Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-12-2002, 10:18 AM   #1
akiy
 
akiy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,812
Offline
Daito Ryu and Aikido History

I know that these topics are quite well-debated over on the Aikido Journal website, but I thought I'd bring them up here...

How important (or not) is the study of Daito ryu aikijujutsu to you? How does it affect your everyday training?

How important (or not) is the study of the history of aikido to you? How does it affect your everyday training?

-- Jun

Please help support AikiWeb -- become an AikiWeb Contributing Member!
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2002, 10:42 AM   #2
mike lee
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 646
Offline
no sympathy for the devil

DR is of absolutely no importance to training in aikido whatsoever. If it was important, O'Sensei would have recommended it.

Nevertheless, there are those in the American DR community who remain bent on discrediting O'Sensei and the way that aikido is currently practiced.

There are a lot of variables in this issue, but the main point is as I have always said: Train diligently under an aikido shihan and gain a complete understanding of your art.

Don't look for the quick and easy way.

Aikido is a great and noble art don't be confused by small-minded individuals with ill intentions and darkness in their hearts.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2002, 08:47 PM   #3
jk
Location: Indonesia
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 245
Offline
Mike,

Going through the Aikido Journal threads mentioned above, I didn't see evidence of anyone trying to discredit O-Sensei or the way aikido is currently practiced.

If you personally don't care about Daito ryu aikijujutsu, or aikido's history, that's fine. If you don't know Daito ryu aikijujutsu, or aikido's history, that's just great. The thing left to do is just practice your aikido, and within that context, keep on finding what you seem to be looking for.

Personally, I'd like a chance to study Daito ryu aikijujutsu, but at this point in my life, it's not that important (nor is it easily available). As for aikido's history, it's somewhat important to me, and I study it when time permits. For me, a little knowledge about whatever influenced O-sensei to create aikido can only help me better understand the purpose for which I train. Whatever works for you...

Regards,
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2002, 09:09 PM   #4
MaylandL
Location: Western Australia
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 241
Offline
Hello Jun

I thought this might be of interest. It is a recent interview with Katsuyuki Kondo on Aikido Journal commenting on the differences and similarities between Aikido and Daito Ryu.

http://www.aikidojournal.com/new/art...p?ArticleID=77

As for me, I would love to experience Daito Ryu but I think my wife would have a cow given I already train 4 times a week and visit the Gym.

All the best for training

Mayland
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2002, 09:27 PM   #5
Edward
Location: Bangkok
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 803
Thailand
Offline
Knowing aikido history is a very interesting and exciting subject, but not necessary to the process of learning aikido.

As for DR, I have seen many videos and it looks very interesting as well, however, it seems that many of the contemporary DR techniques have been influenced by aikido and not the opposite as one would presume.

I personally believe that aikido as we know and learn it nowadays has been created and developed by the genius of 3 persons: Sokaku Takeda, Morihei Ueshiba and Kisshomaru Ueshiba. Even late footages of Osensei show great differences to our modern aikido. That's why I believe that even if we consider Osensei rightfully as the founder of aikido, we have to give credit to Sokaku Takeda for reviving an almost extinct martial art, and for Kisshomaru Ueshiba for giving aikido its modern form.

When I will have my own dojo one day, The shomen will feature the picture of Osensei in the centre, but also the pictures of the other 2 persons who played such a big role in the creation of aikido.

As for learning DR, I might be interested to participate to seminars occasionally, but learning aikido alone takes a lifetime, so I wouldn't want to complicate it further.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2002, 10:28 PM   #6
sanosuke
Dojo: Seigi Dojo
Location: Jakarta
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 247
Indonesia
Offline
it's hard to avoid that Daito Ryu is the main foundation of aikido, among all other martial arts that o-sensei learned. But if you want to master aikido i don't think you have to train in daito ryu also. Although some daito ryu techniques is similar to aikido, their philosophy is somewhat different. According to a daito ryu book I read (daito ryu aikijujutsu; hidden roots of aikido by Shiro Omiya), daito ryu philosophy is to subdue an opponent with less power and time, although it can bring heavy injury to the person, whereas aikido philoophy is also subduing an attack but emphasizing more on harmony (please correct me if i'm wrong, i haven't refer to that book for quite some time).
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2002, 10:58 PM   #7
Dan Hover
Dojo: Bond Street Dojo/Aikido of Greater Milwaukee
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 132
United_States
Offline
I guess I will be the odd one and say that History is important. Although unlike Modern day Daito ryu who feel the need to denounce O'sensei for watering down DTR and call it Aikido. The popular story of O'sensei spending 25 years training with Takeda is a stretch at best. Takeda was very meticulous with his attendence registers of everyone he had taught. O'sensei's name clearly appears on these scrolls, indicating that Yes Osensei did train with him. But for a total of 70 days, spread out over 7 ten day seminars. which in some ways does little to reinforce the perception that Osensei spent 25 years of study under Takeda. This is clearly not the case. True, without DTR we would not have Aikido, and without Aikido I don't really think that DTR would share in the popularity it has today. O sensei created Aikido from DTR amongst other arts that he trained in. Oddly enough you never hear Tenjin shinyo ryu practioners complaining how Kano Sensei ripped them off in creating Kodokan Judo. Likewise Ona ha itto ryu and Kendo. There is even speculation that Takeda himself is responsible for DTR as little is known about it until he entered the picture.

History whether it be Aikido history or national history is important as it gives us a sense of who we are, where we are going, and where we have came from. To be so blind to it, and just merely accept the road you are on is foolish at best, calamitous at worse. Most instructors who I have seen who do not like history are usually the ones who know the least about it. Much like a person who hates cats is usually allergic to them. Now today in Aiki history we are, as a collective, at a crossroads. First and foremost we are at the beginning of a 3rd generation Doshu. Second, Non Japanese are beginning to be recognized as Shihan. Third, more and more of O sensei's direct students are starting to pass on. With this loss of a direct link to Osensei, Myths can be promulagated to fact, and technique and his message can become lost, in favor of a more "american" approach to a culture that few really know about or really understand. Dojo secularism will rise which will encourage this view of lack of a sense of history. Look at Hombu dojo's view of K. Tohei for a classic more recent view of this "revisionism". Without history or following this road of exploration, we wouldn't have such texts like Budo for example. We wouldn't even know what Aikido really is without a way to solidly research pedigrees and claims.

Now in some sense a good knowledge of history will not improve my physical skills in Aikido, but it will give me a sense of how certain techniques were performed in 1936, 1956 and presently. Why they were changed, How they were changed and who changed them. Knowing history will give one a greater appreciation of the various styles of Aikido and where they fit in the "big picture" such as Tomiki, Yoshinkai, Shin-Shin toitsu ryu, and even where Judo fits into the Aikido picture. If one really wants to know an art, how can they truly deny the history of that art? Luckily Aikido is still recent enough that there are still living witnesses to give evidence to the past, and see the great strides we have made and hopefully will continue to make.

To me the difference between knowing history and not knowing history is like that of the difference between a square and a cube. One has depth.

Dan Hover

of course that's my opinion, I could be wrong
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 04:45 AM   #8
Paul
Location: Edinburgh
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 46
Scotland
Offline
Aikido history

Personally the study of Daito ryu aikijujutsu is key to a proper understanding of aikido. History is great teacher therefore it would be hard to look to the future of aikido with a thorough understanding of its history, which Daito ryu aikijujutsu plays a main part.

I agree with Mr Hover when he wrote that knowledge of aikido history would not improve ones physical skills. I would add that it may clarify your skill by adding restrictions to certain movements. Knowledge of aikido's history may help to answer ones questions on why certain techniques are performed in certain ways.

Armed with this knowledge will, I believe, enriches ones aikido and more importantly creates better instructors, which in turn improves aikido generally.

This summer I went along to Kondo sensei's dojo to watch a class and left with a number of questions on aikido answered and with the myth that Daito ryu aikijujutsu is a blood thirsty not happy unless uke is being destroyed system shattered. I would wager that any new student in your dojo would not be able to differentiate between an aikido class and one of Kondo sensei's classes.

We often make the mistake in thinking that Daito ryu aikijujutsu was not very important in the creation of aikido however as Stanley Pranin points out, http://www.aikiweb.com/interviews/pranin0800.html, O'sensei did not, as we often think, study in depth, and I think the word in depth is key here, many martial arts. So why today do we shy away from aikido's obvious past in favour of a more rose coloured picture? O'sensei saw something in Takeda sensei and in his art that inspired him. Who are we to now ignore, like an embarrassing uncle, aikido's past?

Regards Paul Finn
Edinburgh
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 06:46 AM   #9
Edward
Location: Bangkok
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 803
Thailand
Offline
Re: Aikido history

Quote:
Paul Finn (Paul) wrote:
I would wager that any new student in your dojo would not be able to differentiate between an aikido class and one of Kondo sensei's classes.
It is common knowledge now that DR has developed into something similar to aikido, probably after having seen the global success aikido has had in the last 40 years.

Now this opens an interesting thought: which is the predecessor? DR came first, then aikido, them modern DR. I am very much afraid that the current DR is too influenced by aikido.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 08:16 AM   #10
Don_Modesto
Dojo: Messores Sensei (Largo, Fl.)
Location: Florida
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,268
Offline
Re: no sympathy for the devil

Quote:
Mike Lee (mike lee) wrote:
DR is of absolutely no importance to training in aikido whatsoever. If it was important, O'Sensei would have recommended it.

djm: He did (or something like it). Recall that UM wouldn't accept students unless they had already mastered another martial art.

There are a lot of variables in this issue, but the main point is as I have always said: Train diligently under an aikido shihan and gain a complete understanding of your art.

djm: Perhaps. But Darwin didn't come up with his theory by just pounding away as we are so often invited to do in the context of aikido. He took a break, read Adam Smith, borrowed the phrase "survival of the fittest", and better articulated what we now call the theory of evolution with a tip of the hat (with an invisible hand?) to economics. Training diligently with qualified teachers is sine qua non, of course. Tunnel vision is not.

Don't look for the quick and easy way.

djm: Ever read that anecdote about UM teaching naginata? He had a copy of a novel involving the use of this weapon in which he remained untutored and untrained placed on a shrine and slept on it. (g)

Aikido is a great and noble art don't be confused by small-minded individuals with ill intentions and darkness in their hearts.

djm: Hmm. UM himself said something to the effect that evil arises at that point where we distinguish good and bad.

Don J. Modesto
St. Petersburg, Florida
------------------------
http://www.theaikidodojo.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 08:19 AM   #11
Don_Modesto
Dojo: Messores Sensei (Largo, Fl.)
Location: Florida
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,268
Offline
Quote:
Edward Karaa (Edward) wrote:
As for DR, I have seen many videos and it looks very interesting as well, however, it seems that many of the contemporary DR techniques have been influenced by aikido and not the opposite as one would presume.

djm: What is your point of reference for this observation?

When I will have my own dojo one day, The shomen will feature the picture of Osensei in the centre, but also the pictures of the other 2 persons who played such a big role in the creation of aikido.

djm: Nice thought. It might catch you some heat from your Jpn SHIHAN, though. TS is not regarded fondly in aikido circles.

learning aikido alone takes a lifetime, so I wouldn't want to complicate it further.

djm: This cynic's heart tingles at the resonance of "lifetime pursuit" with "customer loyalty".

Don J. Modesto
St. Petersburg, Florida
------------------------
http://www.theaikidodojo.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 08:33 AM   #12
Don_Modesto
Dojo: Messores Sensei (Largo, Fl.)
Location: Florida
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,268
Offline
Quote:
Dan Hover wrote:
I guess I will be the odd one and say that History is important.

djm: Kindred soul!

Although unlike Modern day Daito ryu who feel the need to denounce O'sensei for watering down DTR and call it Aikido.

djm: As an aikido practitioner, I am comfortable with the term "watered-down," pejorative overtones notwithstanding (this, a rhetorical technique catalogued by Aristotle as "paramologia", stealing your opponents' thunder.) It dismisses frivolous bickering: Tomayto, tomahto as I seem to find myself posting frequently, no doubt to my fellow online denizens' probable tedium. As Peter Goldsbury posted so trencantly in one of the AJ debates, we probably lack the framework even to understand UM's "depth" not having read either the Kojiki or the Reikai Monogatari.

....more and more of O sensei's direct students are starting to pass on. With this loss of a direct link to Osensei, Myths can be promulagated to fact, and technique and his message can become lost, in favor of a more "american" approach to a culture that few really know about or really understand.

djm: If I understand aright, this is how the Jpn, largely unschooled in Chinese language and culture, catalyzed an irrational Zen from a theretofore far more wordy Ch'an. The half empty glass...

....If one really wants to know an art, how can they truly deny the history of that art?

djm: Incendiary stuff, this. Read the dismissive quotes of the second Doshu on aikido's debt to DR in Pranin's Aikido Masters.

To me the difference between knowing history and not knowing history is like that of the difference between a square and a cube. One has depth.

djm: Love that. Can I use it?

Don J. Modesto
St. Petersburg, Florida
------------------------
http://www.theaikidodojo.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 08:50 AM   #13
Don_Modesto
Dojo: Messores Sensei (Largo, Fl.)
Location: Florida
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,268
Offline
Re: Daito Ryu and Aikido History

Quote:
Jun Akiyama (akiy) wrote:
1--How important (or not) is the study of Daito ryu aikijujutsu to you?

2--How does it affect your everyday training?

3--How important (or not) is the study of the history of aikido to you?

4--How does it affect your everyday training?
__________________

1--As I posted above re: Darwin/Smith, I value perspective highly.

2--My aikido tecnique is improving as a direct result of exposure to DR teaching (under Kondo and Ribot).

3--Ellis Amdur (http://www.ellisamdur.com/DuelingwithOsensei.htm) wrote a whole book of (excellent) essays pondering the inconsistencies of aikido philosophy and aikido practice. This shold be everyone's attitude to their art, IMO. Inquiring and critical.

The more "virtuous" among our practicing peers, would deny a place to ATEMI, e.g. They bite off more than they can eschew as is popularly demonstrated by resort to quotes of Shioda (pre-) and Saito (post-war) to the effect that ATEMI is 70/99% of aikido. History gives us the foundations and wherefores.

4--How vulnerable is aikido to complacency and fetishism! Cooperation, harmony, love! We could so easily get distracted from the roots of conflict defining the art. History, knowledge of UM's words and deeds, reminds us of his explicit martial intent. As Saotome so eloquently puts it, "Aikido is not plastic harmony!"

Don J. Modesto
St. Petersburg, Florida
------------------------
http://www.theaikidodojo.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2002, 11:17 AM   #14
Roy Dean
 
Roy Dean's Avatar
Dojo: Roy Dean Academy
Location: Bend, Oregon
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 160
United_States
Offline
Although one can be an excellent aikidoist without studying anything other than Aikido, cross training can't help but improve your performance in a root art.

I studied Aikido for several years before changing gears and studying a Daito-Ryu derivative (Daito-Ryu Aiki-jujutsu--> Hakko-Ryu Jujutsu--> Seibukan Jujutsu).

It helped my Aikido, without a doubt. The circles in aiki-jujutsu are much smaller (closer to tiny spirals), and the application of techniques is more direct. Many techniques of aiki-jujutsu do not exist in modern day Aikido. This is either good nor bad, but studying these other techniques and principles definitely shifted my perspective on Ikkyo through Yonkyo.

Aikido has a dynamicism and fluidity of movement that many aiki-jujutsu systems lack. I also believe Aikido to be a premier art for developing sensitivity and timing.

The strengths of Aikido are numerous and formidable. It is not to be underestimated, although many aiki-jujutsu practitioners under the mistaken notion that THEIR art is THE art with the "secret" techniques, and Aikido (and other arts) are ineffective, watered down imitations of THE REAL samurai art. Whatever....

My own aikido/aik-jujutsu sensei, Julio Toribio, has once again put on the white belt and is formally studying under Kondo Sensei. He is exciting about this new journey, and even though the arts he's mastered are similar, they're still different enough to have DR both broaden his perspective and deepen his knowledge of what aiki actually is...

Roy Dean

Discover Who You Are

www.roydeanacademy.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2002, 02:37 AM   #15
mike lee
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 646
Offline
confused teachers = confused students

I studied a number of arts that helped me to improve my aikido, including tai chi chuan and kendo. But I don't practice or teach those arts during aikido class. I don't make policy, I'm merely the instrument of my association's policy.

But some aikidoists consider DR as a cure-all for their low-quality training in aikido. They like to defend their actions with the "history" arguement. (Note: One doesn't need to know the complete history and lineage of firearms to shoot a completely new weapon for the first time.)

Some instructors are even trying to teach DR during their aikido class, while at the same time admitting that they really don't have a handle on either art.

While I've studied other arts, during aikido class I only teach aikido, not tai chi chuan, judo, flower arranging, or anything else. Although I may at times show aikido's relation to other arts during class, such illustrations are not necessary to gaining a solid understanding of aikido.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2002, 12:23 PM   #16
Roy Dean
 
Roy Dean's Avatar
Dojo: Roy Dean Academy
Location: Bend, Oregon
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 160
United_States
Offline
Mike,

I love the title of your last post:

Confused Teachers = Confused Students

It's so true! Mixing arts in a single class can often confuse students, and my teachers have always felt the same way.

It's amazing to watch Sensei Toribio teach as a Godan in Aikido, then completely switch hats and instruct as a Nanadan in Hakko-Ryu, or even make a more dramatic shift and teach a Ninjitsu seminar as a Judan in Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu! His clarity with keeping the arts separated is truly inspirational.

When I instruct my own University students in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, I also keep it pure. Students, expecially beginning students, are very impressionable. I've found that it's best to give students a solid foundation in one art, then let them explore whatever interests them, so they can arrive at their own martial truth. Sometimes confusion is healthy at this point, especially when contrasted with possibility of the instructor shutting down the student's mind.

One of the worst things an instructor can do is to insinuate that THEIR way is the ONLY way, or the ONLY RIGHT way to becoming a modern warrior or martial artist. Some students might buy into their instructor's defensive mindset and automatically cap their potential by not looking at other arts and other training methods.

Worst case scenario, the impressionable student becomes a "true believer," casting healthy skepticism to the side, and dismissing the strengths of other arts because it might contradict the theory and practice of the art they have invested their identity in. Unfortunately, some students never evolve from this state.

A teacher with an open mind both attracts and produces students with open minds. This is what attracted me to Sensei Toribio, and my current Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu instructor Roy Harris. Extensively cross-trained, they constantly push to expand their horizons in their own search for martial truth. They support their students in doing the same, and by letting us choose our own path, they secure our loyalty. Despite their "expert" status and international student base, they continue to grow and learn, inspiring us to grow and learn as well.

The more arts I study, the better my perspective becomes on what Aikido is and isn't. My perspective shifted significantly after I began training in aiki-jujutsu. It's also shifted this year, as I recognized the connections between Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and Aikido.

Sure, one can gain a solid understanding of Aikido by only studying Aikido, but I believe a greater understanding can be achieved by studying Aikido and its related arts, including Daito-Ryu. After all, if you're looking for the kind of martial prowess Morihei Ueshiba possessed, they you should train what he trained, and study what he studied, not just study what he taught, or what his student taught to you.

To briefly recap:

1. I agree that mixing arts in a single class isn't good, in the tradition of my own instructors.

2. Students are very impressionable, so it's important lead with an open mind and encourage their individual growth (through words and action), even if the student's path diverges from your own. To shut down their mind and their potential by insinuating your way is the ONLY true way may permanently stagnate their martial development. Better to be confused than close minded. At least the confused with look for the truth, instead of believing that they already know it.

3. A solid understanding of Aikido can be gained by only studying Aikido, however, this understanding can be refined by studying related arts, including Daito-Ryu.

I hope I've made my points clear. I'd hate for there to be any confusion on this matter.

Kind Regards,

Roy Dean

Last edited by Roy Dean : 11-14-2002 at 12:28 PM.

Discover Who You Are

www.roydeanacademy.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2002, 07:23 PM   #17
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,951
United_States
Offline
Quote:
Dan Hover wrote:
I guess I will be the odd one and say that History is important.
Not so odd. Just about any serious art or academic field includes at least some study of the history of the art or field. Can you imagine getting a degree in art without courses in art history or a degree in music without courses in music history? What about a scientist who had never heard of Aristotle?

Quote:
Dan Hover wrote:
Although unlike Modern day Daito ryu who feel the need to denounce O'sensei for watering down DTR and call it Aikido. The popular story of O'sensei spending 25 years training with Takeda is a stretch at best. Takeda was very meticulous with his attendence registers of everyone he had taught. O'sensei's name clearly appears on these scrolls, indicating that Yes Osensei did train with him. But for a total of 70 days, spread out over 7 ten day seminars. which in some ways does little to reinforce the perception that Osensei spent 25 years of study under Takeda. This is clearly not the case.
M. Ueshiba also lived with Takeda for a period of around two years. He certainly studied under Takeda for a period that spanned some 25 years or more. How much actual contact he had during that time and whether that's a lot or a little depends, I suppose, upon your point of view, but it's altogether possible that he spent more time actually training with Takeda than any other of S. Takeda's students.
Quote:
Dan Hover wrote:
True, without DTR we would not have Aikido, and without Aikido I don't really think that DTR would share in the popularity it has today. O sensei created Aikido from DTR amongst other arts that he trained in. Oddly enough you never hear Tenjin shinyo ryu practioners complaining how Kano Sensei ripped them off in creating Kodokan Judo. Likewise Ona ha itto ryu and Kendo.

Those arts have always acknowledged their roots - this has not always been the case with Aikido.

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2002, 09:52 PM   #18
Edward
Location: Bangkok
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 803
Thailand
Offline
djm: What is your point of reference for this observation?

EK: Actually none. Just listening to conversations with several aikido shihans, but no articles or books if this is what you mean. However, I can see clearly in DR demonstrations great differences in style. It happens that those with fluid circular movement are the youngest ones. Isn't this interesting?

djm: Nice thought. It might catch you some heat from your Jpn SHIHAN, though. TS is not regarded fondly in aikido circles.

EK: You bet! "some heat" would be an understatement

djm: This cynic's heart tingles at the resonance of "lifetime pursuit" with "customer loyalty".

EK: Yes, and no. Surely aikikai hombu would like loyal customers, but if I'm happy with the product and the service is good, then no complaints. When I see my sensei's strength and technique at the age of 60, and how he became suddenly a student when he met his own teacher, and the humility with which he received instruction and correction eventhough he's a 7th dan. I don't find anything cynical about that.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2002, 10:40 PM   #19
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,951
United_States
Offline
Re: Re: Aikido history

Quote:
Edward Karaa (Edward) wrote:
It is common knowledge now that DR has developed into something similar to aikido, probably after having seen the global success aikido has had in the last 40 years.
Where exactly is this "common knowledge"?

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2002, 11:42 PM   #20
Edward
Location: Bangkok
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 803
Thailand
Offline
Re: Re: Re: Aikido history

Quote:
Christopher Li (Chris Li) wrote:
Where exactly is this "common knowledge"?

Best,

Chris
Please refer to my reply to DJM regarding same question.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2002, 09:49 PM   #21
Matt Whyte
Dojo: Sozokan Budo Academy
Location: Australia
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 21
Offline
I believe that the study of the history of Aikido is very important for the pratcitioner to gain an understanding of the way in which Aikido should be practiced. Not so much the study of Daito ryu, but the way in which Ueshiba managed to create his techiniques and the way in which he trained.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2002, 10:09 PM   #22
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,951
United_States
Offline
Re: Re: Re: Re: Aikido history

Quote:
Edward Karaa (Edward) wrote:
Please refer to my reply to DJM regarding same question.
Is this the one that you mean?
Quote:
Edward Karaa (Edward) wrote:
Actually none. Just listening to conversations with several aikido shihans, but no articles or books if this is what you mean. However, I can see clearly in DR demonstrations great differences in style. It happens that those with fluid circular movement are the youngest ones. Isn't this interesting?
My guess would be that those shihans have little actual DR experience themselves. FWIW, I've heard at least two 8th dan uchi-deshi of M. Ueshiba make statements about DR technique (this was in the days before information about DR was widely available) that contained, as it turned out, gross errors.

In any case, watching a few demonstrations and the comments of a couple of Aikido folks is a lot different from "common knowledge", as in:
Quote:
Edward Karaa (Edward) wrote:
It is common knowledge now that DR has developed into something similar to aikido, probably after having seen the global success aikido has had in the last 40 years.
Wouldn't you say?

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2002, 09:59 AM   #23
Lyndon Patel
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3
Offline
Hello, Let me introduce myself. My name is Lydon R. Patel. I am a new poster to this forum.

Upon reading this forum, I noticed this interesting discussions taking place in this thread. A topic discussion that I have posted to before on Aikido Journal's forum. The topic being discussed is of great concern and interest to me. I have enjoyed reading all the informative and enlightening posts.

Having a limited background in Aikido, which means I am not as fortunate or knowledgeable as many fine Aikidoka here who have trained more extensively, I would like to offer an opinion regarding what has been discussed about Aikido and DR History.

I remember when DR was at best fuzzy to so many of us Aikidoka. DR wasn't known in accurate detail it's relation to Aikido as it is today. Due to the internet, the recent accessibility to DR, and publications DR did have a great technical influence on Aikido. With DR, IMHO, Aikido would be standing on a less solid foundation. Because of the information we now know about DR it makes Aikido unique. I personally feel Aikido is stronger of an art that it stands on the DR foundation. This doesn't make Aikido comparable to or the same art as DR . By knowing more accurately the roots of Aikido we can better understand the function and formation, and purpose of Aikido. Misinformation , inaccurate information, and a like, can only cause damage to Aikido. We all know that credence is lost when misinformation becomes myth and rumor.

There are many things I think that are not shared by Aikido and DR which makes the two arts different from each other. There are also things that they share, which compliment each other and don't compromise the unique identity of either one. By knowing the facts and accurate information, Aikido can only be stronger. When people understand O'Sensei's history accurately it can only become a more powerful support to the purpose and independence of Aikido.. By understanding DR role in Aikido doesn't mean in any way a loss to Aikido.

We as Aikidoka don't have to jump ship and join the praises of DR. Nor abandon Aikido and be evangelicals for DR. The danger is when we as Aikidoka become resistant to the possibility that new information brings and accepting it if it is accurate. We do more damage to Aikido, when we fail to see that knowledge is power. We hinder our own growth with ignorance of the facts.. We destroy Aikido when when we are not accurately informed.

Lyndon R. Patel
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2002, 10:00 PM   #24
Edward
Location: Bangkok
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 803
Thailand
Offline
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Aikido history

Quote:
Christopher Li (Chris Li) wrote:
In any case, watching a few demonstrations and the comments of a couple of Aikido folks is a lot different from "common knowledge
Point taken. I should have said "in my point of view" or something...

However, I do stand on my point that, eventhough many aikido techniques might come originally from DR, modern DR's softer and more circular approach to techniques has been very largely influenced by aikido, and by the ideas of Morihei Ueshiba. Why? Simply because they have been succesfull in appealing to a large public who is looking for a non-violent MA, while DR was on its way to be extinct. The formula works, so why not use it?

If you read Kondo Sensei's interviews without knowing his identity, you would think he is an aikido shihan. I do not think Sokaku Takeda would have shared his views.

This said, I would like to add that I myself am an admirer of modern DR because of its solid basics and large repertoire of techniques. I agree with Mr. Patel that knowing DR gives us aikidoka a much stronger foundation.

But it is important to give credit where it is due.

BTW, Christopher, I notice from your posts that you do not hold the aikikai and the Ueshiba family in great esteem. Is my observation right? And would you care to tell us the reason?
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2002, 11:06 PM   #25
DanD
Location: US
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 38
Offline
Quote:
"Going through the Aikido Journal threads mentioned above, I didn't see evidence of anyone trying to discredit O-Sensei or the way aikido is currently practiced".

Not in the Aikido Journal threads but ...

I bumped into this article by "accident".

http://www.ishiyamaryu.com/history.html

Scroll down to "The Crime Of Contemporary Aikido"

Quite surprising to see so much "steaming" (or is it frustration ?) from a Sensei.

What Do is that ?

Last edited by DanD : 11-30-2002 at 11:10 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Mugendo Budogu - Dogi cut to specifically to wear with hakama!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:21 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate