Ron Tisdale wrote:
In reading this thread I couldn't help but wonder of the aikidoka speaking of what they could get from Daito ryu training...how much training in any official branch they had actually had?
The back and forth of opinions on this is always amusing. You hear about Aikido folks leaving to do Daito Ryu because it is better or more effctive somehow but it is hardly ever someone who had really hit the top level in sophistication which Aikido offers.
I can't say that I know of anyone who left Daito Ryu to do Aikido, other than a whole host of Aikido teachers in the early days in Japan. But you certainly here a huge compendium of opinions about Daito Ryu from within the ranks of the Aikidoka which is most often based on little or no actual experience of the art.
It is little minded and just plain not rational to maintain that acquiring another viewpoint, learning new ways of approaching our art won't improve your Aikido. How could more knowledge fail to offer some inspiration for improvement? It is the height of arrogance to assume that, just because we have a different spiritual underpinning to our art, that we then have nothing to learn from the art out of which all of the early great Aikido teachers, including the Founder himself, sprang. This art contains the foundation of evrything we do. It may not be necessary to do Daito Ryu in order to do good Aikido, but the idea that it would be detrimental in some way or that knowing something about how they do their technqiues wouldn't be an asset is not maintenable.