GM CHOI Yong Sul's first student

[puunui]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.

demonstrations in front of the Emperor,

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

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.

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.

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.

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]

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]

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’s part an interview Stanley Pranin did with Ueshiba’s son on the matter:


AikiNews: It is true that a Korean named “Choi” who founded ‘hapkido” studied Aikido or Daito-ryu?

Doshu:I don’t know what art it was but I understand that there was a young Korean of about 17 or 18 who participated in a seminar of Sokaku Takeda-sensei held in Ashikawa City in Hokkaido. It seems that he studied the art together with my father and would refer to him as his “senior”.

AikiNews: If that’s the case the art must have been Daito-ryu.

Doshu: I’ve heard that this man who studied Daito-ryu had some contact with my father after that. Then he returned to Korea and began teaching Daito-ryu on a modest scale. The art gradually became popular and many Koreans trained with him. Since aikido became popular in Japan he called his art ‘Hapkido’ (Written with the same Chinese characters as Aikido). Then the art split into many schools before anyone realized it. This is what my father told me. I once received a letter from this teacher after my father’s death.”
- Aiki News Magazine No. 77




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 “adapted son” theme, though.

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]

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 “adapted son” 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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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]

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.

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?

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.

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

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

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)".

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.

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.

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.

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....

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...

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.

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

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.

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]

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

 

[Chris Parker]

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]

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]

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.

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?

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]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

Who exists in what records?

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.

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

Doesn't bother me.

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.

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?

`

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.

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?