Jack Robison and the Sagawa/Ueshiba issue

[Samurai Jack]

"The Martial Art of Aiki is Synonymous with the Way of Human Cultivation & Development"

Aiki is the harmonization of ki.
The entire universe sustains itself perfectly through harmonization. This harmony is aiki.
[Aiki] creates harmony without producing negative feelings or conflict because the ki of aiki is natural.
The harmony created by aiki must be a fundamental part of the foundation of human society.
This is known as the Global Harmony of Aiki (Aiki no Daienwa).
One should use the principle of aiki to harmonize with and de-escalate those threatening violence, and in the case where an enemy has already initiated an attack, rely completely on the principle of aiki to blend with or redirect their attack, which in turn produces a state of harmony.
We must seriously study (shugyo) the kihon (basics) - as well as the taijutsu (jujutsu), tachi no jutsu (swordsmanship), sojutsu (spearmanship), and bojutsu (staff techniques) - as passed down within the methods of aiki through its founder, Prince Shinra Saburo Minamoto Yoshimitsu, then strive to reach the Way found in the martial art of aiki (aiki no budo), which is synonymous with the Way of human cultivation and development (ningen shuyo).

Quoted so you don't have to scroll or hyperlink through to the thread and find what I am talking about.

I am confused can we say this is a pivotal statement of Y. Sagawa’s/Segawa (alt.sp) relationship or influence, possibly, Ueshiba had on Sagawa? This being so for sake of discussion can it be thought of that Sagawa is possibly mocking Ueshiba? What I mean is that Sagawa is pointing out that Ueshiba plagiarized Daito ryu, and Sagawa is demonstrating that the concepts proclaimed by Ueshiba (espoused in Ueshiba's Omote voice) are those truly of Daito ryu. Therefore, Sagawa is point to all of what Ueshiba claims is Daito ryu. I say this with the understanding that we are dealing with a translated text and as such there is a propensity for speculation, lost of context, and all the devices found in the Japanese language that don't translate.

We must keep in mind that Sagawa challenged anyone to defeat his waza, and if I am not mistaken was never defeated by anyone; an individual with strong personality out to best everyone or anyone. Integrate that T. Kimura was previously an Aikidoka who had a good understanding of Aikido’s philosophy, And the communial mal state of feeling Aikidoka's had in general toward Daito ryu; reference Aikido author John Stevens, back issues of Aikido Journal Stanley Pranin Editorial, and Aikiweb, etc. This may or may not have relevance directly concerning the those words of Sagawa, and when it those words where written, and posted in the dojo. But, it is printed in Kimura's book and not by accident. What is he's message and purpose?

Is the words hanging in Sagawa's dojo a point of mockery, a stab, at Ueshiba for what Sagawa seen as plagiarism. Or is it something else? Personally, with my limited understanding of Japanese language and everything else Japanese I ponder the hallowing words to be nothing more then shared universal tenets of Bu-do, I can't remove my pondering that there is something more behind the words, something greater, something more poignant, something more reveling that needs to be seen by Western mind.

[Ron Tisdale]

I'm sorry...I couldn't make heads or tails from that post. Can anyone help me out?

Thanks,
Ron

[Samurai Jack]

Oh, did I do it again? My fault. Let me rephrase it differently the best I can for you Ron.

Sagawa didn't like Ueshiba (established fact). Sagawa could kick booty on anyone even at 90 years old. Sagawa trash talk ( in a Japanese way ) and puts the throw down on Ueshiba, ruinin' his street cred. Ueshiba, Sagawa may have felt, dis'd for (plargiz'n) fly'n Daito ryu colors. Sagawa mocks Ueshiba with "The Martial Art of Aiki is Synonymous with the Way of Human Cultivation & Development" re-cooping the rights and property ( intellectually of course) of Daito ryu. Kimura furthers the rights and property of Daito ryu by printing "The Martial Art of Aiki is Synonymous with the Way of Human Cultivation & Development" in his book. Pretty much telling the world of Ueshiba's intellectual rights and property infraction. Kimura has an Aikido background, he knows well the philosophy and sayings of Ueshiba, and the Daito Ryu bashing of the past. Therefore, this may lend credibility to Kimura's support of Sagawa's action to establish the rights and property of Daito ryu, that Ueshiba used as his own- as Sagawa may have seen it. Of course, this is all said in a Western perspective. It would be interesting to see how the Japanese see this, and how it would match up. I think this is a big deal to the Japanese, otherwise a well educated and brilliant man like Kimura would have never published it. Lest us not forget the feud and its importance to so many between Kondo and T. Takeda's other students over intellectual rights and property.

Ron, this is the best I could do for ya bud.

[Ron Tisdale]

a) Thank you for the effort.

b) Using slang seems patronizing. But the second half of this last post was much clearer.

c) I think that sometimes we attempt to read way too much into this stuff.

d) I too would be interested in a "Japanese take" on some of these things. But I think we'll just have to continue to read between the lines for some time to come.

I'm also not sure that Ueshiba's 'street cred' was ever seriously impacted by Sagawa. Not that there weren't more than a couple shots taken at Ueshiba...I just don't think that in the end it mattered much.

Best,
Ron

[Samurai Jack]

This may not be much of a matter to us. But it was a matter enough for Kimura, a brilliant Professor, to place it in his book. Maybe what you point out as "cheap shots" are weighted much heavier by the Japanese, and much more serious in nature. I think so because of Kimura bringing it up and Sagawa hang that Aikido-like banner. There is a serious discussion here I think in how Japanese deal with things of this nature.

[Samurai Jack]

Sorry I was pulled away , I thought it was going to be for a long period, it wasn't. Therefore, I will finish my thought.

Look at the struggle between Kondo and T. Takeda's senior students for rights and property. Aikido Journal has tried to inform people about the Aikido and Daito ryu connection. Some say too much to the point of converting (or at least trying to) Aikidoka to that of Kondo's Daito ryu a strategic maneuver well known to the Japanese. If that isn't making sense figure that the larger the organization means the greater support, the greater support of public opinion and belief through association can establish rights and property. This is likened to the phenomena of rumor becoming perceived as fact. And it can be see as a means to unify a larger group to defeat an opposing group lesser in numbers.

What does this mean, well Kimura throws in a new angle which I am sure some are not happy about. He pretty much, in my opinion, establishes that if Ueshiba was unethical by plagiarizing Daito ryu. Thus, Aikido has no claim to the rights and property of Daito ryu, Aikido then if fraudulent by design putting Aikido in "bad budo" as we put it. Sagawa could be in a Japanese way calling Ueshiba a lair. Maybe Sagawa never like Ueshiba for this reason, it sure wasn't for how Ueshiba make cookies. If this is the case then the efforts by Aikido Journal and Editor Stan Pranin, and the support Kondo put behind Aikido and Aikido Journal were a waste of time. As I see, sort of, this pulls support away from Kondo possibly in terms of western support, as the greatest supporters for Kondo are Westerners in the US. Unlike the greatest supporters for T. Takeda's senior students are Europeans. It's a game of Go.

You see Kimura statement by print Sagawa's words is a strong one put in his book by design, or a reason, for a purpose. He didn't just put it in there to increase the number of pages in his book. The Japanese martial arts community is who Kimura is really speaking to. It is their opinion that matters, since it then ripples out to us Westerners in waves carrying the ear marks of Bad Budo.

The question then is how big of an impact will Sagawa words published by Kimura on the Japanese martial arts community in how they will view Aikido and Ueshiba as being a fraud.

[Ron Tisdale]

The question then is how big of an impact will Sagawa words published by Kimura on the Japanese martial arts community in how they will view Aikido and Ueshiba as being a fraud.

I think you put this in terms that are too black and white, when the subject doesn't lend itself to that. I don't think any in the Daito ryu community look at Ueshiba (or aikido as an art) as fraud. What is done, however, is to question just how much Ueshiba got of what S. Takeda taught, and how much of Daito ryu 'aiki' was passed down to Ueshiba's students. From what I have read, it is commonly acknowledged that Ueshiba 'got' quite a lot. But many experienced Daito ryu folk do seem to question any statements to the effect that Ueshiba was 'the best' at what he got. Sagawa, Kodo Horikawa and some others are often mentioned as being as good as or better than Ueshiba.

As an aikidoka, I think that these questions (when framed in this fashion) have a certain amount of merit. The aikido community has long had a kind of hero worship cult built around Ueshiba...and realistic counters to that mindset are valuable, in my opinion. But to call this fraud is disingenuous at best, and downright misleading at worst. I see no resemblance to the kooks and wanabees of bad budo, either. Ueshiba was clear about the fact that he changed things in creating his new art, he gave it a new name, and separated himself from his old teacher. If others still took offense, that's fine.

I do think the Ueshiba family and the Aikikai could have been more upfront early on about the strong roots in Daito ryu that aikido has. But their very close mouthed approach to that is a point against the fraud arguement, as it is not consistent with your premise that there was some kind of competition based on the shared roots.

What I think is more likely than the scenario you give above is that the Martial Arts Community in general will realize two things:

1) The value that Daito ryu has as a distinct art from aikido.

2) The realization that there is an often false seperation between the idea of do/jutsu i.e. do is somehow noble and uplifting and jutsu is somehow base, violent, and/or depraved.

I believe many in the Japanese MA community are already well aware of these things...obviously, in the western community...not so much.

Best,
Ron

[Mark Jakabcsin]

Yeah Jack, and in your world you probably think Elvis was the shooter on the grassy knoll.

Pointless speculation is well.......rather pointless.

MJ

[don]

.... As an aikidoka, I think that these questions (when framed in this fashion) have a certain amount of merit. The aikido community has long had a kind of hero worship cult built around Ueshiba...and realistic counters to that mindset are valuable, in my opinion. But to call this fraud is disingenuous at best, and downright misleading at worst. I see no resemblance to the kooks and wanabees of bad budo, either. Ueshiba was clear about the fact that he changed things in creating his new art, he gave it a new name, and separated himself from his old teacher. If others still took offense, that's fine....

Very fine post, Ron. Archival material, even!

[Samurai Jack]

I invoke a privilege of immunity, a disenfranchisement. And for those, whose hobby it is to fling cow patties at passing passenger busses from grassy knolls, I hate to ruin your fun, Elvis is not dead.

Let's agree people it is speculation, but warranted. Kimura, did publish it. As most martial artists of the West who don't read Japanese nor understand the complexity of its language requires circumferres specere for all. Secondly, the political engagement between Kondo and his Sempei, and the Takeda family after T. Takeda's death is important to note. Because it has provided, yet another educational window into the Japanese martial arts' body politic. So, I don't think we are dealing with the stuff of "the X Files," or if "Big Foot" exists, but rather something more along the lines of re-examining our preconceived believes and perceptions of what we see as truth in the area where there is a mixture of religion and politics. For example, more along the lines of the validity of Joseph Smith's founded the Church of the LDS. Or the private life and deeds of Martin Luther founder of the Protestant Reformation of discussion. Mix that with the plagiarism and scandals of popular political advocates and voices like Bill O'Reilly. When those long held possibly incorrect perceptions are questioned it hits a nerve, like being told Santa Claus doesn't exist as a child. The point here that Sagawa and Kimura are calling foul, or in my opinion establishing the truth, setting the facts straight, with the validity of Aikido and Ueshiba. It is not up to me to walk the horse to water, nor to make it drink, but rather point to a trough.

We hear what we want to hear and listen to those who voice what we already support or believe. We refrain from leaving our comfort zones of belief to avoid discomfort of change and adjustment. In a defense we protest with extermes to discredit the viable and the reasonable. Yet, for those who question and take the change to venture beyond their comfort zones for the sake of truth that is bravery...errrr....enlightenment.

[Samurai Jack]

I think you put this in terms that are too black and white, when the subject doesn't lend itself to that. I don't think any in the Daito ryu community look at Ueshiba (or aikido as an art) as fraud. What is done, however, is to question just how much Ueshiba got of what S. Takeda taught, and how much of Daito ryu 'aiki' was passed down to Ueshiba's students. From what I have read, it is commonly acknowledged that Ueshiba 'got' quite a lot. But many experienced Daito ryu folk do seem to question any statements to the effect that Ueshiba was 'the best' at what he got. Sagawa, Kodo Horikawa and some others are often mentioned as being as good as or better than Ueshiba.

With previous post said, it may not now seem black and white. I do think Sagawa saw him as full of it. S.Takeda, was keen on him for claiming to be an instructor when he shouldn't have. I am sure Sagawa or Kimura are not the only people unhappy with Ueshiba and his actions ( which in my opinion lies in the heart of Japanese feudal politics). I am not bashing Ueshiba, just pointing out another view held by others. For instance, Kimura in his first book talked about how Sagawa disliked Ueshiba, and how Ueshiba used, I think 4 different, names for Aikido before it became Aikido. Those for names where I believe in question, that is leading toward being too similar to sounding like Daito ryu "aikijujtsu." I don't know what period of time Ueshiba did this, while Takada was alive or after his death. But, it seems to really anger Sagawa. I am sure there are other instances.

As for the ability of Ueshiba's skill matched up against those you mentioned it is arguable for some that Ueshiba was an equal. I find it difficult to say either way, as I let the experts speak on that. Though I factor in the fact that Ueshiba changed the original Daito ryu wazas based on his philosophy, and not on refinement as someone like Sagawa whose skill was the result of refinement/improvement of the original. Sagawa really got d' ammm good at Daito ryu, like the others you mentioned.

What Ueshiba got and did get, of course is always going to be a mystery. For one thing, Ueshiba changed Daito ryu to his Aikido, and that causes a problem. But there is a greater question that has been raised by those who know Ueshiba. Was Ueshiba making a move, or were his followers claiming he was the one to teach and perpetuate, the best one, the rightful heir to Daito Ryu skill which he called Aikido?

Concerning Ueshiba it may be or may not be fraud which can be argued, but the indication I see with all involved individuals is how Japanese budokas settle things in forms of dueling, dojo storming, etc. to establish the truth. FWIW. I tend to support the evidence given by Kimura in his book that indicates to me Sagawa was far superior in skill. What the truth is, well I am pointing to that trough.

[Ron Tisdale]

With previous post said, it may not now seem black and white. I do think Sagawa saw him as full of it.

Here again, you are jumping to a drastic conclusion...based on what evidence? Sagawa and Ueshiba were not best buds. I can see where someone could find evidence that Sagawa did not think Ueshiba lived up to his publicity. But 'full of it'? Common...the hyperbole is what kills most of your arguements.

S.Takeda, was keen on him for claiming to be an instructor when he shouldn't have.

If the 'him' you reference is Ueshiba, this statement is false. Takeda made him an instructor, was with him in many of the locations where he taught in the early days, gave Ueshiba the highest license available **at that time**, which is pretty darn close in content to the Hidden Mokoruku that was later given to others. Ueshiba had it hanging in the Kobukan dojo. Check with Stan Pranin on that. You mix half truths with false hoods like this all the time in your posts...so much so that it is difficult to correct them.

I am sure Sagawa or Kimura are not the only people unhappy with Ueshiba and his actions ( which in my opinion lies in the heart of Japanese feudal politics). I am not bashing Ueshiba, just pointing out another view held by others.

No, you are [mis-]parroting snippets of stuff from others, trying to twist it to match your own warped viewpoint, in language that is attrocious. You should stop while you're behind...

For instance, Kimura in his first book talked about how Sagawa disliked Ueshiba, and how Ueshiba used, I think 4 different, names for Aikido before it became Aikido. Those for names where I believe in question, that is leading toward being too similar to sounding like Daito ryu "aikijujtsu." I don't know what period of time Ueshiba did this, while Takada was alive or after his death.

BINGO...you don't know...because you haven't read the available resources, and you haven't understood what you did read.

snipped some more baseless speculation...

But there is a greater question that has been raised by those who know Ueshiba. Was Ueshiba making a move, or were his followers claiming he was the one to teach and perpetuate, the best one, the rightful heir to Daito Ryu skill which he called Aikido?

Again, you don't seem to have a grasp of the facts. Please quote ANYONE who claims that 'Ueshiba was the rightful heir to Daito ryu skill'.

What the truth is, well I am pointing to that trough.

See that star up there in the sky??? WHO CARES??

But don't worry...continue posting this tripe as you please...I just won't read it anymore, and you can have your pulpit.

Best,
Ron

[Mark Jakabcsin]

Let's agree people it is speculation, but warranted.

Jack,
This is where we differ greatly in opinion. Printing such speculation on a public forum with no real evidence to speak of is irresponsible at best and libel at worst. Not to mention the potential problems such discussions can cause. Shameless. Such discussions might be interesting over beers but really have no place, imo, in a public forum.

MJ

[Nathan Scott]

[Post deleted by user]

[Dan Harden]

Well balanced post and I agree with every word, Nathan.

It should be stated openly and fairly however, that several men have trained with the top men in Daito ryu and then touched Sagawa. Of the few who have done so they have openely stated that Sagawa's methods were in fact superior. Two have stated they were "far" superior. One fellow told me after half a life time of training in one VERY well known style, one known for its "Aiki" That he felt as if he knew nothing and had to start over. Which in fact, he did. One other fellow wrote about a similar experience here and on Aikido journal of his experiences with Kimura after he had trained in another well known DR and his considering Kimura (*read* as Sagawa's method) to be far superior.
We can add to that list the students of DR who have felt different methods, then Sagawa's, Aikido guys who went and felt him, a KSR menkyo, Gold medal Judokas and on and on. I have no iron in the fire, but Sagawas abilties, in and of themselves, and perhaps his methods (we will have to see what lives on) are at the top of anyones list of bodyskills.
And there is and was, a whole lot NOT being said. "In-house" knowledge and information frequently remains "in-house."
As Nathan said it is no secret however, that Sagawa himself considered his own skills far superior to other top level instructors of Daito ryu. To the point of even refusing to meet with or train one very well known Menkyo. One thing can be said about his cynical remarks. It seems no one who felt him, in comparison with others- disagreed with him much either.
Another note of interest was comparisons of his remarks with Takeda. Takeda had such low opinion of the state of Japanese budo that he openly insulted many top people as not "getting it" either. Were his summations of others skills accurate? Was Sagawa's? Most will never know. Arguing about it among the lesser lights and the many dim bulbs in Budo is rather pointless.
We should be, and need to be, unbiased in considering skills, but many never will be. Style affiliation rules.

Jack
There is a whole lot to read here about this very subject. Most guys are "talked-out" but read the archives here and on Aikido journal. There are perhaps twenty guys who have done most of the writing, but there is a wealth of information there anyway. The informationt offers personal views, written research, and shihan level teacher support of information offered by some of the students. Relaxe a little, poor a drink and review. You have the time. Think of it like going to the library.

Cheers
Dan