PDA

View Full Version : Kondo S. - DR Aikibudo or DR Aikijujutsu?



Nathan Scott
14th November 2000, 01:15
Hello,

Per request in a recent PM, I am submiting the following question for discussion by those interested:

Kondo S. says they practice the "Takeda-den Ono-ha itto ryu kenjutsu" style as part of their DR curriculum. But the title of his art and the titles he uses (Honbucho & Somucho) are from Daito ryu Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu.

Does Kondo S. (or anyone else) teach Takeda T. DR Aikibudo, or did it die with Takeda T.?

Did Takeda T. teach Aikibudo and DR Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu together when he was alive, or as two completely seperate arts (or did Takeda T. Teach DR Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu at all)?

Has the modern variation (Aikibudo) influenced the dissemination of mainline Daito ryu Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu?

Regards,

Kendoguy9
14th November 2000, 03:43
hello Nathan and all,

it's funny you mention this stuff because some of it was addressed by Kondo sensei this weekend at his seminar. the question of Ono-ha Itto-ryu kenjutsu was very openly addressed by Kondo sensei. Ono-ha is not part of Daito-ryu. it is practiced by members of the dojo, and some have menkyo kaiden in the art, and teach it, but it is not formally a part of the Daito-ryu cirriculum. sensei also mentioned that minor arts such as shuriken are also taught at the dojo, but are not part of the densho. if you take a look at the Daito-ryu Interviews book on page 25 the first question asked Takeda sensei even says that he teaches the arts separatly. Kondo sensei also addressed that he owns the copy rights (or trademark i didn't quite pick up exactly what it was) to Daito-ryu, Daito-ryu aikijujutsu, Daito-ryu aikibudo, and i think Daito-ryu jujutsu. i would take a guess that aikibudo of Tokimune and aikijujutsu of Sokaku are really the same things, just different names to reflect each man's interpertation of the art they practice. it's a shame i didn't read this yesterday or i could have asked sensei :( oh well, there's always next year.

gambatte!!!

Ron Tisdale
14th November 2000, 13:25
Hi guys,

From Kondo S.'s book, on page 31:

Tokimune adopted the title of "Soke" or Headmaster in his capacity as the originator of Daito-ryu aikibudo. However, he maintained a distinction between his role in this capacity and his status as the successor of Sokaku in "Daito-ryu jujutsu" and "Daito-ryu aikijujutsu."

And,

It appears that one of the main distinctions made by Tokimune between the art taught by Sokaku and the Daito-ryu aikibudo he formulated was that the latter art was intended as a "do" for the general public much in the same sense as other modern martial arts.
[end quotes]

The specific words used at the seminar were Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu and jujutsu. From the quotes above, and the specificity of a man who seemed to be very carefull in chosing his words, I infer that both were taught by Tokimune. I would also infer that the distinction is important. I did not have a chance to ask to see techniques from the aikibudo however, so I do not have any idea of the exact nature of the technical differences. I think this important point plays a role in both the succession discussions and in who is qualified to teach what. Perhaps Nathan can put this question to Stanly Pranin at the Aikidojournal web site?

I can confirm Kendoguy9's reference to Kondo S.'s statement about the separation between Ono-ha Itto ryu and Daito ryu.

Ron Tisdale

Nathan Scott
14th November 2000, 16:57
Thanks for the responses guys.

I'll pop this question up over at the AJJ BBS as soon as I get a chance.

I also imagine that the DR Aikibudo and DR Jujutsu must be pretty similar. It would seem that Tokimune S. wanted to preserve DR Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu as it was, and adapt the organizational structure of it to fit modern times under the title of Aikibudo. I'm not sure I understand the real advantage, but I guess it allowed Tokimune S. to teach whatever he wanted under Aikibudo without being critisized for changing the original DR. (?)

Regards,

Earl Hartman
14th November 2000, 17:15
Nathan:

I know little or nothing about aikijujutsu, but I get the impression from these discussions that this is an example of the honored Japanese practice of "tatemae vs. honne", or surface appearances vs. true feelings.

It is in the nature of traditional bugei that it is not for public consumption; as a consequence, practitoners of traditional arts do not feel a need to indoctrinate large segments of the general public in their arts. Indeed, since the art must be directly transmitted from teacher to student via a close and intense personal relationship, it is axiomatic that the real nature of these arts cannot be imparted to large numbers of people in a modern setting. However, one of the main purposes of the modern arts is to do precisely that, to bring the arts to large numbers of people so that they can use them to benefit their lives in some way. This approach, where the practitoner uses the art as a method of self-improvement, does not really require delving into the "deeper" aspects of the art.

Consequently, I think that using a more modern approach via "aikibudo" is a way to perhaps get a lot of people interested in and conversant with the outer, visible aspect of the art (the omote) in the hope that some may later become inclined to pursue it more deeply via the traditional "akikijujutsu" way (the ura).

Anyway, just an opinion. Maybe you could look at it kind of like seitei iai vs. koryu.

MarkF
15th November 2000, 09:08
Originally posted by Ron Tisdale

It appears that one of the main distinctions made by Tokimune between the art taught by Sokaku and the Daito-ryu aikibudo he formulated was that the latter art was intended as a "do" for the general public much in the same sense as other modern martial arts.


Now this is very interesting, and I am wondering what the DR people get from this quote.

It hit me that if this is the way DR is now explained, then it is gendai. It also begs the question: What exactly is Daito ryu? Many other questions come to mind, but if it is to be dispensed to the general public, does this include ALL aiki no jutsu, as well (at least that of DR)?

Well, I will stop there, but I think I need to read this book. The two quotes above pose more questions than answers.

What do y'all think?

Mark

Ron Tisdale
15th November 2000, 13:47
[What exactly is Daito ryu? Many other questions come to mind, but if it is to be dispensed to the general public, does this include ALL aiki no jutsu, as well (at least that of DR)? ]

That is the question of the day. I don't see a clear answer to that in the book, and didn't have a chance to inquire as to specifics at the seminar (asked other questions, but not that one). I'm not sure the aiki-no-jutsu *can* be taught well in a "do" format. Something about the personal nature of the transition. We'll have to get Nathan to post that at the AJ website.


[Well, I will stop there, but I think I need to read this book. The two quotes above pose more questions than answers. ]

Yes, the book is fantastic, the level of detail in the photos is excellant. It still isn't personal transmission though. I would highly recomend that people show up at the seminar next year. You won't regret it (inspite of the pain you're likely to feel for the next couple of days afterwards...). And yes, there are definately more questions...

Ron Tisdale

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 16:50
Mark-san,

DR Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu is by definition not a "do" art, and in practice is not really a do art (you can receive "do" benefits, but the art still has a strong combative foundation).

The Aikibudo mentioned in the quote may or may not even be continued. The part that doesn't make sense to me is that Kondo S. describes the art he teaches as DR Aikijujutsu, and uses the titles that correspond with the art. But he also has adopted the kyu/dan system like Tokimune S. had for his Aikibudo. Did Kondo S. introduce the kyu/dan system to DR Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu?

In some ways there seems to be a clear seperation between Aikibudo and the original DR, but in other ways it appears to be gray (from the outside of mainline, at least).

Regards,

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 21:02
O.K.,

I've hit Mr. Pranin up with this topic on his BBS at:

http://www.aikidojournal.com/ubb/Forum21/HTML/000010.html

Regards,

Justin Campbell
15th November 2000, 23:05
Is it possible that the only reason for the name change from Aikijujutsu to Aikibudo was due to Takeda T. Senseiís modification of the art by adding the modern ranking system (Kyu/Dan) and a structured and organized curriculum?

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 23:21
That seems to be part of it, but quite simply it has been said that "Takeda T. wanted to alter DR to better fit the needs/trends of modern society, and as such wanted to emphasize the qualities of a "do" (way of life) art as opposed to that of a "jutsu" (combative martial art)".

(that's not a literal quote, btw).

So the question remains what is being taught now and by who and how much are the two arts curriculum seperated? What's the techical differences specifically?

Regards,

MarkF
16th November 2000, 09:50
Is it possible that the only reason for the name change from Aikijujutsu to Aikibudo was due to Takeda T. Senseiís modification of the art by adding the modern ranking system (Kyu/Dan) and a structured and organized curriculum?
__________________
JJ Campbell


From reading the interviews with Tokimune he said that he changed to the kyu/dan grading system because menjo's, menkyo, etc., was just too time consuming. I read these interviews about a year ago, so this is definitely not a quote.

But if this really is a question of "do" and "jutsu," then budo is bujutsu, even if budo was the first term to be used as all-encompasing of martial arts, so does it just come down to this? Is it really, then, aikibujutsu?

This is far from important, but this question seems to be brought up again and again, even though we have personal and written word from Kondo (Kon-jutsu?:D Sorry, I just couldn't resist).

From Tokimune's description of aiki (jujutsu) as basically, the push, pull method, the opposite of kiai, then what really is the significance in calling it aikibudo or aikijujutsu? It is very similar to the term "ju do" appearing in the late eighteenth century, then determining the age of jujutsu and judo to both being "jutsu" or koryu.

Well, it just proves that the more questions answered, the more questions are raised.

This is all very confusing.

Mark

BTW: Is the book available to the general public, as in BN? If not, then from where would one purchase it?

Thanks,

Nathan Scott
16th November 2000, 16:38
BTW: Is the book available to the general public, as in BN? If not, then from where would one purchase it?

What? You don't have one yet. I guess you didn't get the memo that said you had to have this book to participate in this forum! :D yuck yuck yuck

Seriously though, it is the English language resourse for DR, because they are translated interviews by high ranking exponents (many of which have passed away now).

The Ikkajo book also has enough new information to warrant it's purchase as well, if just for the text:

http://www.aikidojournal.com

"Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu - Conversations with Daito-ryu Masters" (AKA: CWDM)
Interviews conducted & edited by Stanley A. Pranin
Aiki News ISBN: 4-900586-18-8

"Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu - Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo"
Katsuyuki Kondo
Aiki News ISBN: 4-900586-60-9

If your really interested in DR, these are very valuable resources to better understand the history and mindset of the art.

Regards,

MarkF
17th November 2000, 10:04
No, Nathan,
You guys are doing a great job of confusing the issues and I have depended on you for too long for that. hehehe. I now feel I should be as confused as the rest of you, in the academic way, therefore yes, I do want to get this book, at the very least.

BTW: Nathan, I have had an interest in aiki since around 1969 when I first saw aikido randori on the mat next to me while I was in NYC. Since, I have on occasion worked out with shodokan stylists, and even incorporate some technique into my own curriculum. Besides, there is nothing wrong with believing in magic. It is sort of like "chasing the dragon." You want to get that feeling back so you are willing to go through almost anything to get it.

Mark

Thanks for the order info. Of course, if I used common sense, I would have gone there myself, but why put myself out when you are willing to do it for me?:D:D

Nathan Scott
8th December 2000, 01:39
Yeah Mark, make me work for it! :)

We got a few responses to this question on the Aikido Journal forum (thread linked previously), though I'm still a bit confused:

Snipped from Mr. Paul Wollos:


Maybe its only my opinion, but I risk to write it anyway:

Daito Ryu Aikibudo is a mainline Daitoryu, after re-arrangements of techniques into present groups (such as Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo to Gokajo) by Takeda Tokimune Soke. However, Takumakai also cooperated, and has similar syllabus, just the way of performing some waza are different.

So simply saying, Daito Ryu Aikibudo is a Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu as taught by Takeda T. Soke. Kondo Shihan was a student of late Soke, and what he teaches is Daito Ryu Aikibudo of Takeda T. The only question we may ask, why the name Daito Ryu Aikibudo?

I may guess, that its done to represent the mainline
Daitoryu, descending from Takeda family. Other groups, like Kodokai and Sagawa Dojo didn't follow same path as Takumakai, and their curriculum/scrolls are different. Every group emphasizes something special, unique to itself. Kondo Katsuyuki Somucho teaches the same techniques and in a same way as Takeda Tokimune Soke did.

I know its confusing, but that's how it makes logic to me. So at the end, both names are correct and righful to use by Kondo Somucho.

Paul Wollos

To which Mr. Pranin replied:


I think Paul is on the right track here. I just spent five days with Kondo Sensei at his recent Baltimore seminar and have a couple of insights to offer.

This is a little subtle so I apologize in advance if the point is difficult to understand. Kondo Sensei has assumed the title of "Somucho" (General Affairs Director) and "Hombucho" (Headquarters Director). These are titles used by Sokaku and Tokimune historically as the heads of Daito-ryu aikijujutsu.

Tokimune Sensei assumed the title of "Soke" or Headmaster in the 1950s as the head of "Daito-ryu Aiki Budo." This included the arrangement of the curriculum into various technical groupings and the adoption of the kyu/dan system. It also incorporated study of the Onoha Itto-ryu kenjutsu school which Sokaku learned as a boy but which he did not systematically teach in later years. Tokimune was the first Soke, there being no iemoto or family succession system prior to this.

Kondo Sensei has distanced himself from the Daito-ryu Aiki Budo name in favor of the use of the historical term "Daito-ryu aikijujutsu," which is primarily a taijutsu system. This also supports his claim to legitimacy as the Somucho and Hombucho based on his award of the menkyo kaiden and the special status conferred upon him by Tokimune Sensei during his lifetime.

There is a subtle logic to all of this according to the Japanese way of thinking that may escape Westerners.

Specifically what is being taught are the 118 techniques comprising the hiden mokuroku. I have seen limited use of weapons primarily in a demonstration setting. Derek Steel can provide specifics on training as he practices at Kondo Sensei's Tokyo dojo.

Stanley Pranin

By this description it sounds like Kondo Sensei is teaching Daito ryu Jujutsu, but including Ono-ha Itto ryu kenjutsu?

The political stance seems fairly clear to me, but after Tokimune Soke assumed the title Soke I'm not clear if he gave rank and was teaching the "Daito ryu Jujutsu/Aikijujutsu" system of the modified "Daito ryu Aikibudo" system that appears to be nearly identical. I'm assuming if the the changes Tokimune S. made warranted creating a new name (Aikibudo) that it is a point worth clarifying.

What was Kondo Sensei taught? The Menkyo Kaiden he received is writen as "Daito ryu Aikijujutsu", but it loods like Tokimune S. signed his name using his credential in "Daito ryu Aikibudo" (it's a little hard to make all of it out).

Since the SAD group is claiming Soke, the differentiation between the two "arts" seems to me to be very important.

Perhaps I'll anoy... I mean, approach Mr. Steel about this a bit later.

Regards,

MarkF
8th December 2000, 07:23
Well, politics are the most oft discussed topic on any bulletin board and this is not different. It is interesting to say the least.

The understanding of this situation, to me, is that it is as unclear now as it ever was, with SAD or without (surely someone else would have come around). The Japanese way of thinking, from what Mr. Pranin says, is to leave it in the open air, let it swirl (like a swizzle of good Scotch) for a while, and then we can then take it out for another spin.

It is similar to Jon Bluming and Donn Draeger aproaching Ueshiba M. and asking to do ukemi for some of his waza. "We'll let you know," said Ueshiba K. after his father told them it would be too dangerous. Which means no, of course, in the time-honored Japanese way.:)

I won't tell you what they thought of that answer and aikido at that moment, and I don't even know if the story is true, but the intent is the same here, I think.

"We will let you know."

(To be contined. Da ta da da. Tahhhh)

Mark

hehe