Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 39

Thread: Origin of Daito-ryu / AJJ

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Mallorca.Balearic Islands.SPAIN
    Posts
    130
    Likes (received)
    0

    Question Aikijujutsu concept?The Beginning

    Ok...silly question of the week
    One of my students asked a question about the concept of AJJ...when was the first time when people started using the word to adress a particular "view" of Martial Arts? which are the roots of the concept, historically?is an "ancient" or Koryu concept, pre-Tokugawa?people tried to claim about this subject later?why in 20th century people are talking so easily about Aikijujutsu or claiming to have been practising AJJ without any connection to the roots?
    Thank You!!!!!
    Best Regards,
    óscar Recio
    "Any man who refers to himself as a "master" or knowlingly allows his students to refer to him as a master, isn´t one"
    Takamura Yukiyoshi
    http://www.dojotanabe.com

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,714
    Likes (received)
    153

    Default

    Oscar,

    You might find some information about this in Stanley Pranin's "Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu"(interviews with Daito-ryu masters) book. There has been commentary written about it in various articles in the Aikido Journal, and various internet forums from time to time, as well.

    My understanding is that "aikijutusu" was suggested to Takeda Sokaku long after he began teaching Daito-ryu, and that it was some time before he referred to his art as aikijujutsu.
    Cady Goldfield

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Maryland, USA, by way of Bavaria, Germany, Texas, Indiana and Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default Aiki and jujutsu

    Pretty much what Cady said.

    From what I understand, the term 'aiki' has been around a long time and can be found in the writings and kuden of many ryuha, but was never really applied as part of the name of anything, much less jujutsu, until fairly recently (I'm thinking late-Meiji).

    There are systems of koryu jujutsu wherein is contained significant info and practice related to 'aiki' (by one or the other of the myriad definitions of what it MEANS to the particular style ...), but Sokaku Takeda was the first one (probably at Ueshiba's suggestion, and by default Onisaburo's sugestion) that it described Daito Ryu's jujutsu.

    There are references in some scrolls to 'aiki no jutsu' and similar constructions, but until Takeda and Ueshiba agreed upon appending 'aiki' to the name of their arts, it was never used in the nominative sense ...


    Chuck
    Chuck Gordon
    Mugendo Budogu
    http://www.budogu.com/

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Mallorca.Balearic Islands.SPAIN
    Posts
    130
    Likes (received)
    0

    Question Well so...

    Thank you Chuck and Cady for your answers.
    I´ve seen a pic of a young Kenji Yoshida with a scroll hanging behind him with the "Aiki bugei" motto on it. I think if Richard Elias is on the forum probably he can speak a little about it...there´s a debate on another forum if Yanagi Ryu was pre-Daito Ryu...probably he can tell a little more about the subject.
    I´m sure that the concept used on a nominative way is quite recent but the question is...where i can find historical files or information resources to the Aikijujutsu concept?
    I´ll be checking Stan Pranin´s articles on Aikido Journal anyway...
    Thank You.
    Regards,
    Óscar Recio
    "Any man who refers to himself as a "master" or knowlingly allows his students to refer to him as a master, isn´t one"
    Takamura Yukiyoshi
    http://www.dojotanabe.com

  5. #5
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    Whats in a name?

    I think rich would agree that there really is no debate about anything-just questions.
    The Aikibugei scroll does not even predate the known use of the term Aikijujutsu. It is worth noting (and this aligns with Chucks comments) that both the termn and the description pre-dates Ueshibas involvement in the Daito Ryu.
    The use of the term was noted in Taiso Horikawas notebook from 1913 "Apply Aiki here." Those in DR know what that means to convey. Moreover it has been noted by every member of the generation close to Takeda that he clearly spoke of the Jujutsu, Aikijujutsu and Aiki, as different things to be taught. Mr. Deguchis prompting of the use of the term in the name was the significant change. Though many people in the art still call it jujutsu much of the time.

    There is no definitive answer as to the founding of DR. The founding date cannot be debated significantly for there is next to no information.
    The founding date and even the voracity of the existance of the family art of the Yoshida clan as known as "Yanagi Ryu" past the first decade of the 20th century remains a mystery as well.
    Good luck to us all in our search. As one fellow noted. "This concerns the burning interest of exatly who?" Twenty people in the world.

    I would offer that I highly doubt DR as we know it came into being during the martial career of one man. If you look at and compare the technical syllibus of Aikido (another art founded in this century) and compare it to DR it is profoundly a shallower study. It is the same with Judo. Too, as it has been noted, Takeda was illiterate. Therefore if it was founded by Takeda then the passing down of scrolls, and indeed the very idea of organizing and writing them had to be a nefarious conspiracy.
    Why?
    The men who wrote them for him all claimed it was an old art. Where did they get the first scroll to copy and write down? Was it "made up" out of whole cloth by an Aizu friend? Or did the Horikawa's "aid" Takeda in fashioning them? Further, It has been recognized that Takeda had no lack of confidance in his ability and was rather robust in his dissmissive commentary and physical displays of the martial artists in general of his time. I cannot imagine him not stating that these were his own techniques and this art was his creation were that the case.


    Dan

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Mallorca.Balearic Islands.SPAIN
    Posts
    130
    Likes (received)
    0

    Thumbs up WHOA!!!!

    Well...i´m speechless.
    Thank you so much Dan.
    Regards,
    Óscar Recio
    "Any man who refers to himself as a "master" or knowlingly allows his students to refer to him as a master, isn´t one"
    Takamura Yukiyoshi
    http://www.dojotanabe.com

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Default

    I pretty much agree with Dan. I do not subscribe to the aikido derived theory that states Ueshiba (and/or Onisaburo Deguchi) had anything to do with the addition of term "aiki" to Daito-ryu's name. IMHO that is revisionist history. As Horikawa's notebooks and also diaries of Yukiyoshi Sagawa's father indicated, the term aiki was in use prior to Ueshiba's introduction to Daito-ryu.

    There may have been a name change from Daito-ryu Jujutsu to Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu and general speculation is that Sokaku adopted it because he felt Aiki was central to the tradition he had learned and was teaching.

    My own personal theory is that the overall tradition Sokaku "revived" is properly referred to as simply Daito-ryu, and that it contains among other things as Dan noted: jujutsu, aikijujutsu, and aiki (no jutsu). The "revival" probably results from the rejoining of the Saigo Tanomo (Chikanori Hoshina) line of "oshikiuchi" and the "Daito-ryu" or the Takeda family line of Aizu-han bujutsu, and/or the fact that Daito-ryu was near extinction and through Sokaku's tremendous efforts it was revived and survives today because of the skills of his most accomplished students and successors.

    Older Daito-ryu documents that indicate the art described as "Daito-ryu Jujutsu" for example, on various documents including the eimeiroku, hiden mokuroku, etc... are not (imo) necessarily reflecting an "older name" of the tradition, that was later changed to "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu", but rather what was being taught or disclosed at the time. More recent documents that include the aiki prefix may not necessarily indicate a name change per se, but rather be the result of someone reasoning that since "aiki" represented both the peak and the essence of Daito-ryu it should be included on all the documents (including the jujutsu ones). It could also mean that later Sokaku began to teach the hiden mokuroku as aikijujutsu techniques rather than simply jujutsu techniques.

    That would be consistent with the idea of Daito-ryu's gradual evolution from kenjutsu/jujutsu to aikijujutsu to more pure aiki as posited by some in the Kodokai - Roppokai tradition which posits that Sokaku himself was responsible for evolving and developing Daito-ryu aiki.

    This view holds that what Sokaku inherited was only Daito-ryu Bujutsu: jujutsu, kenjutsu etc... and that because of his mastery of various schools of kenjutsu and other weapons combined with the oshikiuchi when he started emphasizing jujutsu instead of the kenjutsu as Tanomo urged him (saying the time of the sword is over it's time to focus on jujutsu), that Sokaku more or less took the previously existing "concept of aiki" and created the techniques of aiki (aiki no jutsu) himself from his exquisite sword movements and he naturally incorporated these developments into his jujutsu creating aikijujutsu himself. Gradually he developed these techniques more fully and began to strip away the more jujutsu elements focusing on the "aiki" which he felt was the essence of his techniques. He particularly emphasized the aiki aspect of these techniques in his instruction to Horikawa Kodo, and Kodo sensei continued in the way he was taught further refining the techniques - Kodo encouraged Seigo Okamoto in the same way to continue developing these aiki techniques, and gradually through the instruction of Sokaku to Kodo Horikawa and then to Seigo Okamoto much of the remaining vestiges of jujutsu fell away or became less and less prominent as the aiki took it's intended and essential place of prominence as the core essence and distinguishing characteristic of Daito-ryu.

    This view looks at Sokaku as the inheritor of some Takeda family bujutsu/oshikiuchi, a master of Onoha Itto-ryu, who then invented or devoloped "aikijujutsu" himself and fused all those together with vestiges of various other Aizu-han martial arts he had studied thus becoming the "reviver of Daito-ryu". Modern Daito-ryu then according to this view is a blend of old traditional koryu bujutsu and Sokaku's more modern invention, fusion or development of the former into modern aikijujutsu.

    I agree that there is and has been a natural progression/evolution - particularly in some branches of Daito-ryu. But I think agree with Dan that it's pretty increbible to believe any one person could have invented/founded it all, even just the aiki portion of Daito-ryu is so deep and involves so many layers of development, and sophistication that it's hard to fatham some one person contriving it all, regardless of their level of genius, experience and expertise. It just had to be developed more over time. There is embedded deep in Daito-ryu aiki techniques generations of accumulated battlefield and combat experience that seems to scream out at the receptive practitioner a vast sense of history and forgotten knowledge all caught in a flow from archaic history right up to the present that is I believe characteristic of all living koryu bujutsu. Figuratively speaking, I personally find it fascinating to slice open or dissect Daito-ryu aiki techniques I learned from my teacher, and discover the equivalent of age rings in a tree stump, each proclaiming insights from their generation or era previously completely unknown to me.

    Either way, Sokaku is the pivotal character and father of Daito-ryu as we know it. Even if he did not create aikijujutsu himself, he clearly played a major part in it's develoment. And if he did, he truly was an unparalled genius who was able to instill and fuse into his creation, not just tidbits of ancient teachings smattered together, but cohesively melt together so much more from the past than his own experience could have possibly gathered. The resulting seamless depth of what he compiled is just mind-boggling.

    At any rate, oral tradition has it that someone may have persuaded Sokaku - as a result of this evolution/progression even during Sokaku's time to append "aiki" as the prefix to jujutsu making "aikijujutsu". Some say it was Ueshiba as has been claimed by aikido sources, and noted above, but others say it was Yoshida or possibly someone else, perhaps Horikakwa or Sagawa. The 'who' is uncertain, but the story of someone persuading Sokaku to begin calling it aikijujutsu persists.

    If we look at the traditional curriculum there is a general systematic order of instruction that starts with basic jujutsu (hiden mokuroku kata or equivalent techniques) being taught first. These techniques have many characterisitic Daito-ryu traits, but also are not all that different from other Japanese jujutsu schools - they represent (imo) a foundational curriculum of standard or typical basic and advanced jujutsu techniques, principles, and strategies. After that, typically one would begin to study the "aiki no jutsu" curriculum, these techniques were rather unique to Daito-ryu. These were the "secret essence" or advanced techniques of Daito-ryu. After learning the "techniques of aiki" those techniques and principles were then applied to or combined with the jujutsu techniques already learned in addition to the next level of techniques which were the "hiden ogi" and "goshin yo no te" or hand techniques of self-defense - hence the appellation "aikijujutsu" (aiki + jujutsu).

    That is the general order of the densho - but as we know, Sokaku didn't teach strictly according to the scrolls and he taught different individuals and groups differently according to their needs, abilities, etc... Because of the destruction of the Aizu castle and loss of the highly outnumbered and outgunned Aizu clan against their opponents in the Boshin Civil War no known documents pre-Sokaku have survived, so we don't know exactly what their contents were or if the term "aiki" was used prominently before.

    Ono-ha Itto-ryu kenjutsu as well as portions of Jikishinkage-ryu were apparently taught separately to some, but not to others. In the mainline, Tokimune apparently taught kenjutsu concurrently alongside Daito-ryu and considered it as part of Daito-ryu.

    My own understanding again is that the Itto-ryu was used by Sokaku as a foundational curriculum of solid kenjutsu techniques upon which Daito-ryu aiki techniques and principles were added (much like the hiden mokuroku serves as jujutsu base upon which to apply Daito-ryu aiki today). Sokaku's own toho/kenpo (sword methods) and hence the mysterious/lost or at least elusive "Daito-ryu" kenjutsu upon which all Daito-ryu techniques are said to be based is, (at least in imo) based on Daito-ryu's traditional aiki-ken (not to be confused with Iwama or Aikido sword work also known as "aiki-ken") more than strictly on Onoha Itto-ryu. Takeda (and Hoshina) clansmen from generations prior to Sokaku more than likely used whatever pre-eminent kenjutsu ryu was being officially taught in their day and locale (at least in Aizu the officially sanctioned and required school was for a long time Mizoguchi-ha Itto-ryu). So based partly on what I've learned and was taught, and partly on my own speculation, it is my opinion that this "aiki" was much of the "essence" of the secret family tradition(s) that Sokaku received and was taught by Tanomo Saigo and his father, and that he in turn perhaps at Tanomo's insistence used that as a model to develop Daito-ryu as we know it today which is comprised, as you know primarily of jujutsu/aikijujutsu techniques rather than kenjutsu. At the core, however, was and is still aiki.

    Some say the base upon which Daito-ryu rests is kenjutsu (and perhaps this was moreso in the past), others would say the base is jujutsu, the body of Daito-ryu is aikijujutsu, and at the pinnacle or top is aiki - this view describes a progression from strictly jujutsu to incorporating aiki with jujutsu (aikijujutsu) to gradually stripping away the jujutsu elements to achieve the same or desired results using "pure aiki", while others would insist that the base of Daito-ryu is really the "aiki", upon which the rest of the tradition operates and is practically meant to be applied with. My own view leans more towards the latter, although I think each view holds validity, and perhaps in the grander scheme, all of them are correct in one sense/way, or another.

    I might also mention other groups of Daito-ryu techniques include the soden (Takumakai), kuden (various oral teachings), Daito-ryu Aiki Nito-ken (or Aiki Nito-ryu), kaishaku soden, and (menkyo) kaiden. Also worth mentioning are the oshikiuchi, which are the techniques from which Daito-ryu was said to be developed.

    The term oshikiuchi in Daito-ryu traditionally refers to techniques for inside the castle from which we get our zatori and hanza hantachi techniques. The techniques were specially designed for castle bodyguards to defend one's lord while conforming to the strict rules of ettiquette indoors. The Takeda samurai were in fact employed as instructors to the shogun's personal guards. So that makes sense. However there has been some speculation about this term, and what it actually refers to. It's thought by some to refer only to the rules of ettiquette for inside the castle grounds and/or surrounding the presence of the shogun or one's lord and not to martial techniques at all.

    This interpretation doesn't hold up (imo) - why on earth would an extremely accomplished and practical martial artist, who had a known disdain for education/school, who still saw himself as a samurai, who wanted to join Takamori Saigo's armed resistance against the new gov't, sit still long enough to learn only castle ettiquette from (a supposed non-martial artist like) Tanomo Saigo, much less make up a story like that?

    His father sent him to train with Tanomo because Sokaku respected him as a former leader of the Aizu clan and it's resistance in the Boshin civil war. Sokaku would have no reason to make up and teach something like "oshikiuchi" and claim they were techniques if they weren't (nor would Tanomo). And even if Tanomo made it up I can't imagine someone with Sokaku's personality ever repeating such and teaching it no less. Why would Sokaku even claim Tanomo was the one who taught him if Tanomo was only appointed to over-see his training as has been suggested by some?

    Tanomo's entire family commited seppuku (they were samurai) when they saw the Aizu castle go up in flames and thought all was lost. Tanomo was even captured by Imperial forces and was apparently rescued by Soemon and/or Sokichi Takeda and their small party barely escaped with their lives. Upon discovering his family's fate he had to be restrained from following them in seppuku - it is said he was dissuaded because of his obligation as the sole surviving person capable of teaching the oshikuchi - and he was persuaded to become a priest instead of joining his family in death. That he participated in the war, and was a leader (councilor/governor?) of Aizu, suggests to me that at the very least he had combat experience, and may have been a strategist as well. As a samurai in Aizu he likely would've been required at least to train in Mizoguchi-ha Itto-ryu. That it is not mentioned in his diaries does not prove anything. What other documents and evidence of his activities prior to the war have survived? Because they were on the losing side they themselves reportedly destroyed documents detailing their activities and involvement with the Aizu resistance to protect themselves.

    Sokaku was not the first to learn martial arts from Tanomo Saigo his illegitimate but later adopted son Shiro Saigo (of Judo fame) also learned oshikiuchi from his father - Judo sources also verify that he had learned Daito-ryu from Tanomo Saigo, and that it was his own unique techniques that he used to beat the strongest jujutsu fighters of the day in matches that resembled today's NHB competitions. Sokaku also had an older brother who may have been ahead of him for successorship (at least we know he was studying for priesthood). But he died early on and Sokaku was urged to come and take his place at the shrine, but he eventually gave up on that in favor his own musha shugyo.

    The literal translation of oshikiuchi refers to rules for "inside the threshold". So it may also refer to the secret art/tradition passed down within the Takeda family/clan and not shown to outsiders. If Sokaku's "aiki" does derive from the oshikiuchi techniques as it is said, then that translation is consistent with both the traditional Daito-ryu usage of the term, and also with my theory of "aiki" being the "core" of the secret family art of the Takeda/Hoshina clan.

    Another side note is that it is uncertain whether Chikanori Hoshina (Tanomo Saigo) learned Daito-ryu/oshikiuchi from Sokaku's grandfather or from his own family. One version has the oshikiuchi being transmitted down through the Hoshina family in Aizu for generations, while the other battlefield bujutsu was passed down in the Takeda family. The other version speculates that that Sokaku's grandfather Soemon taught Tanomo Saigo the oshikiuchi (aiki) because Sokichi (Sokaku's father) was a rather large and strong giant (a sumo ozeki) who it is suspected would've been less able to pick up on the important subtle details of aiki.

    Regards,

    Brently Keen

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Long Beach, CA, USA
    Posts
    318
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Oscar,

    I don't really have much to add to any of the above. I do pretty much agree with what Dan said though, like he said I would.

    The concept and term aiki is older than the ajj use of the term, but mostly in sword schools, such as Kashima Shin ryu (which also contains jujutsu and very "aiki-esque" techniques in both the sword and jujutsu). There are other terms for what is being called aiki, in all of it's varied forms, in many styles. As you have no doubt experienced, Shindo Yoshin ryu contains such but does not call it aiki. I have seen very similar "aiki" technqiues to those of Daito ryu in arts that have no connection to Daito ryu at all.

    "So how many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie-roll tootsie-pop?... The world may never know."
    Richard Elias
    Takamura-ha Shindo Yoshin ryu
    Yanagi Ryu

  9. #9
    MarkF Guest

    Default

    For an approximate date, etc., of the "founding" of DR Aikijujutsu:

    http://ejmas.com/kronos/NewHist1900-1939.htm

    Use ctrl. & F and enter Takeda Sokaku.

    It's not a lot, but there is an interesting statement. The date used originally was about 1913, but has now been changed.


    Mark

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Mallorca.Balearic Islands.SPAIN
    Posts
    130
    Likes (received)
    0

    Thumbs up THANKS!!!!

    Brently....Richard....
    Well...
    Thank you!!
    Óscar Recio
    "Any man who refers to himself as a "master" or knowlingly allows his students to refer to him as a master, isn´t one"
    Takamura Yukiyoshi
    http://www.dojotanabe.com

  11. #11
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    Registered: May 2000
    Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Posts: 3092

    For an approximate date, etc., of the "founding" of DR Aikijujutsu:

    http://ejmas.com/kronos/NewHist1900-1939.htm

    Use ctrl. & F and enter Takeda Sokaku.

    It's not a lot, but there is an interesting statement. The date used originally was about 1913, but has now been changed.


    Mark


    __________________
    Mark F. Feigenbaum


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

    Mark
    With all due and deserved respect.......
    There is nothing factual that speaks to the "founding " question to be read there. Of the little that is known, that has been cross referenced and IS supportable-the information given at that site is wrong. Even the name of the art is wrong; the dates are wrong, the "founding" statement offered is foolish . Not enough is known to make definitive statements. Anyone worth their salt who would offer opinions is going to offer a lot of qualifiers and will more than likely mention the disputable historical claims as well.

    So to make a definitive statement like that:
    "Takeda Sokaku ,who created DR aiki jutsu(sic) around 1896...."
    is patently ridiculous.
    Were it so easy

    Dan Harden
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 20th October 2002 at 12:58.

  12. #12
    MarkF Guest

    Default

    Hi, Dan,
    I did enclose "founding" in quotes. It is an estimation since most either believe DR Aikijujutsu didn't exist until the time Takeda used the term aiki in his description. Others believe it to be in 1913, and other dates. The approximate date is probably as accurate as any. (1897 which also stated it to be approximate).

    Some also think it to be gendai MA due to the dates including the date of Takeda S. birth probaly makes it a gendai MA. That said,

    I don't really care about that, myself. I believe the separation of gendai and koryu to be nothing more than a continuum, and I no longer feel the need to separate the two (koryu and gendai) for obvious reasons.

    I know the name was wrong, but the easy assumption is a typo. Happens all the time.

    My point was only one of when DR aikijujutsu became aikijujutsu. The other comment was one of Tadeka S. to be some what rebellious, as to the statement I alluded.

    One other point: I don't believe Takeda Sokaku was pround of being illiterate, but only proud he could get others to take care of such mundane tasks.

    Bottom line, the dates are skewed and I tossed in another one for consideration.

    I don't consider it wrong, only that the date of DR jujutsu becoming aikijujutsu has not been nailed down. I don't doubt DRAJJ to be older than this, I only suggested a date for the name change, nothing more.


    Mark

    PS: In another thread someone mentioned that Dr. Jigoro Kano to have been assasinated in the early 1920s or at least well before the true date of his death in 1938.

    The link was there, btw, and I only added it not giving an opinion as to whether it were right or wrong, and I do know who gave that date, and you probably would be very surprised, but as his name isn't given in the bibliography, I left it out. My opionion is only that of the koryu/gendai yea of "separation."

    Argue with the writer about it.

    MF
    Last edited by MarkF; 20th October 2002 at 15:36.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Default

    Another tangent here, but since Mark F mentioned it again: There was a discussion on another thread about Sokaku's alleged "illiteracy", in which someone asserted that Sokaku was "completely illiterate", or something to that effect, and I questioned the truth of the statement and challenged whether it was another (aikido based) exaggeration/assumption. I stated that I felt there was a difference between not being able (or willing) to write and not being able to read. I found the following exchange taken from Stanley's book and posted on the mainline website here http://www.daito-ryu.org In the following question and answer, Kondo sensei essentially affirms my point - I quote:

    Stanley Pranin: "I understand that Sokaku was not interested in studies as a boy and was illiterate."

    Kondo: "Although it is said that Sokaku Sensei was totally illiterate, I understand that he actually could read. It seems that when he was a child he had a reason for declaring that he would never write. I have heard that whenever there was an election, he would practice writing the Chinese characters of the name of the person he was going to vote for and then go to the polls."

    As for the orgins of ajj, sweeping statements that try to put a year/date on the founding of Daito-ryu whether in 1913, or even 1896 as mentioned in the above provided link are indeed ridiculous whether they are approximate or not, because there's no real evidence or even oral tradition to back up such assumptions.


    Brently Keen

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    455
    Likes (received)
    9

    Default

    Originally posted by Brently Keen
    [B]Another tangent here, but since Mark F mentioned it again: There was a discussion on another thread about Sokaku's alleged "illiteracy", in which someone asserted that Sokaku was "completely illiterate", or something to that effect, and I questioned the truth of the statement and challenged whether it was another (aikido based) exaggeration/assumption. I stated that I felt there was a difference between not being able (or willing) to write and not being able to read. I found the following exchange taken from Stanley's book and posted on the mainline website here http://www.daito-ryu.org In the following question and answer, Kondo sensei essentially affirms my point - I quote:

    Stanley Pranin: "I understand that Sokaku was not interested in studies as a boy and was illiterate."

    Kondo: "Although it is said that Sokaku Sensei was totally illiterate, I understand that he actually could read. It seems that when he was a child he had a reason for declaring that he would never write. I have heard that whenever there was an election, he would practice writing the Chinese characters of the name of the person he was going to vote for and then go to the polls."
    OTOH, on the same (mainline) site Tokimune Takeda says "Since Sokaku could not read, he put the letter into his kimono and carried it to Momonoi in Osaka.".

    Anyway, whether he could or couldn't it appears as if he didn't read or write, for the most part.

    Best,

    Chris

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Default

    So we have several conflicting statements coming from the same source.

    I'm not going to argue adamantly about this as I cannot claim to know for certain - however I would argue that a case could be made for either perspective.

    What I really objected to in the other thread was not so much the actual truth, extent of, or untruth Sokaku's alleged illiteracy, but rather the mis-characterization of Sokaku's character and intelligence that results from the repeated assertions that he was illiterate. The implication that one is left with is that Sokaku was an uneducated, barbaric, and cranky sort of brute - that is at least the way many aikido sources have sought to portray him as. The repeated mention of his "illiteracy" only adds to the image of that stereotype.

    Based on what I've learned about Daito-ryu and Sokaku Takeda, I think that the stereotypical portrayal of Sokaku as a truly feared martial artist, but somewhat of an uneducated dolt is inaccurate - and rather to the contrary, I think that his students and associates saw him as rather brilliant (whether he could write or not). So although I do not know (and perhaps no one living truly does) with certainty, which statement is accurate as to what extent Sokaku may have been illiterate or unable to write - I personally share the view which Kondo sensei has expressed as it makes sense to me and jives with what I'd already been told.

    Even if Sokaku was illiterate (and he very well may have been) I'm simply pointing out that:

    1.) other evidence suggests Sokaku's character, intelligence and perceptive abilities were exceptional, regardless of his ability to read and/or write,

    2.) there is also some reason to question the extent of his alleged "complete illiteracy" and perhaps reason to make a distinction between his ability to read and his admitted inability and unwillingness to write.

    As for determining the truth of the conflicting statements, I would suggest making an attempt to put each comment into it's proper context, as well as consider the original language, the possibility of some error in interpretation, as well as the surrounding circumstances, and possible intentions/motives behind each comment.

    I also assume that Tokimune (or perhaps maybe Kotaro Yoshida?) would've been the source for Kondo's "understanding" as stated in his interview - at any rate one would have to question why there might be discrepancies in their statements.

    I personally had heard that Sokaku could read, but couldn't write at least a year before Stanley's book came out while I was still living in Japan, and I was told that came from either an interview with Tokimune or from Tokimune's own newsletter. The person who told me this was formerly a member of another Daito-ryu branch before he had joined the Roppokai, and I remember because I'd made a note of it in one of my training dairies at the time.

    I'll be the first to admit that I could be wrong - I'm not insisting that my source and Kondo's comments are right and everyone else is wrong, I'm only insisting that there is also the possibility that Sokaku's "complete illiteracy" may be just another exaggeration or half-truth resulting from a misunderstanding. I just think that before people make sweeping generalizations, or form concrete opinions, they should consider the implications as well as other points of view - that's all.

    Respectfully,

    Brently Keen

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. John J. Williams/ Saigo-ha DR
    By Trell in forum Aikijujutsu
    Replies: 198
    Last Post: 21st July 2007, 05:06
  2. Commonly Used Budo Acronyms
    By Mekugi in forum Member's Lounge
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 21st May 2004, 03:44
  3. Mugai Ryu book revisited + history update
    By Seishin in forum Sword Arts
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24th January 2003, 00:08
  4. Aikido stealing Daito Ryu techniques
    By chrismoses in forum Aikijujutsu
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 23rd April 2001, 23:42

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •