Daito-ryu and Secrecy

[Nathan Scott]

I've just pasted a previous discussion about this subject in front of this post, and would like to continue the discussion in this dedicated thread.

The subject of whether it is necessary or appropriate to publisize/sell the "inner secrets" of aiki arts has been a subject of friction on the net. Some say that the reasons for keeping the arts secret are obsolete, and/or, that you can't figure it out without a qualified instructor and hard practice anyways. So why bother? Others follow the conservative mentallity and are very opposed to revealing the inner workings of the art to even those not initiated to the appropriate level of the art, let alone those that are not members. Both have valid points - who is right?

If one were to look at the attitude of previous key instructors, it is quite apparent that they were very strict about protecting the inner aspects of the art.

It is known that the lineages that currently comprise Daito-ryu, for example, were taught only to the upper-warrior class in Aizu. Even during Takeda Sokaku's lifetime, he taught almost exclusively to police, military and those of samurai lineage, even though he was advised by Saigo to teach the arts publicly. Sokaku was understood as a non-public person, who was not interested in interviews, demonstrations, filming, books, or photography of his methods.

A well known quote from Takeda Sokaku himself in the artcle "Ima Bokuden" includes the following:

"...However, [Daito-ryu] is taught only to respectable people. Its misuse would be frightening. It seems that in Tokyo now there are various people teaching, but teaching others is something that cannot be taken lightly."

In Kondo Katsuyuki Sensei's "Ikkajo" book, he states:

"Regarding the aforementioned 'secretiveness' inherent in Daito-ryu, it is said that Sokaku Takeda (the 'interim restorer' of Daito-ryu) never taught the same technique twice."

"He later explained by saying, 'if you teach people the true techniques and the next day they leave the school, then all of the secret and oral teachings of Daito-ryu will flow outside the school and be known to the general public.' He also said, 'out of a thousand pupils, teach the true techniques only to one or two. Make absolutely sure of those you choose, and to them alone teach what is real. There is no need to teach the rest'."

"Further, given the traditionally closed, secretive nature of Daito-ryu, I worried to what degree it would be appropriate for me to disclose the oral and inner teachings of the art with which I have been entrusted to those outside the school."

"On the other hand, given the growing proliferation of technical manuals, videos and the like, not to mention the unprecedented availability of all kinds of information made possible today by the internet - much of it incorrect and of dubious origin, I might add - I decided that it would be in the best interest of Daito-ryu to publish a written and pictrorial record of the most fundmental points of at least the first portion of the school's technical curriculum, so that these do not become lost to posterity"

From the AJ article "Sokaku Takeda in Osaka", translated from Daitokan Newsletter #39 ,published by Tokimune Takeda:

Sokaku prohibited Daito-ryu from being transmitted to the general public and taught it secretly as a police tactics method and self-defense techniques for prominent people. Consequently, Sokaku would turn away reporters, commenting that the art was "not a show".

From the DVD "Kondo Katsuyuki - Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu":

"It's also often said that [Sokaku] would not teach the same technique twice, for fear that if he showed things too clearly, people would figure out his techniques too easily..."

"[Sokaku] would allow his students to steal his techniques, but he would never just give them away."

"In many ways Tokimune also continued many of the teaching methods used by his father. This included teaching many techniques in a way that would not reveal their true essence. His view is a fair proportion of students would eventually leave the dojo and stop training in Daito-ryu for whatever reasons. This he felt would cause th Daito-ryu tradition to flow away and become dilluted. For that reason, he often avoided teaching the essence of things so that Daito-ryu would remain as intact as possible."

Students of Daito-ryu are best qualified to keep their methods from being lost. Since the time of this publication, however, open seminars are now being taught to non-members by Kondo Sensei, as well as a bi-lingual DVD released, and news of publication of the Nikajo section has also been announced.

From "Conversations with Daito-ryu Masters":

Pg. 55, Takeda Tokimune - "[Sokaku] never allowed Daito-ryu to be taught to people who were not his students."

Pg. 95, Mrs. Horikawa (re: Horikawa Kodo) - "When Inoue Sensei first began learning [ca. 1963], I believe that the training was quite strict. Showing practice to outsiders was something that Horikawa began to do only just before his death. This was because of Sokaku Takeda Sensei's admonition never to show techniques to outsiders."

Pg. 147, Sato Keisuke - "...I think Sokaku's techniques are truly wonderful and I would like to preserve them for posterity by taking photographs. But I'm afraid that Sokaku will not permit himself to be photographed since he doesn't even allow people to observe his teaching..."

Pg. 148, Sato Keisuke - "Sokaku Sensei used to confirm that no one was observing before he would begin teaching. He was extremely severe in this regard. He absolutely would not show people his techniques."

Pg. 151, Sato Keisuke - "After one session, Sokaku remarked, 'Once you get the knack of a technique you'll be able to execute it rather easily. That's why I don't like to be observed by others when I'm doing techniques."

From the book "A Life in Aikido", pp.299-301:

Up until this moment, demonstrations and lectures about aikido were given by O Sensei alone, and exclusively in the setting of existing dojos. The only exceptions were the official Budo enbu (public demonstrations of various arts) in which O Sensei had participated as a guest. [Ueshiba Morihei] detested the idea of demonstrating for the general public. True budo involved struggle, and invoked the stakes of life and death, so he felt that its inner secrets should be transmitted only to sincere seekers. He believed that to show the secrets freely to outsiders would be immoral, a kind of devaluation or disrespect for the art.

From the book "Discovering Aiki - My 20 Years with Yukiyoshi Sagawa Sensei":

Pg. 44 - "It was difficult to publish a book about Sagawa Sensei because, in addition to his fierce temper, Sensei always said that his aiki was for real fighting and nothing else. For this kind of all out fight where you risk your life, it is natural that there are many secrets. For this reason, Sensei had a tendency not to appear in public."

Sokaku's position is pretty clear from the above writings. It would seem as though Takeda Tokimune Sensei was also fairly conservative, as was Sagawa Yukiyoshi and Horikawa Kodo Sensei. Though the Takumakai has published some of their methods, most of them have been published privately within their own group, and they do seem to be concerned with maintaining control of the content of their art.

From the book "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu", by Okamoto Seigo:

Pg. 7 - "A leading martial arts expert, in his book, once described Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu as an 'intangible cultural treasure'. Mr. Kazuto Ishida, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Japan said, 'These techniques should remain a cultural secret of Japan". He was also a good supporter of Kodo Horikawa Sensei, my master of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. However, against Ishida's opinion, I was obliged to popularize Daito-ryu all over the world because a lot of passionate Daito-ryu lovers are coming all the way to Japan from foreign countries. As a result, I decided to write this book in order to introduce the whole picture of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu."

Pg. 206 - "I can say that 'aiki' is something that can't be explained with pictures or words; it can hardly be understood even in video. Also, I had to omit some techniques due to lack of space and because my students required them secret."

"Unfortunately, as Daito-ryu spreads, and the number of students increases, practice under collective leadership will be inevitable. I'm afraid that, under this situation, I will not be able to point out the characteristics and faults of each student and guidance will become superficial. I have heard that Sokaku Takeda taught either privately, or to less than ten students at a time. I think that was reasonable. The problem with superficial practice is, students tend to be under the mistaken impression that they have mastered Daito-ryu. I am concerned when people, who do not have sufficient technique, comment on Daito-ryu ... Personally, I feel that the world of Daito-ryu is deep and spread infinitely, and I think this is the real difficulty of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu."

The Roppokai, led by ex-Kodokai Shihan Okamoto Seigo Sensei, is known for being very public with their teachings. But even within this group there seems to be a limit as to how much of the inner-methods Okamoto Sensei is willing to put out to non-members. Okamoto Sensei himself states a point of view in his book quoted above that appears to contradict the very publishing of it to the public.

Yonezawa Katsumi, ex-Kodokai Shihan, wrote some interesting things in his AikiNews article "Recalling Kodo Horikawa Sensei":

"[Horikawa's] technique was so brilliant that I was tempted to imitate it immediately. I can understand the reason why Sokaku Sensei himself said the following: 'I never show the techniques in the presense of others, since they are very easy to learn'." (From an interview with Takeda Sensei in 1931).

[snip]

"However, I am deeply convinced that Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu is not an art which has been transmitted through any writings or technical books but through repeated study of its techniques and history in a trust built between teacher and student."

So in conclusion, the only orthodox DR teachers to ever knowlingly publish books or videos/film of their methods are the mainline under Kondo Sensei, the Roppokai under Okamoto Sensei, and to a lesser degree, the Takumakai (referring to the Aiki News technical sections and Nippon Budokan Kobudo documentary). To the best of my knowledge, Sokaku, Tokimune, Sagawa, Horikawa, and most other orthodox teachers didn't publish their methods.

Even Ueshiba Sensei was initially opposed to demonstrating publicly, and was said to change his methods when demonstrating or being filmed. The two books he wrote were both intended to be privately published to a limited number of select individuals, and in "Budo" he is vague about his "aiki" techniques, saying that such methods must be imparted orally. He also does not seem to have taught much of the DR inner-methodology to his students (if known), even though he changed the name of his art and taught independently later in his life.

In regards to the Yanagi-ryu as currently taught by Don Angier, this was said to be a family art passed down only within the Yoshida family. Yoshida Kotaro's son Yoshida Kenji is said to have taught Don Angier the methods because he did not have a son of his own, and didn't want the methods to be lost. Don Angier, assuming the position of Soke of the art, has since conducted open seminars to non-members for many years, and produced a number of video tapes and demonstrations detailing the various aspects of the art.

So assuming that we are talking about arts that are derived from Takeda Sokaku, we can find a very clear pattern of resistance to publicity until the current generation, and even then, most of these branches/arts appear to prefer conservativeness over publicity.

I think most e-budo-ka know that I am against what I consider the "exploitation" of the inner-workings of arts like Daito-ryu (or other respected arts) publicly. I consider it to be very damaging to the ryu-ha ecosystem, and fear that the homogonization of martial arts in general will lead to a big Cluster-F in the intended context and operating systems of the various arts, and cause the traditions of such ryu-ha to be changed to the point of becoming something else (at the expense of killing the original "flow" [ryu]). Once this happens, people will get bored and move on to another style, demand to be informed of their inner methods, and destroy that art. The only recourse will be to create new arts with cool sounding Japanese names and fabricated lineages.

So I'd like to ask, what do you think, and what are your reasons? If you are for making the teachings public, what do you think is going to be the benefit (outside of 5 minutes of fame, money, or, pereceived knowledge/legitimacy)? I don't want to bicker about this, and do not expect all to see eye-to-eye on the subject, but would be interested in reading the points of views of others.

Regards,

[Walker]

I don’t think it’s a big deal either way.

The secretive ones may find they have fewer and fewer prospects until no one cares and the open ones might watch as the great muddle of humanity smothers the art and breed mutant children. In the end a few will most likely get somewhere with the material and the art lives either way. Or we end up with a withered old man who has been forgotten or a new dance craze out of Ol’ Nippon.

I think we can find examples at every point on this curve from cautionary tales of inbred moribund freaks to spectacular hidden genius and from thriving popular arts with many skilled proponents to empty rituals repeated mindlessly.

What’s going to happen will happen and a few will carry their arts to the next generation.

Speaking of which, how can someone who taught thousands even really be called secretive. And given thousands how many got anywhere with the material and carried on when he was gone?

[Eric Joyce]

Nathan,

I somewhat agree with what you said. I do believe there should be a certain level of tradition within the art (etiquette, kata, etc.) However, if someone wants to show the public some of the techniques..hey great…more power to them. That’s their perogative. As far as secret techniques, I wouldn’t be to overly concerned with that. I recently re-read an article by Sensei Yukiyoshi Takamura that made sense to me. He said:

“Any martial art is really a set of concepts and ideas. Physical techniques are important but not the defining elements of a style. I have heard some people say that this is not true, that they have secret techniques. So what! I bet another style has techniques that are similar to their "secret techniques." I would guess that what they actually have is more correctly described a secret concepts. All jujutsu traditions do similar joint locks because the joints in all human beings operate in the same way. There really are no new joint locks. It's how they perform the locks that differentiate the styles. The concepts used in the application of the locks are what are important. These aspects are what make one tradition different from another. They are often the okuden.”


So I am guessing here that what Sensei Takamura is saying is it isn’t so much the technique, but rather the cocepts that are more so the secret. If that is the case, it takes many, many years to understand these concepts (something that one will not be able to pick up so easily in a DVD or book. Point being is, I don’t think there is anything to worry about regarding this. Just one guys opinion.

[Nathan Scott]

Doug,

I think I understand your points. It could be that things will work themselves out anyway, like they have for generations before, but on the other hand, maybe they work themselves out because in each generation there are those that are interested in seeing the arts preserved in tact. If nobody took any efforts each generation, would they still be preserved? Hard to say for sure, but a bit risky to ignore. Also, while every generation surely had their own unique problems to deal with, we've never had a global free-information situation like we have in this generation, and this presents a unique situation that should be addressed.

Speaking of which, how can someone who taught thousands even really be called secretive. And given thousands how many got anywhere with the material and carried on when he was gone?

On the other hand, Daito ryu is known to have had a tradition of focusing on military, police and "politically/socially important" people. Also, one theory is that Sokaku's enrollment books are more of a record of important people he had met than an actual student roll. 30,000 is a lot of students. In any case, Sokaku was clearly selective as to who attended his seminars, often kicking a few bad eggs out before beginning. If you read some of what I quoted in my opening post, it is also clear that Sokaku was selective as to which students he would pass on the real teachings to. In other words, he was still conservative in his teachings

Sokaku had the opportunity to produce books, films, and photo manuals, and was against this to the point of being paranoid. He recorded a great number of people as students, but insisted on person-to-person transmission of the art, and then only to those he felt were of good character. Only a handful of students "got it" because that is all that he wanted to "get it" (though the rest may have gotten some use out of the jujutsu methods taught).

However, if someone wants to show the public some of the techniques..hey great more power to them. That?s their perogative.

It would be more appropriate to say that a person should have the blessing of their teacher to do so, or, a sufficient level of initiation to make such a decision. Those on the net that I notice being pretty open have teachers that are also pretty open, which explains why they don't see a problem with it.

And for the record, we're not necessarily talking about "secrets" or particular techniques. I used the term inner-methods a lot in my opening post for a reason. Some teachers are very open with their omote teachings, but do not want their ura teachings to go outside their student base. It's not that the ura stuff is necissarily "secret", but rather, intended for members only. What Takamura Sensei said was correct. We are not talking about secret techniques, and there likely are other arts with similar techniques and methods. But we are talking about individual traditions, that have a certain culture and way of thinking about them. It is irrelevant whether the teachings are the same as other schools. What is relevant is that many of these schools do not want their methods to become public knowledge.

I used Daito ryu as an example of this because it is an art that I'm familiar with, that has a documented history of being conservative (until this generation).

Regards,

[Eric Joyce]

Nathan,

I see what your saying now. I think when I posted my comments I was looking at it from the perspective of techniques rather than tradition. From a tradition perspective, I believe I said this in another thread, but I would probably be more in line with you in upholding tradition and keeping techniques out of the public eye. I apologize for my misunderstanding.

[Walker]

Nathan,

Sokaku had the opportunity to produce books, films, and photo manuals, and was against this to the point of being paranoid.

These can be dangerous in and of themselves for their tendency to freeze technique. If Ueshiba demonstrated different technique for the cameras, isn’t that just as dangerous as exhibiting correct technique? That can be just as bad as the loss of technique because it is not recorded. Falling into the wrong hands vs. corrupting the right hands.

It is very difficult to envision the correct course between too much openness and secrecy.

I think mostly we agree, but I don’t think there is much that can be done to control events beyond each of us doing our best to carry and develop our tradition. Hopefully conversations like this will encourage others to act ethically and examine their practices.

[Nathan Scott]

Eric, no worries. Thanks for playing.

Doug,

These can be dangerous in and of themselves for their tendency to freeze technique. If Ueshiba demonstrated different technique for the cameras, isn?t that just as dangerous as exhibiting correct technique? That can be just as bad as the loss of technique because it is not recorded. Falling into the wrong hands vs. corrupting the right hands.

Granted, but those that are students should understand the difference. Those that aren't students who would look at such publications may be curious enough to look into the art more, and receive direct instruction. From my experience, the koryu attitude seems to maintain that the less the general public understands of the methods they think they see the better. They don't need to understand. Books like Budo and Budo Renshu are both valuable books, because they were both made from training sessions, or for a technical supplement to existing students. Not for the general public. The techniques found there are different from those found in films of Ueshiba Sensei, and direct students would know that. Martial arts are "living" traditions, and that is the tough part. It requires living people to preserve the arts.

It is very difficult to envision the correct course between too much openness and secrecy.

Agreed, and each koryu will have a different historical precedent about this subject. I think all you can do is honor the precedent of the art and the trust developed with your teacher. If your art is "secret", then leave it that way. If it's not, then fine. Each ryu has a different tradition and history.

I think mostly we agree, but I don?t think there is much that can be done to control events beyond each of us doing our best to carry and develop our tradition. Hopefully conversations like this will encourage others to act ethically and examine their practices.

Yep, we can discuss the subject publicly and be aware of what our colleagues are doing. I figure, why not use all this high-tech information stuff for good use?

Maybe for the sake of discussion, I should re-word my query a bit. How 'bout:

1) What is the historical precedent of your art, and your teacher, and why do you think the precedent should or should not be adhered to? If your opinion is different, are you qualified to change the precedent of the art? Is your teacher following the historical precedent of your art, and if not, what might the reasons be? Are they qualified to change the precedent as an individual representative?

2) Are those that insist on making all arts public domain interested in preserving the arts, or, interested in their own gain? Anyone of good character seeking to study a given art can most likely get accepted and learn legitimately, given that they are willing to make some sacrifices. Are we just becoming too lazy? Koryu arts are popular right now, but most people are not interested in conforming to the koryu culture in order to learn them. So these "popular" arts end up having very small dojo.

3) If we homogenized all arts into one "super" art, what would be the benefit? Can all the various arts be taken outside of the historical context they were developed in, and adapted into one super system? How large a curriculum would such a system have to be, and who would correctly manage, adapt the methods to modern day CQC, and disseminate it? How much valuable information and culture would be lost in the process? If the answer is that such a project would be unrealistic, then how is this mass cross-breeding/open seminar trend helping the arts? Are the people mixing such arts sufficiently initiated into the various arts deep enough to understand who to mix them?

These are living traditions, however, some documentation of the art does seem prudent. The issue lies between do you make such documentation public or private. Many koryu have privately published materials that are intended primarily for students and future students (outside the formal densho). Budo and Budo Renshu were both privately published originally.

**

If you look at the above three subjects, it seems clear to me that preserving the traditions for what they are, and adapting the traditional methods as needed on a personal basis is a logical way to go. Making everything common knowledge is counter to the idea of preservation, and would seem to confuse most hybrid systems rather than help them (at least in the short term). Even if a hybrid system were to come up with a suitable operating system, a large number of "irrelevant" information would be discarded at the expense of the root art that once transmitted them.

So what's the answer? How 'bout follow the precedent set forth in your art? To me, anything else seems too risky (in most cases).

Regards,

[A. M. Jauregui]

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
1) What is the historical precedent of your art, and your teacher, and why do you think the precedent should or should not be adhered to? If your opinion is different, are you qualified to change the precedent of the art? Is your teacher following the historical precedent of your art, and if not, what might the reasons be? Are they qualified to change the precedent as an individual representative?

Well the dojo that I train at is first and foremost a kenjutsu dojo and secondarily one of aikijujutsu. There is some historical precedent for changes in “my” art - Itto-ryu has been split and branched off more then just about anything else... What more the current dojo leader has for the most part dropped all of supernatural BS and archaic rituals. Personally I think that this was a good move for I definitely do not want my hobby to become my religion.

Even after 7 years I am far from the top of the heap, qualification wise... Anyone that would want to train under me would have to be such a fool that they would never get what little I have gotten close to perfect.

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
2) Are those that insist on making all arts public domain interested in preserving the arts, or, interested in their own gain? Anyone of good character seeking to study a given art can most likely get accepted and learn legitimately, given that they are willing to make some sacrifices. Are we just becoming too lazy? Koryu arts are popular right now, but most people are not interested in conforming to the koryu culture in order to learn them. So these "popular" arts end up having very small dojo.

Personally I am not insistent on making all arts public domain but if asked I would have to say that it is better to be open then closed - flowing not stagnant. I am never going to open my own dojo, so I feel that puts me in a different point of view then some of the others that post here.

I really do not teach but do go to an open mat dojo now and then and show a few things every so often. I do not know if it has simply been luck that all of the bad apples seem to disappear after a few sessions or maybe just some innate feeling that drives them away. As for the dojo that I train at it is quite traditional in nature but for some reason or another they put up with me - the prodigal daughter.

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
3) If we homogenized all arts into one "super" art, what would be the benefit? Can all the various arts be taken outside of the historical context they were developed in, and adapted into one super system? How large a curriculum would such a system have to be, and who would correctly manage, adapt the methods to modern day CQC, and disseminate it? How much valuable information and culture would be lost in the process? If the answer is that such a project would be unrealistic, then how is this mass cross-breeding/open seminar trend helping the arts? Are the people mixing such arts sufficiently initiated into the various arts deep enough to understand who to mix them?

A super art would never work. People seem to prefer to specialize and focus on one aspect or another. As a historian I love to know what happened before this and that. But my historical curiosity in regards to the martial arts is not centered on lineage but more on development of certain techniques. For instance when did the term suigetsu charge from a term for proper distance to a strike to one’s solar plexus... Is budo Japanese sure, does it really matter no really...

Originally posted by Nathan Scott
[3b]These are living traditions, however, some documentation of the art does seem prudent. The issue lies between do you make such documentation public or private. Many koryu have privately published materials that are intended primarily for students and future students (outside the formal densho). Budo and Budo Renshu were both privately published originally.

I am all for making such documentation public. The reason being that I have made my own manual as a memory add and an outside manual would provide an alternate perspective. I am not saying that there is not a right and a wrong way to preforming techniques but do to variations in body types (core issue) leads to things ending up a bit different.

Also with out proper instruction all of the manuals in the world are only going to get one so far...

[MarkF]

Originally posted by A.M. Jauregui
A super art would never work. People seem to prefer to specialize and focus on one aspect or another. As a historian I love to know what happened before this and that. But my historical curiosity in regards to the martial arts is not centered on lineage but more on development of certain techniques. For instance when did the term suigetsu charge from a term for proper distance to a strike to one’s solar plexus... Is budo Japanese sure, does it really matter no really...

Exactly, and we have history which has taught us this. Just as people prefer to socialize with certain groups, so would an all-inclusive budo separate and become part of one's own version and of one's own choosing/teaching, and in short order. Even those who attempt to avoid this at all costs, make certain claims, teach it differently while argument abounds concerning the changes, which may not, in reality, have been a change. It is the human thing to do. Sokaku didn't do this to exclude everyone, only some of them even if they make up the majority, he had his own take and he obviously shared it. Tokimune went from there and shared more, and now Kondo sensei is doing so at a speedier rate (obviously, the time periods are the major difference, but Sokaku had to start somewhere and with some one). As to books and such by S. Takeda, he certainly would have needed someone to do the writing and other technical aspects so how much control could he really have had?. Who would tell him?

Probably not very much thus he was a bit selfish with what he did teach. It still got around. I think it has more to do with his lack of education than what he may have intended, but that's just my opinion. In later years he did become a bit paranoid concerning students and others. Tokimune admits to making excuses for his father's behavior at times. I don't think it was age, I think it started long before that.

Great post, Ana.


Mark

[Arman]

Also don't forget, what you see is not always what you think it is. For example, in the much publicized Kondo DVD, you'll just have to trust me when I tell you that a lot of the fundamental principles are not demonstrated, to say nothing of the great inner secrets (whatever those may be). In fact, if you were to copy many of the techniques on the DVD, or even the tapes, movement by movement, you would be doing them incorrectly. Just because certain elements are made public, or discussed openly, does not mean that the cat has been let out of the bag, so to speak. Much of what you see is only the outward form of a technique, done incorrectly on purpose.

As with public seminars, I have yet to witness Kondo Sensei giving away anything profound in such settings. If anything, he has been criticized by those who should know better as not being very proficient at certain aspects of the art because he doesn't demonstrate it to them publicly! Hmmm, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Now, I will say I have seen him demonstrate a technique quickly one way, and then slow it down for teaching purposes. Sometimes, the slowed down version is quite different than the version he performed at full speed. Most people don't catch the difference, and if they did, many do not understand what, exactly, he did differently. If you're good enough to see it and steal it, well, nothing wrong that, really. That's part of the budo tradition.

To conclude, don't assume simply because Kondo Sensei (or others) give a public seminar, or release a tape, or write a book, that he is therefore also revealing the secrets of the art. In fact, most of the fundamental principles that make the art work are not demonstrated publicly.

[BTW, Nathan, are you making the aiki expo this year? Chris, Brian and I will be there. I'd LOVE to have another movie night - LOL]

Regards,
Arman Partamian

[Walker]

Originally posted by Arman
To conclude, don't assume simply because Kondo Sensei (or others) give a public seminar, or release a tape, or write a book, that he is therefore also revealing the secrets of the art. In fact, most of the fundamental principles that make the art work are not demonstrated publicly.

Yes, but what will happen when people 80 years from now “rediscover” these video recordings, realize Kondo’s technique on the videos is different from theirs and change to the incorrect public version. Before you laugh - stranger things happen all the time.

[BTW, Nathan, are you making the aiki expo this year? Chris, Brian and I will be there. I'd LOVE to have another movie night - LOL]

Are you guys trying to get into trouble again?

[glad2bhere]

Dear Nathan, Doug et al:

The concept of secrecy seems to always conjure up pictures of a select group of people preventing the distribution of their particular constellation of truthes. To my mind, the object, then, would seem to be a matter of controlling Power. Knowledge is Power. Theoretically, if I can restrict access to that knowledge, even if I myself do not know, or have not mastered, that knowledge, then, in some way I partake in that knowledges' power, yes?

I would now like to suggest a completely different way of looking at secrecy that really has nothing to do with Power. The word that comes to mind is "Modesty".

Usually reserved for things of a sexual nature, modesty can also reflect a chaste or respectful attitude. Just as one would not take a partner or loved one and capriciously exhibit their most private sexual nature to the public, neither might one capriciuosly disseminate information regarding any other very personal and intimate aspect of their lives. For me, to submit oneself to what is essentially an anachronistic method for revealing ones own weaknesses and then striving to systematically overcome them is pretty intimate. To learn a skill whose only practical application is the subduing, injury or death of another person is pretty intimate. Thats not to say that all people feel this way. Just as there are healthy sexual people there are also pornographers and pediphiles. Just as there are people steeped in the traditions of ancient cultures, there are also folks who will put anything on a video tape or in a book if it will just turn a dollar.

I can understand those who hold with secrecy for the power it may suggest. I can also see an arguement to support those who hold with secrecy for the pride they feel in their personal struggle to be better people. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Kendoguy9]

Hello all,

I think I have to disagree with Arman a little bit on one point. Arman said:

"In fact, if you were to copy many of the techniques on the DVD, or even the tapes, movement by movement, you would be doing them incorrectly."

I think it would be better to say that some of the techniques shown on the DVD are simply liberally applied variations of the techniques. Many of them are missing key elements that Kondo sensei wants us to practice, but I wouldn't call them incorrect. If you want to go up to Amano sempai and tell him he's doing the kata incorrectly I'm sure he'll be able to demonstrate it on you the "official way".

But it does make a good point about how far can the technique change and still be Daito-ryu. I think (as some of our sempai have told us) there is a spectrum you can stay in and still be doing Daito-ryu. Outside of that spectrum and you're no longer doing DR. I think that the DVD and video are within the bounds, but are just thinned out versions for the public, or just variations that might look "cooler".

I would like to second your point about people outside of our group commenting on Kondo sensei's skill because of what they see in a demo or at a seminar. Kondo sensei has told us many times that Tokimune sensei asked him to only show select parts of the curriculum to outsiders. Kondo sensei has been faithful to this. Tokimune himself only showed select techniques on video and at public demos and seminars. So I think that Kondo sensei is actually following his teacher's model in regard to how much is given to the outside. Besides the information on the tapes really isn't that earth shaking. If someone has any tapes of Tokimune sensei doing waza, slow motion on their VCR, and a keen eye, they could reproduce many of the waza just as well as with Kondo sensei's videos.

I think the quote that Nathan posted from Sokaku, about the techniques being easy to pick up holds most true, and that is why only certain sections are shown to the public.

Just my 2 cents,

[Nathan Scott]

Hi Arman,

Also don't forget, what you see is not always what you think it is. For example, in the much publicized Kondo DVD, you'll just have to trust me when I tell you that a lot of the fundamental principles are not demonstrated, to say nothing of the great inner secrets (whatever those may be).

That is understandable, but begs another question then - why publish media showing technique that will draw criticism from those that recognize that such methods "wouldn't work"? The media that Kondo Sensei is publishing is semi-instructional in format, as are the open seminars. How many consumers and participants are correctly understanding the intent of these publications and seminars?

Kuroda Tetsuzan Sensei is doing the same thing. He has a large number of publications out on his arts, as well as a running article in Hiden magazine. All of them are semi-instructional in nature, but it turns out that he is quite concerned about non-members trying to steal his methods. So then why publish instructional material on the arts publicly?

Kondo Sensei said in his Ikkajo book that he was publishing his media to combat the "incorrect and dubious" media others are publishing. He said that "I decided that it would be in the best interest of Daito-ryu to publish a written and pictorial record of the most fundamental points of at least the first portion of the school's technical curriculum, so that these do not become lost to posterity" (pages 10-11). So then why record only the omote techniques with partial explanations/application? Are these really the important parts of the art that might get lost to posterity? If you do publish something in order to preserve the important parts of the art that are sensitive in nature, why not privately publish them (like many other teachers, branches and ryu-ha do) primarily for those that are members of the art, so that they can pass them down and preserve them internally? Is it that he might be seeking acceptance from the public as the head of the mainline still (?). This is why I don't understand these publications.

If anything, he has been criticized by those who should know better as not being very proficient at certain aspects of the art because he doesn't demonstrate it to them publicly!

Actually, the typical criticism is in regards to his perceived skill level at executing the techniques that he does show (in particular the aiki techniques), not in the techniques themselves. I don't state this to be rude, but rather point out that this is what the criticism tends to be about when there is criticism. Skill is and always will be a pretty subjective thing though, so there really isn't much use bickering over how good someone is or isn't!

Most people don't catch the difference, and if they did, many do not understand what, exactly, he did differently. If you're good enough to see it and steal it, well, nothing wrong [with] that, really. That's part of the budo tradition.

But you see, it is not a part of the budo tradition, and that is exactly what Sokaku and many teachers were/are very adament about protecting against. Experienced budo-ka who can steal it and adapt it into their own art (or publications) are the biggest liabilities. Allowing advanced budo-ka to steal waza if they can came from the modern open-seminar culture, not from traditional budo. Traditional budo has a clear history of being conservative and in many cases competitive with other martial art groups. There is no benefit in allowing others to steal your methods (is there?).

Here are a couple of more references I came across from the interview with Sato Keisuke in CWDRM, page 148 & 151:

Sokaku Sensei used to confirm that no one was observing before he would begin teaching. He was extremely severe in this regard.

<snip>

After one session, Sokaku remarked, "Once you get the knack of a technique you'll be able to execute it rather easily. That's why I don't like to be observed by others when I'm doing techniques."

Same thing Yonezawa observed in the quote I posted from him in my opening post.

Nathan, are you making the aiki expo this year? Chris, Brian and I will be there. I'd LOVE to have another movie night.

That was fun, huh? As long as my work responsibilities don't start during that time, I should be able to come. I can't however take full credit for the bad-budo collection. Don Angier's group has a lot of good tapes, and our Aiii-icki guy is one of them. I've got to get more of his stuff. I do have some "beautiful violence" that I don't think ya'll have seen yet that I'll bring if I come. We'll talk more about this as we get closer. That American Kinjutsu would be great to see again!

Doug wrote:

Yes, but what will happen when people 80 years from now “rediscover” these video recordings, realize Kondo’s technique on the videos is different from theirs and change to the incorrect public version. Before you laugh - stranger things happen all the time.

Yeah, I could see that. IIRC, Tokimune was the one who created the Ikkajo omote waza, so that something could be shown at demonstrations. But omote waza without proper understanding of the ura is kind of useless to understanding the methods. Someone in the future might be able to make the techniques effective based on knowledge of the omote, but they may not come up with the same thing that was being done previously (thus re-creating or changing the essense of the art).

Chris wrote:

If someone has any tapes of Tokimune sensei doing waza, slow motion on their VCR, and a keen eye, they could reproduce many of the waza just as well as with Kondo sensei's videos.

Agreed. One of the points is that there is very little footage of people like Tokimune Sensei on video, and pretty much nothing of him (that I know of) - books or videos - being sold publicly, because he chose not to publish those types of things for the most part. This tendency to be conservative is surely why he was able to maintain productive relations with the more conservative branches of DR during his lifetime.

Having a handful of demo techniques is one thing, but is the Nikajo section also something that has omote versions? I seem to recall that Tokimune only approved of showing techniques from the Ikkajo omote series (and perhaps a few other standard demo techniques).

Regards,


PS. I think we should set up a separate thread that all the guys can use to flirt with Ms. A.M. Way to stay focused guys!

[Arman]

Nathan,

I see your point, and do not completely disagree with you. With all respect, however, I think you are being a little too literal-minded with regard to Kondo Sensei's statements and intentions. Let me try and explain my perspective more clearly.

Chris touched on it slightly, though I still disagree with him on the broad strokes. Basically, if you show the outer form of a technique, like ippon dori, and basically explain the gross physical movements without recieving personal instruction on the "little things," you still really won't know how to do the technique correctly. As we all know, it is the little things that are really the big things. So when Kondo Sensei says he wants to make a record for posterity, and to combat misperceptions, etc., etc., he can accomplish this by demonstrating the proper form, by discussing the proper form, but still omitting the little things. It isn't a contradiction, because the outer form you are seeing or reading about is a correct form, but you will have a hard time duplicating it and making it work. I don't see a contradiction in wanting to open up the art a little more than it was in the past, but still not wanting to give everything away.

The tapes, DVD, and book are, IMO, designed for a few purposes, NONE of which are to teach non-members how to do the art correctly. One, they are designed to give a sample flavor of the art to non-members, and perhaps entice them to seek out a qualified instructor. And two, they are designed as learning aids to members, qualified by proper instruction. Finally, they provide a public indication of the manner and form of some of the techniques taught in the school.

The public seminars are similarly designed to give a sample flavor to non-members. They may also provide supplemental instruction for people involved in different branches. In any case, Kondo Sensei doesn't so much teach things incorrectly in such seminars, as he only reveals a finite amount of information.

If you think this is a problem, then consider the quotation you posted earlier, where he talks about Tokimune's warning to only teach the true technique to a few people, and that the rest do not matter. While I think Kondo Sensei is not nearly as conservative as Tokimune was, I believe he took Tokimune's warning to heart. To what degree, I do not know. But I am not so naive as to simply assume he is teaching me EVERYTHING, nor to assume that he has taught me EVERYTHING about how to do every element of a technique (of course, my internal gauge analyzes everything by simply asking "Is this working the way it is supposed to?" If so, then I don't stay up worrying about what I don't, and can't, know). And if I shouldn't assume such things, as a student of his, then why should non-students expect anything more? Because he said he wants to leave a historical record? Because he teaches open seminars? Well, IMO, that ain't reason enough to assume such things. But to each his own.

As for stealing technique, I will have to completely disagree with you. A good teacher only demonstrates what he doesn't mind, at worst, being stolen by excellent practitioners who can learn it by seeing it once, without instruction. As you mentioned, that was why some things were so secret. Because people could steal it. It is the teacher's,and student's, responsibility to protect those things that nobody outside the ryu should know. So if Kondo shows something, but doesn't teach it, and you catch it, well, he must not mind the fact too much. Perhaps that is why some people complain about Kondo's "aiki stuff." He just doesn't show it, for the reasons I stated above. But stealing technique performed in the open is a time-honored budo practice. It tends to separate the excellent from the mere average.

Finally, I would just mention that sometimes, secrets are not as necessary as one might think. Even if Kondo Sensei just told a group of people, "This is how you really do it," and demonstrated a few times, and then moved on, how many people would really get it? Have you not had the experience of going over something with a student time and again, and they still don't get it? They don't practice enough, they forget, they don't stay focused, etc. And you are SHOWING them how to do it, over and over again.

But that is a tangential discussion to the current one. I know we will probably just have to agree to disagree here, but hopefully I made myself somewhat clearer.

And, BTW, I do hope you can make it to the expo. That was a lot of fun.

Best regards,
Arman Partamian