I wish we could say that, but I doubt all instructors take that approach.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
I wish we could say that, but I doubt all instructors take that approach.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
Who says learning ever stops?
Without a mentor of some type -be it individual or an organization- to oversee personal development is progression in the right direction (we can argue what the right direction is) be maintained.
There are several strong issues here that are started to affect the art-especially when we see people suddenly becoming soke's, doctors professors, etc. and forming their "new style" of aikido. As Ikeda sensei pointed out there are variations in the "surface" aspect of the art. However, at least to me, the core of aikido or key principles is what makes the art. When those are followed and quality maintained then the art perpetuates. When the core is maintained and quality deteriorates the art will self destruct over time.
1. When grading comes internally how do we maintain quality? For example, Peter H. indicated the promotion was from subordinates-what level is a valid level to raise someone to say a 6th or 8th dan? Is is acceptable for a group of shodans getting together and saying sensei we think you should be 6th dan or 8th dan and then voting to do so and with the appropriate organizational bylaws authorizing it promote the person? Is there a way to ensure that "6th or 8th" dan is of equivalent quality to say an aikikai, Ki Society, or Yoshinkan 6th or 8th dan? Can such an organization which has literally cut itself off from outside influence overcome the ego effect? (I notice that it seems that ego is often the reason for break away groups- recognition is either not coming as fast as the individual thinks it should or politics or desire to lead are often reasons).
2. What happens when younger people become more technically capable? As pointed out earlier the role would appear to change from being a good technician to producing them.
3. To the bigger question, what would include misrepresentation of the organization's rank structure, grading system and quality? How can the splinter group ensure quality is maintained through subsequent generations? Especially, if they have cut themselves off from outside influence.
Note: not all these questions are mine and some were provided privately. Some of the others are mine or reformatting of other questions. These are very critical issues to Aikido with all the splintering we have seen and are starting to see. When you gave group A splintering from the core, then group B from A and so on, when you get to Group Z-quality may have suffered considerably.
Let's keep the discussion off individuals.
Dr. John H. Riggs
Aikido of Midland
Midland, TX
A few more thoughts and comments.
Yes. I have seen your site and have looked at the guidelines. The information on the site is very clear and straightforward, as are the guidelines. Whilst I do not disagree at all with your approach, which I suspect reflects your training history and experience, I think it would be very rare here in Japan. I do not think there is a single aikido website that gives advice to those considering taking up aikido about how to choose a dojo or organization. It is simply taken for granted that they already know how to make the right choices and that any aikido website is both 100% true and all dojo leaders 100% honest and sincere.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
I think that this attitude reflects the Japanese tendency for ‘amae’ and for placing the interests of the group above those of the individual. If you join a group, you will be looked after and indulged (= amaeru), but your individual aspirations will be formed by and subordinated to those of the group, or rather the opinion formers (the ideologues) within it. These aspirations might well also involve questions of quality, but these, too, will be subordinated to the interests of the group.
Japan’s ‘new’ religions offer some interesting parallels here with the martial arts. Take for example Masahisa Goi, the friend of M Ueshiba who formed the Byakko Shinko-kai. Originally a member of Omoto-kyo, Goi became ‘enlightened’ at some point, attracted a group of disciples and became a guru. When I myself look at his activities, or read the writings of Onisaburo Deguchi, all the alarm bells ring. Are these people really on the same planet?
Of course, unlike a new religion, one sign of quality in the martial arts is whether the techniques actually work, but, here also, what seems a straightforward matter can be hedged around with ideology. In Japan no one goes to a dojo to learn how to attack, so they have to be taught to attack in a ‘sincere’ fashion and to learn the correct form.
So in Japan quality is judged to be present everywhere and any discernment of what lies below the surface, which is never made clear initially, is definitely the responsibility of the individual
Well, if you think about it, aikido ‘styles’ are really stereotypes, abstractions. What you have are real people who think and move in a certain way. Some people are thought to think and move especially well, so they are imitated, with varying degrees of success.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
I think one could write quite a few PhD theses on why disciples leave a teacher and branch off on their own, or break away from an organization and form their own. At points along the spectrum there cases such as, for example: (1) a disciple who is told to move on because he has learned everything that the teacher has to teach; or (2) a disciple who has a rupture with the teacher over some issue, such as differences of opinion about teaching style or organizational matters (this happens quite often in the aikido world, including Japan); or (3) a disciple who leaves because the teacher is too infirm or because the teaching and ‘official’ dojo techniques are poor in quality and are being supported purely by the ideology of the dojo (e.g., dojo tradition, or ‘Aikikai style’).Originally Posted by aikidoc1
The interesting question is what these individuals do after they have broken away. They sometimes form other organizations, with no thought on how to solve the structural problems that led to the initial rupture. This is perhaps because there has been no serious or imaginative thinking about what caused the rupture.
This is not a new problem, of course. The iemoto system in Japan took off because of the explosion of interest in traditional arts during the Genroku era. They were no longer the preserve of a restricted section of the population. The leader of the art was supported by a framework of allegiance with the senior supporters, who accepted the system because they had a legitimate place within it, even though they were not at the very top. I think this is largely why Kisshomaru Ueshiba was so successful in maintaining the growth and technical level of the Aikikai.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
Best regards,
Last edited by P Goldsbury; 20th June 2005 at 01:36.
Peter Goldsbury,
Forum Administrator,
Hiroshima, Japan
Thank you for your insights Peter.
I think it is quite evident from your comments that things here an in Japan differ. I feel here the individual is often the focus rather that the group-what can you give me next? Not what can I do to improve the group.
"The interesting question is what these individuals do after they have broken away. They sometimes form other organizations, with no thought on how to solve the structural problems that led to the initial rupture. This is perhaps because there has been no serious or imaginative thinking about what caused the rupture."
I think this is seen somewhat in the Ki Society groups-perhaps even an example cited earlier.
Tohei had problems with the aikikai and left; several of his subordinates had problems with him-Toyoda, Suenaka, etc. and left; groups attached to these splinter groups had problems with the organization: Dojin, Aikido World Alliance, etc.
The very issue of what individuals do after they splinter-I think anyway-is what will determine the future or quality of their aikido. If they continue to seek advanced training through seminars and study or find another mentor they may improve. If not, the result may be deterioration over time.
Dr. John H. Riggs
Aikido of Midland
Midland, TX
I think some here are being a bit too hard on AikiUSAF! He is clearly a novice! He has all the innocence of someone without much experience and the zest and naiveté of new convert. He will gain wisdom and mostly likely moderate his tone with time and greater experience.
Scott R. Brown
To John Riggs,
The points you make are important. I have added some further observations.
PAG. The development of ‘new’ forms has been common in Japanese martial arts since the Muromachi period and what we now call ‘aikido’ is really a ‘new form’ of Daito-ryu. Yoshinkan, Yoseikan, Shodokan, Ki-no-Kenkyu all explore different directions the ‘new form’ of aikido could take. In some cases aikido has been grafted on to other arts; in others some particular aspects have been explored in one particular direction. The development of all these has been well documented and there is no question about technical proficiency here. The creators of all these forms were outstanding technicians and they broke with M Ueshiba, usually with his blessing, because they needed to use this technical proficiency to explore new directions, just like M Ueshiba himself did. So they follow the traditional ‘master-deshi’ paradigm and, if you want to look at the development in traditional Buddhist terms, this end result is probably at the RI stage of SHU-HA-RI.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
However, I think this situation is far removed from that being discussed in this thread.
PAG. I know of one person who was a 1st kyu, when I came to live here in 1980. He was a good politician but was not known at that time for technical skill. He is now 8th dan. Eight dan ranks in 25 years is very good going, but it would be impossible in the Aikikai (the absolute minimum time would be 43 years, assuming that the ranks from 1st to 4th dan were awarded by examination and the rest by recommendation in the minimum time allowed). The ambiguity of lineage that I mentioned in an earlier post is a point here, since one of this person’s earlier teachers is a very eminent 8th dan Aikikai shihan, but his higher dan ranks are not Aikikai dan ranks. The lineage by rank is not clear from the website of the organization to which this person belongs, though the lineage by Aikikai instructor is clearly stated.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
I have refrained from mentioning this 8th dan yudansha’s country or organization, since he is the head of a respectable aikido organization, with members training hard and in good faith. However, I have a strong suspicion that he received his 8th dan by promotion from within his organization, since I very much doubt that the 8th dan Aikikai shihan involved would promote him to his own rank.
PAG. I think that the question of how Japanese martial arts, which are primarily based on intense combat situations, cope with declining physical strength, is worth many PhD theses. In Homer, the model of the seasoned warrior, too old to deploy his physical skills effectively, is Nestor. However, in Shakespeare’s plays, Nestor always compensates for his declining physical and mental skill by talking too much and usually talking waffle.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
I think that the traditional iemoto model allows for the inevitable decline probably more than the more personal master-deshi model, since there are more people involved. It is assumed in the master-deshi model that the master can teach important skills to the deshi, even when age has diminished his physical prowess. The iemoto allows this to be built into the system, so to speak. The system allows a place for the old sensei and also ensures that the young bloods will not challenge him inappropriately.
PAG. This is a big issue and in Japanese culture the ‘tatemae-honne’ dichotomy almost always determines how information is presented. Misrepresentation is a further ‘western’ dimension, which clouds the earlier dichotomy. I have given one example relating to the grading system. X is an 8th dan, but the higher grades were awarded according to a different system, so we do not really know whether his technical level matches the dan level.Originally Posted by aikidoc1
I have an aikido friend here in Japan who broke away from his teacher. When he did this he was 5th dan. He allied himself to a new teacher within the general organization (the Osaka Aikikai) and was promoted to 6th dan. His departure is usually presented as ‘breaking away to find his own way’, but many things are left unstated. The things unstated are ‘honne’, which all Japanese take for granted, but which is never left unstated in the US, where transparent honesty is part of the cultural value system.
Thank you for allowing us to have a good discussion of the issues involved.
Best regards,
Peter Goldsbury,
Forum Administrator,
Hiroshima, Japan
Excellent points Peter. I personally like to know lineage but don't get in a lather over ranks in other organizations or even within my own.
As moderator you have the option of changing the thread title to something more in line with the topic.
Just thought I'd add a few comments:
Lineage can be important but also can be overstated. To take Prof. Goldsburys example of the 1st Kyu who has magically transformed to 8th Dan, his lineage quoted on his website is correct. However, it is also vague and does not mention date of grades obtained etc.
It is not uncommon for people to claim to be a student of Shihan X having only trained on one seminar with that instructor.
That is why I think t is important to train with or observe individuals as then you can at least make an educated guess about their quality. At the end of the day the choice always rests with the practitioner, after all no-one is forced to do Aikido.
Philip Smith
Good point Philip. There is a case of one aikidoka setting up their own style of aikido and even writing a book who never held rank higher than 3rd dan (that I could find) before suddenly becoming a 10th dan.
Dr. John H. Riggs
Aikido of Midland
Midland, TX
I am sure you are right and I wonder whether the shihan would accept such a claim. As another example, in Hiroshima University, for X to claim to be 'my' student generally implies a fairly close relationship and one that is also accepted by the professor. Today, I met someone who took my university classes over 10 years ago. In fact, in his present situation, it might benefit his career to claim that he was 'my student', since he could mean that he had been taught English by the sole English 'native speaker' professor at Hiroshima University and it would be very hard to prove that his claim was false. However, I have taught about 500 such students in each of the 25 years I have been here.Originally Posted by philipsmith
Agreed, especially in respect of the last part of your final sentence. However, many of the supposed estimations of the quality of aikido training are grounded on the quality of lineage and I suspect that this is true of koryu arts also.Originally Posted by philipsmith
I think there are some issues here, as you suggest. For example, if I were to visit the Cradley dojo, for example, I would expect to the see the evidence of Chiba Sensei's influence over the years, expressed in both the way that the waza are actually practised and in the general attitude to training. The expression would be the result of a long and hard training relationship. Thus, the senior instructors are all 6th dan and the rank would be regarded as a reasonable indication of a sincere training relationship over the years.
However, it is also possible to fudge this issue and I regret that the identity of the 8th dan was so clear to you (I need to work on this in future posts), since he is probably regarded by his own students as a bona fide student of the Founder, via the Founder's immediate disciples. These students might perhaps regard grades as of no importance, when compared with the actual training hours put in. The dan rank does not reflect the long and hard training relationship. Thus the lineage, expressed in terms of real blood and sweat relationships with individual shinans, might lead some to accept the (much more dubious) lineage in terms of dan rank as equally authentic.
Best regards,
Peter Goldsbury,
Forum Administrator,
Hiroshima, Japan
Thank you for the reply to my last post.
I suspect his identity is only clear because of our past relationship, and would not be so to most other people.
As an aside you are most welcome to visit us anytime to see if indeed we retain the influence from Chiba Sensei.
Warmest regards.
Philip Smith
Thanks for the warning.
david gibb