Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 97

Thread: Here a Soke, There a Soke, Everywhere a Soke

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    122
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    A gem. A real gem. Thank you very much for that one, Mr. Bodiford.

    Thinking of another recently started thread: every time I realize what level of knowledge and information is available here at e-budo.com, I really doubt if I should contribute about anything here. But, on the other hand, didn't our twaddle "provoke" Prof. Bodiford to this contribution?

    Regards,
    Robert

  2. #32
    MarkF Guest

    Default

    Robert,
    Absolutely. Could not have put it better.

    Prof. Bodiford,
    This is going to be saved as most complete description, and most accurate, I've heard. That I am a judoka means all the more to me.

    Thank you,

  3. #33
    Yamantaka Guest

    Thumbs up ASKING FOR MR. BODIFORD'S AUTHORIZATION


    Dear Mr. Bodiford,

    What can I say that hasn't been said already? Excellent text! I couldn't have access to you personally so I'm asking here in the List for your authorization for translating and including it in my own list (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aikido-lingua_portuguesa ), where I usually include posts and texts by recognized authorities on martial subjects and japanese culture as, for instance, Wayne Muromoto, Meik Skoss, Stanley Pranin and Karl Friday.
    It would be an honour for me and for my list, if you could authorize this translation of your text.
    Waiting for your answer
    I'm truly yours
    Ubaldo Alcantara - Owner/Moderator
    Aikido List in Portuguese Language

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Karlsruhe, BW, Germany
    Posts
    73
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default permission to post on my website

    Prof. Bodiford,

    as already written, this is an excellent post.
    I also want to ask you if you would give me
    the permission to use your post on my own website. My website is in german language only, but to avoid mistakes in translation, i would use the post in the original language.

    The URL for my website is http://www.budo-nyumon.de

    Thank you for your time

    Regards

    [Edited by Ruediger on 02-17-2001 at 09:48 AM]
    Last edited by Ruediger; 19th February 2001 at 16:05.
    Ruediger Meier

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    111
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default Permission to post?

    Prof. Bodiford,

    Any chance I could get permission to post your soke message as an article at Koryu.com? Perks include a bio squib and links to your choice of further reference sites. Let me know... and thanks!

    Cheers!

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    161
    Likes (received)
    4

    Thumbs up

    Originally posted by W.Bodiford
    Before 1868 martial arts never were controlled by an *iemoto* or *sôke* structure. This is the reason why there exists so many different schools (*ryûha*) of martial arts. Different styles and lineages proliferated because the ruling authorities never would allow any single martial entity to exercise monopoly control throughout the land. In every generation there always existed martial students who broke away to start their own schools with their own secret teachings and their own repertoire of kata. When they issued diplomas they did so by their own authority without paying license fees to any larger organization. In contrast to the wide diversity of martial schools, only a limited number of schools of Noh or Ikebana or Tea Ceremony (etc.) could exist because the monopoly power of the *sôke* prevented any rival schools from being created. In short, the ability to found new schools constitutes a repudiation of the *sôke* power. If there are new schools, then there is no *sôke*. If there is a *sôke*, then there are no new schools.
    I just want to add a minor--albeit important--quibble/clarification to an otherwise excellent post:

    Will's treatment of this topic seems to at least partially confound what I think ought to be understood as two distinct constructs: the idea of what might be called the "soke system" and that of a "soke (or iemoto) + natori system." I would argue (actually, I guess I already have, in *Legacies*) that bugei ryuha had the former, but not the latter.

    Whether or not the term "soke" itself was used in reference to bugei ryuha prior to the Meiji period, the family soden traditions and the license & rank systems that developed during the Edo era do amount to a "soke system" (meaning proprietorship over a package of teachings vested exclusively in the hands of one individual per generation) albeit without the natori component (networks of authority across political lines or networks of branch schools) found in arts like ikebana, chanoyu, or Noh. While bugei ryuha didn't license and promulagate branch schools on the natori pattern, they DO seem to have PROHIBITED them. That is, they do appear to have made efforts to stop unauthorized use of a ryuha name, which amounts to affirmation (in the negative) of much the same sort of proprietary rights to artistic/intellectual property claimed by other arts. Certainly it was not the case that any student, or even any "graduate" (recipient of menkyo kaiden) was free to claim to teach xyz-ryu under that name. Ryuha headmasters did have designated successors. Other "graduates" appear to have had the right to advertise their affiliation with the ryuha, but not the right to pass that right on to their own students.

    That is, bugei ryuha were like ryuha of other arts in their concept of proprietary possession or transmission of the tenets of their arts. The key organizational difference was the absence of branch schools and the use of the term "soke" itself among bugei schools, prior to the modern era.
    Karl Friday
    Dept. of History
    University of Georgia
    Athens, GA 30602

  7. #37
    Guest

    Default

    Mr Bodiford,

    Very illuminating discourse on the history and use of the iemoto or soke terms. Really the best I have ever read.

    I however have several questions for you

    If....

    An individual of western birth was chosen by a Japanese family head as a yoshi or adopted son for the purpose of maintaining a specific family tradition could the term be properly applied to his position? These passages seems to support this:

    _________________________________________________________________


    “If necessary, therefore, another male from one of the affiliated groups would be brought in and designated as heir to succeed to the head of the family. The heir, whether related by blood or adopted, was responsible for maintaining the unity of the corporate families, maintaining their commercial monopoly, and maintaining their good relations with their patrons. The main family itself, as a multi-generational entity, and the head of the family both were called *sôke*.”

    (I believe a system similar to this was utilized by samurai caste families when no male heir was available because family property and land was only traditionally inherited by males. - TT)

    “*Iemoto* or *sôke* simply happen to be the usual terms for designating the main lineage in which a craft or art has been handed down. Therefore these words have become a part of common usage when discussing families who traditionally have possessed a proprietary knowledge of a craft or art. This social or popular use of these terms denotes a historical past, not a present-day commercial or legal monopoly.”

    “Used in this sense of "transmitted within a family" the term *sôke* seems perfectly reasonable.”

    __________________________________________________________________

    The reason I ask is because of this statement from your excellent post:

    “ I cannot imagine how any non-Japanese could call himself a "soke" except as a joke. “

    I happen to know an individual of western birth that does meet the generally accepted criterior of a legitament “Soke” depending of course on some hairsplitting of the definition.

    In 1986 I happen to meet Don Angier, who used the term “soke” not as a indicator of any rank but sort of as an inherited administrative position for Yanagi ryu Aiki Bugei.
    Don claimed to have been adopted as a yoshi and inherited Yanagi ryu from Yoshida Kenji, the son of the enigmatic Yoshida Kotaro. I must admit to some suspicions concerning his claim until I had the chance to examine photographs, film footage and then later confirm the authenticity of certain other technical information related to Daito ryu with Stan Pranin of Aikido Journal Magazine.

    Any lingering suspicions were dashed on a trip to Japan in 1992 when I personally witnessed Kondo Katsuyuki’s recognition of Don Angier as the inheritor of Yanagi ryu Aiki Bugei and the Yoshida family martial traditions. Given that Kondo Katsuyuki was a personal student of Yoshida Kotaro and was currently the technical heir (menkyo kaiden) to Daito ryu, I took this as final confirmation.

    So, I’m not trying to be a jerk but am genuinely interested in your definition of his position. See the credentials of Don Angier have been put thru the ringer and not been found wanting by some pretty heavy hitters including some prominent Japanese. What would you consider his position if not a “soke”. Seriously interested.

    Thanks again for the excellent post.

    Toby Threadgill

    P.S. My past teacher Takamura Yukiyoshi received a Menkyo Kaiden in Shindo Yoshin ryu from within his own family and later in life began his own ryuha. Until his death he eschewed all of this title silliness and simply preferred “sensei” .

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    122
    Likes (received)
    0

    Question

    Profs. Friday and Bodiford,

    while we are at it, I would like to add some questions, if I may.
    While bugei ryuha didn't license and promulagate branch schools on the natori pattern, they DO seem to have PROHIBITED them. That is, they do appear to have made efforts to stop unauthorized use of a ryuha name, which amounts to affirmation (in the negative) of much the same sort of proprietary rights to artistic/intellectual property claimed by other arts.
    Mr. Draeger, in 'Classical Budo', wrote on page 109: 'Ushu Tatewaki founded what would become the Yagyu Shingan Ryu in pre-Edo times. Some generations of headmasters later, in the Edo period, when Takenaga Naoto received official permission from Yagyu Tajima no Kami to name his ryu the Yagyu Shingan Ryu, the martial curriculum was changed.

    That seems to be a perfect example of allowance to use a certain name as opposed to 'efforts to stop it's unauthorized use'. How should we interpret this? Is it the proverbial exception, that is proofing the rule?
    Ryuha headmasters did have designated successors. Other "graduates" appear to have had the right to advertise their affiliation with the ryuha, but not the right to pass that right on to their own students.
    Strictly speaking, that reveals the present situations in Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu as well as in Daito Ryu, to name two well known examples, in a different light. Regarding MJER, a lot of people seem to think, that the several Kongen no Maki holders that were students of Oe Sensei had established legitimate branches. In Daito Ryu, the Takumakai, Kodokai and the Sagawa-line are regarded legitimate branches at least.

    Should that examples be considered as legitimate, valid evolution of those parts of the Soke/Iemoto seido that were adopted into the Bugei/Budo Ryu-ha in modern times, or do that useages of the original schoolnames constitute a questionable practice, provided, that there is no formal permission from the 'official' body?

    Regards,
    Robert

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    161
    Likes (received)
    4

    Default

    Originally posted by Robert Reinberger

    Mr. Draeger, in 'Classical Budo', wrote on page 109: 'Ushu Tatewaki founded what would become the Yagyu Shingan Ryu in pre-Edo times. Some generations of headmasters later, in the Edo period, when Takenaga Naoto received official permission from Yagyu Tajima no Kami to name his ryu the Yagyu Shingan Ryu, the martial curriculum was changed.

    That seems to be a perfect example of allowance to use a certain name as opposed to 'efforts to stop it's unauthorized use'. How should we interpret this? Is it the proverbial exception, that is proofing the rule?
    I don't know much about the specifics of this case (Meik Skoss is the man to ask about Yagyu history), but it seems to involve something fundamentally different from the sort of thing Will and I are talking about. What Naoto seems to have received was permission to use the Yagyu family name in the name of his school. This isn't the same thing as receiving permission to teach the Yagyu family's Shinkage-ryu at a satellite location--which is what the natori system adopted by ikebana and chanoyu ryuha involved. As far as I know, the Yagyu Shingan-ryu was and remained completely independent of the Yagyu Shinkage-ryu and of Yagyu family control.

    Under the natori system, heads of branch schools operate under a kind of franchise sort of arrangement, in which the ryuha head retains complete authority over the curriculum and over all students of the system, whether they study at the "headquarters" or at a branch somewhere. No bugei ryuha is known to have established this sort of system prior to modern times. Rather than being set up in satellite schools of their own, to teach under the auspices of the central dojo, bugei students who mastered their ryuha's curriculum were essentially graduated--given certificates of mastery (menkyo kaiden) and set off on their own. Such students were henceforth completely independent of their teachers and their teachers' organization.

    The meaning of "branch" is therefore different in the case of pre-Meiji bugei ryuha from what it means in chanoyu. In the latter, a "branch" is a subordinate part of a larger organization, teaching as a proxy for the ryuha headmaster. All ranks and licenses issued to students under this arrangement are given under the authority and in the name of the headmaster. In the bugei (prior to modern times), a "branch" is really a new ryuha, with no formal residual ties to its parent school. Thus while schools of Noh or flower arranging established branches, bugei schools simply branched--again and again with each generation, which is why there are/were so many bugei ryuha out there (vs. only two or three schools of chanoyu).

    My last post does, BTW, over-simplify the control-of-name issue a bit, in the interest of making a point. As a practical matter, bugei masters had only limited ability to control unauthorized use of their ryuha names (just as they do today), since (as Will explained) they didn't enjoy the kind of gov't/legal recognition of their property rights that heads of ryuha in other arts did. In practice, the only recourse open to a bugei instructor who found someone fraudulently claiming connection to his lineage was physical intimidation (which was, BTW, illegal under shogunal and most domain law). Moreover, bugei instructors didn't always name a clear successor, and sometimes gave more than one student permission to style themselves instructors of xyz-ryu. And other students often used close variations of their teacher's style names for their own schools. The combination of these factors is the reason there are so many ryuha with similar names and so many ryuha that style themselves ___-ryu ___-ha.
    Karl Friday
    Dept. of History
    University of Georgia
    Athens, GA 30602

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    122
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Prof. Friday,

    thank you for the clarification.

    Cordially,

    Robert Reinberger

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Okinawa
    Posts
    248
    Likes (received)
    0

    Post Permission Request

    Dear Prof. Bodiford,

    Echoing the request of Diane Skoss, I too would like to ask your permission to post this splendidly informative explanation in our quarterly journal. May I have your permission?

    Cordially
    Patrick McCarthy
    International Ryukyu Karate-jutsu Research Society
    http://www.koryu-uchinadi.com

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    66
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Pretty interesting etymological/historical thread. Now that I'm at the end of it, I'm going to get a glass of hot sake and go soke my feet.

    Sorry. I just had to get that in. ;- )

    Tom Douglas
    Tom Douglas

  13. #43
    Yamantaka Guest

    Unhappy CAN ANYBODY HELP ME?

    Please, can anybody help me? I'm trying to contact Prof. William Bodiford to ask his permission to use his Iemoto article but until now I've been unable to do that.
    He has no e-mail available. I've written to his University without success. And I asked Mr. Lindsey for help. No avail...
    Any ideas what can I do except asking for Mafia's help? (
    Yamantaka

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Blue Ridge, Texas
    Posts
    2,000
    Likes (received)
    125

    Question

    Here is Professor Bodiford's email address from the UCLA faculty website. I feel funny about posting it here, but you seem sincere in your desire and it is public information. If I am in error, I apologize.

    bodiford@ucla.edu
    Paul Smith
    "Always keep the sharp side and the pointy end between you and your opponent"

  15. #45
    Yamantaka Guest

    Unhappy Prof. Bodiford's e-mail at UCLA

    Originally posted by pgsmith
    Here is Professor Bodiford's email address from the UCLA faculty website. I feel funny about posting it here, but you seem sincere in your desire and it is public information. If I am in error, I apologize.

    bodiford@ucla.edu
    YAMANTAKA : Thank you, my friend! I tried that and it didn't function...???

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Budo: The Art of Killing -- Cast info sought
    By Brian Owens in forum Media and the Martial Arts
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 12th March 2007, 23:46
  2. "Bad Media"
    By Nathan Scott in forum Media and the Martial Arts
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25th June 2003, 23:02
  3. Takeshin Sogo Budo/ Tony Annesi (Roy Goldberg)
    By kenkyusha in forum Aikijujutsu
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 16th October 2000, 23:36

Posting Permissions

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