Question

[Dave Lowry]

All,
No attempt to put anyone on the spot nor to hector. I am simply curious about some of the responses to the discussion of late below, regarding instruction in a koryu to be offered at an upcoming taikai.

Assuming you are among those planning to attend or interested: What is your opinion on receiving instruction from someone who has expressly defied strictures of the ryu enjoining him from giving that instruction? Is your experience in any way adumbrated by the knowledge that the person teaching has deliberately broken an oath he has taken?

I am not inquiring about technical abilities. I am asking how one approaches the experience of learning from another who has violated vows forbidding him to teach. Is it important to you? Do you make it a consideration in your decision to learn—or not to—from such a person? Do you believe it is a trivial matter or is it important to you to either explain or otherwise rationalise the transgression?

Again, no wish to embarrass or start an argument or to be confrontational. No one “owes” me or anyone else reading here an explanation for why they would or would not participate in such an event. If they would care to give it, however, I would find it of some interest and I hope in that spirit you will indulge me.


Cordially,

[pgsmith]

Hi Dave,
I was under the impression that the students of the various dojo that Sugawara started did not take keppan at the hombu which is part of the problem. Just my assumption though and could very easily be wrong. I am thinking about attending that seminar in Orlando. Not that much can be learned at a seminar, but I have only seen TSKSR in one demonstration, and am curious about it and thought it would be a good opportunity to see it first hand. The politics of the situation are pretty much beyond me as I am not connected in any way with either group. In answer to your questions, I really don't know if he broke oath or is defying strictures placed upon him in order to teach this seminar. I don't know enough about the whole situation to judge anyone. Therefore, the entire thing never entered into consideration when thinking about attending this seminar.

If I was seriously thinking about training in TSKSR, then the politics of the situation would probably play a much larger part in my thinking. If that was the case, I think I would have to do a lot of research and talking with those involved to try and determine what the actual situation was as I only have the most basic of ideas at the moment. Personally though, I think the most basic of ideas on the politics involved is all I should know about it, being as I am an outsider to the ryu.

Just my thoughts and opinions on it.

Cheers,

[David T Anderson]

Mr. Lowry:

I think what the matter hinges on is the nature of the instruction. It's one thing to participate in a seminar...something I would regard as more of a hands-on demo than a lesson as such. I would not regard the presenter as being a bad person for leading such an event [of course, his own koryu leaders would be the final judge of his actions]. OTOH, I would not attend a dojo where lessons in a koryu art are offered by someone not authorized to give them. Clearly that would have little point, since you could never be considered to have any standing in the art even if you did pick up the skills...and it _would_ be wrong. Such a thing is tantamount to stealing the knowlege and legitimacy of a koryu organization, which stands the value of such study on its head.

If I thought that a seminar on koryu techniques would advance my rudimentary skills in swordsmanship, I would probably attend it. However I would regard the experience not so much as 'receiving instruction' in a koryu art, but merely getting a 'flavour' of it.

Having said all that, I should point out that I don't know much about the traditions and strictures of koryu. My own belief is that while a person who wants to be a respected member of a group must obey its rules, nothing breeds disrespect for rules as much as their harsh and uncompromising application. And, aren't we taught in the Aiki arts to bend and accept rather than break and reject?

[glad2bhere]

Dear Dave:

As I was reading your opening comment I immediately did something that I find myself doing just about every time someone raises the sort of question as have you. That is, my mind takes me back to the movie, THE YAKUZA (Robert Mitchum film) from a few decades back. You will, I think, recall that the movie had to do, essentially, with the nature of On and Giri as played out between two individuals--- a former US Occupation Soldier and the husband of the woman with whom that soldier developed a romantic relationship during the occupation. I was especially caught by a comment made by the brother of the Japanese character regarding the nature of obligations, to wit:
"... if you don't feel it, you don't have it."

I have shared this with by way of stating that very few, if any, of my American countrymen have an appreciation of what they assume when they begin a journey into the community of martial artists. I will go even further and say that of those people who are appreciative of the arts, even fewer will appreciate the intellectual, emotional and spiritiual implications of their choices. Even as I write this I can imagine one more person groaning over having to brook yet another spiel about estoeric beleif systems and cultural values. For some reason that befuddles me, it is the simplest thing in the world to wax profound over the physical attributes of an activity while easily discounting the moral underpinnings without which the physical activity is little more than masturbation.

In answer to your question, then, and to draw on my last metaphor, were I a practitioner of Japanese traditions (which I am not) or a practitioner of Korean traditions (which I am) I doubt seriously I would have much time for what might be little more than --- whats' the American term?---- "a circle-jerk." FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Charlie Kondek]

Hi, Dave.

I think even though many folks in the martial arts community (your crowd in particular) have done a lot to explain what a koryu is and how it functions, there's still a lot of misunderstanding as to how it works, both in the (diverse) MA community and persons entering the community for the first time. So these kinds of things are gonna keep coming up. Plus, it seems to me (and I'm not involved in koryu) that there's disagreements within the koryu "community" about modernising or breaking away, etc. I suppose that's not new, but it ain't good for the discipline as a whole, I think.

To answer your question from my perspective: I'm not the least bit interested in koryu (although I admire them, certainly), although I should note that I probably would never get invited to participate in one anyway, as I don't plan on leaving North America. Anywho, I just feel I have plenty on my plate with kendo and judo. That said, if I was interested, I would not seek instruction from someone where the political situation was the least bit muddled.

But! I've done a lot of reading here and elsewhere, and have a much more informed opinion than some.


BTW, I had to look up "admubrate."

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Dave Lowry
All,
What is your opinion on receiving instruction from someone who has expressly defied strictures of the ryu enjoining him from giving that instruction?

Sorry for responding your question with yet another question.

What is your view of what happened between Patrick Demuynck and Tamiya Ryu?

I was trying to find that weblink with Mr. Demuynck's side of the story on his dojo website, but I couldn't find it again.

Honestly, it really depends on "why" the dojo would not allow the instruction.

In Mr. Demuynck's case, I would "probably" not have a problem learning Tamiya Ryu from him...except I don't live anywhere near him or have any interest in Tamiya Ryu. This is based on how each side presented themselves on iaido-l and their websites.

For me, it's really a case by case. If the only reason someone isn't allow to teach is due to a grudge match and/or you are not paying me hombu dues, I could honestly care less. If it is because the soke feels that what is represented isn't true to the ryu, that's another matter entirely.

[Walker]

Adhering to the spirit and the rules is good and admirable, but because we come from an outside culture need to be careful not to go to extremes unthinkable within that culture itself. I think we can all think of examples of Japanese sensei who broke the rules and got away with it. Maybe that’s the trick - knowing how to get away with it in a culturally acceptable manner :)

[gendzwil]

Originally posted by DCPan

I could honestly care less.
Arrgh. Couldn't. You could not honestly care less.

Pet peeves r us
Neil

[DCPan]

Originally posted by gendzwil

Arrgh. Couldn't. You could not honestly care less.

Pet peeves r us
Neil

What do you mean? If someone agreed to pay then skipped out, that's one thing.

If someone from another country shows up at my door and say "Hi, I represent the soke of x-ryu which you claim to practice, from today on, pay dues to me and I'll turn them in to the soke for you...."

Yeah...right.... :D

:D

[Dan Harden]

Money and dues?
Your kidding right?
Is this how we think? What we are left with?
Dave’s question was far deeper and pervasive then this. Perhaps the reply is telling. It speaks to our rather course and base motives while completely obviating the true issues of character and obligation.

Who and where and why do we end up refering to money when it comes to these issues of integrity? No one is getting rich at these arts. It is more often a question of ego and recognition at the expense of our word and personal integrity.

Does our word mean nothing? Cost nothing?
Do you want to partner or enter into a relationship with someone who does not honor his or her commitments? Does anything have meaning anymore?
Everyone these days seems to equivocate and try to explain away their failures. It’s always someone else’s fault or “I have to hear the other side first.” There just isn’t a right or wrong any more.
I fear that for this reason alone the Koryu will keep pushing people away.
I am embarrassed by our support of others lack of commitment.
The fact that we don't care says it all.

I made a promise almost fifteen years ago.
I meant what I said.

Cheers
Dan

[Charlie Kondek]

David,

Neil meant you should have written "I could honestly not care less" rather than "I could honestly care less."

:D

Dan, what do you mean? Also, what promise? I'm sorry to say you're being a bit too obscure for me.

:) <--That's like a quizzical but encouraging look.

[glad2bhere]

Dear Mr. Anderson:

My preference would have been to call you "Dave" but I didn't want to confuse people with the originator of the string.

I read your post and have a little different take on things. Like you what I DON'T know about Koryo traditions would fill a small library. The way I get my mind around this is to compare it to the Masonic order to which I belong.

In our traditions there is nothing "secret" that you probably couldn't find out with a bit of dilligent digging at the local library. Sure there were times in our past when there was some pretty rough treatment meted out to members who couldn't manage themselves but nowadays its, effectively, a mens' fraternity which prides itself on keeping its word when given. I see these Koryo traditions as much the same. If someone gave a seminar on the mysteries of the Masonic Order in which he disclosed things he had sworn to keep to himself or within the Order I know that I wouldn't attend. Its not just that there is an injunction against it. I simply wouldn't have much interest in being around someone who couldn't respect the conventions of the fraternity.

I can also remember hearing that the Marines have something they do at the end of having one of their number stripped of rank. Apparently the balance of the unit turn their backs and walk off. The power of this gesture seems to come from having not been told to do this, as much as doing it out of disgust with someone who broke faith with his comrades. Maybe I'm way off base on this and others can correct me if I am misinformed. For my part, though, there is something more going on here than just choosing to attend a workshop. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Charlie Kondek
David,

Neil meant you should have written "I could honestly not care less" rather than "I could honestly care less."

:D

Dan, what do you mean? Also, what promise? I'm sorry to say you're being a bit too obscure for me.

:) <--That's like a quizzical but encouraging look.

Oh..did I make a grammtical boo boo?

As for Dan...my comments about them dues are related to that whole Tamiya Ryu debacle. Judge not too quickly. I believe I was rather clear on MY view point.

With all this "distance" correspondance stuff that some koryu are doing, I have to wonder about the whole integrity thing ANYWAY.

The "thrust" of my view was what does the practitioner owe allegiance to?

If I trained from a student of the previous, previous soke in podunk nowhere, what real weight does the current soke have on me unless my sensei tells me to owe allegiance to him to? I may not be able to use that name, but I can still practice what I practice.

If you want to set up shop and teach using the ryu's name, you owe the soke whatever he says sinec he owns the ryu. If you just want to practice by yourself, I don't see the big deal.

Regards,

:D

[Nathan Scott]

Hello all,

I don't want to fill up too much space here with a huge response, but I would like to make a few (hopefully brief) comments:

Honestly, it really depends on "why" the dojo would not allow the instruction.

I believe that it does not. Ryu-ha are for all intents and purposed "owned" by one person, each generation. The art is their property to do with as they wish. If you do not like, respect or trust the head of the art, then you should train elsewhere. Otherwise, the appropriate thing to do is to behave with honor, dignity and sincerity. In other words, don't rip them off, move on or create your own art under a different name.

It does not matter why someone is expelled or restricted from teaching. The headmaster, in theory, has the master plan for his generation of the art, and is not obligated to explain their ideas or convert the art into a democracy.

From a modern standpoint, if you inherit or invent something, it is your intellectual property. It is yours to do with as you may, and nobody else has a right to use or abuse it. If you choose to allow others limited access or use of it, that is up to you. The terms and an understanding is established beforehand (keppan, kishomon, verbal agreement, etc.). To break this is to break your word of honor. No matter how long you use someone elses physical/intellectual property, it is not yours to do with as you wish. A license implies that it can be revoked by definition. Just because something is intellectual and not physical does not make stealing it any less wrong.

The fact that someone's character would allow them to break their word on such a large scale speaks much about their judgement and character, and may even indicate the reasons for their seperation from the owner of the art. If someone is fired from a reputable company after many years of service, how would they be perceived if they opened their own business under the same name selling the same products? A typical consumer might not care, as long as the product is cheap, but this attitude is why many people in modern society are not suited to study koryu.

How you conduct yourself is as important as your skill level of knowledge. It is necessary to give something back to the art, and assist in its trasmission as one of its representatives. You can help yourself by pursuing things for your own selfish reasons (like most), or you can help yourself by helping others (aka: the art), and as a result, helping yourself indirectly - as well as others (sho no budo/dai no budo).

Personally, I would not want to support someone by attending a seminar that is actively disrespespecting the wishes of their teacher. Teaching something under a different name is one thing, or even training quitely with a handful of like-minded enthusiasts - this is another. Whether you plan to join or not, you would be showing support for their efforts by participating.

BTW, whether you are koryu politics-savy or not, Otake Risuke is without question the authorized representative (Shihan) under the Soke of TSKSR of this generation, and he is without question against Mr. Suguwara teaching TSKSR. This has been confirmed before, and a statement has even been posted on the net from TSKSR Honbu. There is no confusion about the politics in this case.

Regards,

[renfield_kuroda]

Something to keep in mind: there are always at least two side to every 'political' issue, and there are always political issues. The older a koryu gets, the more branches it has, the more claims to legitimacy and counter-claims of illegitimacy it has, the more students and teachers, among whom a few (many? none?) will have different ideas that those before/after them. The Koryu wil spread like a vine, or a virus, it will adapt to the times, or it will not. It may appear to never change, but be radically different, or it will be totally unrecognizable from itself only a generation ago. Also, organizations (modern and old) come and go, koryu associate, dis-associate, lineage splits, branches, a sensei dies and all hell breaks loose.
For every legitimate, documented Soke of an established Koryu there is a disgruntled student, a skipped son, a quietly seething second instructor. This happened hundreds of years ago in the embroiling politics of Japan, and it happens now.
There is, quite simply no right or wrong. There is only what Soke (your Soke) says.
Niina-gosoke reminds us: "I am the 16th Soke of Mugairyu Iaihyodo. I am Mugairyu Iaihyodo. If I say white is black, the clouds in the sky are black. You don't like it, you're free to study some other art."
Then again, there is entire art called Mugairyu Iaijutsu ('legitimate' in its own right, with a lineage traceable back to Takahashi-gosoke a century ago) which doesn't even recognize Niina-gosoke as a legitimate student of Mugairyu, let alone as 16th Soke.

And finally, let's not forget that all Koryu came from something else. Tsuji Gettan Sukemochi mastered Yamaguchiryu before establishing Mugairyu, and incorporated Jikoryu. Mugairyu has lasted over 300 years. An amazing style? Or amazingly lucky?
If you are interested in just practicing, don't worry about what the art is called or based on (but also don't go around using koryu names like they are your own.) Time will tell.

Again to quote Niina-gosoke: "If you have so much time that you can sit around thinking about these questions, shut up and practice to find the answers!"

Regards,
r e n

[Earl Hartman]

Renfield:

What is this "Jikoryu" you mention? The only "Jikoryu" that I know of is synonomous with "Garyu", and is nothing more than a joke: when you ask someone what style he practices, and he wants to be funny, he will smirk and say I practice "Jikoryu" (literally "my own made-up style") or "Garyu" ("The School of Me"). It's sort of like one of my kyudo teachers, who is a Hanshi; he always laughingly refers to himself as "Han-shi" ("half dead"). Another joke is to refer to oneself as a "meijin", only written with the characters meaning "lost and confused" as opposed to "famous".

Of course, while you are right about the various changes and metamorpheses that the various ryu have undergone, any teacher, when faced with what is perceived as a challenge to his legitimacy (and, whether we like it or not, any "what is your lineage" question is precisely that) will invoke some version of "It's my way or the highway" or "Shut up and train if you want to find the answer". It effectively stifles all debate. That being said, if a trainee has taken on a teacher and is stupid enough to ask such a question after he has done so, he shouldn't be surprised if he's thrown out on his ear. Those are questions one should research discreetly BEFORE one takes on a teacher. If questions arise afterwards, the only choices are to accept the choice one has made or to leave and find a new teacher.

[DCPan]

Hypothetical situation.

Let’s say during the time of the Japanese occupation of Taiwan, a couple of koryu teachers are stranded there.

To pass time and keep his skills sharp, 7th soke of Japan Ryu Samurai-Jutsu went to the local kendo dojo and found a few dedicated kendo students that are earnest in their practice to be his practice partner. What began as a search for kumitachi partner turned into a relationship such that more of more of the ryu was taught.

At the end of the occupation, the Japanese left Taiwan, so 7th soke was forced to leave his students behind. By then, those dedicated kendo students had become kendo instructors in their own right. After 7th soke left, these students found some dedicated student in their own kendo dojo to keep up on their kumitachi work on Japan Ryu Samurai-Jutsu.

30+ years later, you find yourself a kendo student of one of the direct students of the 7th soke. On top of the Kendo Kata, sensei asked if you are interested in being his training partner in some kumitachi. When you asked him what it is, he says something about learning a few things from the 7th soke of Japan Ryu Samurai-Jutsu. So, you got into it.

A couple of years later, the 9th soke of Japan Ryu Samurai-Jutsu was invited to a Kendo Taikai in Taiwan. Having heard that the 7th soke trained with some kendo folks during the Japanese occupation, the 9th soke did some search and found your sensei’s dojo.

After watching your sensei and you practice, he said it’s nice to see dedicated practice of what was passed by the 7th soke. However, unless your sensei and you join his organization in Japan and submit to his leadership, you must CEASE all practice of all materials learned from the 7th soke. Furthermore, you can’t say to anyone else that you have EVER practiced Japan Ryu Samurai-Jutsu.

What would you do? What do you think your sensei should do?

Would your choice change if your sensei was given a menkyo kaiden before 7th soke left for Japan.

Would your choice change if you find yourself unable to respect the current soke’s character?

What does it say about the current soke's character if he or she has casual disregard for students of the previous soke?

Let's complicate the situation a little more. Let's say your sensei observed the current soke's wishes for now. Then, he travelled to Japan to seek the 7th soke to see what he thinks only to find out that he has passed away, what now?

After all, your relationship was WITH the 7th soke, not the 9th soke.

Practice is practice, membership is membership.

Let's say for example that for some unknown reason through no fault of character on the side of EITHER party, Otake sensei somehow no longer represent TSKSR for the current soke. I would still learn from Otake sensei even if he can't call it TSKSR anymore...because it's good stuff.

[A.J. Bryant]

Earl (et al.),

I believe Renfield is referring to the Jikyo-ryu that also descends from the Tamiya-ryu. My understanding is that this ryu merged with the Mugai-ryu at some point, thus making the Hayashizaki connection... Though I could be wrong.

Back on topic... If you take keppan and end up leaving a ryu or are expelled for some reason, move on. Call what you do something else and respect the wishes of the tradition’s leadership. It’s really that simple. If you’re in a ryu that doesn’t require keppan, I suppose that’s something of a different nature (such as Eishin-ryu, etc.). In the case of TSKSR, Sugawara and his students (as well as those of Sugino) should probably not call what they do by that name. Perhaps “Sugawara Shinto-ryu” would be better (though I see he still calls it TSKSR on his website)... A promise is a promise. It’s about honor.

Best,

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Nathan Scott


It does not matter why someone is expelled or restricted from teaching. The headmaster, in theory, has the master plan for his generation of the art, and is not obligated to explain their ideas or convert the art into a democracy.

From a modern standpoint, if you inherit or invent something, it is your intellectual property. It is yours to do with as you may, and nobody else has a right to use or abuse it.

Another hypothetical situation then.

Let's say you learned from the previous-previous soke. You see that the current soke is a fop and has adopted HelloKitty Pink Hakama and "Pi-Ka-Chu" as the ryu kiai.

What then? Do you alter what you learned to what the current soke dictates?

What if the legitamate lineage holder is abusing and debasing the ryu while another instructor who didn't inherit the ryu is teaching, but not recognized by the current fop?

I am obvious not saying that this is what's going on with TSKSR.

I'm simply amazed at the deification of the soke and how his words are like commandments.

In my mind, the current soke would be the current safekeeper of the ryu, but he or she has no rights to abuse the ryu anymore than anyone else because he or she would have violated the trust of the previous soke.

For me, my allegiance is to the "practice". If the current leader isn't being true to what I believe practice should be, I would not hesitate to leave and practice what I had on my own. Nor would I hesitate to share enough of the knowledge to do the necessary partner practice.

This soke can do no wrong thing, I just don't buy it.

[kenanderson]

Mr. Lowry,

I would go to observe the demonstration simply to see how that organizational branch conducts itself. However I would be reluctant to participate in any training they would provide for a variety of reasons. One of which is I am already involved in one ancient Japanese system and would want to obtain permission of my sensei before participating in any of their activities. I never took an oath perse in joining my teacher's training, but I do have a high moral base and would not think of doing anything that might upset that relationship. This may be why some people would have problems with this upcoming event.

[Earl Hartman]

Oh. Jikyo Ryu. That's different.

Sorry, DC, the legitimate inheritor of the ryu gets to do whatever he wants with the ryu. That's how it is, like it or not. In the old days, if such a thing happened, the people involved would probably have fought it out, and whoever was left standing would be Da Man. Can't do that sort of thing today, for obvious reasons.

Regarding the various people who are said by some to be teaching TSKSR in violation of their sworn oath, if indeed such is the case, then I must agree with Mr. Anderson. Call it "Nani-nani-ha, Nani-nani Ryu" and move on. It is simply a matter of being truthful.

I learned Nagao Ryu Taijutsu in a similar situation. My teacher studied under the headmaster of the school, Maeda Kogetsu, but left him when his research led him to conclude that Maeda was falsifying the techniques. In additon to that, Maeda apparently wasn't that good and was quite the laughingstock in the koryu world. When I told people that I had studied Nagao Ryu, they would all stare at me with open mouths for a second and then burst out laughing about "that clown" Maeda. It was really that bad. I learned to immediately say that I had learned with someone who had left Maeda precisely because he knew he was a charlatan. I met Maeda a couple of times, once on a bus, and once at the funeral of my iai teacher, where he showed up in full fig like a Kabuki character: kimono, hakama, a big garish orange jinbaori, a mucking great sword in his obi, and his hair loose and around his shoulders. Everyone else was wearing dark suits and ties, of course. He was quite a character.

Anyway, my teacher renamed his art Shoden Nagao Ryu Taijutsu (literally "Properly Transmitted" Nagao Ryu Taijutsu), just so that there would be no confusion. Now, whether he was a "legitimate" teacher of Nagao Ryu is a matter of opinion. But he did not hide the fact at all that he was a renegade (so to speak) from the "official" branch, and everybody who studied with him knew what was going on.

[R A Sosnowski]

Originally posted by renfield_kuroda
Something to keep in mind: there are always at least two side to every 'political' issue, and there are always political issues. The older a koryu gets, the more branches it has, the more claims to legitimacy and counter-claims of illegitimacy it has, the more students and teachers, among whom a few (many? none?) will have different ideas that those before/after them. The Koryu wil spread like a vine, or a virus, it will adapt to the times, or it will not. It may appear to never change, but be radically different, or it will be totally unrecognizable from itself only a generation ago. Also, organizations (modern and old) come and go, koryu associate, dis-associate, lineage splits, branches, a sensei dies and all hell breaks loose.
For every legitimate, documented Soke of an established Koryu there is a disgruntled student, a skipped son, a quietly seething second instructor. This happened hundreds of years ago in the embroiling politics of Japan, and it happens now.
There is, quite simply no right or wrong. There is only what Soke (your Soke) says.
[SNIP]
And finally, let's not forget that all Koryu came from something else. Tsuji Gettan Sukemochi mastered Yamaguchiryu before establishing Mugairyu, and incorporated Jikoryu. Mugairyu has lasted over 300 years. An amazing style? Or amazingly lucky?
If you are interested in just practicing, don't worry about what the art is called or based on (but also don't go around using koryu names like they are your own.) Time will tell.

[SNIP]

Regards,
r e n

renfield_kuroda's posting reminds me of an interesting question that I refer to as the 'martial arts koan:' "who gave certification (or rank or grade) to the founder?"

Another way to put this is: "who gave the founder the authority to teach?"

What is happening today is just a repetition of the past.

If X-san is well-trained in Y-Ryu, then it is possible that X-san can teach Y-Ryu or at least X-ha Y-Ryu. But if X-san claims to teach Z-Ryu without having trained in Z-Ryu, then we have a case of fraud.

As a community we are hurt much more by X-san claiming to teach Z-Ryu than we are by X-san teaching [X-ha] Y-Ryu without "permission."

Let's save our energies for the former cases, fraud, and leave the latter cases to the Y-kai to figure out. It is rather disturbing to see gaijin running around trying to out-Japanese the Japanese (or Chinese or Korean, etc.), and being so bloody self-righteous about it.

FWIW.

[Charlie Kondek]

Originally posted by R A Sosnowski
Let's save our energies for the former cases, fraud, and leave the latter cases to the Y-kai to figure out. It is rather disturbing to see gaijin running around trying to out-Japanese the Japanese (or Chinese or Korean, etc.), and being so bloody self-righteous about it.

Well, I think the reason the thread was started in the first place is because Lowry-san and the Koryu.com gang are dedicated to promoting awareness of koryu and how it differs from what we perceive as martial arts in the west. So his question is to gather information to that end. I think everyone who posts here is mostly just trying to be helpful. *Shrugs* I mean, you have a point, though, too, Ray.

[Dan Harden]

Out Japanese the Japanese?
Integrity and commitment and intellectual property were a "human" affair last time I checked.
I have drawn buildings for people with an ecpressed understadning that it is _MY_ Intellectual property which they have purchased the licence to use for a single project. They are not entitled to use those same drawing for say an entire office park of repetative buildings. The law protects us from people who do that-and they have.

Now, I learned a Koryu art from a man who was stuck here in the states for a while.
1. He asked that I not teach it or award rank in it. I could only practice what I learned.
2. I agreed.
3. Who am I, if I now break that promise?
4. Do you suppose he would have shown ME or taught ME under any other circumstance?
5. If I promised on the one hand, and then decided; "Hey, its my sweat and effort, I'll do what I want." Then two things have happened.

a. I would have become self-involved, not caring abot the other half of the equation-HIM.
b. I would have forever comprimised my character.

There are a couple of men who have had the same cirumtsance. What do we do. Go to the source and ask....hell, BEG to be let in.


Do you suppose that if a student went up to a teacher and said
"Hey. I'll promise anything to you TODAY. If I decide I don't like you or your rules I will change like the wind and do what I want with it later." that this person would have been taught ANYTHING?

The only _out_ I can see is that you leave. I don't even buy changing the name but using the techniques and strategies. That is still stealing intelectual propery. But I understand that that is just me.

I do know this. If one of my men leaves and sets up shop I will appear on their door step one fine day whereever they go. And I won't be laughing. People's behaviour has degraded for the simple reason that their is no penalty for bad behaviour and broken promises anymore. Takeda chased Ueshiba .....why?

This has nothing to do with self-rightousness or pomp-it is honor and commitment. Something which apparently still needs to be taught and explained.

Dan

[glad2bhere]

Dear Dan:

".....I do know this. If one of my men leaves and sets up shop I will appear on their door step one fine day whereever they go. And I won't be laughing. People's behaviour has degraded for the simple reason that their is no penalty for bad behaviour and broken promises anymore. Takeda chased Ueshiba .....why?....."

Absolutely. In the late 50-s and early 60-s many folks who had been trained (fully or in part) by Choi Yong Sul in his brand of Yu Sool tried to form a unified approach to Korean MA and the effort failed. Everybody wanted to be a chief and nobody wanted to be an indian. The result is that we now have at the very least seven major styles of Hapkido, most of whom claim to be the direct descendent of Choi Yong Sul.

Now, Korea did NOT have a patrilinear MA institution after the fashion of the Japanese culture, but you would have thought that a culture steeped in Confucian ethic would have at LEAST inbued these folks with some respect for the head honcho. Why didn't they? For the very reason that you mentioned, Dan. Who is going to hold them accountable? For my part, I take it a step farther. Why should someone NEED to hold them accountable? What makes it OK for them NOT to hold THEMSELVES accountable? FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Walker]

Takeda chased Ueshiba .....why? Exactly my point.
Each must choose for themselves and be judged by that choice.
Did Takeda ever catch him? ;)

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Earl Hartman
Oh. Jikyo Ryu. That's different.

Sorry, DC, the legitimate inheritor of the ryu gets to do whatever he wants with the ryu. That's how it is, like it or not. In the old days, if such a thing happened, the people involved would probably have fought it out, and whoever was left standing would be Da Man. Can't do that sort of thing today, for obvious reasons.



Well, in the case of the original question, I would not attend that seminar.

However, I find it hard to believe that with the variety of koryu out there, they all have IDENTICAL policy re transmission/inheritance. No all ryu ask followers to swear keppan. If you TRULY love the art you are practicing, there certainly are things that the current soke can do to make you leave, branch off, and practice the way it should be done, as someone mentioned earlier about Nagao Ryu.

What I said before are about hypothetical situations. I certainly would not support anyone that falsely claim to teach a ryu that they have no authority to. However, if they are up front about it, I see no problem with it.

The soke certainly has the right to tell the Kendo teacher in the anecdote not to use the name of Japan-Ryu Samurai-Jutsu. But to tell him not to practice those movements too? Whatever... :D

[Earl Hartman]

I don't think anyone is trying to "out Japanese the Japanese", whatever that means. We're simply trying to keep things straight.

I agree that what is happening in this particular case may be just a repetition of the past, but this is not necessarily so.

Let me give you an example of what I mean: I practice kyudo of the Heki Ryu Insai-ha, what is also sometimes called Heki To Ryu. This is a branch school of the Heki Ryu and was founded by Yoshida Genpachiro Shigeuji, known by his bow-name of Issuiken Insai, and flourished in what is now present day Okayama Prefecture. The lineage has been maintained down to the present day.

However, I practice a branch of a branch, so to speak, which incorporates a certain tehnical innovation that was introduced by a master of the school, Urakami Naooki, sometime in the Meiji-Taisho period. The nature of this innovation is unimportant; what IS important is that Urakami went to his teacher, the headmaster of the ryu, and asked permission to teach the style with this innovation. Permission was duly granted, with the understanding that while Urakami was fully licensed to teach the style with the change he had introduced, the main line, which still exists in Okayama, would not adopt it. So, it can be said that I practice kyudo of the Heki Ryu Insai-ha, Urakami-kei.

The crucial thing here is that Urakami was specifically and duly granted persmission to teach in this way by the headmaster of the ryu, his teacher. He did not go back on his word and just decide to do whatever he wanted to do just because he wanted to do it and that made it OK. This is, in my opinion, a crucial difference which illustrates the character of the people involved.

However, I will grant that in a few hundred years, if budo is still practiced, those people who branched off on their own, regardless of how or why that happened, will probably be regarded as "ancient masters" with all of the legitimacy that confers. If the main line from which they branched off under dubious circumstances still exists, there will still be enmity and suspicion between the two groups. And people on the outside will look at it, scratch their heads, and go "Huh? What's the problem here?" That's just how things work.

The issue here is that people should be aware of the situation and so be able to make an informed choice about the teacher under whom they wish to practice.

[Charlie Kondek]

Originally posted by Earl Hartman
However, I practice a branch of a branch, so to speak, which incorporates a certain tehnical innovation that was introduced by a master of the school, Urakami Naooki, sometime in the Meiji-Taisho period. The nature of this innovation is unimportant; what IS important is that Urakami went to his teacher, the headmaster of the ryu, and asked permission to teach the style with this innovation. Permission was duly granted, with the understanding that while Urakami was fully licensed to teach the style with the change he had introduced, the main line, which still exists in Okayama, would not adopt it.

And that innovation was... firearms!

Just kidding! We not return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Smart-assedly yours,

[kokumo]

Originally posted by Dan Harden
Out Japanese the Japanese?
Integrity and commitment and intellectual property were a "human" affair last time I checked.
I have drawn buildings for people with an ecpressed understadning that it is _MY_ Intellectual property which they have purchased the licence to use for a single project. They are not entitled to use those same drawing for say an entire office park of repetative buildings. The law protects us from people who do that-and they have.


Dan --

With all due respect, I think that the "integrity and commitment" side of your argument will bear more weight than the claims of intellectual property.

Although the Disney drones wish it were otherwise, copyright does lapse in time. Although the Pfizer folks might hope to maintain an eternal exclusive on Viagra, patent law also has explicit provisions mandating licensing.

Because the soke/ryu-ha systems are (arguably) built around preservation of the intellectual property of ancestors and in many cases we are talking about the 15th, 16th, or 17th generation head of one of these arts, all of the intellectual property involved would seem to be older than any provisions of copyright or patent law cover.

And I am sure that you have, at one point in your career, copied a portion of a wall section or a window detail or a broader design concept from a historic structure and if necessary, cited the "precedent." But by the same token, I am equally sure that you simply proposed this as a solution to a problem at hand and weren't trying to convince your client that the work in question was an authentic production of a lineal authorized descendant of Le Corbusier's studio or some such.

Which brings us to the one zone in this area of intellectual property that does seem to be near eternal: TRADEMARK.

If the Soke -- who is entrusted with and has full authority over X-Ryu -- says individual A is not authorized to teach X-Ryu and individual A is representing himself, or allowing himself to be represented as teaching X-Ryu, then this would seem to be a clear case of Trademark Infringement.

But as Americans living in the Northeast, we should both be mindful that the entire history of the textile industry in New England is based on theft of intellectual property and violation not only of confidentiality agreements, but of English laws which classified textile mill specifications as the equivalent of "national secrets."

Even so, in the current US regulatory climate, would it make sense to invest in an enterprise with serious Trademark Infringement Litigation pending? I doubt it.

The "integrity and commitment" standard you cite is a much higher one than the mere legal standard, and all of us know people whose actions are legal but ethically questionable. In the matter of oaths, while the Soke (or whatever the designator holder of the tradition) is the arbiter, the oath is not only to the Soke personally, but to the entire collective body of past, present, and future practitioners.

While there may be sound reasons to violate such an oath in a particular case, that violation is not without costs. The right to use the tradition's name is one of those costs.

Observing at least that level of respect for one's vows would seem to be the minimum necessary to insure sufficient good feeling for future rapprochement.

You also say:

Now, I learned a Koryu art from a man who was stuck here in the states for a while. He asked that I not teach it or award rank in it. I could only practice what I learned.

How you deal with portions of this material that may be partner practice is a matter between you and your teacher. Should you break your vow and not only practice but teach and rank someone who is UNAWARE of the situation, who also happens to have clean hands, boundless energy and a bright spirit, and subsequently turns up at the Hombu's door, I would hope that they find a way to work it out. But the karmic weight of the attendant difficulties your student has along the way would be very much yours and not the student's.

In the not-so-hypothetical case at hand, I go to analogy. Would I listen to an MP3 of some music that seemed promising? Yes. Would I buy an authorized shrink-wrap copy if it were going into the regular rotation? Yes.

The beauty of the current situation is that in the old days, everyone knew everyone and the social sanction that attached to unauthorized transmissions was real. For a time, distance and language eliminated that sanction. Now the Net has brought back the awareness of social sanction that attaches to unauthorized transmission of such materials.

My guess is that a lot of what we are seeing know is the lancing of old festering wounds that developed in the middle period and the various arts -- koryu, gendai, & everything in-between -- will find that they have clear choices and options of self-definition.

But it is also true that in both gendai and koryu arts (witness some of the discussions on this and other boards about spiritual practicies in aikido), there is a substantial body of westerners who quite overtly proceed from a view of Japanese Martial Arts as nothing more than a collection of historically tested and mechanically definable fighting techniques devoid of any social, ethical, or religious content. For such technicians, neither the intellectual property argument nor the integrity and commitment argument hold any water at all.

And I would argue that there is less risk to these traditions from the unprincipled and uncommitted than from those whose religious commitments and mechanistic mentalities a priori preclude any possibility of openness to the kind of commitment and integrity often found in some Japanese cultural and martial traditions.

Which may not place our views very far apart at all, save emphasis.

Best,

Fred Little

[Nathan Scott]

I knew that there would be some that would try to view the "intellectual property" references from a Western viewpoint, which is a problem that almost caused me not to use the term. The term is basically correct, but how the Western world uses or respects intellectual property issues probably do not match the thinking in Eastern koryu. One of the biggest problems in general with seriously pursuit of SE Asian MA is the inability for many to - not only understand - but respect and follow the traditional Eastern way of thinking and doing things. Making comparisons from a Western context is really inappropriate, and will only serve to pull you further from understanding the mindset and logic, IMO.

We can hypothesize all we want about a direct student who practices with a partner, who trains with someone else, and someday makes a big group and becomes famous. But I think this is unusual. Most would diminish, unless those involved did not understand the nature of their training. As others have pointed out, any permission or authority expires with the original parties unless other arrangements have been made. Such a fact should be made clear to all involved too, so that there could be no misunderstandings in the future about the extent of their "authority".

For example, Sugino Sensei was licensed to teach outside the Honbu by Otake Sensei's teacher, and this (and the fact that Sugino was skilled and kind of a big shot) made it difficult for the current (and younger) generation to rescind his permission. However, the previous generation of TSKSR Shihan has passed, and so has Sugino Sensei. If Sugino's group wants to continue using the TSKSR name, they should really initiate relations with the current generation and see what can be worked out.

Also, I'd be the first to agree that the authority and politics of other koryu are not as cut-and-dry as TSKSR. But TSKSR has been well documented and in the public eye for a long time. There really is no room for confusion in this case, which should make a discussion like this pretty simple.

Not all Japanese headmasters are good people, good representatives of their art, or talented. Some are. Also, not all students end up having the sense of "giri" they should, or the sense of ethics and judgement that are expected of them. However, a good student (who understands koryu and the thinking of their teacher/ryu to begin with) and a good teacher (who can appreciate what a gift a good student is) should be able to resolve any differences, in theory.

Anyone can found their own art, based soley on their own ideas or what they have learned in the past. Most of their teachers would probably not mind, as long as they don't use the same name as their art. You may or may not be critisized for it for various reasons, but you don't NEED any special licensing. If you are highly experienced/credentialed, you will probably be far less critisized though.

As far as being more Japanese than the Japanese, I'd say that this is in fact to some degree necessary. Modern Japanese don't know squat about koryu arts, and conduct themselves more along Western lines that "traditional Japanese" lines. Most of the big shot teachers in Japan are salary men, with salary men behavior. Many of the new generation of prospective students would have nearly as much problems fitting in to koryu as we would. So if you are referring to the modern generation of Japanese, then yes, it is necessary to be "more Japanese" than them! (this should get me some heat!) ;)

Hey, classical arts aren't for everyone. There are many other MA that are more accessible, easier to understand, and more tollerant of individualism. It's nothing to lose sleep over.

Regards,

[Carl Long]

Mr Lowry,

I truly believe that such things must be dealt with case by case. I believe that if I respected the integrity and intentions of the individual sponsoring the event, I would probably attend. That does not mean that I would consider myself a student of the instructor, but rather a supporter of the event coordinator. But first, I'd have to be VERY interested in the art being demonstrated.

This is a very interesting discussion. Being that the Koryu, or any other Asian arts are practiced outside of their original culture, does that new country reserve the right to legally enforce it's own laws of rights to ownership upon the art and it's practitioners?

For example, if Shihan-X comes to the Country-B and having the authority to teach under the auspices of his organaization or koryu in that new country, decides to patent the techniques or copyright the name of the organization and/or ryu name in the new country and assumes legal rights to the name. Then at some future time Soke-Y says that Shihan-X is out. What does the next appointed Shihan-Z do when Soke-Y sends him to the Country-B to teach? Does he have the authority to teach the art under the original name? Does he have to change the techniques? Will he need to change the organization name? Has Soke lost the legal rights to the intellectual and physical property in this country? Can Soke insist that Shihan-X stop using the name and techniques that are legally Shihan-Xs' property in the new country?

I would also like to know how Mr Lowry feels about these issues? Being that you deal with copyright laws all the time as a writer.I would like to know how you all feel regarding this matter? It seems an unfortunate circumstance that issues such as these will be faced in the future. But never the less will be encountered.

[Earl Hartman]

Anybody who would attempt to establish his "rights" to the koryu he is teaching by patenting the techniques under US law would, by so doing, prove that he did not understand a single thing about koryu.

He might attract a lot of students. He might become rich and famous. He might be a very tough guy. But he would still be ignorant of the soul of the ryu, no matter who he was or how long he had trained. The only person who could conceivably have a right to do such a thing would be the legitimate inheritor of the ryu in question.

Such behavior might very well be legal under US law. But it would not be ethical.

Actually, there is a very similar brouhaha going on in the yoga world, where some guy is claiming exclusive rights to the kind of yoga he teaches and is suing anybody and everybody he thinks is "infringing" his "rights". It seems that US law migt be on his side, in which case he will either run a lot of other yoga instructors out of business or foce them to become part of his "yoga franchise" (how's that for a mind-bender?) In the process, of course, he is alienatng everybody else in the yoga world.

You pays yer money and you makes yer choice.

[renfield_kuroda]

Fascinating to see so many interesting opinions!

For clarification:
[Mugairyu founder] Gettan studied Jikyoryu from master Taga Jikyosai Morimasa, who did not have a pupil to carry on after him, and so instead of letting Jikyoryu fade, he brought his teachings into Mugairyu

Also, I think it's important to realize that the Soke of a koryu is not the keeper of the koryu's intellectual property. The koryu IS Soke. Years/decades/centuries ago various Sensei and Soke added and lost arts; different weapons, integrated styles, techniques adapted to the times, and thus koryu change. Some more slowly than others.

Actually just recently (last month) there was a 5dan instructor who wanted to test for 6dan (to become Shihan) and Niina-gosoke (16th) told him he's not ready. So he went over Niina-gosoke's head and wrote a letter to Shiokawa-gosoke (15th) directly saying "You promoted me to 5dan, so I'm asking you for permission to allow me to test for 6dan."
Shiokawa-gosoke immediately sent the letter to Niina-gosoke saying "I don't know why he's writing directly to me, I've appointed you as the next Soke and he should be asking you."
Niina-gosoke at first got, naturally, pretty upset, and had all the documents written up for hamon (complete stripping of rank and expulsion from Mugairyu), but he calmed down and finally told the guy: "I'm not teaching you anymore, as you obviously have no desire to learn from me. If you think you can do it, if you think you're good enough to be shihan, you go off and teach on your own, call it yourown-ha Mugairyu but don't use our organization or my name. If you can get 30 students together, you can be a branch of our organization, and if you think they can handle it, I'll grade them for promotion. Of course, you can grade on your own, issue your own certificates...whether or not anyone accepts or recognizes them is another issue. I certainly won't."
The idea being, if this guy really is any good, he'll get some students, who will get good enough to be promoted, and Mugairyu flourishes. However, as Niina-gosoke suspects, even if he does get some students, they won't get very good because he himself isn't very good. They'll be a splinter that might last a few months or years, who knows. But more than likely, and not the first/last time in history, they'll sputter and die out.
Politics. Martial arts. Seems much more romantic when it happens 200 years ago.

Regards,
r e n

[Earl Hartman]

Renfield:

This is a Japanese guy who did this? Somebody needs to hit him with the Clue Stick, and fast.

I guess it just proves there are idiots in every country and that you don't necessarily have to be a round-eye to completely miss the point.

[Joseph Svinth]

Anybody remember Carley Gracie v. Rorion Gracie?

Gracie v. Gracie, 217 F.3d 1060, 1068 (9th
Cir. 2000)

Summary, from http://www.netlawlibraries.com/sums070600.html

QUOTE:

OTHER-SERVICE MARK-DAMAGES-AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES-CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION OF TRADE NAME

Carley came to the United States from Brazil in the early 1970s and began teaching jiu-jitsu in the eastern United States as early as 1974 and in California sometime after he arrived in the state in 1979. Carley has used the name "Gracie" in identifying his jiu-jitsu instruction business. In the late 1970s, Rorion came to the United States and began teaching the "Gracie method" of jiu-jitsu in Southern California. Rorion applied for and obtained a California registration for the Triangle Design logo and obtained federal registrations for the "Gracie Jiu-Jitsu" service mark and the Triangle Design logo in 1989. Carley sued Rorion, challenging the validity of the term "Gracie Jiu-Jitsu" and the Triangle Design logo as service marks. Judgment was for Rorion and in part for Carley.
HELD: Once the district court gave the jury the power to determine the validity of Rorion Gracie's federal service mark, refusing to cancel the registration for "Gracie Jiu-Jitsu" after the jury declared it to be incapable of serving as a mark was inconsistent with the court's duty to give effect to a jury verdict, and as such erroneous. Read as a whole, then, the jury instructions permitted the jury to find trademark infringement based on confusing similarity of the logos at issue; a finding of exact copying was not required. The jury's verdict of infringement was thus supported by the evidence, which included Carley's and Rorion's highly similar logos for their competing jiu-jitsu instruction businesses. Damages were properly awarded to Rorion. The Lanham Act provision upon which Rorion's trademark infringement claim rested, does not require actual consumer confusion for recovery of profits. Rather, by its terms it requires only a likelihood of confusion combined with willful infringement. The Lanham Act permits an award of attorneys' fees to the prevailing party in "exceptional cases." "While the term `exceptional' is not defined in the statute, generally a trademark case is exceptional for purposes of an award of attorneys' fees when the infringement is malicious, fraudulent, deliberate or willful." The jury found the infringement was willful. The amount of attorney fees awarded was 6 times the damages awarded and should be reviewed on remand. Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.

END QUOTE

[renfield_kuroda]

It was indeed a Japanese guy, proving that race has nothing to do with the ability to show proper respect, have a clue, or behave with propriety.
It also illustrates the overwhelmingly good-natured tendendcies of Niina-gosoke, who, upon making his decision and informing Shiokawa-gosoke, was told by Shiokawa-gosoke something along the lines of "If someone tried that with me..."

Regards,
r e n

Originally posted by Earl Hartman
Renfield:

This is a Japanese guy who did this? Somebody needs to hit him with the Clue Stick, and fast.

I guess it just proves there are idiots in every country and that you don't necessarily have to be a round-eye to completely miss the point.

[Walker]

Joe’s entry into this thread - coupled with Dan’s comments vis a vie Ueshiba - remind me that we have not discussed one of the most important elements of the teacher student relationship in traditional Japanese arts especially in the area of authority to teach and official representation: that being Cash.

[kenanderson]

What is your opinion on this matte Mr. Lowry?

[rbrown]

Well Mr. Lowry since you asked...

Don't know that I have anything different to say but all this reminds me of something that happened recently. I work with youth, and some of us were talking after work and someone had read an article in a magazine about what all father's should know or something like that. Anyway there was an item that said don't you miss the days when an adult, asked "why" by a child could look them in the eye and say "because I said so". Now in America we have gotten very far away from that idea. But in this instance it seems trademarks,intellectual property and everything else aside it is simply because someone with the authority to do so said "because I said so".
Now maybe I don't understand what happened, when it happened etc.. but isn't this a very simple matter of what is and what isn't authorized TSKSR??? Isn't this like completing work on your PhD and saying you were a PhD before the degree was awarded by a school and saying "well I've done the coursework". Wouldn't we consider that person a sham or fraud until a school awarded the degree?? Just because you went to all the classes doesn't mean you get the degree!! Can you just say: I was at Harvard went to the classes so now I'm a Harvard graduate even though I never graduated???? We don't allow (at least not in most states) someone to teach high school without a teaching certificate. Now you can get a degree in Education, be smart as a whip, wonderful teacher etc... but without that teaching certificate you are not allowed to teach. And if by some strange circumstances you convinced them to let you teach, even if you do a great job you ARE NOT a certified teacher. This is not a koryu, this is the State Board of Education in most every state. How upset would people be if they found out that Mr. Smith was teaching math class to the 4th Grade of Dave Lowry Elementary (sorry for that one!!!) without a teaching certificate. Even if the kids loved him and everyone thought he was a great teacher.
Why then does there seem to be so much grey area in this matter??? It's not a case by case basis, it's not a "let's call a meeting and discuss it" matter. Iizasa Soke is the only person who can say what happens in TSKSR, no differently than your state board of education decides what the criteria for teaching in the state public school system is.
I know we like to debate ideas and what may and may not be.. I enjoy reading this thread and it is very interesting. But this seems to be a very simple matter if the person is not authorized to teach TSKSR then no matter what they've done, what you learn from them is not authorized TSKSR... end of story. Not because we think so, not because they aren't good, not because they haven't had enough training, not because they aren't a great teacher but simply because the only person who can say "because I said so" SAID SO.

Richard Brown

[M.W. Jones]

Mr. Lowry,

Greeting and salutations.
First off, thank you deeply for all the beautifully written books you've contributed to the wonder "full" and strangely fraternal world of classical martial arts.

These books have profoundly effected my perceptions of the path/s.
First in finding them, then choosing one and finally staying on one.
Having said this...

As an American living in the Northeast, my experieces up until a few years ago fell mostly to modern budo. My desire to better understand budo led me to research bujutsu. Ten years later and hundreds of dollars of esoteric literature devoted to the subject made me think that I might never get to see it in person let alone try it without devoting serious time to Japan. Books and videos really only sharpened my potential appetite for the real thing.

TSKSR has always been the Holy Grail to me, those frightfully valuable books Sugawara published back in the 70's have taunted me since college. If I had not researched every possible media on the subject I might not have known about the keppan. I would have probably gone just to see the demo. What an opportunity. But, I do know about the keppan, and Sugawara, and it vexes me.

I guess if I had anything to do with the art outside the proper training channels then I sure as hell would keep my head down. Private study and speculation is one thing. Publicly professed teaching seminars are another.

Let's say I've seen a picture of an amazingly unique stainglass window, and thru my reading and research discovered its source in a far away land. This window keeps me up at nights thinking about it.
Others have seen it, professed its majesty, but it's only a shadow.
Would't I have to seek out it's source if it really ment something to me. If I wanted to learn the secrets of its construction shouldn't I seek out those closest to its original artisans? What if there was a copy? What if it was nearby? Would it be the same? What is the quality or challenge of the respective paths?

Reall a tough question you've posed. The forum of e-budo is forcing us to consider carefully the consequences of or choices. And the ramifications of publically expressing our opinions. This is the great power of this forum. Thank you for posting such a thoughtful question.

Yours in bujutsu,
Matt Jones

[glad2bhere]

Dear Nathan:

".....We can hypothesize all we want about a direct student who practices with a partner, who trains with someone else, and someday makes a big group and becomes famous. But I think this is unusual. Most would diminish, unless those involved did not understand the nature of their training. As others have pointed out, any permission or authority expires with the original parties unless other arrangements have been made. Such a fact should be made clear to all involved too, so that there could be no misunderstandings in the future about the extent of their "authority".

For example, Sugino Sensei was licensed to teach outside the Honbu by Otake Sensei's teacher, and this (and the fact that Sugino was skilled and kind of a big shot) made it difficult for the current (and younger) generation to rescind his permission. However, the previous generation of TSKSR Shihan has passed, and so has Sugino Sensei. If Sugino's group wants to continue using the TSKSR name, they should really initiate relations with the current generation and see what can be worked out......"

I apologize in advance if I am misinterpreting the intent of your post, but as I read it I think you raise an EXTREMELY important counterpoint when addressing the original question that Mr. Lowry presented. Do we really know the goal and intent of teachers--- especially the leaders of one of the traditional institutions such as a Japanese Koryo--- when imparting their art to the next generation??

IME I have read any number of pieces on the nature of Koryo arts, and have heard a number of times opinions of practitioners as to what the intent and goal of the art is. What I have rarely heard is the sort of explanation of the purpose of the art as presented by the oldest practitioners. Please understand that I do not deride Mr. Lowrys' fine contributions both as books and media. For my part, however, I wonder if what is presented as the intent of the traditional art is strongly colored by what later generations would LIKE it to be as opposed to what it truely is. I suspect that my greatest concern is the increasing introduction of romance, myth and interpretation with each subsequent generation based on what we might consider "obvious" conclusions. For my part, at least in my experience in the KMA, the true essence of the traditional arts seems to be steeped in utilitarianism with administrative considerations (cit: Sugino) taking a second place. Of course, better known are the later generations who seem to have switched the priorities of these two concerns, administration over practicality of the art. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Chidokan]

If someone asked me not to teach something they would have to have a good reason, i.e. too hard for 1st dan level, I dont know enough etc. When I started to teach iaido I had no restriction, as it was accepted that there was only me in my local area, so "get on with it while you learn yourself" was the attitude. Most dojo leaders would be in the same boat I guess, and still are if you take the line that you are always learning!
The only restriction I have, if you can call it that,is sensible. Dont try and teach at too high a level. That's it.
If my students go away to another town I encourage them to practise, and if anyone else wants to join them let them get on with it, any questions my student can't answer they can always ask me.
To tell someone point blank they cant teach without giving a reason is strange....can you elaborate a little further (without giving the game away too much) Dave?

Tim Hamilton

[Brian Stokes]

Hi All,

The proposition in the orginal post by Mr. Lowry is that people are being taught by instructors from a school wherein their lead instructor is teaching in violation of his oath. I would like to know whether Sugawara Sensei has excuted a keppan to TSKSR or whether he is teaching based upon his relationship with Sugino. Technical point, I know, but if there is no keppan there is no violation.

As to koryu. I can only speak as to my personal experience. As a recent initiate into a koryu (the Suio Ryu) after 25 years of doing various other styles I can say WITHOUT HESITATION that there is a fundamental difference between the ways of a "koryu" and those of more "modern" systems. (Of course that begs the question of defining what a koryu is and I have no intention of putting my head onto THAT chopping block.)

For example,in my present training I have been told time and time again by Soke that preciseness is not as important as getting the job done. From my limited understanding of the Suio Ryu it is far more important to send you opponent into early retirement than it is for you to look good as you fall. Further, there is no "perfect" kata. Every kata must be based upon and molded to the abilites of the individual and their opponent, whether real or imaginary) so although three people might do a kata, there may still be slight variations amongst the practioners and yet they are all correct. This approach is substantially different from the other styles I previously practiced wherein there was only one right way to do it.

I really hate the written word (at least when I write it) as it is so hard to correctly express what I understand to be the truth. I could postulate on for ages if I had the time. That is why individuals such as Mr. Lowry are so important to us all!

Best to All,

Brian Stokes

[George Kohler]

Originally posted by Brian Stokes
I would like to know whether Sugawara Sensei has excuted a keppan to TSKSR or whether he is teaching based upon his relationship with Sugino.

Sugawara was a student of Otake Risuke. I don't know if he had a relationship with Sugino.

[Brian Stokes]

Hi All,

I understand your point about being a "student" but I have heard many people who show up for a couple of months at a dojo claiming to be "students" of that particular Sensei. To ME, (I know to some it is not important but the attorney in me says otherwise) it is relevant whether keppan was actually executed.

Brian Stokes

[glad2bhere]

Dear Brian:

".....but I have heard many people who show up for a couple of months at a dojo claiming to be "students" of that particular Sensei...."

In the end, IME, your comment hits the nail on the head. Korean arts don't have the same institution that the Japanese Koryo have. In fact Korean arts are notorious for political in-fighting and repeated mixing and matching of teachers and students. The result is a confounding of how arts are derived. But, more importantly, its difficult to know who it is that is presenting at ones' door and what their bonafides might be. Maybe there are folks who don't particularly care, and IME I have met quite a few who try to bluff their way through or discount the whole issue just for the chance of getting on the mat to "see what I can do." As I tell my students, "Hapkido is not a spectator sport" so people, even visitors are expected to get out on the mat. Its part of our hospitality. But the downside to this hospitality is that, a person who fakes his way onto the mat and then gets injured or injures one of my students puts the whole program at risk. Being able to trust that person is who and what they say they are is very important. I have a lot of faults but none so large that I would risk an entire program just to demonstrate to some idiot that he's made a mistake.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[A. M. Jauregui]

I am not buying this intellectual property argument, as it has been put forth here for it does not apply well to the adaptive nature of martial arts systems - when a group splitters off it will change over time.

I had an analogy of a near degree medical student stranded in the Amazon that ended up being confronted by an expeditionary group of doctors about her qualification of preforming what she does and calling it medical treatment. Were she ended up changing some medical techniques to fit the needs of her environment (improving on certain things and lacking in others) and to appease the other doctors is from then on going to call what she does medizal treatment.

But instead I will give a real life example that I read about over in the aikijujutsu forum. The start of Yoshida-Han Bujutsu.

Originally posted by Richard Elias
In honoring the wishes of Angier sensei, since we are no longer students of his dojo, we will not be referring to the art we practice as Yanagi ryu or be representing Yanagi ryu in any way.
Henceforth, we will be referring to the traditions we have learned as Yoshida-Han Bujutsu.

I understand that no two situations are the same but the way that Mr. Elias, Lovato, and Neal did it is the right way *from all view publicly expressed and in my opinion*...

[Dan Harden]

Fascinating.
Thank you Dave for echoing my responses in the earlier TSKSR post about attendees being forewarned and whether they are being complicit by their attendance. IMO once forewarned- the principle of “clean hands” is out the window.

As to the many replies and respondent’s who love to make an intellectual game of cat-and-mouse out of betrayal.....

I fully appreciate and understand the many opinions offered. It has become clear to me that;

1. Almost to a man, the contributors have the details of the situation WRONG-even including the Sugino information. But this does nothing to give us pause in our opinions it seems.
2 It appears there is no end to those who are willing to quantify and validate a basic betrayal of trust.

So, here’s a different take for us pontificators out here. Since many of you think that we need law, copyright, and trademark to abrogate our wayward behavior. And since it also appears you think that if ANYONE can find an ethical or legal loop-hole to break a vow and do whatever the hell they want- then all the power to them......

I propose another question.

Since there are some Koryu out there who would like to open their doors a bit. Place yourself in the shoes of the party who wishes to control the teaching. It seems clear that many in the martial arts community could care less about people who betray a trust and anarchy may freely reign. Clear that they have little regard for the fall-out and how it is limiting access to Koryu. So, what do the people who DO CARE about it-do?
Should we strongly recommend that Koryu teachers close the doors and get even smaller again? Or should they let the arts die all together; intact? It seems it is the only solution in a society that condones the type of behavior being discussed.
Once betrayed it seems it can all be explained away. Why should they not say “The hell with it.” Turn their backs on us and pack it in?
Left with many of the opinions offered here-I would find no compelling reason for a Koryu teacher to want to get to know-let alone teach and trust-some of the people I have read in these pages.

So here. It’s yours now.

The art is called ____________fill in your personal (family) name
It is yours to do with as you wish…………….
One-to-one you ask for a promise.
One-to-one it is broken.
Next week a place is opened using your________________ (family )name
No one but you cares and the world will learn from whomever, wherever. Charlie at the mall, or Charles Manson, Ethics? Who cares?
So…….
1. What would you do?
2. What would you recommend others do?


Dan
“Every day I gain a deeper understanding why turning my back and training in the country in a closed dojo was the right choice.”

[Erik Tracy]

I'd like to get clarification on the issue of keppan within TSKSR and the explicit/implicit restrictions/previleges therein.

I've gone back thru the archives and have read the 'edict' from Otake Sensei that NO ONE is to teach TSKSR without the explicit permission of Otake Sensei - and that those wishing to contact him from the USA must first do so thru Relnick Sensei.

Has this changed since then?

And, if this is still the case, how does anyone rationalize the teaching of TSKSR if one has not personally made the trip to Japan and taken keppan with Otake Sensei?

How would anyone with foreknowledge of such traditions/strictures of the responsibility to what the TSKSR koryu embodies continue to study under the instruction of someone who has not taken the keppan with Otake Sensei?

If it looks like a duck, smells like a duck and quacks like a duck, you can call whatever you'd like but it is still a duck - so how would changing the name of what you received as TSKSR change the obligation to honor and observe what is a very plain 'order' from the head of the tradition which you so honor and value?

Or are their exceptable exceptions? Does time itself make the exception?

Erik Tracy

[Nathan Scott]

Man, this is a misunderstood subject. I also sense a desire to place "reasonable doubt" on the TSKSR issue, I would guess because a lot of people would like to be able to experience an art that claims to be "TSKSR". Wanting to make something true and reality are not the same thing.

Also, it would be really great if those contributing would be sure to familiarize themselves with the better TSKSR threads in this forum prior to posting. A great deal of this has already been discussed, and some of us put a lot of effort into covering the issues so that we interested parties could find answers without running the TSKSR issue into the ground.

Katori shinto ryu - instruction issue:
http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6146

Tenshin Shoden Katori:
http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7140

TSKSR--instruction issue pt. 2:
http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6585

Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu Information:
http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5631


Bruce, the point being repeated here is that the only thing that matters is what the current head of the system thinks. The current head was selected (and hopefully preped) by the previous head. The arts will definitely change, to a larger or smaller degree in every generation. That is their nature, for better or for worse. But the current recognized head has absolute authority and ownership to do as they like with the art. Even if it differs from what was done previously.

The people being discussed in these TSKSR issues are all claiming the TSKSR name along with its teachings, which is the main reason why there are claims of "property theft". It is not just the curriculum, technique names, and claims to direct instruction (same thing with Daito ryu). These issues are difficult to control or monitor. But using the art name is a pretty straight forward issue, and it is not too much to ask of someone not to do it. I've been on the "victim" end of this issue, and am familiar with all the angles first hand.

Also, please don't confuse the context of such break-offs in various other arts. They all tend to have unique circumstances.

A.M., you are talking about two different situations and dynamics, which is why making comparisons between two other arts is difficult at best. The Yoshida-han guys used a different name than that of Angier (Yanagi ryu), AND, got his blessing to do so.

Brian, if I recall correctly, Sugawara did not study for any short period of time, and although I cannot say for a fact whether or not he took keppan, it seems inconceivable that he could have studied for years and received densho without having taken keppan at least once. But if you're still curious, maybe you could approach Greg Ellis or Mr. Relnick for confirmation.

**

Folks, all this has been discussed before in the threads I posted above. Do some reading and draw your own conclusions, but let's assume for the sake of discussion that what Otake S. says (as the rep for the Soke) is law and most others (specifically the person wishing to teach at the Orlando Taikai) are not authorized to do so. Mr. Lowry asked what everyone thought of that from an ethical standpoint.

If the person was a direct student who is breaking keppan, then that is one consideration. If the person has not trained formally, or has not trained formally under the recognized honbu dojo, that is another consideration. But in either situation, assuming that they are not rightfully using the TSKSR name (and intellectual property), then how do you view that? Does your desire to gain experience in what you believe is authentic TSKSR outweigh your sense of values (right or wrong)?

Or as another analogy, are you the kind of person that, when approached on the street by a couple of guys in a van claiming to have high end new home entertainment gear in the back that their boss doesn't know they have, eagerly buys some of it at a supposed "greatly reduced price" (to later find out that you were scammed)? Even though you thought it was essentially stolen property, you figured someone is going to buy it anyway, so why shouldn't you be the one to benefit from the theft (as a result, choosing to support crime indirectly)?

Interesting responses,

[glad2bhere]

Dear Nathan:
"....Bruce, the point being repeated here is that the only thing that matters is what the current head of the system thinks. The current head was selected (and hopefully preped) by the previous head. The arts will definitely change, to a larger or smaller degree in every generation. That is their nature, for better or for worse. But the current recognized head has absolute authority and ownership to do as they like with the art....."

I think I know what YOU are saying, and you seem to know what I am saying, but I am not so sure other folks appreciate what it means to be involved with an art under the conditions that I understand that Koryo dictate. In Hapkido we have had actual cases where Kuk Sool Won and Hwa Rang Do versions of Hapkido have trademarked their material and have gone to court to protect their respective material. True to the American Way of Life people have had to rely on the courts to make up for what, in another time and another place might have been addressed with Honor and ones' Word. I'll bet that if I pressed the point I could make an arguement for my material (as published in my books)as proprietary in as much as it is copyrighted. But if I mandate that people respect my material and give me their word that it will only be dispersed through me is it unrealistic for me to expect that others will keep their word?

My frame of reference is that there is nothing of value that folks won't try to get ahold of cheaper and sell higher. Maybe the medium of exchange is money and maybe its regard in the eyes of other members of the MA community. IMVHO though it is a mistake to attempt to assess a generations old institution in terms of current business paractice or business management. There two different worlds.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Brian Stokes]

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for your response. Always informational. As an aside it is really not THAT important to me whether Sugawara sensei has keppan. I do not intend to train with the gentleman (although I did very briefly belong to his organization). I only proposed that as an issue that should be addressed. After all, if Sugwara Sensei had not executed a keppan he can be "held" to its standards. Whether or not that is ethical is a different issue.

Personally, I consider the name of a koryu system, or in fact any "established" system, somewhat akin to a trademark. I would like to see what GM would do if someone, formerly an engineer at GM, started a new car company, base his designs specifically upon what his work had been while at GM, produce a car, and then call his creation a Chevrolet! I wonder how many nano-seconds it would take for the GM lawyers to close in on that fellow ....

I guess in the "olden days" of yore people were far more in tune with the rights and privileges of others, including the rights to their name, particularly in Japan.

My two yen,

Brian Stokes

[Ian McDonald]

I really would like to see some TSKSR, and I know Bob Elder wants nothing more than to put on a really good Taikai, but.... I must say that I feel bad about this situation. I cannot, in good conscience, attend the seminar. I have taken keppan in another art and may not even be able to view TSKSR without permission, but if it were legit, I'd be there anyway just to take a look. For me, the understanding and development of my sense of giri is one of the main motivators in my martial arts training. I don't pretend to understand the Japanese notion of giri, but I do understand some basic values, that is the real crux of the matter here. What are your values? Unfortunately, in modern society, especially the US, short term selfish goals motivate far more people than than values such as honor, integrity, self-respect, respect for others, etc. Hell, just about every thing you see on TV any more and every major public figure show that there is no honor any more, just winning. Honor only counts if you can put a cash price on it. That's why I am sighing. But the world is what it is. I will live my life and try to show my values and beliefs but my actions, not my words. Sorry Bob, I'd like to go but I can't.

[ulvulv]

"I have taken keppan in another art and may not even be able to view TSKSR without permission, but if it were legit, I'd be there anyway just to take a look. For me, the understanding and development of my sense of giri is one of the main motivators in my martial arts training. I don't pretend to understand the Japanese notion of giri

Neither do I, and i really dont understand why you are restricted by your "vow". In "beyond good and evil" Nietszche boiled Kants moral imperative too: "I know how to obey, and things should not be different for anybody else."
Your teacher should have some real valid arguments following his/her demands of loyalty.
It must be a great experience of freedom and happiness you experience in your koryu, when you let it restrict your actions like this. If it was a matter of practising in another koryu, I would accept it as an impossible double-bind, but not as a spectator on a seminar or embu.

[A. M. Jauregui]

Nathan I too misunderstood the topic of the thread. I took it as a general discussion of koryu splits in modern times. I did not take it as a thread focused on this whole TSKSR thing that it currently happening. Serves me right for sticking my head into “politics.”

Thankfully I put the qualifier, that no two situations are the same...
Also I stand by my statement that the break from Yanagi ryu to Yoshida-Han Bujutsu was done in a manner that all should emulate.

*Runs away humming as to not let “politics” enter my head*

[renfield_kuroda]

Lest we forget, recall that historically koryu had these kinds issues all the time. Political infighting, branching and splitting and splintering. The son of Soke is skipped in favor of the #1 student, son splits off and forms his own branch. Brothers are caught on different sides of battles because of Daimyo associations, student A goes to Kyushu, student B stays in Edo, and fifty years later one art has become two legitimate arts...a hundred years from now, this particular TSKR issue might be a defining moment for the art, or it might one of many blips in its long history. A hundred years from now, regarding all koryu in general, this is probably not irrelevant, but then again it's difficult for us to take a long view -- mere humans have a tough time extrapolating out 30, 50, 100 years, but I think that's the perspective this issue deserves. Not to belittle these issues, certainly, just to add some perspective.

Regards,
r e n

[Charles Mahan]

Think the TSKSR division is likely to have long term ramifications? Imagine how MJER is going to turn out 100 years from now. While the largest majority of MJER is under Ikeda-soke, Sekiguchi-sensei has a rather sizable following, as does Shimabukuro's instructor whose name eludes me at the moment(Miura-sensei?), and there are a couple of other decent sized groups as well. Considering the sheer numbers MJER contains it seems likely to spawn a minimum of 2 or 3 new ryu as splinter groups seek ways to distinguish themselves from the main line.

At least that's the way it seems to me, but of course I am quite removed from the real political drama, so I could very easily be wrong. But as a previous poster said, this kinda stuff is par for the course in intra-ryu politics.

[Ian McDonald]

Roar,

I'ts not so much a question of loyalty or an inability to see what is going on elsewhere in the sword arts, it's just that for beginners, it is best to learn a particular system and develop a certain proficiency before training with other styles. There are a lot of reasons for this that do not just deal with keeping an art secret or uncontaminated. It is primarily meant to keep the student's mind uncontaminated by other methods until such time as the student has a sense of discrimination. It generally serves to keep the student focused on what he is doing rather than what others are doing. In good time, one obviously needs to know what other styles are doing and why. This helps one understand one's own art better. My "vow" simply consists of an agreement with my teacher that I will not try to learn or practice another style of sword art while I am a member of his organization, until such time as he tells me to have at it. It's not a big deal. I am free to do as I like, however, if I attend a seminar and practice another style, even for a few hours, that would violate the spirit of my vow. Watching demonstrations is always acceptable. What is important, I reiterate what others have said, is the concept of giri. If you make a commitment, keep it. If you have no intention or ability to keep the commitments you make, either do not make them or be prepared to be judged by your actions by those who rely on the words of gentlemen as a bond of trust, as a contract.

[Charles Mahan]

Ian, if I'm not mistaken you are Jikishinkai, yes? How does your vow apply to other versions of MJER? I suspect those might be even more prohibited by the vow.

[Chidokan]

It would be nice for all us MJER people to get together and see whats different...at the moment I cant see it being much, but in a few hundred years??? Who knows? We could be quoted as influential in splitting the style up!!:D :eek:

Tim Hamilton.....MJER Roshukai

[Charles Mahan]

Originally posted by Chidokan
It would be nice for all us MJER people to get together and see whats different...at the moment I cant see it being much, but in a few hundred years???

Heh. You've clearly never seen Scott do some of that Yamanouchi-ha stuff. Just teasing Scott. Well mostly ;)

Sadly, I suspect that if it was politically feasible to gather the various MJER groups for this kind of seminar, there wouldn't be seperate groups. I suspect that such a formal gathering would be impossible, with the possible exception of under the auspices of some totally non-MJER related gathering. Something kinda general. Something without the political bigwigs. Like I said, it seems unlikely at best.

[ulvulv]

"My "vow" simply consists of an agreement with my teacher that I will not try to learn or practice another style of sword art while I am a member of his organization, until such time as he tells me to have at it. It's not a big deal. I am free to do as I like, however, if I attend a seminar and practice another style, even for a few hours, that would violate the spirit of my vow. Watching demonstrations is always acceptable."

That sounds valid enough. From your first post, i got the impression that you trough your vow also was prohibited from watching a seminar. That would sound strange. In the shu-ha-ri process, I guess it is essential to dedicate all your dojotime to learn the basics and structure of your chosen ryu. Or "the ryu that has chosen you" :-\

Tskr is very interesting to watch, I have seen the iai-jutsu kata, naginata and kenjutsu-kata. Even though they was not performed by "the right people", the technical level was quite high, and seemed right enough for my simple perception. That is perhaps because my brains automatically shuts down when it comes to politics.


:D

[Chidokan]

I dont think its wrong to 'have a go' at other styles for a few hours, sometimes it stops the blinkered approach of 'my styles the best ever and yours is rubbish'...for more enlightened students it allows a few extra hours of practise with their chosen weapon, always a good thing, and lets you realise that there isn't really that much more you can do with a sword outside of your chosen ryu. O.K. you may do a few extra kamae/techniques but at the end of the day a cut is a cut, a thrust is a thrust.
That's why I think most teachers allow you to 'wander off' for a while, it doesnt take long for this to sink in and you return back a little wiser. What I can't understand is the people who chop and change and learn a little from each school, and therefore only scratch at the surface. As has been said before, pick a teacher and stick with him, eventually you'll get where you want to be.

Tim Hamilton

p.s. No more mention of the 'P' word..:eek:

[hyaku]

Here in Japan I have had the experience where my teacher gave me the go ahead to go to another dojo and see what what was so special/different. This other particular teacher had studied with his father the Shihan when he was at elementary school and assumed that he should be the next Shihan. I should perhaps quickly add the this ryu had no tradition of having a Soke and a passing down through the family tradition.

I went there with an open mind and was mostly ridiculed at the way I did things. On the other hand I did not see anything particular that opened my eyes and pointed to the fact that what I was already doing was wrong.

On the contrary there was no dojo ettiquette and I was shown just about everything that I should "not" do with a shinken. So saying this man will probably complain for the rest of his life but his gripe will die with him. In future similar situations of this nature will re-occur for sure and we should accept them for what they are. and make our own moral choice should we be fortunate enough to get a chance to study/practice.

As a rule I have not seen authorization or officialdom pushed in Koryu. Its a simple disregard for another so called group as not knowing what they are doing anyway. As Guy mentioned a present leader will simply express grave concern over the ryu being bastardized.

Therefore I see no need in waving the "official" flag too much. These words of official and authorized sound very Western to me. A more Japanese way of dealing with things is: If I were to mention that that was, "Another group saying they did what we did". The reaction would be "So desu neh"

Generaly speaking if a particular student/ teacher of line carries on his own way, it only lasts for his generation. Time seems to have away of weeding things out.

Its the associations that seem to make things worse. A "Ha" of a Ryu will and sometimes does join a particular association to make themselves "official". Kareha is the word used sometimes.

It's generally very democratic and its a case of live and let live unless you are really treading on someones toes.

I have heard this stuff from ZNKR affiliates in the past with comments like, "If you are not affiliated to the ZNKR you are not 'official'. Quite frankly its bullsh?t. Like it like it not we live in a democracy where people are quite free to do what they want.

In the end time and experience show through even within the confines of a ryu itself should there be such a conflict.

Hyakutake Colin

[Nathan Scott]

I just have a couple of things to add to this discussion:

It could be that the current generation of budo-ka could just not care about politics and let things happen as they may, but I suspect things would go to hell. It seems to me that in any generation you are going to have people who just want to train for their own reasons (and don't care about politics), and those that care about the art and what happens to it (not interested in politics, but driven to be involved in hopes of helping the art). Those that jump into the politics become part of the caretakers of the art for that generation. But there are always going to be some that don't mind getting involved and some that think that it is not necessary.

The other point is that we live in different times than 100 years ago, and the next generation will change as drastically as this one has. There is no longer a need to prove your authority through matches or shinken shobu. You simply hang out a shingle and teach for money. If you market yourself better than your neighbor, then you have a bigger following. This is something that has taken place in the last century, and will continue to "corrupt" martial arts in the commerical sectors.

Also, this last decade has really introduced a major global information boom, and everyone seems to think that they have the right to know whatever they are curious about. This is good in some ways, but we are going to see a lot of homogonization of the arts and loss of indentity as this and future generations try to patch up their art with good sounding principles and methods from other arts (even if there are in fact adequate teachings to be discovered in their own curriculum). I look at test cutting as an example. Everyone and their dog is now test cutting, and if you ask everyone where they got the idea or instruction, they will say that their art has always been doing it. This is simply not the case - most have been influenced by the word on the street (perhaps for the better, but it is still influence). The other problem with this computer/internet generations is that they have no patience for learning, reduced social skills, and no desire to train seriously for the sake of training seriously. We have all been conditioned to expect instant gratification and seek the easiest way to our goals. This is another big problem with finding the right kind of students to continue the art.

I believe that if the current and future generations don't make serious efforts, then "ecosystems" like koryu will be corrupted and turned into a mass marketed study-group system world wide (no offense intended towards any particular group that is experimenting with study groups).

There have always been hazards and political issues, but there has never been this much emphasis on making money and free-flowing information as there is now.

With the ability to make video clips, DVD's, video tapes, books, and reach a global market for free, stealing a famous art name from someone else is easier than ever. Especially when ability is not going to be tested. Japanese are not big on litigation (yet), and are not worried about it because, as Hyaku says, these splinter groups usually die off. As long as martial arts are popular, there is a very real possibility that a slick businessman will make quite an empire for themselves using far less cunning and effort than what was necessary even one generation ago.

Bottom line, I think looking after things is a worthwhile cause. I don't mind wasting my time just in case the effort really is necessary.

Regards,

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Those that jump into the politics become part of the caretakers of the art for that generation.


Well...I'm not sure I'd say those that jump into the politics become the caretakers for sure.

There are those that jump into the politics that become the bad apples of the art too.

My certificate of rank in Kendo when I started training in SCKF was not recognized not because my org was not recognized by the IKF.

Instead, one of the SCKF senseis belonging to the OTHER Kendo Org in Taiwan had a beef with the offical org that I got my rank from, and told the other senseis that I got the certificate from the "wrong" org.

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
If you market yourself better than your neighbor, then you have a bigger following.

I thought the traditionalists don't WANT a big following. Don't they want to maintain a REAL sensei to student ratio where some REAL transmission will occur :D

Besides, I doubt any sensei with real shugyo will shinken shobu with the average hooligan making an ass of himself with bad marketing...even "back then". Maybe charlatans that abuse the name of your school...but charlatans in general? He might send the senior students after the guy though :D

Before the internet was available, how many of us "REALLY" went after the charlatans, even at this time and era where you don't have to put your life on the line to do it?

At least of the older senseis that I know, when they see people signing up with charlatans, I get the sense from them that "If they can't tell the good from the bad, they deserve what they get..."

You are not going to be able to keep people from signing-up at the green ranger and the ninja turtle dojos anyhow....

[Nathan Scott]

David,

You've largely misunderstood the intent of my last post.

Traditionalisists typically don't want huge followings, although there are koryu that clearly do hope to expand to the more mainstream "market" internationally.

The comments you were reacting to were followed by "...martial arts in the commerical sectors." I was speaking from this angle because that is what the general public sees, and the image we all have to live with to some degree as a result. I agree that it is not the kind of dojo everyone wants (it ain't for me).

Obviously, I'm not saying that all politics are good politics. If they were all good, then people wouldn't mind getting involved as much. You can't get more than two people together without haveing disagreements. But in regards to threads like this in which a handful of people are attempting to defend a respected tradition from exploitation, there are a number of people who are wondering "why do we bother". Well, who else is going to do it? You? I'd rather be doing something else, personally. But hey, maybe it's good for the 'ol spiritual development.

Anyway, that's the idea. If nobody tried to become involved in "caretaking", then only the opportunists would handle politics, and we wouldn't have anything left worth studying, IMO. In fact, what would be left would probably be regulated by the government and we'd have to submit to evaluation by a board full of people that don't understand what we do, and paying annual fees for licensing if we are let in to the club.

Look at the Saigo-ha Daito ryu group. They've done a good job of researching what is written about Daito ryu in Japanese, but their techniques are horrible. Unfortunately, they write 10 times more books than any other group, and a lot of people (in Japan at least) think that this is what Daito ryu is now.

BTW, it is not my intent to prevent people from joining whacky "fantasy" groups. Just inform the public of what they are, and if the groups are acting in a fraudulent manner, take actions towards correcting it. This is for the sake of all of us who would like to continue teaching.

Regards,

[Nathan Scott]

This thread has probably run it's (useful) course at this point, but I'd like to leave a link to a post that Professor Karl Friday left on Iaido-L yesterday. The subject is somewhat related to this thread, but also offers further perspective on the koryu mentality that may help with understanding how things work. It's a bit long, so I'll just supply the link:

Iaido-L mailing list; July 2, 2003; "Re: Kenjutsu dojo in UK":

http://listserv.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0307&L=iaido-l&D=0&P=1164

If you'd like to follow more of the discussion, you can simply search the archives at:

http://listserv.uoguelph.ca/archives/iaido-l.html

Regards,

[DCPan]

Hi Nathan,

Sorry for taking what you said out of context.

Like my previous posts, I was talking about more general situations rather than the specific question as asked by the original poster regarding TSKSR.

As well put by many, when you have the facts straight, this particular case about TSKSR is fairly clear cut....

:D