PDA

View Full Version : China and the Methods that Drive IP & Aiki


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Carsten Möllering
08-13-2013, 02:05 AM
Many have gone into the chinese internal stuff ...
Yes. One of them was named Ueshiba Morihei ...

graham christian
08-13-2013, 06:04 PM
Yes. One of them was named Ueshiba Morihei ...

Aikido made in china. Sounds like a cheap copy to me.

Peace.G.

oisin bourke
08-14-2013, 09:36 AM
Aikido made in china. Sounds like a cheap copy to me.

Peace.G.

I don't comment on these discussions, but for sheer ignorance, you've outdone yourself Graham. Congratulations.

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 10:04 AM
Graham Christian wrote: View Post
Many have gone into the chinese internal stuff ...
Yes. One of them was named Ueshiba Morihei ...

And before him, his teacher -- Sokaku Takeda.

The ideas of ki and aiki weren't created in Japan, in a vacuum. Island nations with no input from anywhere else, would show no trace of any similarity with mainland cultures. Like so many other deep and sophisticated ideas, Japan was liberally immersed in Chinese philosophy and concepts, as well as crafts and arts. Where do you think Japan got kanji from? Its intro to Buddhism? Or sumi-e? Or even tea ceremony and the concept of the landscape garden? Esoteric internal body disciplines were yet another import from China. Among them were, with 99.99% certainty, those that embodied the concepts of ki and aiki.

graham christian
08-14-2013, 11:49 AM
Graham Christian wrote: View Post
Many have gone into the chinese internal stuff ...

And before him, his teacher -- Sokaku Takeda.

The ideas of ki and aiki weren't created in Japan, in a vacuum. Island nations with no input from anywhere else, would show no trace of any similarity with mainland cultures. Like so many other deep and sophisticated ideas, Japan was liberally immersed in Chinese philosophy and concepts, as well as crafts and arts. Where do you think Japan got kanji from? Its intro to Buddhism? Or sumi-e? Or even tea ceremony and the concept of the landscape garden? Esoteric internal body disciplines were yet another import from China. Among them were, with 99.99% certainty, those that embodied the concepts of ki and aiki.

What makes you or anyone think the ideas were from China? Why stop there? Buddhism goes beyond China as does much of what you think originates there. Japanese history is actually more linked to Korea.

But still, all that is irrelevant and minor. Culture is where it's at and culturally Japan developed it's own way. Then when you come to the topic at hand called Aikido then you enter sophisticated ideas which are spiritual based of Japanese Kojiki and Kotodama, shinto and Kami. Very Japanese. "My Aiki is not the aiki of the past"

Being swayed by arguments of chinese internal arts means only you should go study bagua or something rather than trying to mistakenly believe it has anything to do with Ueshiba's art.

I say that using chinese internal arts in the name of Aikido is an insult to both Aikido and Ueshiba.

Peace.G.

graham christian
08-14-2013, 11:52 AM
I don't comment on these discussions, but for sheer ignorance, you've outdone yourself Graham. Congratulations.

It's not ignorant. Aikido is based on Japanese spiritual. Nothing Chinese about it.

Peace.G.

bkedelen
08-14-2013, 12:30 PM
Among them were, with 99.99% certainty, those that embodied the concepts of ki and aiki.

Having that kind of certainty must be comforting. It seems that I don't have that luxury.

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 01:21 PM
Yes, Graham, Buddhism came from Nepal-India, but it traveled through the filters of China, to Japan. That's why I used "intro." Furthermore, the foundation and roots of internal body methods now practiced in the Far East may also have been derived from practices in the Near East, but again... through the filter of China they went to Japan. We're talking a couple of thousands of years for ideas to evolve and be adapted into other cultures.

My point, though, is that the methods that drive IP and aiki did not, themselves originate in Japan. They came to Japan from elsewhere. China's huge influence over Japan, and its own various arts and disciplines, points to it as the source. Where China original got its inspirations for various things, is another topic.

The most recent incarnation of what we would

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 03:11 PM
There's been quite a lot of information put out about the Chinese connections, even a book, but none put out showing that those connections didn't exist or weren't significant, and none showing that what Morihei Ueshiba developed was technically or philosophically unique.

A number of unsupported assertions have been made, however....

Shinto has been mentioned - of course, that's a Chinese word, which first appeared historically in the Nihongi, which was written in Chinese in the classical Chinese style. :D

Korea's also been mentioned, but of course we know that the Korean elements originated in Japan.

As to Indian (or further) connections - sure, that's been mentioned in the past as well, nobody's denied it.

That there was a Chinese influence on Morihei Ueshiba and Aikido is undeniable - he himself stated that it existed. The only question is...how much?

Best,

Chris

graham christian
08-14-2013, 03:31 PM
Yes, Graham, Buddhism came from Nepal-India, but it traveled through the filters of China, to Japan. That's why I used "intro." Furthermore, the foundation and roots of internal body methods now practiced in the Far East may also have been derived from practices in the Near East, but again... through the filter of China they went to Japan. We're talking a couple of thousands of years for ideas to evolve and be adapted into other cultures.

My point, though, is that the methods that drive IP and aiki did not, themselves originate in Japan. They came to Japan from elsewhere. China's huge influence over Japan, and its own various arts and disciplines, points to it as the source. Where China original got its inspirations for various things, is another topic.

The most recent incarnation of what we would

The methods that drive IP yes but Aiki no. The methods that drive Aiki are spiritual and not of chinese internal mental/physical methods.

Spiritual Aiki is driven by spiritual disciplines borrowed by whatever person of whatever nationality if spiritually aware enough.

The mind is driven by that of the swordsman as are the movements physically.

Many Japanese concepts quite alien to chinese exist in Aikido. So influences pertinent are purely Japanese from bushido to budo to kotodama and shinto and more.

Spiritual has no nationality actually for it is universal as are the basic principles of Aikido.

Peace.G.

graham christian
08-14-2013, 03:44 PM
There's been quite a lot of information put out about the Chinese connections, even a book, but none put out showing that those connections didn't exist or weren't significant, and none showing that what Morihei Ueshiba developed was technically or philosophically unique.

A number of unsupported assertions have been made, however....

Shinto has been mentioned - of course, that's a Chinese word, which first appeared historically in the Nihongi, which was written in Chinese in the classical Chinese style. :D

Korea's also been mentioned, but of course we know that the Korean elements originated in Japan.

As to Indian (or further) connections - sure, that's been mentioned in the past as well, nobody's denied it.

That there was a Chinese influence on Morihei Ueshiba and Aikido is undeniable - he himself stated that it existed. The only question is...how much?

Best,

Chris

Shinto is a religion not a word. The word adopted and used generally is a historical language thing, nothing to do with the religion itself for it is pure Japanese. So some chinese scholar wrote about it....thus making others aware of it......you act like he invented it.

Korean elements originated in Japan? I think the majority of Japanese people themselves originated from korea let alone elements.

Ueshiba I doubt ever stated he was influenced by chinese, that your assertion. He went from Nationalistic to universal. He did often state his major influences though which were spiritual and even blatantly stated they were also the major influences of his Aikido.

So there's no escape if you want to take the influence root.......you have to go spiritual.

Peace.G.

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 04:16 PM
Shinto is a religion not a word. The word adopted and used generally is a historical language thing, nothing to do with the religion itself for it is pure Japanese. So some chinese scholar wrote about it....thus making others aware of it......you act like he invented it.

Korean elements originated in Japan? I think the majority of Japanese people themselves originated from korea let alone elements.

Ueshiba I doubt ever stated he was influenced by chinese, that your assertion. He went from Nationalistic to universal. He did often state his major influences though which were spiritual and even blatantly stated they were also the major influences of his Aikido.

So there's no escape if you want to take the influence root.......you have to go spiritual.

Peace.G.

Actually, I meant that the Korean elements originated in China, of course.

Shinto (along with everything else Japanese) experienced a heavy influence from Chinese sources - but there's plenty of literature out there on that.

All through the Edo period Shinto was heavily Confucian - and that's not even getting into the Shgendo (a blend of Buddhism and Shinto) links to Morihei Ueshiba.

Ueshiba did indeed cite Chinese sources - here's one of them (http://www.aikidosangenkai.org/blog/kiichi-hogen-secret-aikido/).

You still haven't provided any support for your assertions.


The methods that drive IP yes but Aiki no. The methods that drive Aiki are spiritual and not of chinese internal mental/physical methods.

Spiritual Aiki is driven by spiritual disciplines borrowed by whatever person of whatever nationality if spiritually aware enough.

The mind is driven by that of the swordsman as are the movements physically.

Many Japanese concepts quite alien to chinese exist in Aikido. So influences pertinent are purely Japanese from bushido to budo to kotodama and shinto and more.

Spiritual has no nationality actually for it is universal as are the basic principles of Aikido.

You're making assertions, let's see some support for them.

Best,

Chris

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 04:31 PM
Apparently this got split off, so I'll re-post it here...

Shinto is a religion not a word. The word adopted and used generally is a historical language thing, nothing to do with the religion itself for it is pure Japanese. So some chinese scholar wrote about it....thus making others aware of it......you act like he invented it.

Korean elements originated in Japan? I think the majority of Japanese people themselves originated from korea let alone elements.

Ueshiba I doubt ever stated he was influenced by chinese, that your assertion. He went from Nationalistic to universal. He did often state his major influences though which were spiritual and even blatantly stated they were also the major influences of his Aikido.

So there's no escape if you want to take the influence root.......you have to go spiritual.

Peace.G.

Actually, I meant that the Korean elements originated in China, of course.

Shinto (along with everything else Japanese) experienced a heavy influence from Chinese sources - but there's plenty of literature out there on that.

All through the Edo period Shinto was heavily Confucian - and that's not even getting into the Shgendo (a blend of Buddhism and Shinto) links to Morihei Ueshiba.

Ueshiba did indeed cite Chinese sources - here's one of them (http://www.aikidosangenkai.org/blog/kiichi-hogen-secret-aikido/).

You still haven't provided any support for your assertions.


The methods that drive IP yes but Aiki no. The methods that drive Aiki are spiritual and not of chinese internal mental/physical methods.

Spiritual Aiki is driven by spiritual disciplines borrowed by whatever person of whatever nationality if spiritually aware enough.

The mind is driven by that of the swordsman as are the movements physically.

Many Japanese concepts quite alien to chinese exist in Aikido. So influences pertinent are purely Japanese from bushido to budo to kotodama and shinto and more.

Spiritual has no nationality actually for it is universal as are the basic principles of Aikido.

You're making assertions, let's see some support for them.

Best,

Chris

bkedelen
08-14-2013, 04:41 PM
I have never understood how discovering and verifying that China had a butterfly effect on the core principles of Daito Ryu and Aikido is relevant to the acquisition of relevant martial skill. Maybe it is just an academic pursuit?

Anyone who is effectively doing similar stuff can be a resource for us, and they have been for a while now. I don't see how the nationality of that resource is significant.

Based on my understanding of how much good CMA is out there vs how much good JMA is out there, I think its much more likely these days that we would be a resource for them.

graham christian
08-14-2013, 05:00 PM
Actually, I meant that the Korean elements originated in China, of course.

Shinto (along with everything else Japanese) experienced a heavy influence from Chinese sources - but there's plenty of literature out there on that.

All through the Edo period Shinto was heavily Confucian - and that's not even getting into the Shgendo (a blend of Buddhism and Shinto) links to Morihei Ueshiba.

Ueshiba did indeed cite Chinese sources - here's one of them (http://www.aikidosangenkai.org/blog/kiichi-hogen-secret-aikido/).

You still haven't provided any support for your assertions.

You're making assertions, let's see some support for them.

Best,

Chris

You're just playing word games. From stating "he himself stated he was influenced by chinese" to now the lesser " he cited chinese sources" is quite a come down. As I said, he never stated he had any chinese influence.

As for your "example given" it has nothing to do with chinese. Once again a chinese scholar or someone wrote those words but the concept is not of chinese origin. It's a spiritual concept and so all it proves is his awareness of the reality of such concepts.

Maybe you think chinese invented the principles underlying yin and yang.

Shinto is native Japanese shamanistic religion. Shamanistic other spiritual practices over the centuries may well have influences, shingon buddhism for example, but still irrelevant. Shinto is unique as an entity, Japanese.

I can cite jewish or chinese or japanese or arabic or indian sources to get a concept across to others does that mean I am influenced by them? No, it means I use them.

So citing does not equal influenced by so end of argument.

Spiritual texts is what he studied and practiced.

I make spiritual assertions and so don't need to back them up for Ueshiba backed them up in virtually everything he said. In just about every interview given to uchideshi you will hear them say he explained aikido in spiritual terms and they didn't understand. Take your pick.

Still today what's new? I wrote "a little story about Ki" which was taken off the spiritual section. Just shows the scene hasn't changed much. The subject of Ki is in at least three threads now and none of them under spiritual. So once again no change there, people still don't understand.

All that's left is debate on irrelevant things like trying to make things physical or chinese.

Ueshiba was all his life on a spiritual path so all influences pertinent were spiritual. The five minds of budo are spiritual disciplines and so align well for the true student. The true student must study the spiritual otherwise they are just doing some scholarly exercise not martial study.

Peace.G.

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 05:03 PM
You're just playing word games. From stating "he himself stated he was influenced by chinese" to now the lesser " he cited chinese sources" is quite a come down.

Dude, he's quoting a classical Chinese text and saying that it is the secret of his Aikido. It doesn't get much more influential than that.


I make spiritual assertions and so don't need to back them up

This is where I get off.

Best,

Chris

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 05:06 PM
I have never understood how discovering and verifying that China had a butterfly effect on the core principles of Daito Ryu and Aikido is relevant to the acquisition of relevant martial skill. Maybe it is just an academic pursuit?

Anyone who is effectively doing similar stuff can be a resource for us, and they have been for a while now. I don't see how the nationality of that resource is significant.

Based on my understanding of how much good CMA is out there vs how much good JMA is out there, I think its much more likely these days that we would be a resource for them.

The argument is that there is much more than a butterfly effect.

Of course, there's plenty of bad CMA out there (just as there's plenty of bad JMA) - but the Chinese models, tend to have a more detailed and thorough methodology and terminology. That's why many people find it useful.

Just being able to do something doesn't mean that you're able to pass it on effectively. That's why so many star athletes turn out to be crappy coaches.

Best,

Chris

graham christian
08-14-2013, 05:19 PM
Dude, he's quoting a classical Chinese text and saying that it is the secret of his Aikido. It doesn't get much more influential than that.

This is where I get off.

Best,

Chris

He didn't say it was the secret of Aikido. There is no secret. He pointed out to a person concerned what that particular person or group of persons were not understanding. He no doubt pointed out other principles to others when they were lacking them.

I can just see them now running away and expounding how he has told them the secret too.

Yin and yang is basically a no brainer rather than a secret. Unless of course you're not used to such spiritual concepts in which case it will be like some special secret.

Non resistance is a 'secret' of Aikido too, as is kokyu and universal love and the spirit of loving protection and of course Ki. Not forgetting the void...zero....koshi....of course. Many 'secrets'' ;)

Peace.G.

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 05:26 PM
He didn't say it was the secret of Aikido.

His exact words were (in English) "this is the secret of Aikido".

And now this is really where I get off.

Best,

Chris

graham christian
08-14-2013, 06:00 PM
His exact words were (in English) "this is the secret of Aikido".

And now this is really where I get off.

Best,

Chris

He said the secret of Aikido was to do with the natural universal movements and he also said the secret of Aikido was not how to move your feet but how to move your mind for he teaches nonviolence. He said the secret of was thus many things. He said the secret when taking on tenryu the sumo was the circle.

So it's best when speaking English not to use the term secret at all unless you're trying to sell newspapers because it sounds just like a headline attention grabbing statement. Best use the proper term rather than the mystical intriguing term and that would be principle.

Then put that in context by saying it is a principle rather than the principle.

Peace.G.

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 06:43 PM
Yes, quite comforting. :) Morihei Ueshiba quoted directly from the Chinese classics to describe ki and aiki, and his role as a perceived avatar of these forces. It doesn't get much more certain than that.

To address the OP's concerns about the use of "ki" in aikido training, it's not "ki" that's dangerous, but improper instruction (often coming from incomplete understanding) and improper practice of the methods that condition the body to create, balance and apply the complementary forces that generate power. IMO, if a teacher can't demonstrate and explain to you, in clear terms, what he/she is doing and would have you do, and what the purpose and predictable outcomes are, then whatever they are purporting to teach is questionable and the student should beware.

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 06:45 PM
He said the secret of Aikido was to do with the natural universal movements and he also said the secret of Aikido was not how to move your feet but how to move your mind for he teaches nonviolence. He said the secret of was thus many things. He said the secret when taking on tenryu the sumo was the circle.

So it's best when speaking English not to use the term secret at all unless you're trying to sell newspapers because it sounds just like a headline attention grabbing statement. Best use the proper term rather than the mystical intriguing term and that would be principle.

Then put that in context by saying it is a principle rather than the principle.

Peace.G.

And every single one of those comes from classical Chinese sources, I've discussed some of them before.

I used the term because he did - and attention grabbing or not, in Japanese or English it indicates a thing of some importance.

There's a Japanese word for "principle" and he didn't use it in this case. He did in many others, so he clearly understood the difference.

Third times the charm, now I'm really out. :D

Best,

Chris

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 06:48 PM
Chris, you need an intervention. Here, let me help you to the door... :D

Keith Larman
08-14-2013, 08:16 PM
Chris isn't the one who needs the intervention IMHO.

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 09:05 PM
Chris isn't the one who needs the intervention IMHO.

No, some of us really do need an intervention for continuing to try to shine the light of logic and rationality (not to mention empirical fact) through a concrete wall. It becomes an almost unstoppable compulsion and only a server crash or the help of a sturdy friend can help break the spiral of doom! :p

bkedelen
08-14-2013, 09:20 PM
Serious question: can you share the titles of a couple of those Chinese texts that specifically address quality martial arts training? I have read dozens of martial arts books from many cultures and systems including CMA and found nearly all of them to be pretty awful. Only a handful of titles such as The Unfettered Mind and Igensho have been of use to me. You guys have made a big deal out of your confidence in the relevance of "the Chinese classics", including the rather bold implication that Osensei would agree with you if he was alive. For some reason I have never caught the titles of these works. Obviously I have already read the master and the sage and am looking for martial arts specific titles.

Chris Li
08-14-2013, 09:55 PM
Serious question: can you share the titles of a couple of those Chinese texts that specifically address quality martial arts training? I have read dozens of martial arts books from many cultures and systems including CMA and found nearly all of them to be pretty awful. Only a handful of titles such as The Unfettered Mind and Igensho have been of use to me. You guys have made a big deal out of your confidence in the relevance of "the Chinese classics", including the rather bold implication that Osensei would agree with you if he was alive. For some reason I have never caught the titles of these works. Obviously I have already read the master and the sage and am looking for martial arts specific titles.

I hate to quote Wikipedia, but it has a basic list here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_chi_classics

Honestly, though, I wouldn't recommend them for learning much without a lot of relevant hands on.

IMO, the language that O-Sensei used is important for what it points to - a shared methodology. For much else you have to go to the people themselves.

Best,

Chris

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 10:23 PM
There are not many English translations, but I've had this page of the Tai C'hi Classics bookmarked for a while. It's only a few excerpts, though:

http://scheele.org/lee/classics.html

Cady Goldfield
08-14-2013, 11:58 PM
Tai C'hi Classics:"Ba Jin" ("Eight Energies")
Ueshiba: “"Hachiriki” (“Eight Powers”)
Doka 47. Deep in the glow of Izu
Which shines in the Heavens above
There is the reverberating sound
Of the King of the Eight Powers

Tai C'hi Classics: "Move with tranquility [Seek stillness in movement]... Although one moves, there is also stillness."
Ueshiba: "Motion in Stillness, Stillness in Motion"

Tai C'hi Classics: "There are three different levels of T’ai Chi Ch’uan—Heaven, Earth, and Man."
(Cheng Tzu’s Thirteen Treatises on T’ai Chi Ch’uan, by Professor Cheng Man Ch’ing)

Ueshiba: "Aikido can be called the Way of Accord between Heaven, Earth and Man."

Chris Li
08-15-2013, 03:12 AM
I hate to quote Wikipedia, but it has a basic list here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_chi_classics

Honestly, though, I wouldn't recommend them for learning much without a lot of relevant hands on.

IMO, the language that O-Sensei used is important for what it points to - a shared methodology. For much else you have to go to the people themselves.

Best,

Chris

In case anybody's wondering, the "you" here (as in "you have to") is meant to be generic.

Best,

Chris

Carsten Möllering
08-15-2013, 03:13 AM
Aikido ... Nothing Chinese about it.
Last year I had a conversation with a student of Ueshiba Morihei about this issue. He made clear that Ueshiba has made no secret of the influence of Chinese texts and Chinese internal arts on his aikidō.
He, the shihan, was completely astonished about my question. To him this fact was simply natural.

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 09:59 AM
The argument is that there is much more than a butterfly effect.

I thought it had been established that there was possibly some direct movement of Chinese training methodologies into Japanese martial arts via Yoshin ryu, Shinkage ryu, and then in the modern period Sagawa studied Chinese martial arts and integrated a lot of the methods, but there was no solid evidence that Takeda had any exposure to Chinese methods, and no good story that the various arts Takeda studied had Chinese influence at their roots.

And that Ueshiba hadn't actually practiced any Chinese arts.

What did I miss? Are you basing the idea that there was more than a butterfly effect on the fact that Ueshiba quoted the classics? Because, um...just about any Japanese person who was literate in the second millenium was familiar with those.

Chris Li
08-15-2013, 10:20 AM
I thought it had been established that there was possibly some direct movement of Chinese training methodologies into Japanese martial arts via Yoshin ryu, Shinkage ryu, and then in the modern period Sagawa studied Chinese martial arts and integrated a lot of the methods, but there was no solid evidence that Takeda had any exposure to Chinese methods, and no good story that the various arts Takeda studied had Chinese influence at their roots.

And that Ueshiba hadn't actually practiced any Chinese arts.

What did I miss? Are you basing the idea that there was more than a butterfly effect on the fact that Ueshiba quoted the classics? Because, um...just about any Japanese person who was literate in the second millenium was familiar with those.

When did Sagawa study Chinese arts?

I suppose that it would depend on what you'd call "butterfly effects". Personally, I would say that the influence is much to pervasive and clear to be characterized that lightly.

Actually, there are some good stories about Takeda (but not from where you'd expect) - I may get to that some time...

Best,

Chris

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 10:32 AM
When did Sagawa study Chinese arts?

Hmm. I'll see if I can track down where I got that idea from. I thought I read that in one of your blogs, the guy from the Sagawa style who trained with the guy who drew the manga...? Well obviously not or you wouldn't be asking me where I heard that Sagawa had researched chinese martial arts.


I suppose that it would depend on what you'd call "butterfly effects". Personally, I would say that the influence is much to pervasive and clear to be characterized that lightly.

If the influence is pervasive and clear, that means it is obvious that Ueshiba trained with teachers of Chinese arts quite a bit and there is abundant evidence of this. It could simply be that there is a resemblance between what you believe Ueshiba was doing and what you know of Chinese martial arts. A resemblance could be explained by other things than influence.


Actually, there are some good stories about Takeda (but not from where you'd expect) - I may get to that some time...

That's tantalizing. :)

Chris Li
08-15-2013, 10:55 AM
Hmm. I'll see if I can track down where I got that idea from. I thought I read that in one of your blogs, the guy from the Sagawa style who trained with the guy who drew the manga...? Well obviously not or you wouldn't be asking me where I heard that Sagawa had researched chinese martial arts.

That would be Takahashi, he trained Taiji. There was also Yoshimaru Keisetsu, who trained some Chinese arts.


If the influence is pervasive and clear, that means it is obvious that Ueshiba trained with teachers of Chinese arts quite a bit and there is abundant evidence of this. It could simply be that there is a resemblance between what you believe Ueshiba was doing and what you know of Chinese martial arts. A resemblance could be explained by other things than influence.


No one that I know of (except Bruce Frantzis) is saying that Ueshiba trained with teachers of Chinese arts, but that doesn't mean that the influence isn't there.

What we're talking about is fairly specific, chance resemblance seems unlikely to me - especially given the increasingly large amount of information coming out.

The entire Japanese education system in Ueshiba's era was based around classical Chinese texts - I'm not sure why people find it so hard to accept that there was influence in all kinds of other areas as well.

Best,

Chris

phitruong
08-15-2013, 11:17 AM
Ellis's HIPS book, first chapter "The Chinese Connection". very interesting reading. i am not going to put stuffs here. ya gonna have to buy the book and read it for yourself.

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 11:36 AM
Ellis's HIPS book, first chapter "The Chinese Connection". very interesting reading. i am not going to put stuffs here. ya gonna have to buy the book and read it for yourself.

Since that is one of Ellis's books on martial arts, I have read it cover-to-cover twice and have gone back to it for specific passages innumerable times. I do not believe there has been any solid evidence unearthed that indicates that Ueshiba or Takeda had any direct influence from Chinese martial arts.

Chris Li
08-15-2013, 11:53 AM
Since that is one of Ellis's books on martial arts, I have read it cover-to-cover twice and have gone back to it for specific passages innumerable times. I do not believe there has been any solid evidence unearthed that indicates that Ueshiba or Takeda had any direct influence from Chinese martial arts.

Nobody argued that. OTOH, they had no direct contact with Chinese Confucian scholars either, but it would be ridiculous to try and argue that they were not influenced strongly and clearly by Confucianism.

Hiroshi Tada makes a relevant comment at the bottom of the interview here (http://www.aikidosangenkai.org/blog/aikido-shihan-hiroshi-tada-budo-body-part-6/).

Best,

Chris

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 11:54 AM
TNo one that I know of (except Bruce Frantzis) is saying that Ueshiba trained with teachers of Chinese arts, but that doesn't mean that the influence isn't there.

What we're talking about is fairly specific, chance resemblance seems unlikely to me - especially given the increasingly large amount of information coming out.

The entire Japanese education system in Ueshiba's era was based around classical Chinese texts - I'm not sure why people find it so hard to accept that there was influence in all kinds of other areas as well.


So Ueshiba learned Chinese martial arts through some other means than training under a teacher? :confused:

Was it one of those special deals where you get the book, the video, and the black belt in the same package for $99.95??

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 12:17 PM
Nobody argued that. OTOH, they had no direct contact with Chinese Confucian scholars either, but it would be ridiculous to try and argue that they were not influenced strongly and clearly by Confucianism.

Hiroshi Tada makes a relevant comment at the bottom of the interview here (http://www.aikidosangenkai.org/blog/aikido-shihan-hiroshi-tada-budo-body-part-6/).

Best,

Chris

Of course nobody argued that! Confucian influence was so pervasive in all areas of Japanese culture, for centuries, that you aren't arguing anything either.

It is like you are saying that the reason why Spanish fencing styles of the 1600s were so much more advanced than italian or German was because they maintained ancient Assyrian traditions, and this must be abundantly clear because Jesus was a Jew.

allowedcloud
08-15-2013, 12:42 PM
Man, I was about to write about something from "Transparent Power" but after reading some of the recent posts I want to stick an ice pick in my eye instead. Brb

Chris Li
08-15-2013, 01:23 PM
Man, I was about to write about something from "Transparent Power" but after reading some of the recent posts I want to stick an ice pick in my eye instead. Brb

Probably be more productive, too. :D

Best,

Chris

JW
08-15-2013, 03:06 PM
Last year I had a conversation with a student of Ueshiba Morihei about this issue. He made clear that Ueshiba has made no secret of the influence of Chinese texts and Chinese internal arts on his aikidō.
He, the shihan, was completely astonished about my question. To him this fact was simply natural.

I think this is probably the most valuable part of this thread so far-- it deserves some follow-up. Who was the shihan? Or, if you can't give a name, can you tell us the era (pre-war, post, etc) that he studied with Ueshiba? And, in the experience of this shihan, what context did Ueshiba talk about the Chinese aspect-- was it on-the-mat lectures, lectures to non-aikidoka (like Goi Sensei's people or Omoto people), or off-the-mat comments? Thanks!

Re: Cliff's arguments against Chris, I hope the argument doesn't get pushed further than intended. I gather Chris' point is that the strategy and methodology of changing the body and mind are shared with Chinese martial lineages, and derive from common ancestry over the timescale of centuries. (Nothing controversial there.) The example of Confucianism is a good one-- I don't think it is hard to swallow that the body/mind-changing training permeates the Asian martial arts the way Confucianism permeates Asian governmental and sociological structures. (all by "influence" of culture, rather than via teacher-to-student lineages)

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 03:25 PM
Re: Cliff's arguments against Chris, I hope the argument doesn't get pushed further than intended. I gather Chris' point is that the strategy and methodology of changing the body and mind are shared with Chinese martial lineages, and derive from common ancestry over the timescale of centuries. (Nothing controversial there.) The example of Confucianism is a good one-- I don't think it is hard to swallow that the body/mind-changing training permeates the Asian martial arts the way Confucianism permeates Asian governmental and sociological structures. (all by "influence" of culture, rather than via teacher-to-student lineages)

The fact that Japanese culture was originally seeded by and proceeded to be heavily and thoroughly influenced by Chinese culture is a vacuous argument in favor of the idea that Ueshiba's martial arts were influenced by Chinese martial arts. You may as well say that Aikido is exactly the same thing as Tai chi because most people have two arms and two legs.

It had to be felt, right? So who did Ueshiba feel it from? That's where this story has to start.

Chris Li
08-15-2013, 03:49 PM
The fact that Japanese culture was originally seeded by and proceeded to be heavily and thoroughly influenced by Chinese culture is a vacuous argument in favor of the idea that Ueshiba's martial arts were influenced by Chinese martial arts. You may as well say that Aikido is exactly the same thing as Tai chi because most people have two arms and two legs.

It had to be felt, right? So who did Ueshiba feel it from? That's where this story has to start.

Well, I'm fairly sure that most Aikido students feel that they have been heavily and thoroughly influenced by Morihei Ueshiba, even though most of them have never felt them, even though the actual contact is, in many cases, three or four generations in the past.

Best,

Chris

JW
08-15-2013, 06:20 PM
a vacuous argument in favor of the idea that Ueshiba's martial arts were influenced by Chinese martial arts.

OK let's fill in the vacuum. There is an issue of the strong version or weak version of the claim that there was Chinese influence. Strong version is that Ueshiba "learned" or stole something from Chinese MA that became of primary importance to him, because he didn't get it anywhere else. Does anyone think that? I doubt it.

On the other hand, there is the other, more reasonable and more interesting argument:

that the primary thing that Ueshiba was training in order to manifest "aiki" is a training that is shared between his art and other arts, some of them Chinese. The reason for this homology is that the training methodology was in fact developed long ago (partially in China, partially in somewhere like India where the training culture would have come from before making its way to China).

That's what appears to be true to me so far-- one need not try to argue the "strong" version above.

Support for this idea:
- See Ellis Amdur's writings. Including on Aikido Journal, where Chinese MA enthusiast Takeda Hiroshi's home in China was host to Ueshiba. Amdur also points out Shigenobu Okumura's interview comments that explicitly corroborate Ueshiba's appreciation of the Chinese MA.
- Amdur's other writings like HIPS which document the close association b/w Chinese and Japanese MA (the JMA developed over centuries with an eye on what the Chinese were doing and training, complete with voyages to and from China for learning and importing of training methods)
- Ueshiba sometimes cited old Chinese writings to explain martial arts (like in Chris' example)
- Ueshiba often referred to "the secret of aikido," which suggests some kind of core that is underneath the vestiges ("because I knew the secret of aikido he couldn't move me" etc)
- Ueshiba's push-receiving demos are the same kind of demo people in Chinese MA who train the "nei jin" ("internal skill-strength") demonstrate.
- Well, I am at work, there are plenty more list items others could post (they are probably in the archives already), but I don't have any more time right now. The more translations of Ueshiba's writings that come out, the more clear the connection is (see Chris' Heaven-Earth-Man comment above, and the discovery of the mistranslation of "roppo" as "sixty degrees").

The point is, there are very cool things in budo as received by Ueshiba (from Sokaku Takeda, to answer Cliff's question) that are also present in Chinese MA because they come from older Chinese traditions. The way these things are trained is the only real reason we would want to discuss this issue. How you train is up to you. I for one am glad that people on this board have been sharing info! But anyone is free to say they don't believe it.

Cady Goldfield
08-15-2013, 07:04 PM
I don't want to see this discussion go down the road of "Did Ueshiba train with Chinese stylists and get his aiki from them," because I believe strongly that that's the wrong direction. Instead, the focus should be on "where did aiki and internal training methodology come from?" That's where the "Chinese connection" comes in, and it enters long before Morihei Ueshiba or even his teacher, Tokaku Takeda.

Ueshiba's aiki came from Sokaku Takeda, via his Daito-ryu vehicle. Where did Takeda get it...? Ellis Amdur toys with the possibilities in "Hidden in Plain Sight," but the mists of time and lack of recorded history obfuscate any tangible proof. Instead, we are left with the young Takeda's mysterious learning experience with the Shinto scholar, Tanamo Saigo (AKA Hoshino Genshin) who, as with other high-born Japanese scholars of the day, was well versed in Chinese classical literature, ranging from Taoist texts to Confucian and possibly other estorica that may or may not have included certain esoteric internal exercises (qigong, neigong) the Chinese got, in ancient days, from Indian Buddhist and Tantric monks.

There's not much point to arguing the very genuine connection between Japanese "aiki" and internal body method, and that of its Chinese counterpart. It is what it is. Japan is famous for taking an idea and running with it -- look what the Japanese did with cameras and automobiles -- and integrating it into its culture. I believe that a relatively small number of Japanese, probably clan heads and others with connections on a higher level to Chinese teachers, herbalists and medical practitioners, nobles and religious figures, had a fertile cultural exchange and received this special knowledge. Then they proceeded to study it, dissect it, adapt it to suit their needs within their family/clan martial systems or other private institutions. The knowledge, in Japan, perhaps became proprietary as a result, and that would explain why it's such a "novel concept" to all but another relative few folks today.

That said, there are plenty of proofs on a contemporary note, of the Chinese-Japanese aiki/IP connection. The Chen tai chi master Liu Cheng-De, who is noted for his internal power, is quite well known to have lived in Japan for 10 years, during which time he taught aiki to a couple of Sagawa's disgruntled Daito-ryu students who felt they weren't "gettin' any of it" from Sagawa. It's quite certain, then, that they recognized Liu's skills as being what Sagawa had (and, by context, what Ueshiba had, what Sokaku Takeda had), even though Liu was Chinese, and had come with only his Chinese martial upbringing.

Even more contemporarily, there are people on these Internet pages, myself included, who have trained both in Daito-ryu aiki/IP and in their Chinese equivalent, in my case I Liq Chuan. I can state quite frankly that they are... the same animal. The way they are expressed physically and martially is different (there are myriad ways you can manipulate and apply aiki), and the training exercises for their development show superficial creative differences, but the root body conditioning and method are virtually identical. The aiki and the power are identical. I know for a fact that I Liq Chuan's internal method is purely a product of its Chinese heritage.

And while there of course is such thing as simultaneous and synchronous invention of things in different places, such as the printing press and, possibly, the wheel, something as complex, nuanced and sophisticated as an internal body method is very, very unlikely to be something that two different peoples could event, identically, without any cross-pollination of ideas. Add to that the fact that China did exert great cultural influence on Japan and much of Asia, and that the two nations were neighbors separated only by water that was navigable by ship, and it even further decreases any possibility that aiki/IP could be uniquely Japanese, with China and its powerful internal method right next door.

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 10:49 PM
that the primary thing that Ueshiba was training in order to manifest "aiki" is a training that is shared between his art and other arts, some of them Chinese. The reason for this homology is that the training methodology was in fact developed long ago (partially in China, partially in somewhere like India where the training culture would have come from before making its way to China).

There is actually a fine point here. You posit that there was a training methodology to develop aiki skills that was the same thing as was developed long ago and came from China and India. That would mean that the things that Takeda taught and Ueshiba trained and taught were the same things as these Chinese and Indian masters from further back taught.

Is that so? Can this be shown?

One concept that I hear of with regard to Chinese internal arts is solo training. That would seem to be a consistent methodology. If that is a hallmark of Chinese training there is a problem because Takeda didn't teach solo training to any of his students.

Cliff Judge
08-15-2013, 10:58 PM
Instead, we are left with the young Takeda's mysterious learning experience with the Shinto scholar, Tanamo Saigo (AKA Hoshino Genshin) who, as with other high-born Japanese scholars of the day, was well versed in Chinese classical literature, ranging from Taoist texts to Confucian and possibly other estorica that may or may not have included certain esoteric internal exercises (qigong, neigong) the Chinese got, in ancient days, from Indian Buddhist and Tantric monks.

What if it wasn't really that secret at all, but was simply esoteric knowledge that made a somewhat clunky, innappropriate fit to martial applications due to steep learning curve and not much usefulness versus the time and resources required for training? Until the Meiji period when there was no longer a caste of professional warriors who needed real combat skills to keep society functioning?

Jeremy Hulley
08-16-2013, 01:26 AM
That would seem to be a consistent methodology. If that is a hallmark of Chinese training there is a problem because Takeda didn't teach solo training to any of his students.

Where did the solo practices of the Sagawa dojo come from?

Cliff Judge
08-16-2013, 06:14 AM
Where did the solo practices of the Sagawa dojo come from?

From Sagawa. It is not like he did anything but train obsessively until his 90s, right?

Carsten Möllering
08-16-2013, 06:19 AM
I... the era (pre-war, post, etc) that he studied with Ueshiba?He studied with Ueshiba only in his last tow years.

... what context did Ueshiba talk about the Chinese aspect ...
If I got it right, it was during private conversations.

I would not load too much into this, because I don't think it answers the questions we have: I don't think they were talking about technical details of IS or things like that. I just mentioned my conversation and the statement of this shihan as a response to Graham Christian who stated there would be "nothing Chinese in Aikido".

Bernd Lehnen
08-16-2013, 06:26 AM
It is what it is. Japan is famous for taking an idea and running with it -- look what the Japanese did with cameras and automobiles -- and integrating it into its culture.

The knowledge, in Japan, perhaps became proprietary as a result, and that would explain why it's such a "novel concept" to all but another relative few folks today.



Yes, even electricity has become integrated as sort of "Ki" ( :ki: ) via the compound- expression "denki".

the two nations were neighbors separated only by water that was navigable by ship, and it even further decreases any possibility that aiki/IP could be uniquely Japanese, with China and its powerful internal method right next door.

Perhaps comparable to the British Isles.

Insularity doesn't necessarily lead to singularity-myths.:cool: ;) :D :)

Cady Goldfield
08-16-2013, 10:25 AM
What if it wasn't really that secret at all, but was simply esoteric knowledge that made a somewhat clunky, innappropriate fit to martial applications due to steep learning curve and not much usefulness versus the time and resources required for training? Until the Meiji period when there was no longer a caste of professional warriors who needed real combat skills to keep society functioning?

Good question, and one that others have asked, myself included. My conclusion is that it depends on how it was taught and transmitted, and that depends on the teacher. If, say Sokaku Takeda learned it in a very esoteric way from Saigo, but was, as is believed, a genius who was able to extrapolate the essence and apply it to his technical martial skills AND be able to physically transmit it to his (selected) students in that way, then the learning curve is not that steep or long. Sagawa is quoted as stating that he "understood aiki-age" (meaning, he understood the Chinese concept of Peng) when he was 17, from training with both his father (also Takeda's student) and with Takeda himself. The Japanese teaching way is the classical Asian one that is more physical teacher-to-student transmission than verbal instruction.

The available information -- interviews with students/former students, eye-witness accounts, etc. -- indicate that such information is, in fact, quite proprietary and often secretive. That's the way of that culture. The "secret secrets" were taught only to select individuals. Or, through no intention of withholding and more due to the individual students' particular capabilities, focus and needs, the skills were taught to varying degrees so that no two students had exactly the same set of skills, some had more of one thing than another, some were lacking certain aspects, a very small number had the "whole package." Some just plain didn't get it, and went elsewhere (allegedly, Tohei and Shioda, for example). This is evident in Morihei Ueshiba's own pre-war Daito-ryu students.

Alfonso
08-16-2013, 10:35 AM
in the kingdom of the blind the one eyed man is king

Dan Richards
08-16-2013, 11:01 AM
Ueshiba's aiki came from Sokaku Takeda...

Didn't Ueshiba mostly credit Sokaku with "opening his eyes?"

Even more contemporarily, there are people on these Internet pages, myself included, who have trained both in Daito-ryu aiki/IP and in their Chinese equivalent, in my case I Liq Chuan. I can state quite frankly that they are... the same animal.

And while there of course is such thing as simultaneous and synchronous invention of things in different places, such as the printing press and, possibly, the wheel, something as complex, nuanced and sophisticated as an internal body method is very, very unlikely to be something that two different peoples could event, identically, without any cross-pollination of ideas.

I think the "cross-pollination of ideas" could be looked at in a more general way. What was there around in the environment? Well, everyone is basically built the same. People have a head, torso, two arms, two legs, ten fingers, ten toes, and stand upright. The people who "discovered" these arts also had natural phenomena and forces around them: fire, lightening, wind, water, sky, earth.. And also natural elements such as trees, animals, insects, etc..

It's not too far of a stretch to think that the playing field that all people are on - regardless of their culture - is, ultimately, the same field. And for those who would delve deeper into studies such as movement, strategy, integration, would come out with similar conclusions.

The idea of "Hidden in Plain Sight" is even simpler that what sensei might have said or taught to another, or what culture might have copped from another. The "plain sight" part reveals that anyone of us has direct access to the very forces, elements, and designs that Ueshiba or anyone else would have.

Didn't Ueshiba say that the reason most of even his students weren't "getting it" was because they didn't understand in/yo. And if "yo" could represent what Ueshiba actually did say and did do, then "in" could represent everything he didn't say and didn't do.

To read esoteric texts seems to have a common denominator in that it can act as a sort of alarm clock to wake us up. It's not so much what the texts say. Like Cady pointed out with the "same animal" found in various arts, so there's also the same animal that seems to appear over and over in writings from various cultures and teachers.

I think I probably wound up getting my first taste of the "deep end" by reading Huna texts. Also various shamanic writings. But regardless of whether it's something out of the New Testament, Bhagavad Gita, Sun Tzu and whether the culture is Chinese, Japanese, Indonesian, etc.. there's always that same animal.

Ueshiba certainly had to have had his nose in Chinese writings. But it seems that it's the level of consciousness that would, or could, have come from those writings that would have acted as a sort of regular nutrition for a higher-level of fuel to allow him to see deeper into the natural order of things. Including non other the "the universe" - because, apparently, he realized he was the universe. Another one of those "same animals."

The same animal appears to be universal. "I am the universe." is quite a stretch from an identity of "I am Chinese." J. Krishnamurti gives some good insight - and another one of those same-animal alarm clocks - about nationalism equalling violence. And also.. "There are the states of inattention and of attention. When you are completely giving your mind, your heart, your nerves, everything you have, to attend, then the old habits, the mechanical responses, do not enter into it, thought does not come into it at all."

Being attentive and conscious. That would have been that same animal that was the catalyst that Sokaku gave to Ueshiba. Sokaku was the initial alarm clock for Ueshiba to open his eyes. To wake up. To loosen the mechanical responses. That was a big theme of Gurdjieff, Ouspensky and many other western esoterists. Jesus said, apparently, "For those who have ears to hear and eyes to see."

Same animal. Woof.

jonreading
08-16-2013, 12:15 PM
1. I do not think it improbable that O Sensei was influenced by Chinese arts. In Hidden in Plain Sight, Ellis discusses occassions where O Sensei "observed" without participating in a martial art, later to show some influence reflected in his movement. If I remember correctly, the concept of someone like O Sensei admitting to participating in a art below his station would be inappropriate. I can only imagine the difficulty if that admission was made about a Chinese art... I believe that O Sensei was influenced by Chinese internal training.
2. I do not think it improbable that what Chinese influence existed in O Sensei's aikido was removed for the general art by his students. I think the Aikido curriculum that came from O Sensei is not was we traditionally see in aikido. I think you have a number of Japanese students imitate shapes performed by O Sensei, I think you had Japanese students compile the philosophy expressed by O Sensei, I think you had Japanese students develop the teaching curriculum they felt important to learning what O Sensei demonstrated. It would not be suprising to learn that after a period of time, the Japanese imitation of the Chinese teachings replaced the Chinese teachings.

Anyone can say "Y'all", but only Southerners say "Y'all" right...

JW
08-16-2013, 12:42 PM
One concept that I hear of with regard to Chinese internal arts is solo training. That would seem to be a consistent methodology. If that is a hallmark of Chinese training there is a problem because Takeda didn't teach solo training to any of his students.

OK now the argument is more clear to me. What is the reason to say that Takeda did not show solo methods to a few students (I'm thinking, Kodo, Hisa, Ueshiba, Sagawa)? By inference I think it looks more like he did show some. So these are the specific points of the argument I guess:

1. Did Takeda have solo training methods (a general strategy, as well as specific drills) that created a "core skill" that was of central importance in manifesting aiki?
2. DId Ueshiba also have such a method?
3. Did Ueshiba glean any of that method (training strategy, or specific drills as well) from Takeda?
4. Is such a core skill (and its training methods) something that comes from way back and is thus extant here and there in other arts? (And extinct here and there in different lineages of the same arts, as well)

Cliff, you've read HIPS more than me I guess so I am not going to pontificate. But since there are shared results (peoples' demos and explanations of their arts), parsimony alone suggests that these arts of closely related cultures have shared methods (though you seem to have not liked that argument in this thread). There are specific evidences for 1, 2, and 3 above as well, and I think Ellis' writings are pretty targetted and detailed regarding those. (And Ueshiba's comment that DR has "a great training method" comes to mind, as well as the sudden appearance of solo spear training in Ayabe as to point #3 above.) So the question becomes, do we think the solo methods of Ueshiba are very different from those of Chinese arts, or should we consider all these methods as related attempts to build the same internal "stuffs?"

Again, it mostly comes down to what methodologies one will choose to investigate for oneself -- otherwise this is mostly an academic interest. But to be clear, it sounds like the argument is:
Is "aiki" as expressed in budo (aikido) something unique to aikido or to DR?
vs
Is it just another example of martial artists manifesting a traditional power called "nei jin" amongst combat arts which are known to share cultural ties? (Both horizontal and vertical cultural ties)

Considering similarity of results (evidenced in demos and explanations), and known cultural ties, and what I have experienced as congruent strategies, I personally go with the latter.

JW
08-16-2013, 12:51 PM
I would not load too much into this, because I don't think it answers the questions we have: I don't think they were talking about technical details of IS or things like that.
OK, thanks! Agreed, it's just nice to hear of stories like this in context of this particular argument.

From Sagawa. It is not like he did anything but train obsessively until his 90s, right?

So the skill of manipulating an attacker's force (and more importantly, the methodology to train this skill) originated independently in Sagawa, Ueshiba, Takeda, and various Chinese lineages like Taiji?

Dan Richards
08-16-2013, 01:15 PM
I'd agree with you, JW, on it being the latter. Aiki is no more unique to aikido/DR, than arms or legs are unique to them. Aiki can be seen in cultures all over the world. Solo and pairs training can be seen through dances. Look anywhere: American Indian, Maori, Huna, Kali, Dervishes, even American Hip-Hop. Cultures throughout time and all over the world have displayed this type of training in their arts.

Interestingly enough, the "culture" that's probably lost most of its body/mind arts tradition would be none other than the good ol' modern Western culture of the "white man."

Cliff Judge
08-16-2013, 01:28 PM
OK now the argument is more clear to me. What is the reason to say that Takeda did not show solo methods to a few students (I'm thinking, Kodo, Hisa, Ueshiba, Sagawa)? By inference I think it looks more like he did show some.

Well I will see your by-inference and raise you an I-talked-to-a-guy-who: the students of Takeda wrote stuff, and none of them wrote about solo training methods.

So the skill of manipulating an attacker's force (and more importantly, the methodology to train this skill) originated independently in Sagawa, Ueshiba, Takeda, and various Chinese lineages like Taiji?

I remain unconvinced that those are not each unique methodologies, though I have this notion that I got from somewhere that everybody knew Sagawa studied Chinese martial arts at some point.

A page ago, we were talking about how Ueshiba was influenced by Chinese martial arts simply because the whole of Japanese culture was influenced by Chinese culture for centuries. In that light it should hardly be surprising that you would see something like aiki present in pretty much all Japanese martial arts.

(Unless of course it was winnowed out as frivolous or at least not-cost-effective by pre-Meiji systems....)

Chris Li
08-16-2013, 02:00 PM
I remain unconvinced that those are not each unique methodologies, though I have this notion that I got from somewhere that everybody knew Sagawa studied Chinese martial arts at some point.

Well I don't know it, so it can't be everybody. :D

We get that you're unconvinced, and that's fine, but my question is why does it seem so important to you that there not be a connection?

I ask because you've made repeated comments over a period of time that seem to imply this is all somehow damaging (perhaps even purposely damaging) to conventional Aikido.

Best,

Chris