. Nooooo! Please don't go there!!!!

Karl Kuhn
11th October 2001, 07:31
"The third technique for example involves blocking the opponents yokomenuchi strike and counter striking with your own (using a tegatana hand shape) to your opponents temple to fell him. Sound much like Aikido?"

Sure does. There are a number of examples of this in the Shodokan Aikido syllabus. The first example that comes to mind is the second technique of the suwari-waza in the ikkyu exam.

As to whether Ueshiba got the whole package from Takeda, I am in no position to know. Nor am i sure what it would tell me, if I did know one way or another.

My 2 bits.......

Peace,
Karl

Nathan Scott
11th October 2001, 08:49
[Post deleted by user]

Cady Goldfield
11th October 2001, 13:28
Looks like baby fat to me. And he doesn't seem to have any arms.

You tryin' to sell us a bill of goods, Nathan?

Dan Harden
11th October 2001, 13:37
IT is clear that no one has the knowledge to decifer what happened in their relationship. That water has been sufficiently muddied to obscure the closest viewing.

What is clear, is that of all the students that came to the fore of that generation that studied first hand with Takeda S.
Sagawa, Tokimune, Kodo, Hisa
and of the next generation
Tokimune, Okamoto, Inoue, Mori

None, not one, move like Ueshiba did. Many poeple talk of the differences between Daito ryu and Aikido theory. None I believe say it better than the first hand students of both men. When Ueshiba was at his prime, and Takeda was an old man.

Daito ryu Aikijujutsu
Conversations with Daito ryu masters
Interview with Takuma Hisa

"Ueshiba sensei was always accompanied by three or four of his students whom he would use as his practice partners while he was demonstrating. But Takeda Sensei didn't have single student with him and always demonstrated his technique on whomever was brave enough to step forward. He didn't have anyone with him that tme either, so the strong students scrambled one after another to attack him.
He sent them flying like he was twisting the wrists of babies, pinning them so thouroughly they couldn't even cry out for mercy.
Everyone had been absorbed in Ueshibas beautiful technique".....
(this is important as it puts the time frame at a point where the relationship was fracturing; 1933, This is interesting as it is when Ueshiba technique is judged as his MOST combative;pre war period, yet it is interesting that Ueshiba was obviously not doing pure Daito ryu technique at this point in his teachng to the Asahi people)

to continue
But right then we became completely facinated by the strong techniques of this old master.........Every person there immediately bowed low at senseis feet and asked to become hi student........No matter how many times Sokaku sensei said he would teach me I couldn't beleive it was true. It was unbelievable!...What Sokaku taight was incomparably rougher than what we had learned from Ueshiba, and I thought "This is the real thing."

I compare this with the comments from Sugino (TSKSR; a student and friend of Ueshiba who trained with him in the early years more PRE-WAR period stuff ) who openly stated that he didn't like Sokaku much but after seeing him walk up and challenge a bunch of advanced judo men in freestlye, then leaving them pinned while throwing others and doing so with apparent ease, repeatedly and publicly, that he considered Takeda an unparalleled master and his technique the best he had ever seen.


Now, all 2001 armchair quarter backing aside;
I remind everyone that it was at this very time in Ueshibas career that he was supposedly at HIS roughest (Pre-war) and many of the prewar students comments came from this period.
What did these men qouted above; know, and see, and feel on a weekly basis in Ueshibas "interpretation" of Daito ryu principle, that they learned over years, and that made their exposure to Sokaku's technique so "startling?"

I postulate that very early on in Ueshibas carreer in his interpretation of Daito ryu Aiki, he changed in techniques-he essentially, took a left- And never looked back.

Large circles
I agree that the easiest way to discern between the two is to look at the body movement. Much has been made of the differences of Aikido and Daito ryu as the differences in the large movement. I don't believe the strict interpretation of large circle applies here. That is just a convenient way to describe one of the major differences. See through the size and shape of the circle and you will see a much different approach to the use of the hips; the way the body generates power and the way the connection is used. A simplistic comment may be that Daito ryu looks more linear due to the smallness of the body circles. They are not the same art.

Stuck twixt the two
This somewhat drastic change in approach that Ueshiba took shows up in all his students, it even "colored" the Takumakai approach to this day. They stand out in their approach and you can spot them at exhibition by their body movement.
I juxtapose that to the Yoshinkan. Shioda trained with the Daito ryu Kodo kai. his AIKIDO changed completely and now stands out as "colored" by Daito ryu.



I also agree (and it is patantly obvious) that no one remains in the Aikido system that has Daio ryu Aiki. Ueshiba clearly had Daito ryu Aiki but chose to use it differently. What is important is how he got "it."

Mainline Aikido has always talked about his fighting past, his rough days-and the standard line is that you have to go through that to get to where he was.

Another line of thinking is that you can pick up where he left off. I believe both are incorrect. You learn Daito ryu Aiki-through Daito ryu jujutsu-and no other way will suffice.

Whether or not Nathan is correct in that Ueshiba didn't even try to teach Aiki, and reserved it for himself, or whether my own theory holds true:
He tried, but found that the standard Daito ryu learning mechanism of Jujustu first-then learning angles and body structure through jujutsu principles was a requirement for understanding the use of angles and structure to make Aiki connection work FAILED him, because he didnt teach his people the jujutsu methodolgy necessary to inculcate that movement in the first place-thus no blossoming into Daito Ryu Aiki.
The Large open flowing movements he taught them will NEVER grow into the Aiki he had and used. Why? Its Daito ryu Aiki; its too different from Aikido. When the opponent enters their hips are "over thar" in the circle. Daito ryu is "right in there" in a circle. Aikidoka are much more "strong" in their approach then Daito ryu as well. Their stiffer. Dairto ryu is more relaxed and softer. What they do is different and will forever stay that way.

Strength
Well it is clear that Ueshiba had a powerful build, but there may have been something else that contributed to him being judged strong-his relaxed fighting ability. Anyone who has spent time grappling with a relaxed fighter will tell you how heavy they are to move and tiring it is fight them.
A modern example of this could be the muscular giants of the NHB competitions having such a hard time wth a 178lb. pip-squeak like Gracie. It was all about relaxed technique. The big guys wore right out. Aske them how "strong" Gracie felt. They were huge, and they just couldn't get through him and exhausted themselves trying.
Even small men, if they understand physiology enough to use small circles against an opponents anatomy, thus easily de-constructing opponents postures- they will be "perceived" as strong. Why? because the simple relaxed movements of one feels like iron on the other. This is not the slip and slide Aiki-but invasive Aiki. The simple act of interupting boxers and Karatekas strikes leaves bruises on their arms while the jujutsuka is relaxed.


Just some quick thoughts
Dan

Mark Jakabcsin
11th October 2001, 14:10
Dan wrote: "You learn Daito ryu Aiki-through Daito ryu jujutsu-and no other way will suffice. "

Dan, didn't Takeda S. teach Horikawa Sensei only aiki techniques and not the jujutsu? I seem to recall that in Stan Pranin's book but I don't have it with me right now. As I recall Horikaw Sensei learned the jujutsu techniques years later from Sagawa Sensei (if memory serves). Maybe I am not understanding your statement but it would seem that Horikawa Sensei learned the DR aiki before he learned the jujutsu. Comments?

mark

Ron Tisdale
11th October 2001, 17:23
Hi All,

Dan,

I'm not sure how much we gain in the general comparison of the level of skill between Ueshiba and Takeda...I believe everyone would now acknowledge that Takeda was head and shoulders above *all* of his students. That is not what is in question here (though it might have been at one time in the aikido community).

What is in question is whether or not Ueshiba had this Daito ryu aiki, and if so, if he taught it, and if he didn't teach it, did any of his students steal it? I think Gozo Shioda stole enough to know to continue training under Horikawa Sensei.

I also think there is more of it in the yoshinkan today than many know...just my personal opinion.

How does Tohei Sensei's use of "aiki" or "ki" in demonstrations play into your view?

I'm also not sure why Cady resists the idea of Ueshiba being unusually strong. That doesn't necessarily mean he used that physical strength to achieve his technique...just that he was physically strong, full stop.

Mark,

Did Horikawa Sensei have other martial training before hand? Perhaps jujutsu training? Perhaps if you are already at a certain level, you can skip some of the "lower" levels.

Great topic, great posts, I'm such a light weight, oh well.

Ron Tisdale

Arman
11th October 2001, 17:51
There are only so many ways to unbalance and immobilize an opponent. "Aiki" is one method that also has a finite number of applications. It is really nothing other than physics. Some applications are not very subtle. For example, someone pushes me, I don't resist, but harmonize with the push and add force to the attackers momentum. Other applications are very subtle, almost unoticeable. For example, a small motion of the hips and hand creates the proper angle against an attackers force so as to unbalance him with seeming little effort. Some applications are crude, but effective. Someone grabs me and I apply the proper angle against the attacker's joint so as to unbalance and immobilize him through pain. We aren't talking about the Force here, Luke. Distinctions between DR aiki and other aiki don't really make sense. Let me put it this way. The only good aiki is effective aiki. If DR has more effective aiki, it is only because of basic physical principles, e.g. the angle of application. The "secrets" of aiki are really about a particular style's angles of application. Just compare DR to aikido. A martial arts novice would immediatley notice a distinct difference. The major reason for this difference lies in the physics of each art.

Sincerely,

Arman Partamian
Daito-ryu Study Group
Baltimore, MD

AAC
11th October 2001, 18:10
Horikawa, Taiso Sensei received his Daito Ryu jujutsu teaching license (kyoju dairi) in 1913. (The Aiki news encyclopedia of Aikido says 1930, but it maybe in error.) The late Yonezawa Senei stated Kodo Horikawa studed JUJUTSU with his father at that time. At age 21 he actually became a formal student under Sokaku, May 1914. So, in fact his fater was his first teacher. The instruction from Sokaku was Aikijujutsu, because he already had a base in jujutsu to build on.

Mark Jakabcsin
11th October 2001, 18:15
Well Ron I am not entirely clear what training Horikawa Sensei had prior to begining Daito-ryu. I know he his father was teaching him DR for about a year prior to his (Kodo's) start with Takeda Sensei. His father apparently was also well versed in Shibukawa-ryu jujutsu and kendo. I don't know if he had taught his son any of this prior to meeting Takeda Sensei or not. Since Kodo was 20 years old when his father began training with Takeda S. there was certainly plenty of time for him (Kodo) to have picked up other knowledge prior to this. The question then becomes would any of this traiing have assisted him in learning DR aiki or is DR jujutsu the only training that would have helped him learn? I don't know. Opinions, Dan, anyone else.

Antonio wrote: "Horikawa, Taiso Sensei received his Daito Ryu jujutsu teaching license (kyoju dairi) in 1913. "

Curious as to your source on this one. According to Stan Pranin's book on Daito-ryu masters, Horikawa Taiso Senei didn't begin his training with Takeda Sensei until 1913. This is on page 91 and is a quote from Yusuke Inoue Sensei.

mark

Ron Tisdale
11th October 2001, 18:35
Now I remember that passage about he and his father (Horikawa). I think that would definately be the kind of preperation that Dan was thinking of. It makes sense to me too.

Based on my limited experience so far, I think that the yoshinkan training methods also prepare that base structure, but I'm not as sure as far as the advanced methods go. So far anyway, I think that is left up to stealing the technique. But then, I'm a novice, so what do I know?

Ron

Cady Goldfield
11th October 2001, 21:21
Ron,
I'm not "resisting the idea that Ueshiba was physically strong," when obviously he was pretty beefy for a Meiji-era fella. I was alluding to something that Dan actually came outright and suggested -- that physical strength wouldn't necessarily relate 1. to what Takeda decided to teach him and 2. to what Ueshiba was doing on the mats.

Ueshiba in frail old age was still able to do to (and perhaps do better) what Ueshiba the young hellraiser could do. That ain't muscular strength, Jack.

Plus, I was yankin' Nathan's chain a bit for bringing up this topic. Not that it stopped Dan from jumping in like a cat with a grocery bag. :laugh:

Dan Harden
11th October 2001, 22:40
Armon
I thought this thread was about Ueshibas use of "Daito ryu" Aiki in Aikido as opposed to the notion that he never had it anyway.
A discussion of his use of (again ) >>"Daito ryu's"<< Aiki is a discussion that can be had or at least postulated on in viewing his technique. How or where it failed to get incorporated into Aikido in general is a non confrontational, generic, topic. I didn't think this was about Aiki in general. I wont get into a conversation about that. Its more shoveling $^#%@ against the tide. Everyone from Judo's Mifune to Daito ryu's Sokaku to Sagawa, or Kodo and on to the later generation of Giants all bore witness to it in their technique.
Nuff said

Now everyone, including "Billy's combat Aikido" Sensei will talk to you for as long as you could stay awake about that topic. Some well respected guys will tell you that Aiki isn't in technique. Others will say WRONG there are Aiki techniques. Then you have other schools than Daito ryu and how or where they see Aiki being applied according (of course) to the way they see it. You always get the recently converted karate, jujutsu guys who fall in love with it when they feel it and go on and on about the way THEY see it.
Listen.... Aiki, as a topic of discussion, is a dead end.
YAAWN
I say phhtttpppp......train

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

Armon writes

There are only so many ways to unbalance and immobilize an opponent. "Aiki" is one method that also has a finite number of applications. It is really nothing other than physics.

While I could not agree more with this statement-it is VERY simplistic. Saying it is one thing, having the understanding to be able to do it is quite another.
Once having felt the real deal, men struggle for the rest of their lives to improve their technqiue in private small groups. Trying to improve on "it." For that reason it is almost dismissive to verbalize it this way.......ah its only this!!

I have had to listen to too many people yak about it. I say SHOW...they can't. Moreover, while some do have an understanding of applied principles and can display "it" and surprise you with how well they are able to control an attack, for others I would say "God help them if you can get them to be able to use it in any more or less realistic combative framework or in grappling."
Many never train that way- ever. Wrist grabbing, wristy twisties, gi grabbing, gi and arm grabbing etc and the use of Kata like attacks; shomens and pre-arranged forms are a way to learn. If you want to be able to make connections that way, with induced stress and with modern combatives applied- at some point you need to start training with it that way, before you can "see" its applications that way.


Anyway.
The subject of Aikido and >Daito ryu Aiki< (Yes, Daito ryu!) Not Yanagi ryu, not Yoshinkan, not this or that, but Daito ryu Aiki and how it may or may not have been used by Ueshiba is interesting.


You can talk about Aiki in general all day if you like bud- I wouldn't go there if I were you.


Ron

I wasn't comparing Ueshiba to Takeda for a "my daddy can beat up your daddy" excercise. It is my opinion (worth about the 2 cents usually offered) that comparisons are worth noting when they are from eye/hand /training witness accounts.

That said
*************************
It is a question worthy of repeating that it was at this very time in Ueshibas career that he was supposedly at HIS roughest (all the Pre-war nonsense) and these students comments came from this period.

"What did these men qouted above; know, and see, and feel on a weekly basis in Ueshibas "interpretation" of Daito ryu principle that made their exposure to Sokakus technique so "startling?"

************************
Let me be more direct and say what I didn't say before

Why should they be startled? They just spent YEARS training with a Kyoju Dairi, a big kahuna.....oooOO' Sensei at his trumpeted finest pre-war hour!.........
Perhaps because they just felt and witnessed Aiki for the first time?

Or was it, as some postulate; that it was merely that both had Aiki- it was just a difference in application?
There is a very interesting conversation to be had in these two questions alone.

Fun ride that goes nowhere

Dan

AAC
11th October 2001, 22:46
FYI, Stan Pranin's interview with the late Katsumi Yonezawa in a old japanese/english edition of Aiki News. "Recalling Kodo Horikawa Sensei".... However, 1930 is the most logical date of the two.

Arman
11th October 2001, 22:51
Dan,

Dead end? Sure. Sometimes I just can't resist trying to flush the "aiki bunnies" from the brush. Sorry. :)

Arman Partamian
Daito-ryu Study Group
Baltimore, MD

Nathan Scott
11th October 2001, 23:15
[Post deleted by user]

Mark Jakabcsin
12th October 2001, 12:07
Dan wrote: "I have had to listen to too many people yak about it. I say SHOW...they can't. Moreover, while some do have an understanding of applied principles and can display "it" and surprise you with how well they are able to control an attack, for others I would say "God help them if you can get them to be able to use it in any more or less realistic combative framework or in grappling." "

Dan,
I seem to recall one or two forum members in the past defending their teachers when others claimed those instructors were of limited ability by saying that their teacher would never demonstrate their real aiki or ability on an outsider. They adamatly swore that only those on the inside of their organization would have experienced the real thing. Playing devil's advocate and using such logic can you really ask some one to SHOW and expect them too? Maybe they just chose not too. Kind of a weak arguement I agree but then.........well.....

mark

BillyB
12th October 2001, 13:59
Could someone define "Daito Ryu aiki" please? I am finding it very difficult to follow a discussion about an undefined concept. As far as I am concerned, "aiki" is the blending element found in aikido. I would be very interested to hear a more specific, and therefore useful, definition.

Many thanks
James Ball

Dan Harden
12th October 2001, 14:05
Mark and Billy
I hate to see the thread > take a left<
lets keep this short or post it to another thread howz about that

Billy
We are discussing a narrow topic concerning a defined singular art and its relationship with one of its teachers. Therefore we are tailoring the comments to what Daito ryu considers itself to be- not what others do.

And no. Sorry, I do not wish to discuss Daito ryu Aiki.


Mark
Those previous writings referred to as "pre-crash Aiki wars" were all rather comical don't you think?
Giving credit to all parties who posted then and now, it has never been repeated only embaressingly referred to.
Some parties were saying that "some" high level stuff is seldom if ever shown. That is correct and has been stated throughout the years in many of the threads on E-Budo, it is standard in many schools- particularly older schools.
In a comical twist, if you remember the fellow who was most derisive and verbal about the credibility of that topic (even being derisive of two of the highest level guys out there).
About two years later the fellow went on to post a thread on another forum all about his very own Aikijujutsu teacher; apparently he is quite taken with him, I didn't bother to tell him that his very own teacher spoke highly of the others- why bother. Morover we're talking about men here with lifetimes in their arts- not fligh-by-nights.
Anyway... In this post he goes on to say that many of the techniques in HIS school; not just the high level Aiki... ARE NOT SHOWN...get this To anyone outside the school. He even goes further to mention several examples.......HAH!

I didn't write a word...oh it could have been fun. I have the original posts, plus his others all saved.
I just laughed....ya gotta let people mess up and just keep rolling.

IT is fair to say that your not going to see it all at a demo. But if you ask and then are shown you will see enough to know if someones got it. And there are always flavours and levels.

Again, I hate to change the thread with a dead end topic. Lets respond elsewhere


Dan

Mark Jakabcsin
12th October 2001, 14:41
Dan,
Point well made and taken. You are right about trying to stay on topic, I guess my devilish side just kinda took over. I do remember the other quotes you mentioned and noticed your silence at the time. I guess I will have to work on that. I am sure we have all been a little guilty of the same from time to time.

mark

Dan Harden
12th October 2001, 15:13
Mark

Yeah....I chose silence instead of embarrasing him. He's a great guy. He can be a little edgy an opinionated at times. Just like us... :) so you have to let it slide to get the full measure of the man. He can piss you off, but he has many interesting points and experiences and he can also be witty and cause you to think. Not to bad to have to put up with a few fiobles.


Nathan
good points
Budo Renshu has nikajo and sankajo techniques in it as well. Just to be clear, the technique names your using to compare Ueshibas Budo renshu to Tokimunes Aikibudo; are modern monicers for techniques that essentially had no names. they were listed more on the lines of "this attack-this defense" in the scrolls. Tokimune named everything.
anyway
I don't believe anyone is going to be able to explain the changes in Ueshibas approach. With all do respect to the man himself-I doubt he could.

Twirly-whirley
It seems clear that he was the consumate artist and a rather religous fellow. In that vien he probably did what was natural to him-he created- and let his understanding of Daito ryu Aiki change with his vision of how martial arts should change. The results (imo) were his personal expressions of an art that used Daito ryu Aiki principles and connection to good effect, but yet in a framework that was rather "empty" without the Daito ryu Aiki.
In other words-only he could make it work.

Jujutsu
I would imagine that the Mokuroku was no longer serving his "vision" of martial arts either and that is the reason that he wandered far from that as well. His newer version -it maybe more correct; accordng to the records and interviews to say Kissamoru's version- was a simpler jujutsu with all the twirley-whirley. But yet nowhere do we see the high level Daito ryu Aiki anymore-only a new Aikido "Aiki" which is quite different from its foundings-some say better, others worse.
Records show that much of the teaching fell to Tohei and Kissamoru with several comments made that the old man did things "different." This includes Tohei's rather obtuse comment that "the only thing of value the old man ever taught us was how to relax." It would have been interesting to see behind the scenes.

All in all it seems he was a martial art genious and inovator. However, I do not think he left the tools in the system that can approach his level. Nor do I think that Daito ryu has anyone that would move like him either. Daito ryu has incredibly talented men who's skill level matches or arguably exceeds his but it "looks" different and always will. Who knows what would happen if they chose to change their mind and explore the direction Ueshiba went in.

Would you need to spend 20-30 years doing Daito ryu and then change YOUR mind, like he did, and start using Daito ryu Aiki in that evasive twirly then knife sharp way to re-develope, re-experiment, and re-explore where he was going with it to get there?" Who knows.
It seems no one else is getting to his vision from where Aikido is today. Even many ..(gosh so many it could fill volumes) senior Aikido people acknowledge that what is currently practiced is missing what Ueshiba had. The problem is that many see it as a religous or "ki" thing that only he had and that the answer lies in enlightenment. Others argue about maybe needing that violent past and hard style to go through to "get there."
I'll leave that up to Aikido people to decide, its been talked and written about for decades.
I haven't read of anyone except Shioda finally taking the radical approach to retrace the steps and get back to the beginings -and his art was changed forever due to his involvement in Daito ryu. The non-religous, mechanical aspects of angles and circles, and how that effects the anatomy will lead to discovering the "earthly" science that is Daito ryu Aiki.
Wanting to "steal it" aint gonna happen anytime soon. You need to fall in love with Daito ryu to get Daito ryu Aiki- twenty three years later I don't know how you change your mind. Yes I do.....a religous epiphany.

Dan

Arman
12th October 2001, 19:38
I think we all may overestimate Ueshiba's influence on modern practitioners of aikido. What I mean to say is, perhaps Ueshiba's closest students after the war were the essential transmitter of the art, NOT Ueshiba. Thus, what they lacked was passed on, with Ueshiba apparently unconcerned with the technical failings (given his religious experiences). Take a look at this article by Stan Pranin before you respond.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/articles/ajArticles/ed_109.asp
Interesting, yes?
Let me know what you all think.

Sincerely,
Arman Partamian
Daito-ryu Study Group
Baltimore, MD

Yamantaka
13th October 2001, 02:03
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
As a further point of reference, note the following DR students, listed as they trained under Sokaku sensei (and for the following lengths of time):

1) Sagawa Yukiyoshi= 1912-1936 (25 yrs consistently)

2) Horikawa Kodo = 1914-1936 (23 yrs consistently)
(and one year under his father Taiso from 1913-1914)

3) Takeda Tokimune = 1925-1943 (19 yrs intermittently)

4) Ueshiba Morihei = 1915-1919/ 1922 (5 1/2 yrs intermittently)

5) Hisa Takuma = 1936-1938/39 (2/3 yrs consistently)
(and from 1933-1936 under Morihei s.)

So, Yukiyoshi s., Kodo s. and Morihei s. were all classmates in the same dojo in Yubetsu, Hokkaido. Kodo s. and Yukiyoshi s. however seem to have trained consistently, where Morihei s. had breaks in instruction - especially after leaving Hokkaido (though he was active in DR for over 20 years).

YAMANTAKA : Hello, Nathan San!
Could you give me the source for this information (Length of training for each master)?
I found it very interesting
Best

Dan Harden
13th October 2001, 03:47
Armon

You will find that many of us here are old horses quite familiar to Stanleys work. We followed his career and the well documented research he has done. We watched the format changes from tiny newsletter to (several sizes of) glossy extravaganza to desk top publishing to electronic magazine. I have all of his Journals from the begining to now-less one.
We also followed his somewhat unpopular and openly critisized decision to cover Daito ryu and in so doing he revealed Ueshibas intensive involvement in it- and its role as the basis for the technical syllibus of Aikido in the early nineties.
Trust me when I tell you-before then it was NOT known and routinely denied both verbally and in print. I had shown an Aikido student some techniques and had an Aikido 6th dan tell me that Daito ryu didn't exist anymore-in front of witnesses. Oh how I wish Stanleys work had been out then!
At many levels Stanleys work was cutting edge. His exposure of the many myths, the outright fabrications, and the historic denials from the mainline did not put him on the top of the Aikido Social list.

It is interesting to sit back almost fifteen years later and hear the new guys quoting what to them is "old hand, accepted knowledge" about the players, the intensive link to Daito ryu, The incredible contribution of Tohei to the syllibus and various other things while not having the slightest idea of the cost both in time and position of one dogged historian in making all that research-"Common" knowledge.

If you re-read Nathan and my posts you will see some of that links material already discussed.

Anyway
Good link

Dan

Nathan Scott
13th October 2001, 09:07
[Post deleted by user]

Dan Harden
13th October 2001, 13:41
Nathan

Hey you have part of my library!!! hah

Gentlemen
When talking about these things we have to be careful less it appears were slamming Morihei or in some cases Sokaku. I don't think anyone is trying to do that. Just tryng to figure out a complicated relationship.

Nathan
I think I first read of Ueshiba Sensei's Goshin yo no te in Aikido Journal in an interview with Tokimune. I think itwas around the tmetat Stanley got to see the 35 volumes of the emuroku that Skoaku had totaling some 30,000 students. I'll have to check but I think it was mentioned again in an interview with Kondo.
Not all of the information printed in Aikido Journal appeared in the Daito ryu interview book. One of the most interesting was an interview with a Mr. Sato. He was a student of Sokaku and a contemporary of Ueshiba. It appears that Sokaku had Mr Sato write down a list of questions to ask Ueshiba. I can't remember them all but among them were
Why are you telling people you gave me a house?
Why are you changing what I taught you?
why are you lying about me?
I think there were something like 6 or 7 questions
There were other interviews and tid bits of information discovered by Stanely through the years and he would comment on them in the Journal. Another intriguing comment was that the Ueshiba family had several letters from Sokaku to Morihei but they would not show them to Stanley.


Much has been written of Sokakus volitile personality. However most of the sources I have seen quoted were of people surrounding Ueshibas camp. It seems clear that Sokaku had a wide ranging following including Very highly placed military and law enforcement personel. At one point a significant portion of law enforecment training was taking place in Daito ryu. Sokaku traveled for years teaching L.E. Dept's. and military. He also taught princes and princesses. I cannot imagine the explosive personality attributed to him faring well in the circles he traveled in. Perhaps the people surrounding Ueshiba "saw" a volitile personality for the simple reason that at the later stages in their relationship Ueshibas actions upset him. Thus, at a time when all Ueshibas pre-war uchideshi were arriving and his Aiki-do was taking off-his students frequently met one very pissed off Sokaku.
During the later stages of their relationship his appearences and Ueshibas dis-appearences would certainly suggest that.


Over all,
It appears that he met Sokaku through a Yanagi Ryu guy (couldn't resist calling Kotaro that) Kotaro Yoshida. Fell in love with the art, studied for a span of years in a closed seminar fashion
left Hokkaido to go back home
continued to train intermittently
had a life, found a religion he liked
continued to train on and off
(it is important to note that his training with Sokaku was on and off , but it would appear from his level of skill that he practiced daily with SOMEONE)
at one point Sokaku came and lived with him, at the end of that portion of a year he was given Kyoju Dairi
(many people considered him to be one of the best in talent and ability)
things started to gradually change after that
Where and when he got the second scroll I will have to check and get back to you on.
Eventually he changed the art (without permission) and in several rather unseemly circumstances RAN AWAY when Sokaku showed up.
Sokakus arrival in Asahi (some say he chased Ueshiba down there) and his taking over of the teaching for three years resulted in him giving Hisa a higher rank than Ueshiba; a Menkyo Kaiden. Thus making Ueshibas student; Takuma Hisa- Ueshibas senior in the art. Some have incorrectly argued that the Goshin yo no te was the highest awarded rank then-but you have the menkyo beng given to others in roughly the same time frame. At any rate- years later Ueshiba "gave" Hisa an eighth dan in Aikido, (still think rank means anything-ever did?)

During this period Ueshiba completely broke away, Stopped paying the stippend to Sokaku for students enrollement (the Aikido statis quo was that Sokaku charged a small fortune for training. This was qouted in about a dozen interviews and then it was debunked in about ten different interviews with NON Aikido affiliated people who trained with Sokaku. So unless Sokaku charged "only" Ueshiba allot of money for training, that was just another story told.
At a point, Ueshiba changed the name but still awarded the Daito ryu mokuroku to people. He actually changed the name of the art on the scrolls he issued yet copied the rest of mokuroku verbatum. Stanley published photos of one given to Mr. Mochizuki.

I cannot imagine what would be said of that behavior were it to happen right now. Imagine what we would be reading in E-Budo?

In the fullness of time the statis quo was to barely mention his training in DR. His involvement was obscurred, vastly reduced, made to appear that it was "just" another art he studied, and te general impression offered was that he studied many, many arts. with Daito ryu beng just another one. Nowhere is it mentioned that the majority of his training was in a single art-that being Daito ryu. In one book by he is listed as the surviving heir to Daito ryu. Imagine being Tokimune and reading that? It appears that his Yagyu scroll is very fishy by all accounts. When shown to the Yagyu Soke all he said was the equivalent of "That's incorrect." Talk about being put on the spot.
Of the many many arts?
It appears he studied little of other arts and of those most were AFTER his formulation of Aiki-budo. The vast, overwhelming majority of his training time was spent in Daito ryu. WHich is why Aikido, at least at first, looked so much like Daito ryu.

So what did he know?
Daito ryu. Really, really, well.
And a smattering of other things

Yamantaka
13th October 2001, 15:57
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Hi Ubaldo-san,

One thing I realized that I haven't come across yet, is the date and/or circumstances in which Morihei s. received the Goshin'yo no te mokuroku.
Everyone seems to agree that it was issued to him, but I don't see a date anywhere. Anyone else (with source)?
Regards,

YAMANTAKA : Thanks for your answer, Nathan San!
And yes, many things about Aikijujutsu and Aikido are still unanswered. Everyone believes that Ueshiba Morihei O received the Goshin'yo no Te but I don't know if it's in the possession of the Ueshiba family and if it is I don't believe it has been presented to anyone.
Let's hope some day all this will be out, in the open
Best regards and good keiko :toast:

Yamantaka
13th October 2001, 16:36
Originally posted by Dan Harden
Gentlemen
When talking about these things we have to be careful less it appears were slamming Morihei or in some cases Sokaku. I don't think anyone is trying to do that. Just tryng to figure out a complicated relationship.

YAMANTAKA : I don't believe you, O Infidel! You're trying to smash the unsullied image of the Kaiso! :mad: ;)


Originally posted by Dan Harden
Over all,
It appears that he met Sokaku through a Yanagi Ryu guy (couldn't resist calling Kotaro that) Kotaro Yoshida. Fell in love with the art, studied for a span of years in a closed seminar fashion
(it is important to note that his training with Sokaku was on and off , but it would appear from his level of skill that he practiced daily with SOMEONE)
at one point Sokaku came and lived with him, at the end of that portion of a year he was given Kyoju Dairi
(many people considered him to be one of the best in talent and ability)

YAMANTAKA : It seems his total training was 1,5 years m/l (combining his 5 years of intermitent training). The longest continuous period he trained with Takeda Dai Sensei was the 6 month period at Ayabe.


Originally posted by Dan Harden
In one book by he is listed as the surviving heir to Daito ryu. Imagine being Tokimune and reading that? It appears that his Yagyu scroll is very fishy by all accounts. When shown to the Yagyu Soke all he said was the equivalent of "That's incorrect."
Of the many many arts?
It appears he studied little of other arts and of those most were AFTER his formulation of Aiki-budo. The vast, overwhelming majority of his training time was spent in Daito ryu. WHich is why Aikido, at least at first, looked so much like Daito ryu.

YAMANTAKA : I think the book was JUDO AND AIKIDO, by Kenji Tomiki. On page 102, Tomiki says :
"After seven generations, the legitimate successor to the art (Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu) is now Mr. Moritaka (another name of Morihei) Ueshiba. A man of profound religious belief, he made many additions to the art and it is now known as Aikido". (!!!)
Concerning the Yagyu Shingan Ryu school, I agree about the "fishiness" of Ueshiba Kaiso's Menkyo. But not about his training. He practiced that art with much dedication for about 5 years (from 1903 to 1908), in Sakai, near Osaka. I have observed many photos of the Founder applying atemi and those atemi are extremely similar to the ones practiced at that school. I would say that almost all atemi of Aikido are directly based on Yagyu Shingan Ryu. As to the other arts...
- JUDO less than a year;
- TENSHIN SHIN'YO RYU JUJUTSU less than a year;
- JUKENJUTSU during his period of military training;
- SWORD TRAINING IN KORYU Mostly unknown (he invited teachers of Kashima Shinto Ryu to teach at the Kobukan but apparently he didn't train just watched, in spite of having signed
a Keppan;
- SOJUTSU, KUKISHIN RYU, KITO RYU... Legends, myths and fancies...


Originally posted by Dan Harden
:mad:


YAMANTAKA : Now, Now, Dan...:nono:
Relax, smile, be happy:laugh:

Dan Harden
13th October 2001, 18:51
Ubaldo
hey you
ya you........phhhttppp!!!!!! :)

I'm not trying to be difficult. I guess I just need to post more happy faces :) :) :)

Take the list of is training you offered.....
1/2 yr
1/2 yr
1 yr
2 yr
he just watched
then.......
23years
So when all the books and his own kid says "he studied losts of arts. Daito ryu was JUST one of them -that about says it all.....

The man was without a doubt a genious. But there were too many attempts to sully Sokakus well deserved reputation and deny the history in order to raise the other. Each, on their own, deserve recogniton without it being at the expense of the other.
I'm fine with everyone where they are. To coin a phrase "Don't mean beans to me."

Dan

Arman
15th October 2001, 15:26
Dan,

Well, I wouldn't say Ueshiba's connection to Daito-ryu was entirely unknown. Draeger discusses the connection in "Modern Budo and Bujutsu," in the section on Aikido. He talks about Ueshiba training with Sokaku and receiving the kyoju dairi in Daito-ryu. "Modern Budo and Bujutsu" was first published in the early 1970's.
Sincerely,

Arman Partamian
Daito-ryu Study Group
Baltimore, MD

Yamantaka
15th October 2001, 16:55
Originally posted by Arman
Dan,
Well, I wouldn't say Ueshiba's connection to Daito-ryu was entirely unknown. Draeger discusses the connection in "Modern Budo and Bujutsu," in the section on Aikido. He talks about Ueshiba training with Sokaku and receiving the kyoju dairi in Daito-ryu. "Modern Budo and Bujutsu" was first published in the early 1970's.
Sincerely,
Arman Partamian
Daito-ryu Study Group
Baltimore, MD

YAMANTAKA : I'll say you're right but we must remember that the "official party line" at the Aikikai didn't mention Draeger and the majority of Aikido students at the time were more concerned with practice than reading. Also Draeger's books weren't very widespread and became known and studied only in the two last decades. Remember, also, that in JUDO AND AIKIDO, by Kenji Tomiki (published in the sixties) Ueshiba Kaiso was said to be "Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu's heir" (as Dan said, Takeda's son should be thrilled...) the art now being called Aikido...
The problems with history...
Best

Really, only through the efforts of Stanley Pranin DRAJJ came to be acknowledge as THE aikido root.

PRehse
15th October 2001, 18:00
Originally posted by Yamantaka
Remember, also, that in JUDO AND AIKIDO, by Kenji Tomiki (published in the sixties) Ueshiba Kaiso was said to be "Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu's heir" (as Dan said, Takeda's son should be thrilled...) the art now being called Aikido...
The problems with history...

Don't have a copy of the book so I can't check but I have been told that Ueshiba M. left Hokkaido shortly after realizing he would not be heir to Takeda's art. That was from a Shodokan (Tomiki) vetran.

Jay Bell
15th October 2001, 18:56
- SOJUTSU, KUKISHIN RYU, KITO RYU... Legends, myths and fancies...

However....here we have:

Kukishin Tenshin Hyoho (http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/impact3_e.htm)

Not to say that the above statement was incorrect, I can't seem to find much Hontai Takagi Yoshin ryu/Kukishin ryu in Aikido at all....but it's just interesting..

Comments?

This is a great thread, all. It's really put some unanswered questions out on the table.

Take care,

Jay

Nathan Scott
16th October 2001, 09:10
[Post deleted by user]

Jay Bell
16th October 2001, 09:53
Hi Nathan,

I'm actually inclined to agree with you. Looking at Aikido, I don't see much, if any, Kukishin ryu influence at all. I'd be really curious to find any hard links to the Kuki arts.

Jay

Yamantaka
16th October 2001, 18:41
Originally posted by PRehse

Don't have a copy of the book so I can't check...

YAMANTAKA : Hi, Peter! Don't you worry, I'll send you the page as an attachment to a PM.
Best

Yamantaka
16th October 2001, 19:25
Originally posted by Jay Bell
Hi Nathan,
I'm actually inclined to agree with you. Looking at Aikido, I don't see much, if any, Kukishin ryu influence at all. I'd be really curious to find any hard links to the Kuki arts.
Jay

YAMANTAKA : Hello, Jay!
Read again that site. It is very unclear about Ueshiba's involvement in Kukishin Ryu. It presumes that Ueshiba made some declarations and said that he had some Kukishin scrolls.
Some master of Kukishin Ryu is supposed to have said that, "perhaps", Ueshiba had some knowledge about the art.
And Nathan is right. To use Kukishin in his creation of Aikido, Ueshiba supposedly would have to had a Menkyo Kaiden and that's an unknown part of his life.
So...Legends, Myths and fancies...
Best

Nathan Scott
18th October 2001, 20:03
[Post deleted by user]

Yamantaka
19th October 2001, 01:24
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Hi Ubaldo-san,

It's not that I was trying to say that Morihei s. would have to hold a menkyo kaiden to incorporate what he might have picked up into aikido. This would be *a good idea*, since you wouldn't be sure that you'd get the full picture, but it is clear that Morihei s. was influenced by many arts that he did not hold high (or any) rank in.

YAMANTAKA : And where, in God's name, was my head when I wrote that??? :smash: What I really wanted to say is that Ueshiba Kaiso didn't seem to have any great knowledge of Kukishin Ryu (far from a Menkyo Kaiden) but you are also right : Ueshiba Okina trained in many arts, sometimes for very little time, but he was undaunted to put them in the Aikido mould. In a very known story, he studied Naginata by a book and then taught it to a young lady artist.


Originally posted by Nathan Scott
FWIW, the "Aikido", by Ueshiba Kisshomaru (1985) is full of inaccuracies in dates and historical facts. The technical photos are nice, but either the history was poorly researched or the translation of his books into English suffered greatly (or a little of both).
Also, "Invincible Warrior" by John Stevens (1997) also has historical inaccuracies and many misleading stories (still).
Filtering through these kinds of conflicting facts really gives you a headache. Mr. Pranin's work is by far the most reliable and consistently accurate I've found yet.

YAMANTAKA : According to our friend, Peter Goldsbury, AIKIDO ICHIRO (untranslated) is a very much better work. About Stevens, I agree with you : good writing, bad facts. Pranin is undoubtedly still the best.
Yours

Walker
20th October 2001, 01:14
Nathan,
I see you have listed height and weight in you chronologies and while those stats are interesting I want to know bust and hips! Especially for that hot looker Ueshiba!:smokin:

Yamantaka
28th December 2001, 09:03
QUOTE]Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Hi all,

As a further point of reference, note the following DR students, listed as they trained under Sokaku sensei (and for the following lengths of time):

1) Sagawa Yukiyoshi= 1912-1936 (25 yrs consistently)

2) Horikawa Kodo = 1914-1936 (23 yrs consistently)
(and one year under his father Taiso from 1913-1914)

3) Takeda Tokimune = 1925-1943 (19 yrs intermittently)

4) Ueshiba Morihei = 1915-1919/ 1922 (5 1/2 yrs intermittently)

5) Hisa Takuma = 1936-1938/39 (2/3 yrs consistently)
(and from 1933-1936 under Morihei s.)

So, Yukiyoshi s., Kodo s. and Morihei s. were all classmates in the same dojo in Yubetsu, Hokkaido. Kodo s. and Yukiyoshi s. however seem to have trained consistently, where Morihei s. had breaks in instruction - especially after leaving Hokkaido (though he was active in DR for over 20 years).
[/QUOTE]

YAMANTAKA : Dear Nathan,

I took the liberty of placing your list in the Aikido Journal Bulletin Board and Stanley Pranin made the following remarks :
########################################
"I think that we're talking about apples and oranges here. What I am alluding to is direct study under Sokaku Takeda. You have to keep in mind the geography of Hokkaido and the fact that it took a relatively long time to get from place to place even though the physical distances were not that great.
Sokaku Takeda lived in Shirataki-mura almost exclusively for about 5 years when Morihei Ueshiba was there. They lived in the same household for 1-2 years. Then Sokaku moved into his own home but this was very closeby Morihei's house.

Horikawa and Sagawa lived in towns several hours away. Sokaku's visits to these places was occasional.

Also, in looking at Ubaldo's listing which is very interesting, by the way, there is a tremendous overlap in dates. Sokaku can't be teaching all of these individuals in separate geographical locations at the same time. So what we are referring to is the amount of time training in Daito-ryu, not the amount of study under Sokaku Takeda.

Stanley Pranin "
#########################################

Could you please comment on that?
Best regards and a very good New Year
Ubaldo

Dan Harden
28th December 2001, 15:12
Principles Vs techniques VS time spent

Although much time is spent yakin about-and postulating about "principles" I wonder how many truly understand the difference?
In that vein, I think you find the answer to the "How long did so and so train with so and so, and how much do they really know?" in the individuals personal pursuit and practice time as well as their personalities.
Who do you think gets more? Someone who trains with "the man" for ten days once a year? Or someone who gets a partner and trains for 30 hours a week?
And who accents THIS or over THAT in their time spent "in" the very same art?

This type of training and understanding takes years and years of ........sweat. Regardless of detractors comments- it is obviously a very deep and detailed art. For that reason, people walk away with their own personalities coloring their observations of the art and what they chose to "see" and accent.

Regardless of the personal hands-on experience it is patently obvious that Sagawa and Kodo, took Aiki in a specific direction, and made a very significant and deep study of the control of the human body. While other schools of the same Ryu went more in the direction of disseminating "techniques" and founded more technique oriented arts.
Yes, both have techniques and principles but soeme accented one over the other.

I think its interesting to see the approaches of the various schools. You can compare the angles and technical basics that identify the Ryu- but the skills of the top guys are not all the same-not by a long shot.
For the universalists out there- the "everything is the same" guys; there is most certainly a diifferent "feel" to the different schools.

It would have been fascinating to see inside the minds and hearts of the various people’s personalities in their studies and what led them to their current understanding of the same basic art. Of course this applies to most anything but I do feel that DR offers a substantial variance to occur due to its technical depth.


Dan

Cady Goldfield
28th December 2001, 15:30
To the above I'd add that students receive only a fraction of their training from the instructor and dojo instruction. A music student may have a half-hour or hour-long lesson once a week, but spends the rest of the week practicing at home... scales, arpeggios... The more advanced the student becomes, the less actual time he or she needs to spend with the instructor. At that point, the instructor need only make small corrections and additions, and the student takes them home to re-work his/her skills.

Some people spend maybe 8 hours a week in actual dojo training with instructors and sempai, but then spend the bulk of their time at home trying to "re-live" the movements and principles. It's much, much harder to do this if you don't have any training partners outside the dojo, so for some of us it takes way longer than usual to actually make progress. I suspect that Ueshiba had plenty of training fodder -- his students and perhaps peers in the other arts he studied -- between visits with Takeda Sokaku.

Confidential to DJH
You readin' your e-mail, kiddo?
When we training?

Nathan Scott
29th December 2001, 09:43
[Post deleted by user]

Yamantaka
29th December 2001, 10:25
Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Ubaldo-san,

Thanks much for posting the list to Stan and re-posting his response here. I missed your posting over there, since I don't get out that way much these days.

As I said before, the dates I posted are all taken from the various interviews, which means that there are some foggy memories by some of the people interviewed. Not altogether unusual.

Regards,

YAMANTAKA : Domo arigato gozaimashita.
It's always a pleasure to read your answers.
Happy New Year! :toast:

Nathan Scott
12th January 2002, 03:11
[Post deleted by user]

Ron Tisdale
14th January 2002, 17:26
Well, it is interesting, but is this really unusual in the context of japanese training in budo?

I've always been taught that to learn aikido it is necessary to have a seeking mind: not that someone will spoonfeed the knowledge to me.

Frankly, I would find it strange if Ueshiba "taught" any other way. My question would probably be focused on 'given the nature of the training taking place, would someone with a seeking mind be able to eventually reach the same level'.

I think this question is much harder to answer...

Ron Tisdale

Nathan Scott
14th January 2002, 21:30
[Post deleted by user]

Cady Goldfield
14th January 2002, 22:36
It's possible that Sokaku "read the riot act" to M. Ueshiba about teaching aikijutsu, after they had their documented falling-out. There were a number of noted events that make this a plausible reason. Ueshiba may simply have stopped showing that aspect of the DR curriculum because Sokaku told him to stop.

Some folks have other postulations (there's another one that sounds truly plausible, but I tend to go with the "Takeda says stop showing" one), but we'll probably never know for certain.

Jay Bell
14th January 2002, 22:54
Cady,

Interesting outlook on it. I'm interested if Ueshiba sensei was more frightened and "on the spot" more then anything. When Takeda sensei came to Asahi, it was said that Ueshiba sensei disappeared. Maybe what and how he was demonstrating and teaching the Soden was far from the Daito ryu that Takeda sensei taught.

If I had altered teachings and was teaching my own spin on things...and my Soke showed up in town...it might put a bit of a panic in me enough to get the hell out of dodge....especially since Takeda sensei mentioned that he would be teaching from that point on. Or...it could have been that Ueshiba sensei just merely felt sluffed?

Any thoughts?

Nathan Scott
14th January 2002, 23:01
[Post deleted by user]

Cady Goldfield
15th January 2002, 01:26
Hi Nathan and Jay,

Jay, yeah... the infamous "Asahi Incident" apparently was one of several in which Ueshiba was told that his teacher was in town, resulting in Ueshiba taking off in a big hurry ("Oops! Just remembered someplace I gotta be!"). I believe it was Stanley Pranin who documented several other incidents, through some of the stories shared by DR exponents and their descendents. Another one of the tales is that Morihei failed to pay to Sokaku the token fee (just a few sen) per student whenever someone came to study with Ueshiba and signed his emoroku, which may have resulted in Sokaku's feeling he had been dishonored and disrespected by his student. Who knows?

There have been other hypotheses on the subject, but I don't know enough about Ueshiba's inner workings to have an opinion on them. Sticking to the more mundane and simple (Occam's Razor being my guide), and being the non-expert that I am, I'm most inclined to think that either Sokaku said to stop teaching it, or that Morihei wanted to "keep his edge," as Nathan suggests, or that Morihei figured "What the heck. It's too tough to teach it, and they don't need it for what I intend aikido to be" when he became more engrossed in the spiritual purposes and applications of his new art. Or, a combination of those factors.

Again, who can say? It's all just speculation, although it is fun to wonder and come up with hypotheses.

Chris Li
16th January 2002, 00:32
Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
Jay, yeah... the infamous "Asahi Incident" apparently was one of several in which Ueshiba was told that his teacher was in town, resulting in Ueshiba taking off in a big hurry ("Oops! Just remembered someplace I gotta be!").

I think that I've mentioned this before, but this kind of response to an uncomfortable situation, while very odd (and somewhat cowardly) in western terms, is not unusual in Japanese terms. It's a classic example of the "ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist" response so common in Japanese society.

Best,

Chris

Dan Harden
16th January 2002, 02:42
Chris

I think the point that Nathan and Cady were making is that the behaviour (regardless of culture) just isn't a sign of a healthy relationship.
From the rhetoric that has followed regarding payments and permission and denial of history- there seems to be no indication of subtrafuge on the part of Takeda.


Dan

Chris Li
16th January 2002, 03:14
Originally posted by Dan Harden
I think the point that Nathan and Cady were making is that the behaviour (regardless of culture) just isn't a sign of a healthy relationship.

It's certainly true that their relationship was on the rocks. It's the same kind of behavior that used to drive foreign business people nuts. They'd be under the impression that they had a firm comittment, only to show up one day and have their Japanese partners saying "What are you talking about?". It's all a part of the "ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist" strategy. Still, I think that it's important to consider the story in the context of the culture in which it occurred.

Actually it's curiously addictive once you get used to it :).



From the rhetoric that has followed regarding payments and permission and denial of history- there seems to be no indication of subtrafuge on the part of Takeda.

Did anybody say that there was?

I don't even think that there was that much deliberate subterfuge on the part of most other people. Certainly there was a lot of mistaken information floating around, but there are a couple of causes for that. Even today, it's not all that usual in Japan to question an instructor directly as to specifics - people usually just listen to whatever the person says passively. This was even more true in M. Ueshiba's time. Mostly, a lot of Aikido history was pieced together from what people heard (or recalled they heard) him say, and what they inferred from that. This was complicated by his manner of speech, which was, to say the least, a little less than orthodox.

There was very little systematic compilation of facts until the foreigners moved into that area.

Best,

Chris

O'Neill
22nd September 2002, 23:14
I have often wondered about the lesser known students of Takeda sensei and their ability. We often hear about the skills of ueshiba
sensei. I have also heard that the skills of Yoshida (which may have rivaled Takeda's), Sagawa (very complete), and Korikawa kodo (amazing aiki waza)were second to none. Could the fame and history of aikido have over shadowed the other masters of Daito ryu?

I read an interview in Aikido journal that stated that some koryu jujutsu teachers considered Yoshida sensei to be quite amazing.
History has a unique way of down playing some pretty amazing people sometimes. Any thoughts?

Erin O'Neill

tmanifold
22nd September 2002, 23:22
Part of the reason Ueshiba has so much fame is that many of his feats were either, on tape or had surviving first hand sources(until recently).

Guts
24th September 2002, 08:41
I don't know much babout AikiJuJitsu other then what I have read, but I'm betting anyone who stuck it out with Takeda for a long time was a very great martial artist.

PRehse
24th September 2002, 10:09
A lot of this had to do with Ueshiba M. putting himself out there.

He accepted challenges, taught the Military, ate bullets, gave demonstrations, reached enlightenment, you know the usual stuff required to get yourself noticed.

In the process he gathered a lot of students some very well placed.

There were a few contemporaries of Ueshiba M. that I think he would have had trouble with but you can bet Ueshiba M. was pretty good.

Question. How many of the others listed below accepted challenges outside the dojo?

Barry Southam
24th September 2002, 23:10
Friends,

I am not an aikido student however I find it very interesting and have a question concerning those who studied Daitoryu years ago..
It seems that the founder of Aikido is the most talked about individual who studied Daitoryu and developed his own system...I don't mean to be rude or give the impression of starting a debate but..Would you place others who had studied Daitoryu on the same level of importance as Ueshiba such as Okuyama( founded Hakkoryu Jujutsu) ?

Barry E. Southam

Judo background

Daito
27th September 2002, 07:58
Hi,

Ueshiba taught openly trying to make aikido popular. Some say he followed the steps of judo and got advice from Kano Sensei.
Others did not. They kept closed doors for long time, and cared little about promotion of their arts.
Aikido became very popular eventually, so this is the reason why Ueshiba is mentioned so much. He is known as a founder of Aikido first, then as a student of Daito-ryu.
Now, if there wasn't any Ueshiba, we may not know much about Daito-ryu, or maybe this art would be close to extinction by now.
It seems like few tried to follow Aikido steps, but never to such an extent (Okuyama & Hakko-ryu, Tokimune & Aikibudo).
Regarding the technical ability in Daito-ryu, the places would certainly change.

tmanifold
27th September 2002, 20:42
Another thing about Ueshiba was that he was weird much like Takeda himself. The fact is normal people don't get the recognition that people who are a little odd do. I imagine that most of the people who studied under takeda, and were good martial artists, were normal people. The went about their daily lives just like everyone else it just so happens the were excellent martial artists.

rupert
3rd October 2002, 16:50
I have visited several "great' teachers and all of them had at least a few hopeless students, you know, the type that have trained for some time yet have little skill. Just training with a master does not make you one. Takeda probably had some lousy students too, although I suspect he may have lost patience with them sooner or later. I saw a gaijin in an old Ueshiba movie - looked pretty hopeless to me - but probably famous now because of it. I have an old video of myself from about 18 years ago - of course, I look pathetic. But I didn't have Ueshiba as my teacher!

Rupert Atkinson