Daito Ryu, Aikido and katageiko:
For me, the most significant difference between aikido and Daito Ryu lies in the approach to Katageiko.
Katageiko can be translated as “form practice” and is sometimes associated with stiff, stilted prearranged movements when performing a sequence, but it actually has a much wider and deeper meaning than that in Japanese culture. At one level, it means remodelling your movements, gestures and attitudes based on those of your sensei/sempai so that you can embody the underlying principles of the ryu that you practice.
In other words, the ryu expresses itself through you. In the case of Daito Ryu, this means changing oneself so that one can embody and express aiki. Aikido, is much more plastic and flexible in its approach ime. It’s more a case that the techniques are presented as vessels into which you can pour your own meaning and thus create your own Aikido. Tada Hiroshi, a senior aikido shihan said that when he died, his aikido would die with him, and I think this exemplifies this attitude.
I had a huge challenge understanding this difference when I switched from Aikido to practicing Daito ryu. I just couldn’t understand why Daito ryu practice was so restrictive and felt so weird. It was only when I read Donn Drager’s book “Classical Budo” especially the chapters on training methods- that the approach clicked for me. I would encourage anyone interested to read the book.
I recently had an interaction with someone who couldn’t see any meaningful simliarity between daito ryu and weapons practices in schools of swordsmanship such itto ryu. This was surprising to me as a significant number of people who train with me in Daito Ryu (which is primarilly and unarmed art) also practice various styles of Japanese weaponry. I find they are great to practice with as they understand the attitude and attention to detail in the kata geiko model and their training in two traditions helps them analyse commonalities and differences in both practices.
I find that Aikido practicioners have a harder time with daito ryu practice as , like me, they are used to moving around more and being allowed more freedom to interpret and execute a technique. So from this point of view, daito ryu is more akin to a koryu (classical) martial practice than a freer flowing modern art. There are of course positives and negatives associated with both approaches.
Finally, some observers may note that The public disseminator of daito ryu (Sokaku Takeda) and some of his students downplayed the role of kata geiko in training. Sokaku seemd to teach in a more haphazard manner. I would point out the following about this: In Japan today, and even more so in the past, mimetic behaviour is a skill that one is expected to develop from childhood. The prescribed way of doing something was embodied in a master (shihan) and the capable student was expected to remake themselves through imitation of gestures until they embodied the principles of their mentor. This was a default method of transmission in many walks of lfe, including crafts, trades, fine arts, dance, religious practice, etc. People who hold that Sokaku didn’t teach in a formal manner are missing this point.
