Talk:Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu/Archive 1

Archive 1

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art

Just a few ideas,

I think the general entry for Daito-ryu is pretty good however I'd like to see it expanded a bit and have something more added concerning the techniques of the art rather than just arguments between different groups about rightful succession.

The current entry states that Takeda Tokimune did not appoint a successor, which is true according to all the sources which I have read from places like Aiki News/www.aikidojournal.com and from what I heard while studying the art in Japan. Later it mentions the 'mainline' of Daito-ryu and identifies neither Kondo's Shimbukan organization or Kato's Daito-kai organization as representing the 'mainline'. This is bound to raise some eyebrows as they are the two groups who argue the most that they represent the mainline; Kondo as having the greatest claim in terms of licenses and Kato and Arisawa having the greatest claim in terms of time directly under Takeda.

It is probably better to avoid the use of the term 'mainline' altogether as it tends to be used to label other traditions as somehow illigitimate while all the people we are mentioning here have long associations with Takeda-sensei.

It is my feeling that it would be better to keep an encyclopdia entry inclusive of all true information rather than as a vehicle for the promotion of a particular perspective.

Matt

Matt There is so much room for expansion on this article - please do. I was also thinking that the Aikijujutsu article should be merged with this one. I did not put in the merge tag for before I had some input. What do you think?Peter Rehse 00:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Peter- I also find it curious that the "aikijujutsu" is a redirect of "aikijutsu" when the former is the name of an art and the latter is not used that way to my knowledge in Japan. -I have seen it used in Blackbelt articles when associated with people like Lovret however.

The only reason I could see for not merging them is that some other budo forms which do not claim direct association to Daito-ryu now use the term aikijujutsu. Personally I haven't heard any good evidence of budo forms which used the term predating Takeda Sokaku.

I was once told that the contemporary Takenouchi ryu uses the term to describe its jujutsu however I am doubtful that this was historically true.

Any thoughts on this?--Mateo2006 02:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The way I see it we really only have two choices.

An article called Daito-ryu aikijujutsu (basically the Daito-ryu article moved) with only a few modifications. In that article we mention that the term has been used by some modern schools (with or without connection to Takeda). Terms like Aikijutsu (which also causes me pain), Aikijujutsu, and the several versions of Daito-ryu would link to that.

The second choice would be an article called Aikijujutsu which would be the Daito-ryu article with a bit more of a re-write. I like this option less. I'm going to leave the merge tag out till Monday and see if we have some sort of consensus for either way or leave alone.

The use of Aikijujutsu prior to the Takeda/Ueshiba get togeather in Ayabe has no historical basis. One of my teachers is a Professor of Budo History at Waseda University. He says that the name was suggested by certain high ranking military officers (he suspects Takeshita but is not sure which one exactly) and they were inspired by some popular books at the time. I just reread the yet to be published article on the subject and it really is interesting on how important the name change was vis a vis the relationship between the two men. It wasn't just a spur of the moment thing over a bit of sake.Peter Rehse 03:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

To me the former approach also seems to make more sense and seems less trouble. :)--Mateo2006 03:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I added material about the various branches of the art. I apologize if this breaks the flow of the narrative which was established. Will try to smooth it out later if that's okay.--Mateo2006 00:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Who me complain - this is the sort of thing the article was crying out for.Peter Rehse 02:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

On the subject of who is mainline I think the word 'mainline' is the wrong word to use. But maybe 'mainstream' seeing as Kondokai is the most "popular" form of Daito-Ryu. I'm sure there is a way to convey that one school is more popular then the other without reducing the others to inferiority. Gelsamel 02:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Tension between Kondokai and Takumakai

Being a Takumakai student I understand that there is alot of political tension betwen Takumakai and Kondokai as to whose replicate Sokaku's style most closely. From what I understand in Kondokai there is more jujutsu and less Aiki then in Takumakai (which stresses that if you use any amount of strength to preform the move then you aren't using Aiki properly).

Also I think the amount of techniques may differ from one school for the next. Here is an excerpt from the Takumakai website:

---

Shoden 118 kajo ura-omote

Aikinojutsu 53 kajo ura-omote

Hidenoogi 36 kajo ura-omote

Daito-ryu Aiki Nito-ryu Hiden

Goshinyonote 84 kajo jo-chu-ge

Kaishakusoudennokoto 477

Kaidennokoto 88 kajo

---

Also as I understand it Takumakai Aikijujutsu is the only Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu school to have Soden (Killing techniques).

With all the variations and things you can add on to the techniques there are some 2800+ techniques alltogether. Gelsamel 01:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC) (Forgot to log in :D)

---

Thanks for the additional input.

I know that Kondo and his affiliates refer to their line as "Daito-ryu Mainline" rather than 'Kondokan'. People who wish to acknowledge that Tokimune didn't select an official successor and wished for a family member to take over the art often refer to this group as the 'Shimbukan' which is really just the name of Kondo's dojo. Although this isn't really accurate either it is probably preferable to 'Kondokan' which I'm sure you are using only as a term of convenience.

I don't think that any branch of Daito-ryu has the 'aiki' market covered. Many groups such as the Roppokai would claim to have greater emphasis on aiki than other branches. Kondo at recent seminar staed that every technique in daito-ryu must have an element of aiki in it.

Although you subtitle is concerned with tension between the Takumakai and Kondo's group your submission doesn't really speak to this directly.

The additional technique list is great and of course still well short of the thousands of techniques often claimed by the art.

I have never heard of the Soden waza referred to as the "killing techniques" of the art, as of course many of the other techniques can kill pretty good too.:) The soden offially refers to the books which preserve the art as taught first by Ueshiba and then by Sokaku. There are also police restaint techniques and woman's self defense techniques featured the last couple of volumes. I believe that Ogawa of the Daibukan is the only person who teaches directly from Soden as his primary teaching method.

According to Mori sensei the Takumakai has evolved its own method for teaching techniques over the years which doesn't come directly from the manuals and Hisa Takuma also did not teach directly from the manuals. Interestingly The Nippon Kobudo film feature techniques recreated from the Soden for the purpose of their preservation on film I'm told. Teachers like Ogawa, Mori, Okabayashi and Kawabe-sensei (the most active senior teacher in the takumakai presently)were all featured on this documentary doing techniques with specific cues given to them by Hisa Takuma during the filming. Many of the techniques were not familiar to the participants at the time of the filming, or so I'm told.

Interesting stuff. :)--Mateo2006 09:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about talking about different stuff under the title. I'm not too great at organizing my infomation haha. The Soden were refered to Killing Techniques by my sensei (rather, not as a direct translation) probably as a way of explaining the massive difference between normal waza and the Soden Waza. Sure a lot of other techniques involves snapping the neck but these ones seemed to be especially dangerous and violent.

On the Takumakai website they say that they're the only Daito-Ryu branch which includes the Soden, which is interesting because according to an interview with Katsuyuki Kondo he received copies of the Soden.

[1]

"I believe that you have practiced with several other advanced students of Sokaku Takeda Sensei. Would you tell us about these experiences?

Since I have already talked about the headmaster, Tokimune Takeda Sensei, Tsunejiro Hosono Sensei and Kotaro Yoshida Sensei earlier, I won't mention them again now. I received instruction many times from Takuma Hisa Sensei between 1970 and 1973, and in 1972 he gave me copies of the eleven volumes of the Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu Soden."

Also, just as some misc. info. Kawabe is visiting my dojo starting from the 1st of December I think. Which is quiet great considering we're one of two (three, but the thrid is only just starting up) dojos in Australia with a total of probably around 20 people (for the 2 dojos). Gelsamel 01:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice. Kawabe is great to train with from what I hear and a nice guy too.

Re: the Soden; I guess the difference is that Kondo probably doesn't teach the techniques from the Soden. But who knows? If he trained with Hisa then that training may have informed some of his approach.

There is a lot of great experience out there in many different places. :) --Mateo2006 01:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, my sensei tells me he is really nice and fun to be with. And that when you see him and get thrown by him you think "He'll never be able to do this, he is so small" but of course - he does. And when you're thrown by him it feels like you're floating and you won't know you've been thrown till you hit the ground :D. I can't wait! Gelsamel 07:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I was just graded Rokkyu :D, I've been doing it for 3 or 4 months now. They're going to send off the stuff to japan so they canwrite up a certificate. Hopefully I will get it when Kawabe-sensei comes down. Gelsamel 03:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Article Promotion

Still needs a pici though.Peter Rehse 05:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

And Takeda-Ryu?

I deplore the fact that "Aikijujutsu" directly leads towards Daito-Ryu; Takeda-Ryu is even older and hasn't its own website...

Response: The only traditional "Takeda ryu" with a verifiable history and lineage that I know of is a school of kyujutsu which specializes in archery while on horseback.

I believe that you are referring to the Nakamura-ha Takeda Ryu which most believe to be a modern composite art employing portions of Kukishin Ryu and other more modern arts.

When I was first living in Japan Nakamura-sensei was promoting his art as a sogo bujutsu rather than a school of aikijujutsu and referred to the empty handed grappling in his art as Takeda ryu aikido. I have seen others refer to portions of his curriculum as aikido and other portions as aiki no jutsu since then.

Some of the controversy, of which there is no shortage is discussed here:

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-15229.html

You see that the school has its own website as do several of its branches.

Don't take my word for it. Ask questions at places like Koryu.com or Hoplos who have scholars with legitimate credentials specializing the history of Japanese budo and bujutsu systems who have no vested interest in the answer. If you wish you should start a separate page on "Nakamura-ha Takeda Ryu" (which he doesn't refer to as an aikijujutsu system but rather as a sogo bujutsu sytem). Many may be interested in the teachings of Nakamura's system. I exchanged e-mails with a Tomiki Ryu aikidoka who trained with Nakamura-sensei and he was very satisfied and enthusiastic about his training there.--Mateo2006 22:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I also meant Maroto-Ha Takeda-Ryu, which was officially accepted by the DNBK (Dai Nihon Butoku Kai) on 2006. It is also the first Ryu to be registered under the denomition "Aikijujutsu".

Matt's Response:

Maroto-ha Takeda ryu is the invention of Roland Maroteaux student of Nakamura-ha Takeda-ryu who also studied Hakko-ryu before joining with Nakamura's organization and then, having problems with Nakamura, formed his own organization. From their own organization's information it appears as if this school is less than 10 years old. Any google search will give you this infomation.

This comes off the Maroto-ha website with English errors included:

"Roland J. Maroteaux, was back in the 70's the first european Shihan of a traditional jujutsu school (Hakko Ryu - derived also from Takeda traditions). He went back to Japan looking for a more traditional system as close as possible from an Aiki original source considered disapeared by the most practitioners. So he discivers takeda Ryu and Soke Nakamura, folowing a book from am library. He follows Nakamura Sensei in training for more then 10 years with no rank and in 1990 he is certified as Joden Shihan Takeda Ryu (6 Dan Aikijutsu, 5 Dan Iaido, 5 Dan Jodo). So he bacame the first outsider of the school and he is allowed to teach the school, in his own manner Maroto Ha - outside borders of Japan. Starting with 1998-99, Soke Nakamura grants the right of unique representative of Takeda Ryu in Europe to a 3rd dan Judo Imaf - Kobilza, with no rank in Takeda Ryu. The Kobilza is sueing Sensei Maroteaux for illegal use of the Takeda Ryu Logo in Europe. Contactated by Sensei Maroteaux, Soke Nakamura offers evasive explanations. Because Sensei Maroteaux also was against the high prices politics of Soke Nakamura, and specialy because he asked some discounts for East Europeans countries, Mr, kobilza speculated this information and made to Soke Nakamura an offer of mantaining high prices in exchange of his nominations as Chief Instructor for Europe. He even send many letters and faxes to all Takeda Ryu Dojo leaders (including me) promising favours too all who will quit the "fake" Sensei Maroteaux and join his new organisation. So mr Kobilza gets a quick jump from 3 Dan Judo IMAF, to Okuden Shihan, 7 Dan Aikijutsu Takeda Ryu, etc ...Sensei Maroteaux chose to quit Takeda Ryu nakamrua Ha and burns in public his official apointement from Soke Nakamura as leader of European Sobukai Takeda Ryu. Then he is practical forced to continue his own way of teaching the same school under the name of Takeda Ryu Maroto Ha."

The Dai Nippon Butokukai also registered Mr. Davey of the Saigo-ha tradition. This doesn't mean that the history behind a martial art has be confirmed as legitimate. This organization was orginally primarily a kendo governing body which was disolved after the second world war. It was revived on a small scale later. I used to train in Daito-ryu every week in the Budokuden in Kyoto on their premises. To be registered there doesn't really mean much. You can register new martial arts there.

I've seen some of Mr. Maroteaux demonstrations. There are some elements of good budo there however their history is a rather short one.--Mateo2006 18:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Keiko Techo

Because I have recently been graded Rokkyu I receive a copy of Keiko Techo 3rd Edition for Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu Takumakai English Version, I'm curious as to how legal it would be if I could post a few excerpts from this manual.

Also, last day of training with Kawabe-sensei today! He is so awesome :D Gelsamel 00:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Rengokai

We have a link to the Rengokai organization which I identified as a Saigo-ha lineage because they use the same term to refer to their art as the Saigo-ha which is not used by Kondo or Kato's group, nor used by the Takumakai (or legimate offshoots from Ohgami or Okabayashi's group), or the Kodokai (or the Roppokai or the Yonezawa offshoots).

Futhermore there is identification on their website of Saigo Shiro and Houei Yamashita as being Daito-ryu practitioners. That Saigo studied Daito-ryu is denied by major Daito-ryu figures such as Kondo and by the Kodokan where he began training at a very young age. I can't see why this website would identify these figures if they were not of this lineage.

Let's hear some dialogue on this.

Also registered posters are always taken more seriously than anonymous ones.--Mateo2006 05:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mateo2006;

Rengokai are not affiliated with any "saigo-ha" lineage which includes, but not limited to, Sogawa-sensei, Mr. Williams or anyone else claiming any type of lineage to Tanomo Saigo. I am well aware of the attempts to credit or discredit Sogawa-sensei and more than enough has already been said of Mr. Williams, so I will not flog that dead horse either. Adding "saigo-ha lineage" to the link is not only incorrect, but also unnecessary. We should strive as a community to ensure Wikipedia is as factual as possible editing out any content based on speculation, assumption or opinion and stating Rengokai are saigo-ha is clearly based on one of those. You are doing a great service keeping this article up to date and thank you for that, but please do not edit the link. Instead, if you have any questions feel free to contact me via the Rengokai website for any further clarifications. Thank you for taking the time to discuss this. Take Care.

Zain Fuji Yama Dojo

I'm not trying to discredit Mr. Williams as I don't know him. But I think we need more information here. What lineage does Rengokai belong to?--Mateo2006 02:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

There's no response here so I'm removing the link altogether. Maybe when Zain checks back in he can replace it and explain the group's lineage, which would be great.--Mateo2006 21:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Aiki-jujutsu an Internal art?

I heard that aiki-jujutsu is also an internal martial art (at least in the higher levels) similar to aikido.

Can anyone fluent in Japanese or lives in Japan confirm this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.98.128.230 (talk) 11:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

I've never heard anyone distinguish Japanese martial arts as "internal" or "external", including aikido, which I practice. I've only ever heard those terms used to classify Chinese martial arts. Japanese martial arts are more apt to be distinguished as "hard" (goho), or "soft" (juho); a distinction that is similar to that of internal vs external, but ultimately very different. Bradford44 17:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

What *is* aiki-jujutsu?

This article gives quite a bit of information on the founding and history of aiki-jujutsu, but as an outsider I notice that it offers no information on what exactly it is. All I can glean from the article is that it's an unarmed grappling martial art. Would it be appropriate for someone to add a description of its basic style and techniques? Vlcice 03:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent observation! Thanks. : ) --Mateo2006 06:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Ideas for improving status of the article.

Bradford44 gave the following advice for this article. I thought that it might be helpful to others who'd like to see the article improve.

"If you're interested in taking the article further, the following things still need improvement:

• Citations for statements such as the following, found under 'The Horikawa Branch': "The Kodokai was founded by students of Kodo Horikawa (1894-1980), whose distinctive interpretation of 'aiki' movements can be seen in the movements of his students." This is basic factual background information that requires a source. Not every sentence, but certainly every grouping of related statements needs a citation.
• The article desperately needs a history section. Explain the 1000+ year lineage that Daito-ryu claims, beginning with Minamoto Yoshimitsu studying the bodies of the dead, etc... Make sure to acknowledge that this is the claim of Takeda Sokaku, and some people dispute it for lack of evidence.
• Classification of techiques needs some kind of introduction, explanation, and context. Right now I can only imagine that it is entirely meaningless to a non-martial arts practitioner.

If you want to discuss further, we should probably do it on the Daito-ryu page so others can participate. I'd love to see this article move to GA, though. Bradford44 04:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)" Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mateo2006"

I'll handle the Horikawa immediately after writing.

The 'history' section is a little more daunting as historians and martial arts researchers seem to widely reject Daito-ryu's fantastic claims of a lineage more ancient than all others and yet have no evidence of its existance prior to the Meiji era. People like Mol have written diplomatically about it but really there is no compelling reason to believe that Daito-ryu stretchs back to Emperor Seiwa as was claimed by Takeda. I guess we should just document the controversy?

The last poster on this page also meantioned the Achille's heel of this article and that is the lack of physical description of the art in the article and I'll try to make some first steps in improving the article in this direction.--Mateo2006 12:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that's right, just document the controversy. In addition to a physical description of the art, and the above suggestions, I think the article needs a little expansion on Daito-ryu's external influence, also. Bradford44 13:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent point. I am in complete agreement.--Mateo2006 14:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Naming Conventions

Our Wiki rules state that "for a historical figure (a person born before the first year of Meiji (1868)), always use" the family name first. For those born after 1868 use the Western order. I always wondered why? Did Japan become a Western country after 1868? They certainly didn't adopt this convention themselves and we don't adopt a similar convention in Wiki for countries like Korea.

Daito-ryu persents a awkward situation in that the proper Wiki way of render the founder of Daito-ryu is Takeda Sokaku while his son's name should be written Tokimune Takeda. I think this is quite hard to follow for the average reader. It would seem a consant rule for name order would better serve ease in reading than a close following of the Wiki rule. Thoughts out there?--Mateo2006 22:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think its that confusing to simply call Takeda Sokaku "Sokaku", and Tokimune Takeda "Tokimune". Also, using more pronouns would be fine, as long as they strictly adhere to the rule that the pronoun always refers to the person most recently named. Also, the first time their names are mentioned, kanji and correct name order and romanization should be indicated parenthetically, further clearing up any ambiguity regarding their names. If you don't do this consistently, then no one can tell which is the first name, and which is the surname. If you start switching the name order on a case-by-case basis, then people knowledgable about WP:MOS-JP may start believing that the dates of birth are typos or something, which hurts the overall reliability of the article. Bradford44 12:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Assessing recent changes in article

Bradford44, was good enough to put the school's internal perspective on its history into the article and we now have 33 in-text reference citations footnoted. I think that the article no longer needs the 'request for further citations' alert.

I refrained from footnoting the information in one paragraph on on the influence of the techniques on aikido and judo via Tomiki Shudokan aikido and the goshinjutsu kata as these are amply footnoted in the the internal links . Thoughts out there?--Mateo2006 19:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Quite right, and this article is very nearly GA material! Just a little more revision (and I'm going to finish up the ref fixing), and I think we can submit it for GA review. Regarding your second paragraph, above, I was under the impression that each article should stand on its own, reference-wise, rather than relying internal links to referenced articles. I can't cite a rule for that, but I think it become an issue on Ga review, and definitely later on at FA review. If they are significant statements, I think they need a reference in this article, if they are statements made in passing, and are not otherwise subject to reasonable dispute, they don't necessarily need a reference. Finally, the "Horikawa branch" still needs some cleanup. For example, who is Inoue, why doesn't he have a last name, who made him Shihan, and what does he have menkyo kaiden in (and what is a menkyo kaiden, since the term has not been introduced to readers)? It's not that the answers can't be deduced, but rather the sentence introducing him is poorly structured. Some of the other sections have similar minor problems, so continuing overall copyediting for writing style and grammar is still welcomed. Bradford44 20:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Matt: Fair enough. I will fill in the footnotes regarding Tomiki etc.

The Horikawa paragraph keeps getting changed for what seems to be self promotion interests so I've largely left it alone for a while to seem what was going to show up in it next. : )

I'll try to clean it up a bit though as you observations are definitely sound. Best --Mateo2006 01:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Shihan Tung: Bradford44, I don't know why Matt implies that there are significant changes in the Horikawa section on an ongoing basis. I added one sentence to the paragraph to complete the Bokuyokan information. The way it was written implies that only in America is there a following of the Bokuyokan school. This is incomplete: there are three international headquarters established for this school in addition to the main Headquarters in Japan: USA, Canada, and Europe. The sentence was simply added to reflect how widely the Bokuyokan school has spread. I have no interest in "self-promotion" as Matt continues to insist - Bokuyokan is interested in the quality, not the quantity of its students and we have no desire to mass-produce our art. I am authorized and charged by Nidai Soke Yonezawa Hiromitsu to speak for Bokuyokan in the Western Hemisphere and feel that it is my responsibility to complete the information regarding Bokuyokan in Wikipedia.

Regarding Kodokai: Inoue Shihan Menkyo Kaiden is no longer head of Kodokai (he is a retired leader, still retains a title called Chairman/Menkyo Kaiden - this is an advisory position and not part of the current organizational structure) - Tatsuo Shimbo is the current Menkyo Kaiden Headmaster. For verification of this data, see http://www.uskodokai.org/website.swf

Also, Matt, you might notice on that website as well that Horikawa Shihan also received his rank of Menkyo Kaiden, as well as Eisei Meijin in the Aikikjutsu field in Japan.

You widely reference Stanley Pranin Sensei for this article - I will forward this discussion to him for his input as well as he is a good friend of mine.Shihantimtung 18:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm doing my best to stay neutral, here. I don't train in Daito-ryu, and only want the information to be presented in a neutral and balanced manner. My interest is primarily seeing this article be promoted to GA class (or further), using what I know of wikipedia style, guidelines, and the preferences of the people who review such articles for promotion. Both Matt and you, Mr. Tung, make fair points. Taking Matt's point first, please be aware that it is important to draw a line regarding inclusion of the details of a branch style - each notable branch style is, after all, entitled to its own article where details can be discussed at length. Regarding your point, Mr. Tung, I don't think there is anything wrong with briefly mentioning where the primary dojo(s) of each branch school are located. To both of you, I would like to suggest that each section for a Daito-ryu branch include the following information and no more than this:

1. Who founded the branch and who they learned Daito-ryu from
2. When it was founded
3. What region/country it originated and is primarily practiced in
4. Who the current headmaster is
5. A very brief explanation of how the branch differs (technique or philosophy-wise) from the others, or Takeda Sokaku's original teachings, if at all.

This article should focus primarily on a holistic view of Daito-ryu, and not on the minutia of where all the Daito-ryu dojo in the world are located, who all the qualified teachers are, or (as many jujutsu-related articles are prone to) a listing of all the names of the techniques, etc...

As another point, the manner in which Yasuke Inoue was previously mentioned was inappropriate, as honorific or academic titles are not to be included inline with the person's name. That is, it is proper to say "Yasuke Inoue holds the rank of Shihan", but it is not proper to refer to him as "Inoue Shihan". Additionally, I too had never before seen Menkyo Kaiden used like an honorific in the same way as "san", "sama", "sensei", and "shihan". It was equally strange to me that the article stated that at some point he ceased being a Menkyo Kaiden, as if it were a position, rather than a rank. This has been cleaned up, now.

Finally, to (hopefully) put the "self-promotional" accusations to rest, please be aware that on wikipedia, it is usually assumed that if you are writing about yourself, or your own organization, you are doing so for advertising or self-promotional purposes. This may be contrary to WP:Assume good faith, but is nevertheless a fact of wikipedia (see also, WP:Original research). I imagine this is because 99 times out of 100, it is the truth. Indeed, I believe one or more of my martial arts teachers is notable enough for their own article, but I'm choosing to refrain from creating one - at this point I'm sticking to improving articles about my teachers' teachers and up. It is funny that you mention Mr. Pranin, who I have long felt needs an article here, but because he is a friend of one of my instructors, I don't feel it is appropriate to create one myself. That said, I think we can put accusations of bias behind us, and just focus on creating an accurate and informative article. Did I miss anything anyone thinks still needs to be addressed? Bradford44 18:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your impartial evaluation and for your kind and respectful reply. I am obviously not as familiar with Wikipedia rules and regulations, and am only trying to increase the accuracy of the data presented. I have no idea what the GA status means. While I understand your concerns that if a person writes about their own school or tradition, they would give the appearance of trying to promote that school; however, it is equally true that one should write what one knows. Therefore, in my opinion, the best person to write about a school's history and tradition is someone who has made a lifetime study of that art and tradition. And if there are questions about an organization's structure, who best should answer those questions than someone who is actually in that organizational structure? To comply with your request, however, I took out the reference to additional dojo names, and made the prior sentence simply more inclusive of the current status of the Bokuyokan.

We will give consideration to your suggestion that we write an article for Bokuyokan separately, but, as I'm sure you must know, most schools prefer that the details of their organization remain private. I will discuss the possibility of a Bokuyokan entry in Wikipedia with Soke Yonezawa.

Regarding forms of address, you must understand that Japanese is my preferred language, and therefore I tend to speak with the Japanese language forms. Hence, I refer to Katsumi Yonezawa as Yonezawa Katsumi Soshi Shihan, honoring him with his title as well as his native preference for name order, out of respect for him and his tradition. I don't understand why Wikipedia would make a rule which denies someone their earned title of respect as well as their preferred name order. For instance, would you deny Albert Schweitzer his title of "doctor?" I completely disagree with Wikipedia rules that Inoue Shihan (or any other professional) should not be named using his title.

Also regarding Inoue Shihan: My English is not the best and I did not make my point clear - I was not saying that Inoue Shihan no longer has the Menkyo Kaiden qualification. Menkyo Kaiden is an instructor who is authorized to teach all forms of the art for that school, and is not a political title. I was saying that Inoue Shihan is no longer the leader of Kodokai - he is a retired Menkyo Kaiden (retired teacher). He is now an advisor of that school.Shihantimtung 01:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

A technical question as well: The first footnote for the last sentence in the Horikawa Branch paragraph (which now reads: The Bokuyokan is currently run by his son Hiromitsu Yonezawa from Hokkaido, with a following at the Yonezawa Dojo in U.S.A., as well as branches in Canada and Germany) refers to the Roppokai website. I just checked that website, and there is no Bokuyokan information listed at all. Perhaps that first footnote should be deleted, as it is erroneous.Shihantimtung 01:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

MATT: Bradford has covered the needs of the article very well here. As the article is about Daito-ryu in a broad context and not any school of Daito-ryu specifically it seems acceptable to have the international headquarters for the organizations mentioned but not the various branch dojos. (Which would weigh down the article considerably. I also agree that the US headquarters should be deleted but didn't do this myself.) The changes in the past in this section have not been by yourself but by others. + Thank you for your impartial evaluation and for your kind and respectful reply. I am obviously not as familiar with Wikipedia rules and regulations, and am only trying to increase the accuracy of the data presented. I have no idea what the GA status means. While I understand your concerns that if a person writes about their own school or tradition, they would give the appearance of trying to promote that school; however, it is equally true that one should write what one knows. Therefore, in my opinion, the best person to write about a school's history and tradition is someone who has made a lifetime study of that art and tradition. And if there are questions about an organization's structure, who best should answer those questions than someone who is actually in that organizational structure? To comply with your request, however, I took out the reference to additional dojo names, and made the prior sentence simply more inclusive of the current status of the Bokuyokan.

- Wiki does not allow for us to write from personal experience or personal research. The Wiki rules are quite clear on this. You have to have 3rd party resources and print is given precedence over internet sources. If we write something about ourselves or our school it is assumed to be self promoting or if you have too much POV in the writing style it will get removed by anyone editing the article not by myself. Martial arts titles and the use of unfamiliar terms from a discipline or from another language are also considered inapppropriate for a Wiki article and when essential they need to be explained. + We will give consideration to your suggestion that we write an article for Bokuyokan separately, but, as I'm sure you must know, most schools prefer that the details of their organization remain private. I will discuss the possibility of a Bokuyokan entry in Wikipedia with Soke Yonezawa.

- I'd be happy to help you set up a page on the Bokuyokan. This would be a good addition to the Wiki content and the content you wish to place there would be suitable to that kind of article. But of course you would have to write the text and not cut and paste it from any outside source (just put things in your own words) and you would be expected to provide an outside source as footnotes to reference statements made in such an article. I agree that generally for an encyclopedia that it is better to write about things we are further away from but there is plenty in Aikijournal.com to use to support the beginnings of such an entry.--Mateo2006 02:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Tung, I understand your reaction regarding the use of titles and writing articles based on first-hand knowledge. However, these are policies and guidelines long established on wikipedia for the purpose of maintaining neutrality, verifiability, and a tone befitting an encyclopedia.

Name order for Japanese is governed by the rule at WP:MOS-JP#Names. The rule is that a Japanese person born prior to the first year of Meiji (i.e., prior to 1868) is written with the Japanese name-order; surname first. A person born later is written with the western name-order, and the Japanese order is indicated parenthetically. This article mostly follows this rule right now. The rules get more complicated when a "historical" person's name is properly romanized with macrons, but the name has been widely published in English without macrons, but all the rules are there at WP:MOS-JP.

Use of English honorific academic titles is governed by the rules at WP:NAMES#Honorific prefixes and WP:NAMES#Academic titles, respectively. This rule was logically extended to Japanese honorifics, such as "sensei", "shihan", etc... by the participants of the WikiProject Martial Arts, as explained at WP:WPMA#Honorifics and academic titles. Indeed, if you review Albert Schweitzer's article, you will note that the article does not refer to him as "Dr. Schweitzer" (except for once near the end, which is an error). Further, Schweitzer's article is actually in violation of the rule by including postnominal initials for his academic degrees in the first sentence.

"GA" means "Good Article", which is part of a rating system here on wikipedia. If you look at the top of this talk page, you will notice that this article is currently rated "B-Class". To get higher than B-Class requires an article undergo a review process by other uninvolved wikipedia editors. For the whole ranking system and criteria for advancement, see WP:WPMA/Assessment.

I think that covers everything, please ask if you have more questions. Disagreements with any of the guidelines should be discussed at the respective guidelines' talk page. Bradford44 14:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

TimTung: Matt San, thank you for your offer of creating a Bokuyokan page. I spoke with Yonezawa Soke this week, and he believes that if people wish to read about our school, they should visit our website, so I must decline.

Matt: No worries. It is there (Bokuyokan) if you ever feel inclined to correct any obvious errors that others write.--Mateo2006 08:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Bradford San, thank you again for your kind courtesy and explanations of your complicated rules. If you have questions about the Horikawa system, feel free to ask.Shihantimtung 02:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Bokuyokan

My name is Tim Tung, and I would be pleased to give additional information about Bokuyokan in particular for this Wikipedia article. My credentials are these: I am the senior Shihan and Jun Honbucho for the Bokuyokan school of Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. I have lived in the US for more than 35 years, but prior to coming here, I studied in Japan and speak fluent Japanese. I was the Uchi Deshi (special protege) of Katsumi Yonezawa Soshi Shihan. I am currently responsible for all of Bokuyokan in the Americas, and am the author of Daito-ryu Zukan, a published scholarly work on Daito-ryu, including its history and techniques, in Japanese. I would ask the courtesy of discussion before my additions are removed, please.

Also Inoue Shihan is no longer Menkyo kaiden of Kodokai, but is now Chairman. Instead, Shimpo Shihan is the Menkyo Kaiden of Kodokai (Honbucho).68.36.245.195 03:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Shihantimtung 03:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Matt: People are not removing your additions because you lack credentials or because the information is incorrect. They remove them because they seem to be self promoting. The article is about Sokaku Takeda not about branch schools in America of Daito-ryu organizations. To post information about such things here appears out of place. Try writing an article on the Bukuyokan and all this information would be completely appropriate.

In other branches of Daito-ryu and in other schools of koryu the menkyo kaiden is a license of higher transmission and not a position in an organization. I assume if a menkyo was granted to Inoue by Horikawa that he still has one regardless if the organizational structure of the Kodokai has changed. It is interesting that Horikawa chose to give out this particular license despite not having been given one himself. (He earned his Hiden Mokuroku and the Hiden Ogi Mokuroku in 1931 but not the menkyo. The Menkyo does not seem to have a been a part of the grading system in Sokaku's early years ( see Kyoju Dairi) and in the later years there were multiple menkyo holders.)

I have lived in Japan and trained in Daito-ryu and written the greater part of the text on this page but people can and will change any material I post which seems inappropriate or is unsupported by outside footnotes.

That's just the nature of Wikipedia.

--Mateo2006 14:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

"Self-promoting?" It was not intended to be so - and my entry into the discussion was meant to be helpful - so accusations of this sort are not appropriate nor appreciated. You list the American headquarters of the Bokuyokan school, I simply added the European and Canadian headquarters as well. This provides information regarding one of the major schools of Daito-ryu, and further enlightens the reader who may be interested in such things. Because this is not your school and you are not interested does not mean that others won't find the data of value.

Secondly, this article is not about Sokaku Takeda, but about Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu - unless the article is titled in error? Because you wrote the bulk of the article on this page, does that mean you claim ownership of it? If so, I indeed do not comprehend the purpose of Wikipedia.

Sokaku Takeda was a teacher of two forms of Daito-ryu: aiki-jujutsu and aiki-budo (also known as aiki-bujutsu) (not jujutsu and aiki-jūjutsu as you have stated in the article). Bokuyokan is one of the schools that concentrates on aiki-jujutsu, and is descended through the Kodokai branch. The simple statement regarding the additional two headquarters of Bokuyokan is not self-promoting: it offers further information about how widely the art has spread throughout the world.

The point of my comment about Inoue is that he is no longer the head of Kodokai but has retired to a position called "chairman" and the new leader (who was granted Menkyo kaiden) of that group is Shinpo Shihan. I was offering a correction. Feel free to correct the error or not; I am more concerned that accurate information be present regarding Bokuyokan.

I have trained with a number of Daito-ryu Kodokai instructors, including Inoue Menkyo Kaiden (at that time), Shinpo Shihan, Kato Shihan, and Yonezawa Shihan in Kitami City, Hokkaido. Under whom did you study, and which style or school were you trained in, please?Shihantimtung 03:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Family Tree

I don't think the family tree is coming out clearly enough to be a good support for the article. I'm going to try to see if I can adjust the size. Failing this perhaps we could redo it?

Adding the family tree was kind of a whim that I wasn't sure would work out. Even at its full size, it is difficult to read - I guess I thought it might be useful as something that could be clicked on for more information. Making it bigger just messes up the balanced look of the page. I would greatly prefer some pictures of actual practice, the article is in desperate need of more pictures. Bradford44 03:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree completely. The idea of the tree is a nice one, though. Perhaps someone who knows how to put one of those 'information boxes' could put one together with this infomation?--Mateo2006 16:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The arts taught in the Daito-ryu

Greetings. I'm only vaguely aware of the Daito-ryu tradition, but aren't there weapon-arts taught in the Daito-ryu as well as grappling? I seem to recall viewing a joint-demonstration of DR that included kenjutsu. Does the DR, or perhaps a specific DR-branch, teach weapon-arts as well? (Note: I'm not talking about Takeda-ryu). If so, then the "arts taught" could be updated with (as an example): "Kenjutsu - Roppokai-branch" "Hanbojutsu - Roppokai, Tokimune-branch" and along those lines. If it becomes to complex to include that info the info-box then its no prob. Fred26 06:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to move "Daitō-ryū aiki-jūjutsu" to "Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu"

It seems to me that this article article is improperly named. The article is primarily about the school of Daito-ryu, and only secondarily about the martial art that Daito-ryu teaches, which is called "aiki-jujutsu". The way the article is presently titled, it gives the impression that the article is primarily about aiki-jujutsu, and the words "Daito-ryu" are a qualifier as to whose brand of aiki-jujutsu the article is about (as if there were other types of aiki-jujutsu). Therefore, the article should be titled simply Daito-ryu, (and at somepoint, "aiki-jujutsu" probably needs its own article). Alternately, the words "aiki-jujutsu" might properly be part of the school's name, like Shodokan Aikido. If that is the case, then "aiki-jujutsu" should have a capital "A". Due to the manner in which almost all of Daito-ryu's publications are titled, I believe the correct course of action is for the article to be moved to Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu, indicating that is the full name of the organization which is the subject of this article. Any comments or objections? Bradford44 23:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

MATT: Capital A seems appropriate to me if judo is properly under Kodokan Judo or Itto-ryu kenjutsu is properly Itto-ryu Kenjutsu. Also none of the publications for the art feature a hyphen in the name (eg, books on the subject by Pranin, Certa, Omiya ...even Obata etc.). Why not Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu? Is it so people will recognize that aikijujutsu is a type of jujutsu? Not that I feel really strongly either way.--Mateo2006 03:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, in general, using examples from other articles will not be helpful, because there is a lack of consistency. In fact, the article about Kodokan Judo is currently at Kodokan, and Itto-ryu is currently at Ittō-ryū. Please be aware of the difference, though, between arts where the name of the martial art practiced (such as "judo" or "kenjutsu") is a part of the name of the school, and where it is just describing the school. If it is part of the school's "official" name, it should be capitalized, and be included in the name of the article. If it is not part of the school's official name, it should not even be part of the article's title, much less capitalized. Thus, I believe (and I could be mistaken) that Kodokan should actually be moved to Kodokan Judo, while Ittō-ryū should stay where it is. A good rule of thumb might be, if you were to go to Japan, and look at the sign hanging over the front door, what would it say. I suppose Itto-ryu might included "Kenjutsu" after it, but certainly any of the comprehensive koryu would have only the name of the school. Daito-ryu, on the other hand, seems to clearly use "Aikijujutsu" as part of its name. There's even a great old photo of Morihei Ueshiba from the 1930s, sitting in seiza in front of a sword stand and a hanging banner that reads (in kanji, of course) "Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu".

Regarding the hyphen in "aiki-jujutsu", I may have actually been the one to add that originally. It's purely a personal preference issue. There are no rules regarding hyphens in Hepburn romanization, their use is up to the judgment of the writer to include them wherever they help to improve clarity. I felt that an English-speaking reader with no Japanese experience might have a hard time with "aikijujutsu", because all of the repetitive vowels kind of make the word blur together, and it is a logical place to break the word up, without making it look like two entirely separate words. Or putting it another way, it makes "aikijujutsu" readily identifiable as a compound word, and clearly shows the two root words. I am not at all attached to doing it this way, though, and would have no problem with them all being changed back to "aikijujutsu", if anyone feels strongly about it. Bradford44 13:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

That all seems sound thinking to me Bradford44. Other opinions out there?--Mateo2006 14:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

It's been more than five days with no objections, so I'm going to make the move. Bradford44 19:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Techniques section

I'm going to try to add kanji to the techniques section, as well as convert the lists into a table, but I wanted to know first what "Hiden Mokuroku" was there to indicate where it is in parentheses following "Shoden". Bradford44 19:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)