Here is the first part of my post that was lost during the upload. I have reproduced it here. It should go at the beginning of my initial longer post above.
Yes, I am still here...can't get rid of me that easily. Please forgive my less than immediate reply as I am here in the Middle East (Tel Aviv) nearing the end of teaching a 6-week international budo seminar assignment and not able to get to my e-mail frequently.
No worries. I?fll note that in our continued correspondence and allow for extra time before posting.
I do appreciate the dialogue on this matter; Discussing the history of this issue helps reveal both sides of the story, although I must admit, I still don't completely understand why the legacy of my departed teacher is only now being challenged by a foreign student/s of his junior [Otake sensei], when there was more than ample time and opportunity during the more than six decades he taught by Otake sensei, himself.
I too appreciate such dialogue. While my approach was accusative and fiery, as I mentioned, it was intentional to get more of a response on the issue than in past discussions. Given all of the contributions by people, it seems to have worked. As for why these things are only being discussed now, I can only assume they weren?ft because they was no forum like this with which to do so and few people willing to engage the issue earnestly. As for why Otake Sensei has or hasn?ft, perhaps he has, but I make it an issue not to pry into personal affairs until he feels like divulging them. And when private matters that are not of public record are divulged to me, I must keep them under wraps if I am to abide by my blood oath. Everything else here is of public record and is thus, open for debate.
You state that, "the character that a person is commonly believed to display has no bearing on the soundness or ethics of any given action on their part". While you might insinuate that the public face was different from the actual nature of a person, I feel that it is my duty to publicly defend the man I personally knew and trained under by baring witness to my own observations of him.
What I insinuate is that the character of a person as averaged out over the life up to a point (or ending with their death) should not weigh in whether any specific act at any specific point in time is ethical, sound or right. Rather, that that particular action should be judged on its own merits, divorced from the character of its agent. This is the same principle as employed in our court systems. It doesn?ft matter that Father Joseph spent an entire life devoted to the homeless and raised funds for charities and such, it matters whether or not he molested a child, and if he did so, his past virtues should have no bearing on the degree of punishment, but rather should be determined by the severity of the crime. The reason I brought this up was not to insinuate that Sugino Sensei perhaps had a dark side, or that any action of his was subject to criticism. The point was that such personal matters as character should be divorced from the subject of whether the current Sugino Dojo is justified in continuing to teach under the KSR name.
My original intention for interjecting was to ensure that the baseless innuendo and insinuation, which I know exists surrounding Sugino-sensei, did not get purchase in an open forum, nor went unchallenged should it have arisen.
If any innuendo or insinuation was made that was baseless, you have every right to address it, and I encourage you to do so. Whether or not it gets purchase or not is more dependent on how credible or substantive the argument for it is.
It is therefore vital to acknowledge in a public forum his skill and character as ultimately this is what is being challenged/attacked.
As noted above, his skill and character has no bearing on the issues as I have pointed them out. Please see my prior post for the numbered points I have raised and seek an answer to from the Sugino group.
Personally, I never had reason to ask whether the master was or was not *officially* recognized.
Again, I think we have put to rest whether or not Sugino Sensei was recognized or not. I believe the evidence is a resounding YES that Sugino Sensei, alone, was indeed recognized and respected.
In fact, after all the political hooplah I witnessed in the martial arts during ten years of residence in Japan, such hogwash made/makes me sick to my bones.
I am just a sickened by politics. In fact, my own intuition tells me that there was much politics at play for how things turned out the way they did. But Japan, in which hierarchy and authority are so all-important, is a country maddened with political back-biting, scheming and other nastiness. Having lived here and learned the language and understood the culture, you should be familiar with this as much as I. You should also understand that it is a core tenet of how power changes hands, and lineages get passed down et. Hell, I always thought Minamoto Yoshitsune was the natural and best choice for shogun, but his slime-ball back-stabbing older brother got in good with the Imperial Court and played a dirty trick and got medieval on his brother?fs !!!. Old history, but very telling. I hate politics, which is why I don?ft discuss them very often, and why I don?ft post much in general, and about KSR in specific, on this forum as my post rating will tell. But I took a personal assessment of late, made some choices, and thought that I?fd like to reopen this debate and see where the truth lay.
From my perspective and granted it is the perspective of someone who trained under Sugino Sensei, it seems as if there is a slight case of revisionism afoot.
No doubt. But in the end, revisionism or not, and whether you or I like the consequences, it is the person who holds the Soke-ship or their trusted retainers, who call the shots and dictate how a ryu is run and what is permissible.
Let us speak of the facts. Sugino Yoshio taught TSKSR his entire life and was widely recognized for it.
Agreed, and justly so.
He unreservedly imparted his teaching to hundreds (if not thousands) of learners in the same way that he had learned from his teacher; with integrity, an eye for detail, and respect for its heritage.
I will take your word for it, being a direct student of his.
The question one might ask themselves is if Sugino Sensei publicly taught TSKSR his entire life (he lived more than nine decades) and was never publicly challenged by the Izasa family (i.e. given a "cease and desist" order), or by his then junior, Otake Sensei, then would that not indicate that he did so with their tacit consent?
It would. I think we have resolved that issue. Although, I will point out that, regardless of how many years earlier Sugino Sensei started than Otake Sensei, and even regardless of whether or not he was technically superior, the person holding the Shihan rank (the person transmitting the lineage on behalf of the Soke) is Otake Sensei and not Sugino Sensei (or his son as it were). It may not seem fair, or right, but in the end, that is the way the cards fell. So in that sense, Otake Sensei was the senpai of Sugino Sensei when he was awarded the Shihan rank, because in traditional ryu, rank takes precedent over date entered. I don?ft know one single school where this is NOT the case. I just wanted to point this out. Again, unfair maybe, but that is the way it is. So in the end, since Otake Sensei assumed the Shihan position, he has been the ?gsuperior?h or ?gsenior,?h if you will, of Sugino Sensei while he was still alive, for the record.
I ask whether you have any evidence to the contrary that can be independently corroborated that originated while Sugino sensei was still alive?
Of what, exactly? That he wasn?ft recognized or respected by the Soke? Given the evidence provided just in this current thread by helpful folks like Steve, Rob and Mr. Kohler, I don?ft think contra-evidence is really available for that. But the, again, that is not the issue in question.
As you might well appreciate, independent and verifiable information is the only kind with any value, otherwise theoretical discussions such as this rapidly get bogged down in conjecture, speculation and self serving innuendo.
Then we are agreed.
Greg Ellis
I like autumn best of all, because its tone is mellower, its colors are richer and it is tinged with a little sorrow. Its golden richness speaks not of the innocence of spring, nor the power of summer, but of the mellowness and kindly wisdom of approaching age. It knows the limitations of life and it is content.