# GM CHOI Yong Sul's first student



## puunui (Apr 14, 2012)

By the way, many people mistakenly believe that GM CHOI Yong Sul's first student was GM SUH Bok Sup. That is not true. GM Choi also taught in Japan prior to moving back to Korea after WWII.


----------



## mastercole (Apr 14, 2012)

puunui said:


> By the way, many people mistakenly believe that GM CHOI Yong Sul's first student was GM SUH Bok Sup. That is not true. GM Choi also taught in Japan prior to moving back to Korea after WWII.



A senior who knew GM Choi told me that GM Choi use to travel with Takeda Sensei and assist in demonstrations. And Takeda Sensei would have GM Choi fight with any trouble makers that showed up at their training. It certainly seems that he would have been a instructor while in Japan. I also heard he spoke fluent Japanese, without an accent.


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 15, 2012)

Yet, when any evidence has been asked for, it has been found lacking. The most anyone in Japan can remember is a Korean national who attended one or two seminars (as a student), and trained on rare occasions with Ueshiba while keeping up occasional correspondence with him. The claims of being the demonstration assistant in trips to Hawaii, demonstrations in front of the Emperor, being an adopted son of Takeda, living at his mountain home, or even being taught Daito Ryu by Takeda, let alone to the level claimed, has so far only had evidence in the form of "Choi said so". There is no record of any name he said he was known by in the Daito Ryu's records, nor any support for most of the claims mentioned. 

If you want the other side of the story, that is...


----------



## mastercole (Apr 15, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Yet, when any evidence has been asked for, it has been found lacking. The most anyone in Japan can remember is a Korean national who attended one or two seminars (as a student), and trained on rare occasions with Ueshiba while keeping up occasional correspondence with him. The claims of being the demonstration assistant in trips to Hawaii, demonstrations in front of the Emperor, being an adopted son of Takeda, living at his mountain home, or even being taught Daito Ryu by Takeda, let alone to the level claimed, has so far only had evidence in the form of "Choi said so". There is no record of any name he said he was known by in the Daito Ryu's records, nor any support for most of the claims mentioned.
> 
> If you want the other side of the story, that is...



I'll take GM Choi's story over your guess work.


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 16, 2012)

The problem is that Choi's story is full of holes, inconsistencies, easily disprovable claims, and no direct evidence for support. The idea that he couldn't demonstrate his claimed ranking/licencing within Daito Ryu as he left his documentation on the train (not saying that couldn't happen, Kunii Zen'ya of the Kashima Shinryu apparently left a number of old densho on a taxi after a TV appearance...) flies in the face of the fact that such licences would not only be listed on his licence, it would also be listed in Daito Ryu's records, where Choi's name (both his Korean and his Japanese adopted one) is conspicuously absent. 

You can continue to believe it if you want, but you may also want to take a closer look at what you're believing....

Oh, and it's not really guesswork, for the record.


----------



## zDom (Apr 16, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> The problem is that Choi's story is full of holes, inconsistencies, easily disprovable claims, and no direct evidence for support. The idea that he couldn't demonstrate his claimed ranking/licencing within Daito Ryu as he left his documentation on the train (not saying that couldn't happen, Kunii Zen'ya of the Kashima Shinryu apparently left a number of old densho on a taxi after a TV appearance...) flies in the face of the fact that such licences would not only be listed on his licence, it would also be listed in Daito Ryu's records, where Choi's name (both his Korean and his Japanese adopted one) is conspicuously absent.




I am not disputing anything you have said.

But people who attempt to establish themselves as martial arts masters without any trained skill are rejected by those with a reasonable ability to assess a potential instructor and produce paper tiger from those not wise enough to see through the ruse.

Choi's students have demonstrated remarkable proficiency and ability. He reportedly impressed them with his knowledge of martial art techniques.

What are you thoughts: how is it that Choi ended up being able to successfully defend himself with martial art techniques, many of which bear notable similarity to DRAJJ, and to teach those techniques to a long list of students?

By watching? Then he was a genius.

He made them up? Then he was a genius.


Some other Ju Jutsu instructor? Any ideas on who it could have been, what type?

What are the possibilities other than "Takeda Sokaku trained him"?


----------



## puunui (Apr 16, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Yet, when any evidence has been asked for, it has been found lacking.



Incorrect. GM Choi's testimony is evidence, credible evidence that is not lacking. 



Chris Parker said:


> The most anyone in Japan can remember is a Korean national who attended one or two seminars (as a student), and trained on rare occasions with Ueshiba while keeping up occasional correspondence with him.



Incorrect. As far as people remembering, this may be due to the fact that hard research on GM Choi's experiences in Japan from the Japan perspective did not begin until the early 1980s, when I began corresponding with Sensei Stanley Pranin of Aiki News. We would write letters and he also would send me cassette tapes of his thoughts and research into the subject. By that time, most practitioners who had studied directly with Takeda Sensei either passed away, or were in their 80s or 90s. 

Pranin Sensei did look through the attendence and payment ledgers of Takeda Sensei and he could not find any entries regarding GM Choi. But what they don't mention is that there is also no entries in the attendance or payment ledgers of Takeda Sensei's son Tokimune Sensei either. In addition, there are photos of GM Choi standing with groups of Daito Ryu students, notably Hisa Sensei during the Asahi Newspaper period. Hisa Sensei is listed in the records, but not GM Choi, even though there is photographic evidence that GM Choi at those training sessions and seminars as well, standing in the back of the photo.




Chris Parker said:


> The claims of being the demonstration assistant in trips to Hawaii,



The japanese newspapers of the time that were published in Hawaii would have covered such demonstrations and those newspapers are still available at the University of Hawaii library on microfiche. It's on my list to go look through those newspapers. They weren't that thick back then, not like today's newspapers, so it would be a hard thing to go scan for that sort of thing. 




Chris Parker said:


> demonstrations in front of the Emperor,



in front of the royal family, not necessarily the Emperor.



Chris Parker said:


> being an adopted son of Takeda,



This has been explained before, that GM Choi felt Takeda Sensei was like his father, since he did not have one since he left Korea. It is a common feeling among those who have been raised by people other than their natural parents. GM LEE Won Kuk used to say I was like his grandson, even though we are not related. 



Chris Parker said:


> living at his mountain home, or even being taught Daito Ryu by Takeda, let alone to the level claimed, has so far only had evidence in the form of "Choi said so".



No, there are pictures. 



Chris Parker said:


> There is no record of any name he said he was known by in the Daito Ryu's records, nor any support for most of the claims mentioned.



Discussed above. It should also be mentioned that the Daito Ryu records are incomplete. We do not have all of the records. Some were lost. 



Chris Parker said:


> If you want the other side of the story, that is...



Funny but when it comes to taekwondo, the karate people are quick to accuse taekwondo as being nothing but shotokan karate, even though, when you think about it, there is no "evidence" of that other than the testimony of those who claimed to have trained in Japan. But when it comes to Hapkido, often those same people are just as quick to deny any connection to Daito Ryu. How funny is that?


----------



## puunui (Apr 16, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> The problem is that Choi's story is full of holes, inconsistencies, easily disprovable claims, and no direct evidence for support. The idea that he couldn't demonstrate his claimed ranking/licencing within Daito Ryu as he left his documentation on the train (not saying that couldn't happen, Kunii Zen'ya of the Kashima Shinryu apparently left a number of old densho on a taxi after a TV appearance...) flies in the face of the fact that such licences would not only be listed on his licence, it would also be listed in Daito Ryu's records, where Choi's name (both his Korean and his Japanese adopted one) is conspicuously absent.



Tokimune Sensei also did not have any licenses in Daito Ryu, and he also is not listed as a student in the attendance or payment books.


----------



## elder999 (Apr 16, 2012)

puunui said:


> Funny but when it comes to taekwondo, the karate people are quick to accuse taekwondo as being nothing but shotokan karate, even though, when you think about it, there is no "evidence" of that other than the testimony of those who claimed to have trained in Japan. But when it comes to Hapkido, often those same people are just as quick to deny any connection to Daito Ryu. How funny is that?



Well, I covered this all six years ago, in this post:



> I don't have a dog in this hunt at all, anymore, but here's the little I was able to find out when I was interested, that might be of interest to some of you.
> 
> Here&#8217;s part an interview Stanley Pranin did with Ueshiba&#8217;s son on the matter:
> 
> ...



Which is, after all, a sight more credible than Choi's having made it up whole cloth, or inheriting some ancient tradition in a hidden Korean monastery......:lfao:


----------



## puunui (Apr 16, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Richard Kim once said  that Choi studied with Yoshida Kotaro-and that Choi&#8217;s Japanese name was  also Kotaro-though they were not related at all. This may contribute to  the whole &#8220;adapted son&#8221; theme, though.



Funny, because that information came, again, from me. I still have the letter (written in 1982) that Sensei Richard Kim sent to me explaining all of that. And Pranin Sensei asked Kisshomaru Sensei those questions because our correspondence regarding Hapkido and its connection to Aikido and/or Daito Ryu. Now people want to come around 30 years later and want argue about it....


----------



## elder999 (Apr 16, 2012)

puunui said:


> Funny, because that information came, again, from me. I still have the letter (written in 1982) that Sensei Richard Kim sent to me explaining all of that. And Pranin Sensei asked Kisshomaru Sensei those questions because our correspondence regarding Hapkido and its connection to Aikido and/or Daito Ryu. Now people want to come around 30 years later and want argue about it....



Yeah, but I posted it *here* first, four years before you were a member, and got it from other sources. 

Kind of makes it old news, for those who are paying attention.......


----------



## puunui (Apr 16, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Yeah, but I posted it *here* first, four years before you were a member, and got it from other sources.
> 
> Kind of makes it old news, for those who are paying attention.......



Thanks for trying to get the word out, although you can be sure there will be those that misinterpret the information.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Apr 16, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Which is, after all, more credible than Choi's having made it up whole cloth, or inheriting some ancient tradition in a hidden Korean monastery......:lfao:



I've seen the interview in AN. It was interesting but I found it odd that  Stanley Pranin asks specifically about a Korean named "Choi" and Kisshomeru Ueshiba answers about a "young Korean." It certainly could've been Choi, Yong Sul but there was at least one other Korean who studied Daito Ryu (Jang In Mok, for example). It's too bad he didn't specify Choi, Yong Sul by name. 

The possible link to Kotaro Yoshida is interesting. If Richard Kim is correct, however, it makes me wonder why GM Choi would refer to Sokaku Takeda as his "adopted father" instead of Kotaro Yoshida. I will also point out that there is some controversy surrounding some of Richard Kim's scholarly work so _caveat emptor_. If Katsuyuki Kondo, who also trained with Kotaro Yoshida at one point, could corroborate this story that would be pretty firm evidence.

I will point out that Tokimune Takeda didn't receive any sort of official Daito Ryu ranking because he was a member of the Takeda family. That is a practicethat was carried over by Morihei Ueshiba when he founded Aikido. Neither his son nor his grandson received any ranks even though they trained in the art. There's just no parallel between that and Choi, Yong Sul losing his certificates (which is certainly possible in a post war-Korea).

Anyway, the bottom line is GM Choi learned something somewhere from someone and by all accounts was phenomenal. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## puunui (Apr 16, 2012)

chrispillertkd said:


> I've seen the interview in AN. It was interesting but I found it odd that  Stanley Pranin asks specifically about a Korean named "Choi" and Kisshomeru Ueshiba answers about a "young Korean." It certainly could've been Choi, Yong Sul but there was at least one other Korean who studied Daito Ryu (Jang In Mok, for example). It's too bad he didn't specify Choi, Yong Sul by name.



He didn't specify because he didn't know. He was simply repeating what he had been told. Pranin Sensei did follow up and found an entry in the Daito Ryu enrollment ledger regarding a group of korean students who attended a seminar, but GM Choi was not part of that group. 



chrispillertkd said:


> The possible link to Kotaro Yoshida is interesting. If Richard Kim is correct, however, it makes me wonder why GM Choi would refer to Sokaku Takeda as his "adopted father" instead of Kotaro Yoshida.



Even if Sensei Kim were correct, it doesn't not necessarily lead to the idea that GM Choi was with Yoshida Sensei rather than Takeda Sensei, especially given the photo of GM Choi with Takeda Sensei at the Asahi Newspaper period. 



chrispillertkd said:


> I will point out that Tokimune Takeda didn't receive any sort of official Daito Ryu ranking because he was a member of the Takeda family. That is a practicethat was carried over by Morihei Ueshiba when he founded Aikido. Neither his son nor his grandson received any ranks even though they trained in the art. There's just no parallel between that and Choi, Yong Sul losing his certificates (which is certainly possible in a post war-Korea).



First of all, it is never established that the martial arts certificates that GM Choi references when he lost his bags at the train station were Daito Ryu certificates. That is a leap in logic. Secondly, there is a parallel with GM Choi and Tokimune Sensei if GM Choi did act as Takeda Sensei's manservant for all those years, and never paid for lessons, because that would mean he would have no reason to be included in payment ledgers. However, we come back to the facts that GM Choi is in a photo with Takeda Sensei and HISA Takuma Sensei (who was awarded the highest license in Daito Ryu) and Hisa Sensei is listed in the records, but GM Choi is not. How do you explain that?


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 19, 2012)

puunui said:


> Incorrect. GM Choi's testimony is evidence, credible evidence that is not lacking.



I'm a little surprised I need to explain what the term "found lacking" means here, honestly... it doesn't mean there isn't any evidence, it means that the evidence presented (found) has problems, issues, gaps (is lacking). So, uh, yeah, all evidence so far has been found lacking. 



puunui said:


> Incorrect. As far as people remembering, this may be due to the fact that hard research on GM Choi's experiences in Japan from the Japan perspective did not begin until the early 1980s, when I began corresponding with Sensei Stanley Pranin of Aiki News. We would write letters and he also would send me cassette tapes of his thoughts and research into the subject. By that time, most practitioners who had studied directly with Takeda Sensei either passed away, or were in their 80s or 90s.
> 
> Pranin Sensei did look through the attendence and payment ledgers of Takeda Sensei and he could not find any entries regarding GM Choi. But what they don't mention is that there is also no entries in the attendance or payment ledgers of Takeda Sensei's son Tokimune Sensei either. In addition, there are photos of GM Choi standing with groups of Daito Ryu students, notably Hisa Sensei during the Asahi Newspaper period. Hisa Sensei is listed in the records, but not GM Choi, even though there is photographic evidence that GM Choi at those training sessions and seminars as well, standing in the back of the photo.



So you're saying that my comment of "as far as anyone remembers" isn't correct, as all the accounts are vague and contradictory to Choi's story, and when Stan Pranin looked into it, he couldn't find any evidence other than a photo or two, taken at one time, rather than over the 30 year claimed timeline, most likely at one of the seminars that he possibly attended? So my statement is incorrect as you have presented evidence that supports the contention?



puunui said:


> The japanese newspapers of the time that were published in Hawaii would have covered such demonstrations and those newspapers are still available at the University of Hawaii library on microfiche. It's on my list to go look through those newspapers. They weren't that thick back then, not like today's newspapers, so it would be a hard thing to go scan for that sort of thing.



Off you go, then.



puunui said:


> in front of the royal family, not necessarily the Emperor.



Ah, quite a distinction, then. That makes it a true claim. Obviously.



puunui said:


> This has been explained before, that GM Choi felt Takeda Sensei was like his father, since he did not have one since he left Korea. It is a common feeling among those who have been raised by people other than their natural parents. GM LEE Won Kuk used to say I was like his grandson, even though we are not related.



First off, this, like almost everything else, is not about you.

Next, haven't we covered this, honestly, weak reasoning by you before by quoting Choi's own words? Here we go again, then: http://www.hapkido-info.net/html/choi__yong-sul.html Note particularly "Takeda Sokaku liked me, and feeling for my situation decided to adopt me."

Again, it's not claimed that Choi was "like a son", it is claimed, by Choi himself, that Takeda "decided to adopt (him)". 



puunui said:


> No, there are pictures.



Pictures don't really mean much, other than that they were in the same place at one time... which is fine if we consider that Choi most likely attended one seminar at least. But that's not what's being put forth.



puunui said:


> Discussed above. It should also be mentioned that the Daito Ryu records are incomplete. We do not have all of the records. Some were lost.



Oh my, really? Daito Ryu are rather known for being quite meticulous, you realize. I'd want to hear where your evidence comes from for this, honestly.



puunui said:


> Funny but when it comes to taekwondo, the karate people are quick to accuse taekwondo as being nothing but shotokan karate, even though, when you think about it, there is no "evidence" of that other than the testimony of those who claimed to have trained in Japan. But when it comes to Hapkido, often those same people are just as quick to deny any connection to Daito Ryu. How funny is that?



Are you really saying that these are the same thing? TKD is pointed out to be based strongly on Shotokan (and other karate forms in some cases, but dominantly Shotokan) due to records found, and the physical evidence of the techniques and more, in order to counter the claim that it's a historical, 2,000 year old Korean system. It's a modern Korean system which is primarily taken from the aforementioned systems. 

The claims for Daito Ryu/Hapkido are centered around Choi's claims of three decades of training, and learning techniques that no other Daito Ryu students ever learnt, and so on. The evidence for that is non-existant, frankly. Yes, there is certainly a similarity between the approach to joint locks and throws in Hapkido and early, basic methods in Daito Ryu, but that detail itself shows the claims to be bunk, really. Is there no connection to Daito Ryu? That's never been the question. The question is how much of a connection there is.

I've gone on record here as saying that I don't think the early pioneers of TKD got that far into their karate training either, by the way, so making the connection between TKD/Shotokan and Hapkido/Daito Ryu isn't really a good one either.



puunui said:


> Tokimune Sensei also did not have any licenses in Daito Ryu, and he also is not listed as a student in the attendance or payment books.



We'll come back to this... but he does exist in the records, you realize.... 



puunui said:


> He didn't specify because he didn't know. He was simply repeating what he had been told. Pranin Sensei did follow up and found an entry in the Daito Ryu enrollment ledger regarding a group of korean students who attended a seminar, but GM Choi was not part of that group.



Ooh, there's other reasons that he didn't specify, I'd say... 



puunui said:


> Even if Sensei Kim were correct, it doesn't not necessarily lead to the idea that GM Choi was with Yoshida Sensei rather than Takeda Sensei, especially given the photo of GM Choi with Takeda Sensei at the Asahi Newspaper period.



Out of interest, are you referring to this photo:http://www.scottshaw.com/history.html (under "Takeda and Choi")?

Here's what it says about that photo, if you can't find it there:



> This photograph, taken in the early 1900's, shows Takeda Sokaku, Ohbata Shigeta, Hiratsuka Katsuharu, Yoshida Kotaro and several other men. It is sometimes claimed to also depict Yong Shul Choi, (first row, second from the left). Initially, it must be noted that employees, especially those of Korean decent, were never photographed with their Japanese superiors. Furthermore, the name of this man was Takuzo Kawatani. This individual was an associate of Hiratsuka Katsuharu.​



So, uh, this photo is your evidence? I will say that the a lot of the rest of the information I treat with a degree of scepticism.



puunui said:


> First of all, it is never established that the martial arts certificates that GM Choi references when he lost his bags at the train station were Daito Ryu certificates. That is a leap in logic.



Actually, most accounts state that Choi lost his luggage and all of his valuables, including his "Menkyo Kaiden certificate" in Daito Ryu.... we'll come back to that. But, for one account, here's a link: http://www.rimshapkido.org/history.html



puunui said:


> Secondly, there is a parallel with GM Choi and Tokimune Sensei if GM Choi did act as Takeda Sensei's manservant for all those years, and never paid for lessons, because that would mean he would have no reason to be included in payment ledgers.



No, there isn't a parallel. The way Takeda Sokaku taught, he wouldn't teach a manservant. And he wouldn't teach people who weren't members of the Ryu, or of his family, and a manservant doesn't rank as either. Additionally, we have many records with Tokimune's name on them.. his was often seen co-signing along with his fathers on eimokuroku for people such as Hisa Sensei.

Actually, here's quite a good interview with Tokimune which covers ranking used within Daito Ryu, the rules for record keeping, and so on. The fun thing to mention? 

There is no Menkyo Kaiden licence in Daito Ryu. Kaiden, yes, but not Menkyo Kaiden when Takeda Sokaku was issuing them. Mokuroku, Ogi, then Kaiden, with some specific licences such as Kyoju Dairi (assistant instructor): http://www.aikidofaq.com/interviews/daito_ryu.html

I'd also be very hesitant to state that Tokimune didn't have any licencing... very hesitant indeed. 



puunui said:


> However, we come back to the facts that GM Choi is in a photo with Takeda Sensei and HISA Takuma Sensei (who was awarded the highest license in Daito Ryu) and Hisa Sensei is listed in the records, but GM Choi is not. How do you explain that?



Bluntly, it's looking more and more like he attended a seminar or two... but possibly didn't even train in them, simply observed. The reasons for that are that the only attendees of seminars were registered students (there isn't a record of Choi being registered at all) and the instructors/assistants, all of whom were recorded. The idea of him not being recorded indicates that he didn't train, as he would not have been permitted.

Now, to clarify, none of this is meant to diminish his achievements, it's just an exploration as to where it came from. What has been presented in Hapkido is very low level, when looked at against Daito Ryu's syllabus (entry level technique). And if Choi was able to create his system and approach out of watching some  seminars, and then some informal training with some of the students there (which is what is looking more and more likely, bluntly), then it's truly a great achievement for him. But none of that makes the claims any more credible.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 19, 2012)

Chris, what do you have to say regarding Elder's post?


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 19, 2012)

I know the interview, and it doesn't support Choi's claims. If he was really the secret high-level disciple, taught more than any other, he wouldn't refer to Ueshiba as his senior (as Kisshomaru states). Additionally, it only really supports the idea of a single seminar attendance. The comment from Richard Kim honestly strikes me as a little odd, as Choi's Japanese name has been recorded a number of times, but not as "Kotaro" -  it was apparently "Yoshida". That would at least make more sense, as Yoshida is a surname, and would imply a family connection, for the potential confusion. But no, I'm hardly convinced of Choi's claims, and that doesn't really give anything for me to reconsider.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 19, 2012)

Given that you say that DRAJJ 2000 year old history is as debatable as Hapkido's origin in DRAJJ, I just consider the whole issue an historical cluster-(you-know-what) and take it at face value.  If you (the general you) don't accept Choi Dojunim's account or Takeda's account, then you'll never know whatever the truth is anyway, which brings you right back where you started.


----------



## puunui (Apr 19, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> I know the interview, and it doesn't support Choi's claims. If he was really the secret high-level disciple, taught more than any other, he wouldn't refer to Ueshiba as his senior (as Kisshomaru states). Additionally, it only really supports the idea of a single seminar attendance.



Except that the photos which show Takeda Sensei and GM Choi together come from very different times. One for example was taken when both were relatively young. Another was taken when both were much older, at least twenty or more years from the first one I mentioned. 




Chris Parker said:


> The comment from Richard Kim honestly strikes me as a little odd, as Choi's Japanese name has been recorded a number of times, but not as "Kotaro" -  it was apparently "Yoshida". That would at least make more sense, as Yoshida is a surname, and would imply a family connection, for the potential confusion.



What are you talking about here? Is it your understanding that Kim Sensei said that GM Choi's name was YOSHIDA Kotaro? 



Chris Parker said:


> But no, I'm hardly convinced of Choi's claims, and that doesn't really give anything for me to reconsider.



We're (or at least I) not trying to convince you. I get the feeling that once you make up your mind about something, nothing will change your mind.


----------



## puunui (Apr 19, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> I'm a little surprised I need to explain what the term "found lacking" means here, honestly... it doesn't mean there isn't any evidence, it means that the evidence presented (found) has problems, issues, gaps (is lacking). So, uh, yeah, all evidence so far has been found lacking.



It is found lacking, to you. Not to others.




Chris Parker said:


> So you're saying that my comment of "as far as anyone remembers" isn't correct, as all the accounts are vague and contradictory to Choi's story, and when Stan Pranin looked into it, he couldn't find any evidence other than a photo or two, taken at one time, rather than over the 30 year claimed timeline, most likely at one of the seminars that he possibly attended? So my statement is incorrect as you have presented evidence that supports the contention?



No, that is not what I am saying. At all. 



Chris Parker said:


> First off, this, like almost everything else, is not about you.



Just because I use real life examples from my own experiences to illustrate a point does not make it all about me. In fact, I would enjoy if you did the same thing, use examples from your own life to make your points, especially experiences based on your time in Japan, if and when you ever decide to go.



Chris Parker said:


> Next, haven't we covered this, honestly, weak reasoning by you before by quoting Choi's own words? Here we go again, then: http://www.hapkido-info.net/html/choi__yong-sul.html Note particularly "Takeda Sokaku liked me, and feeling for my situation decided to adopt me."



That wasn't his words. That was a translation. Who knows if the translation was accurate. 



Chris Parker said:


> Pictures don't really mean much, other than that they were in the same place at one time... which is fine if we consider that Choi most likely attended one seminar at least.



Yeah, one that is not recorded in the record books.



Chris Parker said:


> Oh my, really? Daito Ryu are rather known for being quite meticulous, you realize. I'd want to hear where your evidence comes from for this, honestly.



it came from Pranin Sensei. He said this specifically: ""According to one of Sokaku's sons, Munemitsu, several books of Takeda's eimeiroku were burned along with some of his personal belongings when his body was cremated upon his death in 1943. Thus, the number of books lost and their percentage of the total number kept by Sokaku Takeda is not known at present." I don't know if this information is on the internet or not.



Chris Parker said:


> Are you really saying that these are the same thing? TKD is pointed out to be based strongly on Shotokan (and other karate forms in some cases, but dominantly Shotokan) due to records found, and the physical evidence of the techniques and more, in order to counter the claim that it's a historical, 2,000 year old Korean system.



What records found are you referring to above?



Chris Parker said:


> The claims for Daito Ryu/Hapkido are centered around Choi's claims of three decades of training, and learning techniques that no other Daito Ryu students ever learnt, and so on. The evidence for that is non-existant, frankly.



Other than his testimony, which again is evidence. Whether the evidence convinces you, is a different matter.



Chris Parker said:


> We'll come back to this... but he does exist in the records, you realize....



Who exists in what records?



Chris Parker said:


> Out of interest, are you referring to this photo:http://www.scottshaw.com/history.html (under "Takeda and Choi")?



No I am not. I never saw that photo before. I don't think that is GM Choi, to tell you the truth. For one thing, the gentleman looks too old, compared to Takeda Sensei. That tells me that you do not know which photos I am referring to, probably because they have not been posted on the internet, at least to my knowledge. But the photos do exist. 



Chris Parker said:


> I will say that the a lot of the rest of the information I treat with a degree of scepticism.



Doesn't bother me. 



Chris Parker said:


> Actually, most accounts state that Choi lost his luggage and all of his valuables, including his "Menkyo Kaiden certificate" in Daito Ryu.... we'll come back to that. But, for one account, here's a link: http://www.rimshapkido.org/history.html



I first heard about the lost bags story before the internet was in full swing and I understand that these things get more and more inaccurate as time goes on. If these webpages were the sole basis of my understanding of hapkido history, then I probably would be as skeptical as you are. 



Chris Parker said:


> No, there isn't a parallel. The way Takeda Sokaku taught, he wouldn't teach a manservant. And he wouldn't teach people who weren't members of the Ryu, or of his family, and a manservant doesn't rank as either. Additionally, we have many records with Tokimune's name on them.. his was often seen co-signing along with his fathers on eimokuroku for people such as Hisa Sensei.



Not cosigning but rather writing for his father. Sokaku Sensei was illiterate, as was GM Choi. But the question remains, how come Tokimune Sensei isn't listed as a participant in the records? And where is his certifications? 

`


Chris Parker said:


> There is no Menkyo Kaiden licence in Daito Ryu. Kaiden, yes, but not Menkyo Kaiden when Takeda Sokaku was issuing them. Mokuroku, Ogi, then Kaiden, with some specific licences such as Kyoju Dairi (assistant instructor): http://www.aikidofaq.com/interviews/daito_ryu.html



Perhaps not anymore. But Sokaku Sensei did award the menkyo kaiden to Hisa Sensei in March 1939. That is documented by Pranin Sensei and others.



Chris Parker said:


> I'd also be very hesitant to state that Tokimune didn't have any licencing... very hesitant indeed.



What license did he have, and when was it issued?


----------



## zDom (Apr 19, 2012)

:s67:


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 19, 2012)

puunui said:


> Except that the photos which show Takeda Sensei and GM Choi together come from very different times. One for example was taken when both were relatively young. Another was taken when both were much older, at least twenty or more years from the first one I mentioned.



Where are these photos that you're referencing? So far I see a lot of claims, but not really any evidence to back them up.



puunui said:


> What are you talking about here? Is it your understanding that Kim Sensei said that GM Choi's name was YOSHIDA Kotaro?



Do try to follow along... the quote in Elder's post (that I was talking about, as that is what Daniel asked for my take on) is: "Richard Kim once said that Choi studied with Yoshida Kotaro-and that Choi's Japanese name was also Kotaro-though they were not related at all. This may contribute to the whole "adopted son" theme, though."

So no, I don't think that Kim said Choi's Japanese name was Yoshida Kotaro.... my issue is that, in the same interview with Choi, he states that his Japanese name was Asao Yoshida, which goes against Kim's statement.



puunui said:


> We're (or at least I) not trying to convince you. I get the feeling that once you make up your mind about something, nothing will change your mind.



Hardly. I do, however, require something with some basis to get me to reconsider my take on things, and so far there just isn't anything like that presented. But really... kettle? 



puunui said:


> It is found lacking, to you. Not to others.



Choi made certain claims with little to support them. I'm hardly the only person who finds his statements lacking.



puunui said:


> No, that is not what I am saying. At all.



 Here's an opportunity to clarify, then, because that is certainly how it reads to me.



puunui said:


> Just because I use real life examples from my own experiences to illustrate a point does not make it all about me. In fact, I would enjoy if you did the same thing, use examples from your own life to make your points, especially experiences based on your time in Japan, if and when you ever decide to go.



You consistently make things about you, complete with as much name-dropping (as unimpressive as it is) as you can. And making comments about whether or not I've been to Japan as another snide dig really isn't appreciated, you know.



puunui said:


> That wasn't his words. That was a translation. Who knows if the translation was accurate.



Seems like a pretty definite statement... I don't know how badly done a translation would need to be in order to get that so badly wrong (stating "He decided to adopt me" instead of "We were very close, and he considered me like a son to him"). Grasping at straws here.... 



puunui said:


> Yeah, one that is not recorded in the record books.



 Which is what is leading me to believe he may have only been an observer. Before you fly off the handle, note the word "may".



puunui said:


> it came from Pranin Sensei. He said this specifically: ""According to one of Sokaku's sons, Munemitsu, several books of Takeda's eimeiroku were burned along with some of his personal belongings when his body was cremated upon his death in 1943. Thus, the number of books lost and their percentage of the total number kept by Sokaku Takeda is not known at present." I don't know if this information is on the internet or not.



Again, grasping at straws here... yes, I know about some documents being lost to fire, but really, 30 years worth of records, remarkably being the only ones that mention Choi's involvement, position, ranking, membership, and so on? Come on, does that seem really feasible to you?



puunui said:


> What records found are you referring to above?



In other threads here, I seem to remember you clarifying about some founders of TKD studying Shotokan (and other Karate systems). I also seem to remember references made to enrollment records for said founders.



puunui said:


> Other than his testimony, which again is evidence. Whether the evidence convinces you, is a different matter.



His testimony doesn't gel even with the structure of Daito Ryu and it's teaching methods, though. How that could be taken as credible is beyond me, frankly.



puunui said:


> Who exists in what records?



Tokimune. Stated. Try to keep up.



puunui said:


> No I am not. I never saw that photo before. I don't think that is GM Choi, to tell you the truth. For one thing, the gentleman looks too old, compared to Takeda Sensei. That tells me that you do not know which photos I am referring to, probably because they have not been posted on the internet, at least to my knowledge. But the photos do exist.



No, I don't know what photos you're referring to, as so far, you are the only one I've heard refer to them. I found one which talks about a claim of showing Choi, but that's it. And you saying you don't think that that is Choi is really going out on a limb when the article itself specifically states that it's not him... But back to the point, so far I've only got your say-so that any photos exist... can you provide anything to back that up?



puunui said:


> Doesn't bother me.



 The information there doesn't bother you, or my not accepting it doesn't bother you? Actually, don't bother with that, I don't think it really matters one way or the other.



puunui said:


> I first heard about the lost bags story before the internet was in full swing and I understand that these things get more and more inaccurate as time goes on. If these webpages were the sole basis of my understanding of hapkido history, then I probably would be as skeptical as you are.



 Hmm, well, I'm going on Choi's testimony here.... you know, the one you put so much stock in? 

But, to cut to the chase here, if he didn't lose his ranking certificates when returning from Japan, surely he could have just shown them to back his claims up... now tell me, did that happen? And what does it tell you if no-one ever saw them?

Seriously, straws.



puunui said:


> Not cosigning but rather writing for his father. Sokaku Sensei was illiterate, as was GM Choi. But the question remains, how come Tokimune Sensei isn't listed as a participant in the records? And where is his certifications?



For that, you'd need to ask probably Kondo Sensei.... 



puunui said:


> What license did he have, and when was it issued?



Well, he was Takeda Sokaku's successor, so that's one clue...


----------



## puunui (Apr 19, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Where are these photos that you're referencing? So far I see a lot of claims, but not really any evidence to back them up.



One place is at my house in my library. 



Chris Parker said:


> Do try to follow along... the quote in Elder's post (that I was talking about, as that is what Daniel asked for my take on) is: "Richard Kim once said that Choi studied with Yoshida Kotaro-and that Choi's Japanese name was also Kotaro-though they were not related at all. This may contribute to the whole "adopted son" theme, though."



Ok got it. Kim Sensei never said GM Choi's name was Kotaro, so any speculation based on that premise is a wasted effort. Here is the actual text of my letter from Kim Sensei. 

http://www.toshima.ne.jp/~fukuoka3/hapkido/hapkido3.htm

***

dated November 26, 1984:

The founder of Hapkido, Mr. Choi -- Japanese name Yoshida, is not related to Yoshida Kotaro, Samurai extraordinary. 

Mr. Choi was a student of Yoshida Kotaro. In fact he was an excellent  student. You must realise that before Japan surrendered in August 15,  1945, all Koreans had Japanese citizenship and names. 

Mr. Choi returned to Korea and taught Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu. He named  it Hapkido which in Japanese is Aikido. Since his time Hapkido has  become modified with a distinct Korean flavour. It is an excellent art. 

I would that the thrust and direction of Hapkido where it is different  from what originally Mr. Choi had taught is in a number of sophisticated  kicks which is unique to the Korean style of fighting. Probably,  according to some, it may have improved the art for modern day  consumption. That would be a matter of debate. 

You are learning a good art. Stay with it and practice until perfection. 

Sincerely, 

                  Richard Kim, Hanshi 

*****

I didn't realize someone took that letter and posted it up on the internet. He wrote some more stuff in his own handwriting at the bottom, but the above is the typed portion of the letter. 




Chris Parker said:


> So no, I don't think that Kim said Choi's Japanese name was Yoshida Kotaro.... my issue is that, in the same interview with Choi, he states that his Japanese name was Asao Yoshida, which goes against Kim's statement.



Again, Kim Sensei never said that GM Choi's japanese name was Yoshida Kotaro. 



Chris Parker said:


> Choi made certain claims with little to support them. I'm hardly the only person who finds his statements lacking.



Yes, I know. Many non-hapkido practitioners question GM Choi's story. Mr. Amdur even devoted a chapter in one of his books to the subject. Have you read that?



Chris Parker said:


> You consistently make things about you, complete with as much name-dropping (as unimpressive as it is) as you can. And making comments about whether or not I've been to Japan as another snide dig really isn't appreciated, you know.



At least I've done things and met some awesome people along the way. Most people enjoy hearing about those types of experiences. Sorry it bothers you. But I for one would appreciate it if you did sprinkle in some personal experiences in your posts, and I promise I would take it to mean that it is all about you. 



Chris Parker said:


> Seems like a pretty definite statement... I don't know how badly done a translation would need to be in order to get that so badly wrong (stating "He decided to adopt me" instead of "We were very close, and he considered me like a son to him"). Grasping at straws here....



No not grasping because others who have interviewed GM Choi got the story correct. It would be grasping if I had nothing else but this translated interview to base my statement on.



Chris Parker said:


> Which is what is leading me to believe he may have only been an observer. Before you fly off the handle, note the word "may".



Actually, there is something to the idea that GM Choi learned primarily be observation. One hapkido researcher who interviewed GM Choi said that he had for a long time learned from Sokaku Sensei "over the shoulder", which is another way of saying he learned by watching classes and not necessarily participating in those classes. So I you notice I didn't really object or otherwise comment on that part of your earlier post. 



Chris Parker said:


> Again, grasping at straws here... yes, I know about some documents being lost to fire, but really, 30 years worth of records, remarkably being the only ones that mention Choi's involvement, position, ranking, membership, and so on? Come on, does that seem really feasible to you?



Not grasping at straws. You asked me how I knew that the records were incomplete and I responded with Pranin Sensei's words. The records are incomplete and we don't know how much was destroyed. 



Chris Parker said:


> In other threads here, I seem to remember you clarifying about some founders of TKD studying Shotokan (and other Karate systems). I also seem to remember references made to enrollment records for said founders.



I asked GM LEE Won Kuk, the founder of the Chung Do Kwan, about his experiences training in Japan. He said that he did receive rank from Funakoshi Sensei, which should be recorded in the shotokan, shotokai or jka records. But no one, at least not that I know, really followed up with the japanese organizations to confirm that. Two practitioners, GM YOON Byung In and GM YON Kwai Byeong, were students of TOYAMA Kanken Sensei when both were students in Japan and that their names were listed in one of Toyama Sensei's books, but he was the Shudokan founder and was never affiliated with the Shotokan.



Chris Parker said:


> His testimony doesn't gel even with the structure of Daito Ryu and it's teaching methods, though. How that could be taken as credible is beyond me, frankly.



Sure they gel. Not exactly, but then who is to say that today's Daito Ryu curriculum is the same as the one taught by Sokaku Sensei, if so, at what point in time. 



Chris Parker said:


> No, I don't know what photos you're referring to, as so far, you are the only one I've heard refer to them. I found one which talks about a claim of showing Choi, but that's it. And you saying you don't think that that is Choi is really going out on a limb when the article itself specifically states that it's not him... But back to the point, so far I've only got your say-so that any photos exist... can you provide anything to back that up?



I do. But we have to keep some of this stuff to ourselves.  



Chris Parker said:


> The information there doesn't bother you, or my not accepting it doesn't bother you? Actually, don't bother with that, I don't think it really matters one way or the other.



ok. 



Chris Parker said:


> Hmm, well, I'm going on Choi's testimony here.... you know, the one you put so much stock in?But, to cut to the chase here, if he didn't lose his ranking certificates when returning from Japan, surely he could have just shown them to back his claims up... now tell me, did that happen? And what does it tell you if no-one ever saw them?



it tells me that it was unfortunate that he lost those. Oh well.



Chris Parker said:


> Well, he was Takeda Sokaku's successor, so that's one clue...



He is Tokimune Sensei's successor.


----------



## mastercole (Apr 19, 2012)

Chris Parker.  

I will give you this, you really google well. But come on, you argue with people who actually train in Japanese martial arts - about Japanese martial arts, you never been there and never trained in the population. You argue over Korean martial arts, you never been there or trained in that population. 

Like Taekkyon. I go over to Korea research the heck out of this, train and interview the leading researchers of Taekkyon, attend forum's in Seoul put on by universities, etc, and, have the son of the leader of Taekkyon's son move to the USA and live at my home for 10 years to train and study more. I make a comment about Taekkyon and you felt the need to explain everything about Taekkyon that I discovered is wrong and that UNESCO was also "suspect." 

You are not adding anything to this discussion other than argument, which by the way, you are really good at, I guess, but your rambling post are nauseating to say the least.


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 20, 2012)

puunui said:


> One place is at my house in my library.



 Would you be willing to scan it and post it, then? I'd think that you'd want to welcome the opportunity to provide evidence to backup your argument.



puunui said:


> Ok got it. Kim Sensei never said GM Choi's name was Kotaro, so any speculation based on that premise is a wasted effort. Here is the actual text of my letter from Kim Sensei.
> 
> http://www.toshima.ne.jp/~fukuoka3/hapkido/hapkido3.htm
> 
> ...



So the quote that Elder put up is incorrect... did you just miss it the first time around, then?



puunui said:


> Again, Kim Sensei never said that GM Choi's japanese name was Yoshida Kotaro.



There was never a claim that it was Yoshida Kotaro, Yoshida Kotaro is a known person, and the question was whether or not some possible confusion occured over similarities in Choi's Japanese name... I don't know where you got the idea from that anyone thought they had exactly the same name.



puunui said:


> Yes, I know. Many non-hapkido practitioners question GM Choi's story. Mr. Amdur even devoted a chapter in one of his books to the subject. Have you read that?



 A chapter about Choi and his claims directly? Nope. But I do know his chapter "A Conversation With Daito Ryu's Other Child" in Dueling with O'Sensei. Choi's claims are briefly touched on, the rest is a comparison of Daito Ryu with other Koryu, and it's various offshoots and forms, including Aikido and Hapkido. And there isn't really much I disagree with in Ellis' assessment there.



puunui said:


> At least I've done things and met some awesome people along the way. Most people enjoy hearing about those types of experiences. Sorry it bothers you. But I for one would appreciate it if you did sprinkle in some personal experiences in your posts, and I promise I would take it to mean that it is all about you.



 So have I. And you might be surprised at how people take your posting method there. But the thing is, I tend to try to rely on arguments.



puunui said:


> No not grasping because others who have interviewed GM Choi got the story correct. It would be grasping if I had nothing else but this translated interview to base my statement on.



Can you provide an alternate interview with a different story, then? Until you do, it's what we have to work with... after all, both yourself and Al say that you're more than happy to take Choi's interviews over anything else.... except where it's inconvenient, it seems.



puunui said:


> Actually, there is something to the idea that GM Choi learned primarily be observation. One hapkido researcher who interviewed GM Choi said that he had for a long time learned from Sokaku Sensei "over the shoulder", which is another way of saying he learned by watching classes and not necessarily participating in those classes. So I you notice I didn't really object or otherwise comment on that part of your earlier post.



Ueshiba, and Bruce Lee were said to also possess the ability to basically see something and be able to replicate it. From all accounts of Choi, it wouldn't surprise me if he was similarly gifted.



puunui said:


> Not grasping at straws. You asked me how I knew that the records were incomplete and I responded with Pranin Sensei's words. The records are incomplete and we don't know how much was destroyed.



Do you really think that it would be 30 years, specific to Choi, that was destroyed? Surely that's a bit convenient, yeah?



puunui said:


> I asked GM LEE Won Kuk, the founder of the Chung Do Kwan, about his experiences training in Japan. He said that he did receive rank from Funakoshi Sensei, which should be recorded in the shotokan, shotokai or jka records. But no one, at least not that I know, really followed up with the japanese organizations to confirm that. Two practitioners, GM YOON Byung In and GM YON Kwai Byeong, were students of TOYAMA Kanken Sensei when both were students in Japan and that their names were listed in one of Toyama Sensei's books, but he was the Shudokan founder and was never affiliated with the Shotokan.



Thanks for the clarification. 



puunui said:


> Sure they gel. Not exactly, but then who is to say that today's Daito Ryu curriculum is the same as the one taught by Sokaku Sensei, if so, at what point in time.



It's not. Tokimune was instrumental in restructuring Daito Ryu. But that's not really what I was referring to.



puunui said:


> I do. But we have to keep some of this stuff to ourselves.



Then you'll understand if I remain skeptical until some evidence is presented.



puunui said:


> it tells me that it was unfortunate that he lost those. Oh well.



Wait, which is it? I said that the claim is that he lost them when he lost his luggage coming back to Korea, you questioned that, and I point out the problem with him not losing them, now you're saying "it was unfortunate that he lost those"? Do you think he did lose his certification (if he ever actually had any), in which case the claim is as I said, or that he didn't, in which case he would have had them to show anyone who asked?



puunui said:


> He is Tokimune Sensei's successor.



We're discussing Tokimune?!?! Tokimune is Tokimune's successor? What?!?





mastercole said:


> Chris Parker.
> 
> Hmm. Hi Al.
> 
> ...


----------



## WMKS Shogun (Apr 20, 2012)

My silly two point interlude into this:
1) How did this turn from GM Choi's first student to arguing the legitimacy of the lineage and training of GM Choi? (Actually, I know how, I read that part) Should we not be more concerned with finding out if he did teach anyone while he was in Japan? Are there any records or stories of such a thing? If not, then his first student would be in Korea (most likely) and therefore the lineage discussion is moot. 
2) People argue the lineage thing but the facts are that by now it is nearly impossible to discern if GM Choi's claims were true or fabricated to give credence to his claims about the origins of both his own martial skills and the curriculum of what is now called hapkido. I think we can, however, generally agree that regardless of the origins of GM Choi's skills and curriculum, hapkido is, when taught and performed properly, a viable martial art which does seem to resemble DRAJJ in many respects. 
-Now back to your regularly scheduled search for truth


----------



## mastercole (Apr 20, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Oh, and yeah, I stand by my assessment, especially as you didn't seem to be able to answer anything about it, despite your research.



I don't want to discuss any thing with you, facts, or opinions because it would not matter. I have read many of your post with various people and they go on and on and on, it never matters what evidence anyone presents you, you are always right, even on martial arts you have never studied. In my humble opinion. Keep doing what you are doing though, you do it better than anyone


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 20, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> But the thing is, I tend to try to rely on arguments.


I prefer to rely on facts and whatever information I have at hand, with the knowledge that that information may need to be updated if or when more reliable information presents itself.  If you rely on argument, then you are relying on your skill in arguing, which is unrelated to factual information.



Chris Parker said:


> Yes, I'm adding argument. It's drawing information out from both sides of the discussion, which is, you know, the point of this forum. My being good at arguing should be an indication that there is something to what I'm saying.


I'm not going to take sides on this topic, but I will say that "adding argument" is not adding to the discussion in any way.  

Arguing is, in fact, distinct from both the facts of the topic and from discussion.  In a discussion, two or more people discuss and exchange information.  In an argument, one seeks to use words to dominate and subdue those who hold a perspective or a viewpoint different than their own.  

So when Master Cole says that  you're not adding anything to the discussion and you say that you're adding argument, to a certain extent, you are actually supporting his position.  Note:  I am not saying that I think you add nothing to the discussion; I am only addressing the context that you use the term 'argue.'

Nor is skill at arguing any indication that there is anything at all to what you are saying, and I'm surprised that you would make such a statement, given how particular you are about the content of others' posts.  If you feel that you have a stronger case and more substantial evidence/support for that case, that adds to the discussion, but one need not argue in order to present one's case.

Being good at arguing means that you are skilled in verbal confrontation, not that you are correct.  One may have factual information be a poor arguer, and thus may lose an argument to a person who's facts may not be correct, but who is better at arguing.  

So yes, Master Cole paid you a compliment; you're good at arguing.  My brother is good at arguing.  It is a useful skill for a lawyer, his chosen profession.  But in no way does that imply that Master Cole thinks that your argument, or case, is sound.

Again, I am not saying that your argument, or case, is unsound; only that ability to argue is distinct from the soundness of one's argument or case.


----------



## puunui (Apr 20, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Would you be willing to scan it and post it, then? I'd think that you'd want to welcome the opportunity to provide evidence to backup your argument.



No, I am unwilling to scan and post it. I've already shared enough information regarding hapkido history. Much of the information that you cite to from the internet either came from me or was a result of my correspondence with Pranin Sensei. Like I said earlier, some stuff I prefer to keep to myself. If you wish to rely on what you find out there to draw your conclusions, then that is your decision. 




Chris Parker said:


> But the thing is, I tend to try to rely on arguments.



Yes, I know. 



Chris Parker said:


> Can you provide an alternate interview with a different story, then? Until you do, it's what we have to work with... after all, both yourself and Al say that you're more than happy to take Choi's interviews over anything else.... except where it's inconvenient, it seems.



 Actually yes, there are better sources of information than poorly translated interviews. Again, that is what you have to work with, but I would say that is my situation, at all. The truth of the matter is that there are only a few hapkido history researchers in the english speaking world, and we all know each other and share with each other our findings and perspectives, much of which has not been put out there for public consumption. And we've all met face to face and know each other personally. Two have been to my home, and one stayed with me more than once. I was the youngest and most junior of the group. One passed away, and it was a big loss for hapkido. 

In other words, you're in way over your head in this discussion. 



Chris Parker said:


> Ueshiba, and Bruce Lee were said to also possess the ability to basically see something and be able to replicate it. From all accounts of Choi, it wouldn't surprise me if he was similarly gifted.



But both Bruce Lee and Ueshiba Sensei had excellent instruction for a prolonged period of time.You are speculating that GM Choi's martial arts instruction is limited to a single seminar.



Chris Parker said:


> Do you really think that it would be 30 years, specific to Choi, that was destroyed? Surely that's a bit convenient, yeah?



I am simply responding to your argument that GM Choi is not listed in the books by making the factual statement that we do not have all the record books today, and we do not know how much of the records remain, per Takeda Sensei's seventh son. Do you still dispute that? 



Chris Parker said:


> Then you'll understand if I remain skeptical until some evidence is presented.



Again, I am not here to convince you of anything. You will believe what you will believe, no matter what I say.




Chris Parker said:


> Wait, which is it? I said that the claim is that he lost them when he lost his luggage coming back to Korea, you questioned that, and I point out the problem with him not losing them, now you're saying "it was unfortunate that he lost those"? Do you think he did lose his certification (if he ever actually had any), in which case the claim is as I said, or that he didn't, in which case he would have had them to show anyone who asked?



I didn't question the fact that he lost his luggage and therefore his martial arts certificates. What I stated was we do not know what kinds of certificates GM Choi lost, that we cannot simply conclude that they were daito ryu certificates because in the original version of the story, it was not stated what kinds of certificates his lost. Since that original source, others have embellished the story to say all kinds of things and what I was attempting to do was to get us back to the original source. 

The rest of your post is simply argument (often of the thread derailing nature) as well as insults, so I choose not to respond to those.


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 21, 2012)

mastercole said:


> I don't want to discuss any thing with you, facts, or opinions because it would not matter. I have read many of your post with various people and they go on and on and on, it never matters what evidence anyone presents you, you are always right, even on martial arts you have never studied. In my humble opinion. Keep doing what you are doing though, you do it better than anyone



Hmm, if you don't want to discuss anything with me, why keep engaging me and quoting me in order to respond (well, not really respond...) to me? Kinda like shoving someone away while saying "Hey! C'mere!" (for those that know Bill Hicks....)



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I prefer to rely on facts and whatever information I have at hand, with the knowledge that that information may need to be updated if or when more reliable information presents itself.  If you rely on argument, then you are relying on your skill in arguing, which is unrelated to factual information.



Hi Daniel,

This seems to need some clarification, as your description is basically what I am meaning by "argument". I'm using it to mean that I am putting forth an argument, putting forth an expression of my side of the discussion. It does not mean that I am "arguing for the sake of arguing", it means that I am putting forth statements and questioning others in order to put my side across.

When I say I rely on argument, that means that I rely on structured responses put forth with the aim of convincing others, which is what argument actually means. In a discussion, a topic is discussed (talked about), in an argument, differing sides are put forth with their reasonings and evidence in order to establish which is correct, or most appropriate (or however that argument goes). Argument is not inherently negative, seeking to dominate and subdue, or anything else.

When I talk about "adding argument", I refer to adding reasoned and thought out statements designed to support my standpoint. I don't just let someone say something I consider to be flawed, letting it go without comment. In a discussion such as this, where there are very different observations and perceptions, which are mutually exclusive to a great degree, adding argument (presenting an argument) is really the way that you do add to the conversation. I'm hardly about to pat people on the back.

Hope that clears up my meaning a bit. Think of it like in A Few Good Men, when Lt Kaffee is wonderfully drunk, talking to Sam, and asking if his father is proud of him. "I bet he is. I bet he sits there in the bar, and talks about his son. He's got a big case. He's arguing. He's making an argument".

Argument is language designed to persuade from one opinion to another, not antagonism for it's own sake. That's how I use it.



puunui said:


> No, I am unwilling to scan and post it. I've already shared enough information regarding hapkido history. Much of the information that you cite to from the internet either came from me or was a result of my correspondence with Pranin Sensei. Like I said earlier, some stuff I prefer to keep to myself. If you wish to rely on what you find out there to draw your conclusions, then that is your decision.


 
Hmm, so the evidence that you claim backs up your take on things can't be presented? Okay, it's certainly your right what you choose to put up or not, but it's rather hard to be convinced by evidence not seen. I can think of a few mirrors to this, of course.... 



puunui said:


> Yes, I know.



I would ask that you read the definition and application of the term argument posted above. That is what I mean when I say I rely on argument.



puunui said:


> Actually yes, there are better sources of information than poorly translated interviews. Again, that is what you have to work with, but I would say that is my situation, at all. The truth of the matter is that there are only a few hapkido history researchers in the english speaking world, and we all know each other and share with each other our findings and perspectives, much of which has not been put out there for public consumption. And we've all met face to face and know each other personally. Two have been to my home, and one stayed with me more than once. I was the youngest and most junior of the group. One passed away, and it was a big loss for hapkido.
> 
> In other words, you're in way over your head in this discussion.



Ignoring the "all about me" tone again, and the sly digs you're attempting, here's a question. Why, if there are only a few of you, alone, who have access to anything that might support the questionable and questioned claims of the depth of Choi's training in Daito Ryu, do you not release it to the public? Wouldn't it stop all this, if you just published a book which presented all the evidence, perhaps re-translated the "poorly translated" interviews to get Choi's words correct, and settled it once and for all?

From what I've seen, all evidence has come down to one thing: Choi said so. Is there anything genuinely corroborating? And if so, why keep it secret?



puunui said:


> But both Bruce Lee and Ueshiba Sensei had excellent instruction for a prolonged period of time.You are speculating that GM Choi's martial arts instruction is limited to a single seminar.



 Bruce's instruction wasn't really that long, when it comes down to it. Ueshiba, for the record, was said by a number close to Daito Ryu and Aikido to have been one of Takeda Sokaku's most gifted and senior students... and he only trained with Takeda for about 7 years, from some accounts. Surely if Choi was training with Takeda for 30 years, then Ueshiba's place wouldn't have been so vaunted?

But, to be clear here, no, I'm not saying that Choi's martial arts instruction was limited to a single seminar. I think he did a lot of training, probably with some of the early Aikido people (before the name Aikido was around), as well as a few other things most likely. And what training he did I'd speculate that he did very seriously, and was highly skilled at it. But his actual official training in Daito Ryu under Takeda Sokaku himself? That's where I have my questions.

I'll see if I can make this as clear as I can. 

I believe that Choi was a singularly gifted martial artist and teacher. I believe that he had some exposure to Daito Ryu, probably including training informally with students of the Ryu, likely associated with Ueshiba and the early ideas of Aikido. I believe that his formal exposure to Daito Ryu, however, was limited at best, and has been exaggerated beyond plausibility. That doesn't make him, or his art, any less, the same way that TKD isn't any less for being based in Karate, it's just the claims that don't mesh with historical basis that generate issues.



puunui said:


> I am simply responding to your argument that GM Choi is not listed in the books by making the factual statement that we do not have all the record books today, and we do not know how much of the records remain, per Takeda Sensei's seventh son. Do you still dispute that?



Do I deny records were lost? No. I don't buy that we don't know of the records that show Choi's training, though.



puunui said:


> Again, I am not here to convince you of anything. You will believe what you will believe, no matter what I say.



No, if you have a good enough argument, you'll convince me. I will believe what the best evidence indicates. And it doesn't look good for Choi's claims as they stand.



puunui said:


> I didn't question the fact that he lost his luggage and therefore his martial arts certificates. What I stated was we do not know what kinds of certificates GM Choi lost, that we cannot simply conclude that they were daito ryu certificates because in the original version of the story, it was not stated what kinds of certificates his lost. Since that original source, others have embellished the story to say all kinds of things and what I was attempting to do was to get us back to the original source.



So... what kind of certificates do you think they were, if not Daito Ryu ones? And if he didn't lose Daito Ryu certification, then he either retained it, or never had it. If he retained it, he could have shown it. If he never had it, then that's not very supportive of his claims.



puunui said:


> The rest of your post is simply argument (often of the thread derailing nature) as well as insults, so I choose not to respond to those.



I simply return as I receive.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 21, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> Hi Daniel,
> 
> This seems to need some clarification, as your description is basically what I am meaning by "argument". I'm using it to mean that I am putting forth an argument, putting forth an expression of my side of the discussion. It does not mean that I am "arguing for the sake of arguing", it means that I am putting forth statements and questioning others in order to put my side across.
> 
> ...


Clarification appreciated. 

I will say that, speaking generally, on internet forums, the lines between making an argument and arguing are often blurred.  I have certainly found myself crossing the line from time to time.  Sometimes, people are kind enough to let me know when I don't catch it myself.


----------



## puunui (Apr 21, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> I believe that Choi was a singularly gifted martial artist and teacher. I believe that he had some exposure to Daito Ryu, probably including training informally with students of the Ryu, likely associated with Ueshiba and the early ideas of Aikido. I believe that his formal exposure to Daito Ryu, however, was limited at best, and has been exaggerated beyond plausibility. That doesn't make him, or his art, any less, the same way that TKD isn't any less for being based in Karate, it's just the claims that don't mesh with historical basis that generate issues.



Contrast your speculation to what UESHIBA Kisshomaru Sensei has said about the subject:

Q: On another subject, it is true that a Korean named Choi, who founded Hapkido, studied aikido or Daito-ryu?

UESHIBA Kisshomaru Sensei: I don't know which art it was, but I understand that there was a young Korean of about seventeen or eighteen years of age who participated in one of Sokaku Takeda Sensei's seminars in Asahikawa City in Hokkaido. It seems that he studied the art together with my father and [my father] would refer to him as his senior. 

*

This is one of several comments made by Kisshomaru Sensei which establish the relationship between Takeda Sensei, Ueshiba Sensei and GM Choi. There is no controversy. We know what happened, and we are not just relying on the poorly translated interviews of GM Choi as the sole basis of our understanding in this matter. And I will also say that if people wish to show their sincerity and dedication to GM Choi and/or to hapkido, then the path that we have taken is easily followed. Why should we rob them of the opportunity to discover the truth for themselves by constantly spoon feeding them? Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.


----------



## Chris Parker (Apr 22, 2012)

I don't see any real contrast, mainly as I disagree with your interpretation of Kisshomaru's statements. He doesn't mention Choi by name (in fact, he goes to pains to avoid saying that he is talking about Choi...say, Jang In Mok?), so the likelihood exists that he simply isn't talking about Choi at all. Additionally, from a structural and grammatic point of view, it's rather incorrect to interpret Kisshomaru's comments that Ueshiba would refer to the mentioned "young Korean" as his (Ueshiba's) senior. That just doesn't make sense from a range of viewpoints.

The sentence is "It seems that he studied the art together with my father and would refer to him as his senior." In that sentence structure the "young Korean" is the sentence principal, which means the correct reading is: "It seems that he (the young Korean) studied the art (Daito Ryu, already stated as being at one mentioned seminar) together with my father (Ueshiba Morihei) and (the young Korean) would refer to him (Ueshiba Morihei) as his (the young Korean's) senior."

While your talk of not wanting to "rob them of the opportunity" to do their own research and find things out (as you understand them), the whole idea of "show(ing) sincerity and dedication to Choi" is just plain bizarre, and rather cultish, frankly. You seem to be saying that if the student believes the Choi story without questioning it, and just looks for evidence to support it, they'll find it. Well, yeah, of course they will. But it won't be actual critical thinking or research, will it? 

Honestly, that line of thinking just reminds me of a South Park episode....


----------



## Doomx2001 (Apr 26, 2012)

puunui said:


> In addition, there are photos of GM Choi standing with groups of Daito Ryu students, notably Hisa Sensei during the Asahi Newspaper period. Hisa Sensei is listed in the records, but not GM Choi, even though there is photographic evidence that GM Choi at those training sessions and seminars as well, standing in the back of the photo.



Puunui, this is the first time I have heard of this before. If you could please scan and post the photo's of Grandmaster Choi with Hisa sensei's students, and the other photographs you have eluded too. I ask this of you not for the sake of arguing, but rather to help preserve, and clarify an important part of martial art history. What you have said is in your belongings is these photo graphs which would mean alot to me, and Hapkidoist the world over. 
Also, it is extremely hard to find the photo's Hisa sensei took toward the end of Grandmaster Sokaku Takeda's life. So those photo's are a treasure in that regard as well. 

Again, I appeal to you to please share with us any photo's of that time period, which would be of great interests for those who not only do Hapkido, but those who also practice Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu. 


And finally, your original point in that GM Choi had other students other than the man most know of him teaching first at the mill (forgive me, I have forgotten his name) is very interesting and eye opening. Because usually, part of being a senior student of any art, usually means learning to teach others. And if Choi is as high ranking Daito ryu student as been ascerted, then he would have most definately taught some people while in Japan, but then on the other hand, his Korean decent may have prevented just that. Interesting point though. One worth looking more into.

Anyway, please show us the photo's. It would clarify so many things. 

 - Brian


----------

