Daito ryu and Chinese arts

[Rezim]

in the site <http://www.taikyokuken.co.jp/english/english.html>, theres a japonese teacher, hidemine jibiki, who claims that he learned daito-ryu from tsunejiro hosono and kotaro yoshida.
can any of tell me about this teachers claims about daito-ryu and the relation of his teacher, tsunejiro hosono, to sokaku takeda.
thanks for the help!!

[chris davis 200]

As far as i am aware this is a genuine group that trace their lineage back to Wang shu Jin, the famous internal arts fighting master from Taiwan.

Regarding the daito ryu lineage - i do not know much about it - the school is respected and i beleave that their lineage would be quite easily tracable and genuine.

Cheers
Chris

[Nathan Scott]

Interesting. Kondo Katsuyuki Sensei also studied under Tsunejiro Hosono and Kotaro Yoshida originally, before being referred to Tokimune Takeda. I would guess that if anyone would know about who Hidemine Jibiki is, it would be him.

Daito ryu Tai Chi? Hmmm. Personally, I'm not for mixing the arts of different countries, from a traditional standpoint. I know that both Yoshimaru Keisetsu and Sugawara Tetsutaka have done some published research on comparisons between DR/Aikido and Tai Chi/Chinese martial arts. The comparisons are interesting, and I'm sure there are similarities on a fundamental level. But Chinese MA and Japanese MA seem to think, move and flow a little differently.

Regards,

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Daito ryu Tai Chi? Hmmm. Personally, I'm not for mixing the arts of different countries, from a traditional standpoint. I know that both Yoshimaru Keisetsu and Sugawara Tetsutaka have done some published research on comparisons between DR/Aikido and Tai Chi/Chinese martial arts. The comparisons are interesting, and I'm sure there are similarities on a fundamental level. But Chinese MA and Japanese MA seem to think, move and flow a little differently.

Regards,

I haven't seen Yoshimaru Keisetsu outside of his books, so I couldn't say what he does on a day-to-day level, but Sugawara definitely does some funky stuff with Japanese and Chinese arts. I participated in one of his Japanese-Chinese "friendship" demonstrations in Tokyo, and he did a demonstration of Aikido as a Tai-chi form.

Best,

Chris

[chris davis 200]

hi guys,

I dont think that this school teaches Tai chi in the Daito Ryu Class or the other way around. as far as i am aware they are destinct classes and are seperated.

I dont think that mixing tai chi into the daito ryu syllabus would be a very good idea or vis versa - Daito ryu Tai chi?? Would sound a bit silly!. But studying tai chi in conjunction with daito ryu can have its advantages in my oppinion.

I have found the it is very good for understanding softness, balance and smooth movements. The chin na aspect is also very similar to daito ryu and, although rairly taught, can give you a better understanding of Kizushi(sp).

cheers
chris

[A. M. Jauregui]

I thought that only fools learn tai-chi...
*j/k UB40 ref.*

I look forward to what others have to say on the topic of daito ryu and tai-chi for I have yet to try the latter.

[Striking Hand]

Ana.

I study Chen Tjq over here in japan under a 20th generation Instructor/Lineage holder.

AFAIK, no reported/documented link exist between DR and T'ai ji quan.
The same counts for aikido.

The school in Shibuya is well known and teaches a multitude of Martial Arts.

I considered them once, but didn't like the way they seemed to be commercialised and the way the charged for lessons.
This does not mean that they teach bad MA.

From what I can gather they run multiple classes in a variety of styles and arts, there does not seem to be much mixing between styles.

Cheers.

[chris davis 200]

I study Chen Tjq over here in japan under a 20th generation Instructor/Lineage holder.

who is this? Just interested, cheers :)

[Striking Hand]

Originally posted by chris davis 200


who is this? Just interested, cheers :)

Chen Pei Shan he teaches small frame Chen TJQ and also lives in Tokyo.

[glad2bhere]

Dear Nathan:

".....Daito ryu Tai Chi? Hmmm. Personally, I'm not for mixing the arts of different countries, from a traditional standpoint....."

I don't know if it works quite that way, but let me give you a thought.

In Korean Hapkido arts there is, of course, the influence of Japanese traditions and not a little talk about Daito-ryu AJJ. However there is also the influence of Chinese traditions, most clearly found through the MU YEI TO BO TNG JI which incorporates material from Gen. Qi of the Ming Dynasty. You will recall, I think, that this is the same material which is thought to form the foundation for much of Chen TCC as the "Cannon Fist" Form. And Gen Qi's material, in turn is thought to derive from the Taizu Long Fist of the Song Emperor Taizu of the 10th Century. The result is that a particular posture or method may be seen as one of the 32 methods identified by Gen. Qi in his boxing approach, or it may be likewise approximated by a particular method observed in Daito-ryu--- give or take the position of a foot or pinkie. In this way, I am not sure that one would say that two arts (TCC and DRAJJ) are blended as much as one can say that careful observation can reveal biomechanics that they both share, or express. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Nathan Scott]

Don't get me wrong lads. I'm not saying people are literally trying to mix DR and Tai Chi, but there does seem to be a trend of Japanese researching Tai Chi and other Chinese arts and experimenting with how they can enhance Japanese arts - or at least offer comparisons between the two. Open up any Hiden magazine issue and you seem to see at least one or two full articles about Chinese arts.

As I said, there are surely quite a few things in common, which is interesting. I'm well aware that cross-pollination in martial arts (multi-cultural) is and has been common for quite a long time, and this has surely benefited the arts. But my point is that:

1) These are traditions that we are learning and preserving. The teachings are in the format of an out-dated context (not modern CQC), and it is important, in my opinion, to keep these teachings pure so that the true meaning of the kata and art can be correctly understood in its traditional context. Especially since many of us are not native Japanese, and none of us are living in the Tokugawa period. Adding "cool ideas" from the arts of other countries would in most cases only serve to muddle the intended teachings of the koryu kata.

2) On the other hand, if you are looking at a koryu art from higher up the pole (highly licensed/headmaster, etc.), then further development of the art may be a consideration. However again, you have to think about how you intend to present the art to future generations. "Here is a classical art, that has historical context in 'blah-blah-blah', and in the 18th generation, various ideas from non-Japanese fighting arts were mixed in to improve the techniques and tactics". At this point, you might be better off simply removing all the "traditional context". Meaning, for example, if part of your art was believed to have been developed as an art of protection/self-defense inside Edo castle during the late Edo period, the aspects of the methods that relate to this context would be unnecessary (ie: you could do everything from standing and lose much of the etiquette, among other things).

What I'm saying is that to further develop a koryu based on the operating system already extant in the art is a good and necessary thing, but to change the operating system through the influence of other countries from other periods of time is to risk making something new. Nothing wrong with that, but you would be corrupting a classical system.

Chris, Keisetsu posted a few pictures comparing Chinese movement with DR movement in at least one of his books, which is what I was referring to. A lot of people, including him, seem to be adopting the natural, centered stance seen in tai chi as the shizentai of their Japanese art. Interesting idea, but...

Regards,

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi Nathan,

What is your take then on what Takamura Sensei did with Shindo Yoshin ryu (I think that's the correct name)?

Ron

[Nathan Scott]

Hi Ron,

I have read all the articles and writings on Takamura Sensei, and like everyone else, was impressed with his obvious knowledge and experience.

Takamura S. is an example of someone who was in a senior position to make developmental changes in his koryu in an attempt to maintain the relevancy of the art (if I remember correctly). This was a difficult decision for him, and I don't know personally how it has worked out. But if I remember correctly, he did not adopt ideas from other cultural arts to YSR as much as simply modernize the historical context of the kata so that modern students could better benefit from studying the art. Again, I don't know how successful this adaptation has proven to be, or if it's been long enough to determine. Toby would probably have some feedback about this.

From my own point of view, I'm big on teaching the traditional art/methods first (in other words, for at least a few years) before experimenting with modern appliactions of the riai. I tell new students that the arts are very effective, but that if they are looking for the short road to modern day self-defense, then they are in the wrong place. Training at my dojo will be (generally) be a longer route, but will perhaps be more complete in transmission.

I think most exponents of koryu arts who are serious eventually experiement formally or informally with modern day applications of the principles. To me, it would be kind of a waste not to. But if you abandon the traditional context, etiqutte, modernize the art too much, or adopt influences from other arts (formally into the system), you have to seriously ask yourself what you are doing to the art.

In theory, fully adapting a classical art to the modern context is a cool idea (maybe as a parallel art). In one way, there would be nothing more appropriate. Modern attacks, defense against Western fighting approaches, knifes, guns, bottles, defense against bar fights, military CQC, Police arresting, etc.

But there are things to gain from the ideal of Japanese traditionalism, as well as important teaching methods that are not overtly understood by the student.

It is a very complex alteration to make, and I'm sure a controversial decision. But as I said previously, those highly licensed/headmasters are in a position to decide what the best way to keep the art alive (aka: develop) is. Their decisions may not always be embraced by their colleagues.

Regards,

[INFINOO]

Im not sure shared history of the two arts, however, I can tell you there completly differnt now. There like ying/yang In/yo:D. Depending on your teacher and if you learn applications or not I think nothing but good things can be gleened about cross training Tai chi and incorperating it into your aiki. There is a quaility of movement in Tai Chi that is really unique and differnt than JMA or FMA or western systems. The training meathodology in the chinese systems(Especailly military) that I have studyed/studying is also somthing that is worth looking into. You could say I have bought into the "tradition" of investagating and studying anything that works.

[Nathan Scott]

You could say I have bought into the "tradition" of investagating and studying anything that works.


Great for modern combatives, bad for classical art preservation.

Regards,

[Eric Joyce]

Hey INFINOO

I would have to agree with Nathan on this one. I know I am a stickler when it comes to this (Learning and preserving traditional ways). It's what keeps the art alive through time. Plus, it's what makes studying the arts enjoyable (at least from my perspective) Once you start to "cross-pollenize" things, the art (at least the classic ones) starts to lose its identity.

[INFINOO]

If classical art preservation is your goal than by all means dont change a thing. Just curious though, would this include not letting foreigners learn the secrest of the art:D. Taking of blood oaths ect...OO Wearing of the two swords all the time. See were Im going with this?

I just thank my lucky stars that I have had "exceptionally" good teachers in more than a couple of differnt arts that had my best interest at heart which was making me a better martail artist and person instead of up holding a "so called" tradition. If not I would more than likly would be dead. That would really be some tradition :rolleyes: Im sure my kids would understand there daddy not being around as long as his art stayed pure. I could almost puke. Its interesting in China when a student wanted to learn a skill that he was not familiar or not an expert at, so to speak(like the spear), he would send the student to a teacher who was. The more that things change the more that they stay the same. The more I think about the cross-pollenization remark kind of sound racist.
It also makes me wonder if some of the posters have ever been in a fight? If so, I would "love" to hear how tradionial it was.

"sticking your head in the sand dosnt make you disappear"

Regards

Gregory Rogalsky

[glad2bhere]

Dear Eric:

".....I would have to agree with Nathan on this one. I know I am a stickler when it comes to this (Learning and preserving traditional ways). It's what keeps the art alive through time. Plus, it's what makes studying the arts enjoyable (at least from my perspective) Once you start to "cross-pollenize" things, the art (at least the classic ones) starts to lose its identity....."

Believe it or not I support your position very strongly. I have seen no small amount of change in the KMA over my career and frankly I am not often sure that the change has been for the best--- or even productive. Things have modified over the years-- slowly, with considered purpose. For this reason I any pretty adamant about not simply cross-matching material from a variety of sources to produce hybred arts on impulse.

The reason I raise the thought of the Chinese arts is that there are many influences that may not be getting their due. As I am a practitioner of KMA rather than JMA I don't pretend to speak to the the latter. However, regarding the former I can speak with some authority when I say that following the Occupation, the overwhelming weight of KMA was skewed towards JMA. The would have been predictable given the circumstances and the times. The magnitude of the influence, however, was such that even Koreans, themselves, began to deny that there were any traditions other than those imported from Japan. Hyung proceeded from Japanese Kata and were executed with distinctly Japanese biomechanics. Patrilinear hierarchies, ranking systems and organization was all laid over the KMA.

Now, I am not naive enough to think I can reverse some 100 years of Japanese influence. However, when I practice my hyung I may now, as frequently, look to Chinese material as Japanese for a more thorough understanding of why I do what I do. For instance, though my Hapkido hyung are of a distinctly Japanese flavor, when considering an application for a biomechanic I can examine Cannon Fist of Chen TCC as easily as Funakoshi or Ueyshiba. I might not understand a particular sword parry, but I no longer automatically run to DEITY AND THE SWORD for insight when I also have Dr. Yang, Jwing-ming to draw on. I suppose what I am suggesting is that despite my strong support of your position, I also leave the door open for additional imput from alternate sources.

For the purposes of this post, though, everything I have just said brings us to the ultimate question. IF--- I was taught a particular method or biomechanic, and sought after additional insight (even over and above what my teacher gives me), and SHOULD I find such insight in an alternate source, would I be empowered to adjust or modify my execution? In asking this I am putting aside for a single moment the strictures and injunctions of organizations and considering only the nature of the culture I presume to study. My thought is--- if the answer is "no"--- than the discussion (and perhaps growth)would seem to stop there. If, however the answer is "yes" how then does one represent the modified material to ones' own community? Just some thoughts.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Rezim]

thank you guys for your points, but i was originaly asking about proficiency level of mister hidemine jibiki in daito-ryu.
is he a hiden mokuroku, hiden no gi, kioju dairi

[Nathan Scott]

Those interested in discussing the modernization of koryu arts could adapt the following thread to this subject:

"Traditional vs Modern"
http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15405

(Never heard of "Hidemine Jibiki")

Regards,