To me, this "answer one's own question" as a way of making an authoritative statement simply smacks of "bush-era" logic, whereby, umm... no actual evidence or even logic is cited or used at all, 'cept the one that makes sense to the person making the claim in the first place. I mean, it sounds good to everyone who agrees with the premise up front, but when examined it appears to have so many holes in it that crediting its ability to hold water as compared to say, Swiss cheese, would be a challenge at best.
Well, I guess if you can come up with any research or evidence, I would certainly look at it. Or if you could detail the holes, considering you see that many. I'm sure that others would be interested, too.
Perhaps before posting to a website known for its' unabashed Aikido
leanings, unabashed, Takeda-thumping, Daito-Ryu members, in an effort to make themselves appear more "fair and balanced, should openly acknowledge that one of the main reasons anyone outside of Japan trains in, or even knows about Daito-Ryu is because of the world-wide popularity of Aikido
. Perhaps they should be forced to take a blood-oath, just to keep that old-school feeling, acknowledging that fact when applying for membership. This way that fact could be left out of each post so that we will all know they mean aikido...
the bastardized, mother-less version of their own-art.
Or more simply, that "modern-day" nemesis
brought about by that - no first name, no Sensei title, nor any honorary mention that he is the founder of an art form, needed
, shifty-eyed "Ueshiba" guy who is well documented to have
- had no original ideas
- had no real sword (or other weapon) abilities
- just limited the syllabus of the real art from which is came.
- just changed the art's name so he didn't have to pay his "under-acknowledged" teacher
- if he really knew anything, never shared what he knew
- didn't really have a systematized method
- blathered on and on and on and on... about useless, spiritual, umm... blatherings
- ...etc, etc, etc, etc...
I'm not really sure where this came from. Personally, I really admire Ueshiba and what he did. I think he took what he had learned in a completely new direction. I think he knew a whole lot more than he "taught". I love aikido.
But, the fact remains that Daito ryu was Ueshiba's main and largest martial influence. That Ueshiba can still be seen to be doing Daito ryu techniques even into his old age. That he trimmed Daito ryu techniques (as I said before, that isn't a bad thing). Those are facts.
What has been debated is Daito ryu aiki. But, anyone doing research has found there really is no debate to that. It doesn't detract from Ueshiba, his abiliies, or what he accomplished at all. Ueshiba still stands among the preeminent Budo men of his era. He is that because of his martial abilities *and* his spiritual nature. His martial abilities were Daito ryu aiki at the core. Most would say his spiritual nature was from Omoto kyo and Deguchi.
Ueshiba stood out. Kendo men wanted to train with him. Kano respected him. All of his students respected him. Yet, none of them stated that it was his spiritual nature. No, that doesn't diminish that aspect of him, but it is without a doubt his martial abilities, the Daito ryu aiki, that gave him a base to spread his message of his Aikido.