Just for clarity's sake, can you see that I'm actually arguing for inclusion
rather than exclusion?
In other words, it seems odd to me that all that comes after a certain period (including all that comes after his death) that bears the name Aikido IS Aikido, but that which he taught and was also called Aikido is somehow deemed Non-Aikido.
BTW, Shirata came to Aikido via Oomoto connections and was actually sent to teach at the Takeda branch of the Budo Senyo Kai BECAUSE he was Oomoto and O-sensei thought that he (Shirata) could bridge the differences between the Oomoto members of the Senyokai and the purly Aikido members of the Senyo Kai. So obviously O-sensei thought there was some spiritual understanding there. When I knew him Shirata still prayed in an Oomoto manner and also taught Yamagushi no Gyo which he clearly related to his teacher and Aikido.
As for me, I just try to best learn what my teacher taught me knowing, and accepting, that that will be different from my peers (senior and junior students of Shirata sensei). I learned from Shirata Rinjiro not from Ueshiba Morihei. Although I am interested in my teacher's teacher and his teacher, etc. I think you will agree that it is a bit silly for me to claim that I am doing O-sensei's Aikido. I can't even claim to do Shirata sensei's Aikido. I guess I do my understanding of Aikido as taught to me by Shirata Sensei, as taught to him by O-sensei. Although, I know that there are things that I could do that would probably send my teacher "over the edge" "THAT'S NOT AIKIDO!"
So . . . another paradox! We must be headed in the right direction!!