A Unified Field Theory: Aiki and Weapons — Adagio un Poco Mosso

This article should now be considered a work-in-progress, of interest both for the discussion it engendered as well as presenting an earlier perspective on my work. I have radically revised this essay in my new book, HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT. Some of the conclusions I have reached are somewhat at variance to what you will find here. Those interested in the book can find it at www.edgework.info/buy.html

PART IV - Ueshiba Morihei and Weapons — Kobukan sword: Shinto-ryu, Kage-ryu, Chujo-ryu

Refiner’s Fire

And then Ueshiba Morihei studied Daito-ryu — simply put, the sun around which his creative energies first revolved, and from which they later evolved. Here lies what he embraced, what he embellished, and what he rejected. Did he study weaponry in any detail from Takeda Sokaku? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But even if he didn’t, even if such instruction was limited, Ueshiba learned Daito-ryu empty-hand methods, and he began to develop his own way of expressing aiki with weapons as well.

In the 1920’s, he began to teach: first, at Ayabe, and then at the Kobukan, he became one of the most significant teachers of martial arts in Japan. Unlike today, where some, at least, regard aikido as an idealistic, not-very-effective martial practice, Ueshiba was recognized as a formidable man - many, from a variety of disciplines, regarded him as the best they had ever seen. He was not only sponsored by dignitaries, but many of the leading martial artists in Japan regarded him with admiration, even reverence. He readily took challenges, and humbled some very strong men.

Unlike many, who achieve some skill and then rest on their considerable laurels, Ueshiba was hungry — he continued to desire to learn. Sugino Yoshio stated, “Ueshiba was always smiling or laughing cheerfully like some sort of playful god, but when it came to bujutsu he had an almost superhuman insight. Whenever we were watching demonstrations of other martial arts he would provide his own running commentary - ‘That technique was like this… Did you see that movement he just did? It was actually this kind of movement here… .’ and so on. He understood everything that was being done, even if he was watching from a distance.”

From a Japanese social context, however, Ueshiba was somewhat constrained in how he learned. He had not only achieved a certain level of notoriety — he was the master of his own art. Thus, he could not study from just anyone, no matter how good they might be. Additionally, he had already established, through his studies with Takeda Sokaku, his “core” art. It is very likely that he “stole” techniques - even essential knowledge (gokui) - from other ryu through the kind of observation Sugino describes. Rather than trying to learn NEW martial arts, however, it is obvious from what he did over the rest of his life that he was trying to REFINE his own art — and he used other arts to that end.

Kenjutsu at the Kobukan

Although more a useful working image than strictly factual, Japanese kenjutsu has been subsumed into three general categories, allegedly the three primordial lines from which it emerged: Shinto-ryu, Chujo-ryu and Kage-ryu. Shinto-ryu encompasses such famous schools as Tenshin-Shoden Katori Shinto-ryu, Kashima Shinto-ryu, Kashima Shin-ryu and Bokuden-ryu; Kage-ryu is the mother lode from which emerged, among myriads of others, Yagyu Shinkage-ryu and Jikishinkage-ryu; and from Chujo-ryu, perhaps the most influential, emerged Toda-ryu, Nen-ryu and Itto-ryu. Chujo-ryu is perhaps the most central influence on the development of modern kendo. To some degree, each of these lines passes through the Kobukan.

Tenshin-Shoden Katori Shinto-ryu (TSKSR) “entered” the Kobukan through three young men: Mochizuki Minoru, Murashige Aritoshi, and then later, Sugino Yoshio. Mochizuki and Murashige were dispatched, along with Tomiki Kenji, by Kano Jigoro. The former two men studied Katori Shinto-ryu at the Kodokan, something Sugino studied in far more depth as well. Ueshiba regarded Mochizuki and Sugino quite highly, even considering them, separately, as prospective son-in-laws. Is it possible that TSKSR had a significant influence on Ueshiba’s sword or staff? It is very unlikely - for several reasons. Technically speaking, TSKSR has a quite unique style of kata — long chains of waza linked together, with killing techniques “hidden” within the linkages. Bo techniques are done in “overhand” fashion, with a lot of body-displacement and crushing blows: spear methods have a characteristic tucking of the butt of the weapon underneath the armpit upon the thrust; and sword is typified by methods that insure that one avoids one’s helmet and other armor when cutting. Ueshiba could have, as Sugino describes, absorbed through observation if these young men practiced TSKSR while at the Kobukan — but no tincture of its methods are apparent in his sword methods.

At any rate, Ueshiba could not have directly learned from them. They were his students, and such a role reversal was unthinkable, particularly because they were not teachers, merely young men, avid though they might have been. It would have been a loss of considerable face if TSKSR techniques started to appear in Ueshiba’s sword or staff, he thereby copying his young, not-even-fully-trained deshi.

Kendo, however, became quite significant at that time. As is well known, Nakakura Kiyoshi entered under Ueshiba’s aegis, becoming his son-in-law, and he started a kendo class at the Kobukan. This must have been a wonderful outlet for the hot-blooded young uchi-deshi, because, unlike the kata-type practice of Ueshiba’s aikijutsu, they could actually compete against one another. Did Ueshiba learn kendo from his son-in-law? Of course not! But it is probable that the developing weapons skills of the young men of this period — Shirata Rinjiro, for example — were influenced by their hours practicing kendo. This is borne out by the fact that the vast majority of the uchi-deshi from the Kobukan did not emerge with sword skills bearing the stamp of one or another sword school, nor do they display high level skills with the sword from the perspective of classical kenjutsu. Instead, they very likely learned the basics of using a sword through their kendo practice, skills that were refined on an informal (if anything with their teacher could be truly informal) basis, either by observing Ueshiba using weapons to teach principles, or specific one-on-one instruction - the latter surely resulting in all the variations on a theme we see among Ueshiba’s closest students. For example, Sudanomari Kanshu stated in an Aikido Journal Interview: “I learned personally from O-Sensei when I was an uchideshi, and saw his way of swinging the ken, and when I was thrown by him or when he applied techniques on me and, of course, after I came to Kumamoto for about the first 3 years in both the spring and fall when O-Sensei came to give seminars. Then when I went home I would practice swinging the ken myself. The key to swinging the ken freely in all directions is the use of the hips. I was taught the methods of swinging the jo individually by Ueshiba Sensei. Those jo movements were in fragmented form and I combined them into a single flowing movement as a training method.”

Shirata Rinjiro, as described by his long-time student, Allen Beebe, in his post in the forum thread, “Origins of the AikiJo Revisited,” seems to have learned in a similar manner. Mr. Beebe describes nine ken kata (apparently solo forms, several with sub-groupings), which have “no significant similarity at all to Saito sensei’s ken practice.” He goes on to describe ken awase and kumitachi forms, as well as jo suburi, kumijo, and jo tai ken “which do bear some similarity to Saito sensei’s ken forms. However, I would hasten to point out that the execution of all of these were qualitatively different … . Misogi-no-jo seems to be Shirata sensei’s creation based on his experience and teaching… . I’m guessing that Saito’s influence was primarily on Shirata sensei’s jo.”*

Returning to the sword, Ueshiba Kisshomaru stated in an interview: “Mr. Shiho Otsubo of the Yagyu Shinkage-ryu used to come to our house in the old days. When he saw my father’s movements one day, he was surprised and said: “You must have studied Yagyu-ryu somewhere.” At the time of this interview, many years after Otsubo would have made his visit, Doshu was focused on the new “historical” development regarding Ueshiba’s early training in Goto-ha Yagyu Shingan-ryu. However, Otsubo, a shihan in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu, would not have seen similarities to Shinkage-ryu - which is what he would have meant by “Yagyu-ryu” - were there merely influences from Shingan-ryu in Ueshiba’s weapons techniques. Goto-ha Yagyu Shingan-ryu is a wonderful martial art, but it is referred to as “taijutsu” — body technique — for a reason. It uses the muscles and the skeletal structure as a generator of massive, crushing force. I am not saying that it is crude — far from it! But it is a radically different method of combat from Yagyu Shinkage-ryu’s sophisticated slashing, that is complete with some of the best Irimi - entering technique - in any koryu kenjutsu. Otsubo, obviously offering what was, from his perspective, quite a compliment, was saying that he saw Shinkage-ryu, NOT Shingan-ryu. But was not the hackneyed claim that Ueshiba did Yagyu Shinkage-ryu sword long-ago debunked — the Shinkage-ryu menkyo of Takeda Sokaku referring to jujutsu and the Yagyu “mid-level-unsigned-certificate” that of the Yagyu Shingan-ryu?

At my request, Toby Threadgill contacted Shishida Fumiaki, a prominent martial arts historian and one of the leading shihan of Shodokan (Tomiki) aikido. The passage in his reply relevant to our discussion is as follows: “He (Tomiki) told me that he learned Shinkage-Yagyu-ryu (kenjyutsu) with Ueshiba from master Gejo Kosaburo in Tokyo.” Does this not contradict my thesis above about Ueshiba — a master of his own school — studying from someone else? Gejo was a special case, however. He was, I believe, friendly with Takeda Sokaku, thus Ueshiba’s elder not only in years but in budo hierarchy. If he was Takeda’s friend, he would be, in that world, a kind of “uncle.” He was a shihan in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu. Equally important, he was a retired Imperial Navy Admiral (I’ve also read Commander). Ueshiba was, thus, honored by Gejo studying with him. All of this, together, created a particular social context which allowed Ueshiba to also study from him without any loss of face. Gejo is seen in photos of the period, a saintly looking elderly man with a wispy white beard — almost the template for Ueshiba in future decades - sitting at the place of honor to the right of Ueshiba.

What this suggests is that, not only did Ueshiba pursue his own training in the company of one-or-another of his students, he really did seem to select people out as specifically suitable both for his own training and for theirs as well. Here Tomiki - and perhaps unnamed others - was receiving special training in the company of their own teacher! It may, however, be objected that perhaps Tomiki was embellishing his own history a bit — perhaps Gejo showed a few things to Ueshiba in his presence, but this, the argument could go, would not constitute real training.

We have, however, proof that Ueshiba learned Yagyu Shinkage-ryu with some degree of depth. This proof lies in the sword method of Hikitsuchi Michio. Hikitsuchi taught three sword forms, called Sho (matsu — pine), Chiku (take — bamboo), and Bai (ume — plum). According to Meik Skoss, who trained under Hikitsuchi, “Sho” embodies Irimi — the triangle; “Chiku” embodies Tenkan — the circle: and “Bai” embodies Osae — the square. Fascinatingly, these three kumitachi forms are modifications of forms from Yagyu Shinkage-ryu: “Sho” is Kaboku, #4 from Kuka no Tachi; “Chiku” is Settetsu, #2 from Sangakuen no Tachi; and “Bai” is Ozume, #7 from Kuka no Tachi. In essence, then, not only did Ueshiba learn a good deal of the Yagyu Shinkage-ryu curriculum, he abstracted out three different forms as a: the embodiment of what were, to him, the three fundamental principals of his art, and b. creating a curriculum, using these forms as “containers,” specifically tailored to Hikitsuchi Michio.

This puts one more sword school in a somewhat different light. In the late 1930’s, somewhat after Gejo Kosaburo no longer appears in the Kobukan history or photos, two members of the Kashima Shinto-ryu, Mssrs. Iida and Aoki, on their return home from teaching at the Kodokan Kobudo section, would stop by the Kobukan. They taught Kashima Shinto-ryu to Ueshiba Kisshomaru and Akazawa Zenzaburo for a period of about one year, with Ueshiba Morihei observing. Social forms were also observed — only Ueshiba Morihei, along with Akazawa, signed the enrollment books of the ryu as a student — it would have been odd, Ueshiba Kisshomaru says, for a father and son to enroll together. Doshu states, “My father would watch us practice and then, after they had left, we would train together, saying how in “Aiki” we should do it this or that way.” Ueshiba let this year’s training “jell” for a number of years. Doshu went on to state, “He began to practice this weapon as it is now being done in Iwama around 1955.” What I find fascinating is that this is probably around the same time he was teaching Hikitsuchi his distillation of Yagyu Shinkage-ryu.

Refined Fire

In the same interview that I cited, just above, Ueshiba Kisshomaru also stated, “My father never taught the ken in a systematic manner either.” This is, I believe, almost completely true. Similar to my thesis regarding Takeda Sokaku, I believe that Ueshiba, particularly when it came to weaponry, taught in the moment. He took each student with the skills, potential skills (or lack of skills) that they had, and taught them a version of aiki-ken suitable to that instant in time. Unlike Takeda, however, who was already a complete master of any number of weapons when he started teaching Daito-ryu, Ueshiba was a work-in-progress, still refining his art — particularly his weapons skills - until a few years before his death. It is likely that the majority of his students learned sword much as Sudanomari Kanshu — a somewhat free-form combination of observation and coaching.

Others — Tomiki Kenji, for example, and Ueshiba Kisshomaru and Akazawa Zenzaburo, actually participated in Ueshiba’s studies as they were happening. Rather than merely observing and picking up a trick (or gokui) here-and-there, Ueshiba continued to engage in some degree of formal study of various sword forms up until the late 1930’s.

Finally, a select few individuals — Saito Morihiro and Hikitsuchi Michio being the two that I am aware of — were presented with kata actually derived from specific ryu, which served as containers to hold what Ueshiba felt were the essential principles that THAT individual, at least, needed to learn, as well as a vehicle for Ueshiba to work out things of particular interest in his own training. It is possible, thereby, that an examination of the essential differences of Hikitsuchi and Saito’s ken forms could reveal, as much as anything, different lines of Ueshiba’s exploration of the principles of aiki, and in a sense, how he regarded Saito and Hikitsuchi. There is a particular intimacy that develops when practicing weapon-to-weapon. The forms and methods of practice developed with each of Ueshiba’s deshi are a distillation of his relationship with that man.

As for the younger - postwar - deshi, most of the Tokyo students seem to have used Saito sensei’s forms as their initial jumping off point. However, just last week, I watched a class of Kato Hiroshi, who seems to have taken the pastiche of sword and jo that Ueshiba showed in Tokyo, and applying his understanding of Ueshiba’s aikido, has developed a very unique, very fine method of embodying aikido within the sword. Unlike the “attack-and-response” type of awase techniques that I have seen in many versions of aiki-ken, Kato seems to combine deflection (which is a small tenkan) and attack (irimi) in one move. Kato here seems to be following in the same kind of footsteps as Sudanomari Kanshu and numerous others - his aikiken is a kind of ideal picture of what he received from Ueshiba. Absorbing and processing what he learned, his weapons work becomes a kind of living photograph of a relationship. You can see and experience what he paid particular attention to, and what it meant to him. This personal expression of one’s teacher’s instruction certainly exists in the movements of the successors of classical ryu, but it is far more hidden within the kata. Here, it is almost naked.

In sum, then, what is the REAL aikido sword? Who is teaching a method of sword that conveys the principles that, although he conformed to no ryu or organized method, led the utterly terrifying kendo and iaido master, Haga Jun’ichi, to assert that Ueshiba was the best swordsman in Japan? It would be that which embodies most closely the principles that Ueshiba Morihei asserted were primary: Circle, Square, and Triangle, these three melding to become Takemusu Aiki. This is surely a disappointing answer - almost a cliche. But, in truth, it is the only answer - recall Ueshiba breaking down Kashima Shinto-ryu kata with his son - “… in Aiki, we should do it this or that way.” For Ueshiba, it was that simple. And you?

*I will return to staff weapons in Part V. Suffice it to say here that it is not surprising that Saito sensei’s influence on Shirata sensei (and all of the post-war instructors) in the realm of the jo was huge, because Ueshiba’s jo is largely a postwar development, a path that leads, for the most part, through Iwama.

www.ellisamdur.com

Ellis Amdur — April 14^th, 2006 (add comment)