"Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" Forum

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[akiy]

Dear AikiWeb Members,

I have just created a new Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum in the AikiWeb Forums.

Please direct all discussions on martial traditions not specifically regarding aikido into this forum. This includes topics based on "aiki" concepts rooted outside of aikido proper, discussions which rely upon non-aikido jargon, and threads otherwise focusing on non-aikido martial traditions. Both the explicit content as well as the implicit intent of each topic will be considered.

I ask for your cooperation in moving and starting discussions of these kinds to the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum from now on; please respect these wishes as a part of your responsibiliy in participating in the AikiWeb community.

Thank you,

-- Jun

[MM]

Dear AikiWeb Members,

I have just created a new Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum in the AikiWeb Forums.

Please direct all discussions on martial traditions not specifically regarding aikido into this forum. This includes topics based on "aiki" concepts rooted outside of aikido proper, discussions which rely upon non-aikido jargon, and threads otherwise focusing on non-aikido martial traditions. Both the explicit content as well as the implicit intent of each topic will be considered.

I ask for your cooperation in moving and starting discussions of these kinds to the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum from now on; please respect these wishes as a part of your responsibiliy in participating in the AikiWeb community.

Thank you,

-- Jun

Hi Jun,

Out of everything here, I finally find one thing I disagree with. Not bad, really. But that disagreement is the name of the new forum. As I posted on the other thread, it relegates everything in this new forum as not belonging to aikido at all. In one stroke, all debate is done and over. None of the "aiki" topics being discussed will ever be seen as part of aikido. No one will view threads in this topic as having any importance at all in the aikido world. I would rather have seen the forum titled "Non-Traditional Aikido" than this. Any possibility of a name change?

Thanks,
Mark

[Cady Goldfield]

How about the "It's Aikido, Jim, but not as we know it" Forum?

;)

[Ecosamurai]

Dear AikiWeb Members,

I have just created a new Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum in the AikiWeb Forums.

Thank you Jun :)

Mike Haft

[Jorge Garcia]

Dear AikiWeb Members,

I have just created a new Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum in the AikiWeb Forums.



Thank you Jun.

Jorge

[dps]

I was not visiting the forum as much as I would like to because the discussion seemed more and more not to be about Aikido. Thanks Jun.
David

[akiy]

Hi Mark,
Any possibility of a name change?
At his moment, no.

-- Jun

PS: I do appreciate your thoughts, though. Thank you...

[MM]

Hi Mark,

At his moment, no.

-- Jun

PS: I do appreciate your thoughts, though. Thank you...

Thanks for taking the time to read them and thanks for moving the other thread to training. We do the best we can with what we have. :)

Mark

[Nicholas Eschenbruch]

Thank you Jun,
I hope this helps to keep some contributors who I find very inspiring and who were apparently about to withdraw.
Nicholas

[Alec Corper]

Why? There are already sites for other MA. I thought this was Aiki Web. Either it's related or not, if not why not go elsewhere, E-Budo, for example? Sorry Jun, I think its very courteous and an "aiki" like non-conflictual compromise, I just don't always think that compromise is the best answer. The tree that bends too far sometimes just snaps.

[akiy]

Hi Alec,

Thank you for your thoughts. If you are not interested in reading the posts in the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum, please use the recently announced Exclude Forums from View (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12083) feature.

-- Jun

[Ellis Amdur]

If this were cut-and-dried, it would be easy, wouldn't it? But -
Where does the aiki in aikido stop and the aiki in Daito-ryu begin?Is the aiki in aikido similar to the jin/chi in Chinese martial arts? If not, why did Ueshiba rely on Chinese philosophical concepts to describe so much of what he did? If one puts an arm-bar or wrist lock on someone, is it intrinsicly different when done by an aikidoka or a jujutsuka or karateka? If Osensei was doing something different from his followers, what was it? (BTW - Is it possible that the world benefits far more from the changes that his son et al made than if aikido continued in the vein that Osensei taught?) And I'm not asking for answers to these rhetorical questions, just outlining the dilemma.
We have a situation where a site devoted to the discussion of aikido naturally draws in connections - by history, similarity of function, etc. At the same time, it's gotten obvious that the creative ferment has not been entirely productive, with a lot of ugly, personal references, etc.
Seems to me that "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" is the PERFECT name. A) For those folks who honestly wish to confine the discussion to "orthodox" aikido matters, (there will be cross-over, regardless, they know where not to go B) For those who have a more fluid, inclusive - or from another perspective, more fundamental(ist) - definition, they come to this forum. Given that some people prefer to call such things Ueshiba-ha Daito-ryu :), perhaps this really is fitting. And if in the process, some readers say, "Wait a minute, shouldn't this be my aikido?" Wonderful. I think the name thereby provokes the right questions. Whereas if people get huffy about being sectored off, it begs the question, in my mind, if such folks are getting a touch missionary in approach. I get as tired of phrases like, "If you want to devote yourself to twenty years of twisting wrists," as I do "You are talkign about resistence. Osensei never resisted."
Actually, I do have a better name - The "Popular Body Mechanics" forum - How to do, rather than all the rest of the personal insinuation and huffy outrage.
And it seems to me that tact requires two things.
1. For those who find this subject interesting, this is the place to post and be enthusiastic and provocative. Personally, I'm interested in reading about the skills and the exercises and the history. I am not interested in the least in the semantic debates and arguments about whether it works or is real or needs to be felt, or whether current aikido is a valid martial art with or without such skills. That's been done to death and ground into the pavement!
2. For those who find this subject overly provocative, IGNORE. For example, the Baseline Skills thread could easily be cut down to three pages, rather than it's current 39, if we went only by real information rather than sterile debate and shrill, school-girl level arguments.

Best

[Ron Tisdale]

Nice post Ellis, thanks for that!

Best,
Ron

[Ron Tisdale]

George, Another good one...

I think the suggestion of another sub-forum is a good one, and I'd like to thank Jun for trying it out. I really don't care what it's called, and it doesn't bother me at all if good *aikido* discussions take place in it that others miss because they don't want to go there. That's their choice, they have the right to make it, and we'll get along fine without them. Maybe from time to time, they'll take us off ignore and take a peak.

More importantly, maybe some of the diversionary tactics can cease now, and we can get back to some darn good discussions...

Best,
Ron

[Cady Goldfield]

Nice post Ellis, thanks for that!

Best,
Ron

Except for the "school girl" reference... :p Since I'd contend that it was mainly "school boys" doing the shrill stuff. ;)

[Mary Eastland]

Thank you, :)
Mary

[Alec Corper]

Thank you for your thoughts. If you are not interested in reading the posts in the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum, please use the recently announced Exclude Forums from View feature.
I'll try again, either its related or its not. If it is, why a separate forum? If its not, what the hell is it? I wont be ignoring it, I just cant see the point of the division, but I won't mention it again.

[Ellis Amdur]

Hi Alec - Is Daito-ryu related to aikido? Yes - - - - and - - - no. Is Daito-ryu related to koryu? Yes - - - - and - - - - no. Is Aikido related to Chinese martial arts. Yes - - - -- and - - - - no. To karate? Yes - - - and - - - no. It seems that, for many readers of the blogs, the "no" shade far outweighed the "yes" in a number of threads, and the "yea sayers" were saying, "No, it's yes." And that, some found quite aggravating. Particularly when the "yes-sayers" added so many negatives. And on the contrary, the "no" sayers often said "no" to the "yes" sayer with the "no" in the middle in such a way that the "yes - sayers" said "no way." Given that aikido IS the "way," this caused some problems, because the "yes" sayers said they were either on the way, found the way or showing the way, and the "no-sayers" found this to be way out there, that the way was Osensei's, and the "yes-sayers" said that this was, in fact true, but the "no-sayers" and the "yes-sayers" found that the truths they agreed upon were diametrically opposed to one another.
This is not to say that you cannot say "no" or "yes" on the new subsection or the old, but everyone is asked to be both direct (irimi) and (courteous) tenkan about it - something we all can agree on, yes?

Best

[gdandscompserv]

And that my friends pretty much wraps it up.
Thanks Ellis.:D

[Thomas Campbell]

Hi Alec - Is Daito-ryu related to aikido? Yes - - - - and - - - no. Is Daito-ryu related to koryu? Yes - - - - and - - - - no. Is Aikido related to Chinese martial arts. Yes - - - -- and - - - - no. To karate? Yes - - - and - - - no. It seems that, for many readers of the blogs, the "no" shade far outweighed the "yes" in a number of threads, and the "yea sayers" were saying, "No, it's yes." And that, some found quite aggravating. Particularly when the "yes-sayers" added so many negatives. And on the contrary, the "no" sayers often said "no" to the "yes" sayer with the "no" in the middle in such a way that the "yes - sayers" said "no way." [snip]

This is not to say that you cannot say "no" or "yes" on the new subsection or the old, but everyone is asked to be both direct (irimi) and (courteous) tenkan about it - something we all can agree on, yes?

Best

Ellis:

The City of Seattle should have hired you to publicize the vote on the waterfront viaduct that concludes tomorrow.

For those forum readers who may not know (or care), Seattle's waterfront elevated freeway was damaged by the 2001 earthquake. For six years, politicians have been debating whether to repair it or tear it down, and if torn down, whether to replace it with a new, larger viaduct, a tunnel (a la Boston), a bridge across the harbor, or improved local street traffic patterns and mass transit. The City Council finally pitched the matter to the voters with an advisory ballot on which the voters can voice their "yes" or "no" on two separate issues: build a new viaduct (yes/no); build a tunnel (yes/no). That's right . . . one voter could vote to build both a viaduct and a tunnel.

$1.5 million of local taxpayer money spent on this . . .
http://seattle.metblogs.com/archives/2007/03/seattle_voters.phtml

That kind of money might have been better spent getting Dan Harden, Mike Sigman and Erick Mead together in the same room . . .

[MM]

Hi Alec - Is Daito-ryu related to aikido? Yes - - - - and - - - no. Is Daito-ryu related to koryu? Yes - - - - and - - - - no. Is Aikido related to Chinese martial arts. Yes - - - -- and - - - - no. To karate? Yes - - - and - - - no. It seems that, for many readers of the blogs, the "no" shade far outweighed the "yes" in a number of threads, and the "yea sayers" were saying, "No, it's yes." And that, some found quite aggravating. Particularly when the "yes-sayers" added so many negatives. And on the contrary, the "no" sayers often said "no" to the "yes" sayer with the "no" in the middle in such a way that the "yes - sayers" said "no way." Given that aikido IS the "way," this caused some problems, because the "yes" sayers said they were either on the way, found the way or showing the way, and the "no-sayers" found this to be way out there, that the way was Osensei's, and the "yes-sayers" said that this was, in fact true, but the "no-sayers" and the "yes-sayers" found that the truths they agreed upon were diametrically opposed to one another.
This is not to say that you cannot say "no" or "yes" on the new subsection or the old, but everyone is asked to be both direct (irimi) and (courteous) tenkan about it - something we all can agree on, yes?

Best

ROTFL, I actually followed most of that. Scary. ;)

Thanks,
Mark

[Ellis Amdur]

Hi Cady and Mary -

Actually, it was my wife who came up with the "school-girl" reference. She was reading over my shoulder the other day - one of these threads that have led to this solution and she said, "Ellis, why is it that all these big tough martial artists talk to and about each other like a bunch of junior high school girls?"
I replied, " - - - - - - - - - -Uh - - - ummm" :straightf

[Cady Goldfield]

Perhaps your wife hung out with girls either exclusively or at least much more than boys, and so the distaff was her main or only frame of reference. I was a tomboy and hung out with guys, and believe me, they could be shrill and whiney to the nth degree!

But remember, you gots to be a member of the minority to use the pejorative terms about said minority. Your wife can make reference to school girls with impunity. But you, fella, well, you know... ;)

[Ellis Amdur]

I never had the chance to hang out with boys, having been raised by wolves.

[dps]

Hi Cady and Mary -

Actually, it was my wife who came up with the "school-girl" reference. She was reading over my shoulder the other day - one of these threads that have led to this solution and she said, "Ellis, why is it that all these big tough martial artists talk to and about each other like a bunch of junior high school girls?"
I replied, " - - - - - - - - - -Uh - - - ummm" :straightf

Sounds like your wife could be a candidate for moderator for the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions Forum.

David

[Upyu]

Jun,
Why don't you just create an "Internal Mechanics" Forum?

It's not about Aikido, or Chen style, Wu Style, Long Dong Style, Silat, Karate, Hakyokuken, Taikyokuken, Akitaken,Miyagiken, etc.

The way I see it, we only have two arms, two legs, a head, so there's only so many ways you can come up with efficient movement.

The only people caught up in the trappings of style and reigi are the mediocre ones.
(Counting through just japanese examples lets see...the Prez of Honda, Oda Nobunaga, Hideyoshi, Ieyasu(damn, that's three in a row :D), Takeda Soukaku, Ueshiba (someone correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe he pissed off Takeda at some point), Sagawa (but he was a cranky geezer to begin with), Musashi etc etc etc.

"Then why not just take your "#$t to another board?"
Well, because it seems the discussions and debate are happening right here, right now. Frankly if it weren't for your board we wouldn't be airing out the dirty laundry <so to speak> like we are now.
If it weren't for you and your board we wouldn't have had a lot of these get togethers, and some people might not have had the inspriations they've had as a result of what's come to pass so far. ;)

摩擦は進歩の母だよ；）
Masatsu ha sinpo no haha dayo.

[gdandscompserv]

I think its good that the frustration comes out and people argue. The only people that drop out with a huff are people that weren't really driven to find what they don't have, or they already got all the goods and they stand back to have a good laugh at us teenageers bickering amongst ourselves :D
Somehow I find the latter less likely.

Its all in good fun, even if you get the occasional w"#$"ker like... oh wait I'm supposed to keep it clean, so I'll refrain from posting names:cool:
So nice of you to refrain from posting my name.:D
I too think it's a good thing that the frustration comes out. Once that's out of the way one can begin learning.

[Upyu]

So nice of you to refrain from posting my name.:D
I too think it's a good thing that the frustration comes out. Once that's out of the way one can begin learning.

Believe it or not I wasn't referring to you at all :cool:
You give yourself too much credit :D

The guy I was referring to begins with a "J" ends with...
oops given away too much already :p

[akiy]

Why don't you just create an "Internal Mechanics" Forum?
Thank you for your suggestion. For now, I will keep things the way they are currently.

-- Jun

[Mary Eastland]

Hi Cady and Mary -

Actually, it was my wife who came up with the "school-girl" reference. She was reading over my shoulder the other day - one of these threads that have led to this solution and she said, "Ellis, why is it that all these big tough martial artists talk to and about each other like a bunch of junior high school girls?"
I replied, " - - - - - - - - - -Uh - - - ummm" :straightf
My thank you was to Jun,
Talking about sexist references is like spitting into the wind...:)
Mary

[Thomas Campbell]

Non-Aikido Marital Traditions Forum
(cf. just about the most common typo on martial arts forums).

[akiy]

Hi Thomas,

You made me check...

-- Jun

[Tim Fong]

Jun,
It's too bad you decide yet again to move a thread about aikido into the "non-aikido martial traditions" forum.

[akiy]

It's too bad you decide yet again to move a thread about aikido into the "non-aikido martial traditions" forum.
(For clarity and for reference, Tim is referring to the thread located at http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12107)

I appreciate your thoughts, but I disagree with your assessment that the thread in question was about "aikido" as, in my view, the thread's implicit intent was not to discuss the art of aikido. For me, at least, there is a big difference between a subject that may be beneficial to people practicing aikido and the subject of aikido itself.

In any case, I have outlined my thoughts regarding the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum in the first post (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=171492&postcount=1) of this thread.

-- Jun

[mriehle]

See, I think this is a wonderful idea. I like some of the discussion of non aikido stuff, but too many of them became personal flame wars in recent days. Unfortunately any real information in them was lost to the acrimony.

Some of that, I think, may have been due to the nature of the forums where the discussions occured.

So, I'll be checking out this forum, but now I feel several times more justified in ignoring people who attempt to turn worthwhile discussions into personal vendettas.

[akiy]

Hi folks,

Can you please take discussions not pertaining directly to the formation of the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum outside of this thread? Thanks.

-- Jun

[rob_liberti]

I just noticed this. Call discussions about learning internal skills and aiki non-aikido if you like, but there is no stoppping it...

Here I am an aikido-a-holic for decades, and I am convinced that what Dan Harden is doing in his non-aikido martial tradition is the same aiki as what Gleason sensei does in aikido. I've been promoted to yondan by the same teacher that is Jun's teacher. I teach at 3 ASU aikido schools. I will be teaching a lot of what Dan shows me AS AIKIDO in Jun's own organization - heck even to interested people in his dojo eventually. The bottomline here is that it's happening... No stopping it now. Call it what you like... I just appreciate having a place to discuss things even if they are improperly named.

Rob

[akiy]

Hi Rob,

I do not think things are "inappropriately named" at all. If a discussion centers or is based on a martial tradition other than aikido, regardless of how appropriate such may be in aikido, I am asking that they be discussed in the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum. As you write, there is a specific forum for discussions of that nature. I would appreciate it if you could respect my wishes as the owner of this website.

As far as my own training in my own dojo and organization goes, I do not care to go into personal discussions of that nature and I would hope you are able to respect such boundaries yourself. I do not represent my dojo nor organization here on my website and I do not appreciate this odd "appeal to authority" argument that you are posing.

Best,

-- Jun

[rob_liberti]

I wrote "improperly named" not "inappropriately named". Improper just was supposed to send the message that I think you made a mistake. Inappropriate seems to send the message that I think you are making the mistake on purpose os something - which wasn't the intended message. But maybe I'm reading too much into it.

Jun, of course I respect your opinion as the web site owner. I appreciate your providing the site as a place to discuss aikido to a certain level of depth.

I didn't intend to appeal to authority. I just question why my opinion coming from similar background (which I will no longer discuss - I didn't know it was taboo) is just unilaterally dismissed as wrong. For instance, when I post in the aikido techniques section about kotegaeshi and that post gets put somewhere else that is called non-aikido, I wonder who is anyone to say that my opinion of the depth of an aikido technique - no matter what the source of that opinion is - is not aikido. My aikido teacher seems to agree that the aiki I'm learning from alternative sources is the same aiki in aikido.

People discuss aikido insights that they got from training BJJ and MMA and that doesn't get ripped out of the forums and placed in non-aikido martial traditions thread do they?

Will I live with such decisions? Sure. I guess I kind of wonder here something like if you don't want feedback about such things, why there is a section in the forum for feedback about the subject in the first place.

Regardless, I'll drop it. My opinion is that more and more people will see things my way and things will work themselves out.

Rob

[eyrie]

I thought it was quite clear...
Can you please take discussions not pertaining directly to the formation of the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum outside of this thread?

A simple request really... and in keeping with the thrust of the first post (http://aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=171492&postcount=1) of this thread.

I think Ellis's post #12 quite eloquently says it all. So, to prevent further misunderstandings, perhaps this thread should be locked, as any further discussion regarding the formation of the NAMT forum is moot.

[Aikibu]

Thanks Jun.

Now I can talk about automatic weapons employment without any guilt. :D

William Hazen

[rob_liberti]

I thought it was quite clear...

A simple request really... and in keeping with the thrust of the first post (http://aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=171492&postcount=1) of this thread.

I think Ellis's post #12 quite eloquently says it all. So, to prevent further misunderstandings, perhaps this thread should be locked, as any further discussion regarding the formation of the NAMT forum is moot.

geeze fine... what was unclear is why my opinion of "directly" related to aikido suddenly was wrong.

I kind of got the feeling over the years that THE most offensive thing you could do on aikiweb was tell someone that they weren't doing "aikido" at all.

I've so far stated that about 1 teacher - took hell for it (not from Jun), and didn't back down becuase the world should know when a 3rd kyu claims 8th dan and hangs a shingle.

I'm not saying the people not learning aiki in a more direct way are not doing aikido - just approaching it slower like I did for decades.

Honestly, I was just at a knife combat class with Gleason sensei - and you won't see me writing how that IS aikido. I have a fairly good idea based on lots of real hard work and experience what is aikido and what is non-aikido.

That amount of life-effort into something, when shared, and then dismissed as "non-aikido" sends kind of a invalidating feeling as opposed to being "all huffy" as Ellis discussed in your favorite post there, Ignatius. But to be honest I would have been a lot happier with Ellis's idea in calling it the "Popular Body Mechanics" forum or even "unpopular body mechanics" forum - basically anything not unilaterally dismissing what I am teaching as aikido in my aikido class as non-aikido.

Rob

[Cady Goldfield]

Rob,
Maybe you now have a deeper appreciation for what Galileo had to face! ;)

[DH]

I kind of got the feeling over the years that THE most offensive thing you could do on aikiweb was tell someone that they weren't doing "aikido" at all.
I have a fairly good idea based on lots of real hard work and experience what is aikido and what is non-aikido.
- basically anything not unilaterally dismissing what I am teaching as aikido in my aikido class as non-aikido.
Rob

I am mindful of a really great line from a really bad film Shogun When the Daimyo (himself planning to take over Japan as Shogun) asks the pirate Captain.
"When is rebellion not considered a crime?"
"When you win."
"Yes" smiles the soon to be Shogun. "That is the correct answer. When you win."


1988 Ueshiba family states he trained in many Koryu to make Aikido and "he did a little Daito ryu too.
2008 I thought everybody knew it was from Daito ryu. His first dojo was ONLY doing Daito ryu. Oh.... you must mean in the old days when people didn't know Ueshiba studied nothing in depth BUT Daito ryu

so now we have
2003 What is aiki? What is ki? What do you mean it was lost? It's in Daito ryu?? Its in Taiji?? Its the same stuff Ueshiba did and aikido people don't know it?? What??
Grand debates, fights, testing, meet-ups and revelations on a grand scale led to
2008 What was called untrue is already being trained by several teachers in Aikido, all of whom apparently think it was and is the aiki in aikido all along.

2020? "What? I thought everybody knew this was aiki"....
Oh You must mean in the old days when Aikido people didn't know how to train Aiki.

Because it is so profound, aiki training is simply going to change the face of aikido as it is currently known. No one having felt it will not want to learn it. It was aikido, it will be aikido again.


In the mean time we are guests in someone elses house.
Thems the rules. Play nice.
Here's a thought. This stuff is outragously controversial. So many forums have tried to squelch it as it is pissing off the rank and file who haven't got it and cannot defend against the 'in your face" truth it reveals.
Jun gave it a home. That aint bad.

[Timothy WK]

Since someone else re-opened this topic, I have some thoughts I would like to discuss.

Over the last year since the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum was started, I've gone back and forth on whether I think Daito-ryu should be considered "Non-Aikido" (or whether Aikido should be considered "Non-Daito-ryu"). But as time has gone by, I've started to feel straight-jacketed a bit by the distinction.

For the record, I've been training Daito-ryu (Hakuho-ryu, specifically) for about a year and a half. The longer I train, the more I see similarities between the two. I think the (technical) differences between Daito-ryu and Aikido are often exaggerated---especially given the wide spectrum of Aikido styles out there. I think the differences are exaggerated because: a) people are unfamiliar with Daito-ryu and/or have misperceptions about it, or b) various people and groups (on both sides) have a political interest in keeping the two separate.

I don't think the technical difference is necessarily any greater than the difference between the various Aikido branches. They all utilize different strategies and training methods. Some schools/styles are hardcore martial, some utterly "spiritual". Some are more circular, some more linear. Some include internal training, some don't. Various styles have also incorporated techniques and strategies from other arts (most notably the Shodokan and the Yoseikan). Etc, etc.

The "spirit" or "culture" of Daito-ryu is definitely different, but is that a big enough difference to separate the discussion? The big stumbling block I see---besides unfamiliarity of Daito-ryu, in general---is that the curriculum of Daito-ryu is a lot different from Aikido. So I admit that communication between the two groups might be a bit labored.

But I think the "General" forum would benefit a lot from Daito-ryu discussion, if for nothing else, for the fact that Daito-ryu provides a historical context for Aikido.

[Timothy WK]

I'll add one more thing to my above comments. I admit that "Daito-ryu" sometimes gets thrown around casually by people who haven't---I believe---actually studied Daito-ryu. That sometimes annoys me, as I can tell they are acting on their (? mis-)perception of Daito-ryu, rather than actual experience. And it is, of course, an abuse when individuals try and use Daito-ryu as an authority over Aikido. One isn't "better" than the other, they're just different.

So while I admit that stuff goes on, I don't think that's reason to separate the discussion.

[MM]

Non-Aikido Martial Traditions.

In a world where various aikido groups have argued what constituted "Aikido", it isn't really too far a stretch to place some of our conversations in this forum.

In a world where quite a few people said, I know what you're doing, we do that, too. And then when these people felt it directly, they found it was different and it wasn't what they were doing. To the aikido world, that can translate as "non-aikido". Even though these people noted that it constituted the higher levels of aikido.

When the people advocating aiki have training backgrounds in Daito ryu and Taiji, it isn't a far stretch to have those conversations in a "non-aikido" forum.

Dan, Mike, Timothy, Rob, Ron, Ellis, and I have all experienced things first hand. Jun has not. Do not disparage those who have not yet had the chance that we were given. And do not disparage the decisions those people make, because they certainly do not have the same experiences we do ... yet. (I'm certainly hoping they get the chance.)

While I believe that the aiki we talk about should be the driving force for aikido, it is not yet a recognized or accepted idea. Sometimes things change slowly. And in that, Jun has given us an area for discussions and there have been some very good discussions in the "non-aikido" forum. Jun changed aikiweb and gave us this forum. We should be thankful for that. I am. To me, whether I talk about this in a "non-aikido" forum or an "aikido" forum, the truth of the matter is there for those that want to read it. For those that don't, it will hopefully be archived for when they decide it is important to them. For some, it never will be.

What makes aikido, aikido? I'm sure that will always be something of an argument. Having a place to discuss with other aikido people Daito ryu aiki in relation to aikido, Taiji skills in relation to aikido, aikido(tm) to aiki...do, the aiki of the martial world, the body skills, the usage of aiki in any venue, etc etc is more important to me than what forum label it falls under. And Jun has graciously provided that.

Thank you, Jun.

Mark

[DH]

Mark
I'm pretty much in agreement with you there. Stop and think of that statement "Jun changed aikiweb to allow for discussions of it."
Anyone want to add a "WOW!"
Has anyone seen the heavy-handed moderating with transparently clear bias and agendas on other boards?
It’s going to be tough for guys like Rob who teach at three dojos and sees this training as an absolute in his Aikido. He stands alone among all the guys who tried training this way with me, He may even stand alone nationally for an aikido teacher with three dojos who is training this way not at yearly seminars- but somewhat regularly, who is also in a position to immediately effect aikido, and change training to accent aiki as he may see fit, or as he and his teacher sees fit.
Long sentence to state he is somewhat unique at this phase of the game in reaching out to get it and bring it back in. I don't know how often Ikeda is out there with another teacher just training aiki. Now that I am on that topic. There is another guy Ikeda. He greatly outrankes Rob and has more students, but by his own admission the training he is getting from Ushiro is aiki for use in his aikido. So the sources are not just Daito ryu, and Taiji but from Karate as well. Which kind of makes the whole point-pointless. It's all related, so what is not aikido/DR/Karate/Taiji/ Asian arts?

Aikidoka talking about Aiki...do
As he sees his body change and his ability to mainfest aiki grow-he is natrually going to want to talk about it. I see him as a bit of an experiment for what may happen in aikido. That's probably why he feels a sense of right to talk about what he sees, and what he is doing in three dojo teaching Aikido. I've actually never talked with him about this issue-we're to busy when I see him, so if I misunderstood you Rob my apologies.


I feel compelled to add that Jun has gone after me for my posting style many times, but he has stuck with me as I tried to soften my approach. To me that alone speaks volumes of his moderating and tolerence.
I thought long and hard about how to frame that "Aikido and aiki...do where are we at" thread. for just reason-respect
I think Juns point is precise though.
a) Talk about aiki training in context of aikido, how it relates, in the larger forums.
b) Talk about where it came from or how it used in other arts in the Non-Aikido forum.
I think that’s pretty clear.

[Ron Tisdale]

Seconded, with the exception that we have no idea what Jun has or has not felt, and he has specifically asked that his privacy be respected.

Jun have been very gracious...let's just leave it at that until he says otherwise.

Best,
Ron

[rob_liberti]

We simply have that issue about "Reticence and Agreement".

I am fully ware that it is Jun's website and I AM THANKFUL.

Jun's opinion of what things are called here is ultimately authoritative. I believe that is is fair to say that owning a website does not mean his opinion of what is aikido and what is non-aikido is ultimately authoritative in general. - There is a difference. And having such a successfull worked wide forum, there is some amount of responsibility.

No one - not even Dan is saying Dan does aikido. But I think it's a bit much to say I am discussing non-aikido when I apply something *I learned from* non-aikido to AIKIDO. Plenty of other names for the forum where suggested which would avoid such a problem.

Otherwise, it kind of leaves me feeling like: so am I the head instructor of "shobu non-aikido of connecticut" now?

I am not looking to demand my changes. I just wanted to be heard in a feedback thread about something that bothered me and was asking for consideration on the matter in my rather blunt way.

No hard feelings.
Rob

[akiy]

Hi folks,

I appreciate the respectful, open, and honest feedback and dialogue(s) that we're having here.

To address a few points directly:
But I think the "General" forum would benefit a lot from Daito-ryu discussion, if for nothing else, for the fact that Daito-ryu provides a historical context for Aikido.
I am very happy to have people discussing historical, technical, and other aspects of arts outside of aikido and how it relates to aikido in the general aikido forums here -- as long as those discussions are focused on their relationship to aikido. Once it starts to focus outside of aikido, I believe the discussion should be moved to the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum. As I have written in the past, I created the AikiWeb Forums for people to discuss the art of aikido and their experiences in the art. There may be many influences that people have had in their experiences that have helped elucidate certain elements of their aikido practice. I sure have. And, I'm frankly happy to hear people discussing their experiences from non-aikido sources in the general forums -- as long as they discuss how their experiences relate directly to their on-going aikido practice.
Dan, Mike, Timothy, Rob, Ron, Ellis, and I have all experienced things first hand. Jun has not. Do not disparage those who have not yet had the chance that we were given.
I do not see how I am disparaging other people's experiences. I'm also a bit perplexed as to another instance of trying to bring in my personal training into the discussion. All I'll ask is to please do not confuse my reticence to share my personal training history with closed-mindedness nor lack of diverse, first-hand experience.

I think Juns point is precise though.
a) Talk about aiki training in context of aikido, how it relates, in the larger forums.
b) Talk about where it came from or how it used in other arts in the Non-Aikido forum.
Yes, that's pretty much it, really.

Lastly, once again, let's keep discussions not pertaining to the formation of the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum out of this thread. Thanks.

OK, folks. I need to get back to work here.

Best,

-- Jun

[MM]

I do not see how I am disparaging other people's experiences. I'm also a bit perplexed as to another instance of trying to bring in my personal training into the discussion. All I'll ask is to please do not confuse my reticence to share my personal training history with closed-mindedness nor lack of diverse, first-hand experience.

Best,

-- Jun

Didn't mean it that way.

Mark

[Timothy WK]

I hear you Jun, you make the rules.

But just to clarify, I'm arguing something different than the other people here:
Others seem to be arguing for a general re-definition of "aiki" as internal skill... Which kinda opens the door to discussing non-aiki sources or methods. You don't want that, which is cool, I get it.
I'm arguing that the specific topic(s) of Daito-ryu history, technique, training, etc should be considered the same thing as Aikido. IMO, there is a very close and direct technical and historical link between the two that makes discussion of Daito-ryu extremely relevant to Aikido---in a way unlike any other art (even Judo). Given that Ueshiba practiced Daito-ryu as his primary art---for at least part of his life---I think most of what can be said about Daito-ryu would be things that the Founder practiced himself, or was relevant to his personal practice (I'm one of those people who get tempted to call Aikido "Ueshiba-ha Daito-ryu")... But I'll add that only a handful of people on this board, I believe, really have any sort of authority to speak about "Daito-ryu" (I have extremely little myself).

[Dan Austin]

No one - not even Dan is saying Dan does aikido. But I think it's a bit much to say I am discussing non-aikido when I apply something *I learned from* non-aikido to AIKIDO. Plenty of other names for the forum where suggested which would avoid such a problem.


What problem? ;)

Otherwise, it kind of leaves me feeling like: so am I the head instructor of "shobu non-aikido of connecticut" now?

Maybe the poll of the week should be how many Aikidoka are annoyed by discussions being diverted to internal skills and how everybody other than Dan is an aiki-less weenie. Perhaps those numbers would explain the wisdom of a separate forum. ;) I can tolerate you guys because I have no problem being a bit of jerk too, but many people are much more delicate. ;)

Seriously, I really wouldn't worry about where the threads go, typically the NAMT forum has quite a bit of readership, and many of the most-viewed and interesting threads are there too. As long as the interested people know where to find the posts, that's great. There's even a search function! I can have all Dan Harden all the time if I like! I don't mind yanking people's chains when they're begging for it (like now), but I have to say Jun has shown an admirable level of patience even when you're dragging his meatspace affiliations into the picture. Trust me, if it were my website and people had the nerve to publicly whine about how I ran it, or pontificate about my personal experiences without being in my head, my answer would be f******************************************k you. :)

[Peter Goldsbury]

I would like to come to Jun's support here.

I am a moderator or one discussion forum and regularly contribute to two more and I can see clearly how Jun has chosen to moderate this general forum (his forum). There are other ways of doing so (and I myself have been much more severe, over at E-Budo, in the case of Baffling Budo / Bad Budo, which could have legal consequences).

I think if contributors have issues with the way Jun moderates the forum and organizes the threads, they should discuss this via PM.

Best wishes to all,

[rob_liberti]

How soon they forget!

I kind of remember a time when you couldn't post about anything without being told about your average aikidoka's inability to deal with someone "closing the distance", how "90% of all fights go to the ground", etc. It was the previous posting rage as I recall and that was fine. I read posts by Jason Delucia, Dan Austin, Roy Dean, Kevin L, etc about MMA in many of the forums. I do not recall any of the MMA folks who combined what they learned with aikido getting their posts pulled out of a thread about aikido and put into a a category named "non-aikido". And DR aiki seems a lot closer to aikido than MMA.

Wink all you like, Dan. The problem I was suggesting was that we could have a separate forum AS WELL AS rename it to ANTHING without the phrase "non-aikido" in it - which seems like it would satify everyone.

Since I kind of notice thread names changing frequently, it really seemed like a simple request that would harm no one.

As far as my personal faux-pas regarding Jun's background. I got the impression that my thougths about what was aikido was "invalid" and I was having trouble relating to why we would be at odds having a similar background. Honestly, it didn't seem like a big stretch to me. If he wanted to be all anonymous, as the admin I would assume he could have picked a different name like "john smith" for instance. It certainly wasn't obvious that it was a taboo subject to me, but now that I know I'll do my best to respect his wishes.

And honestly, if this is not the correct place to provide feedback on the name of the forum, then I'm really confused about what this thread was for discussing.

As far as opinion polls. Since when is truth going to be "popular"?

The funny thing is I already dropped the issue with Jun and I'm just arguing with other folks for my daring to raise the issue in the first place.

Rob

[Dan Austin]

Wink all you like, Dan. The problem I was suggesting was that we could have a separate forum AS WELL AS rename it to ANTHING without the phrase "non-aikido" in it - which seems like it would satify everyone.

You're the only person who seems unsatisfied. Even Dan posted that he doesn't have an issue with it. If more people shared your view, Jun might have made a different decision, but if a single person's opinion should be the deciding factor, it should be his.

Since I kind of notice thread names changing frequently, it really seemed like a simple request that would harm no one.

Again, if he finds it making more work for him then he may come to a different decision. Apparently he prefers to move threads.

As far as my personal faux-pas regarding Jun's background. I got the impression that my thougths about what was aikido was "invalid" and I was having trouble relating to why we would be at odds having a similar background.

So if you're for Obama, he should be too? He's entitled to reserve his opinion about the true nature of Aikido, even if the light from Dan's body hasn't broken through the clouds and bathed him in a golden glow yet. ;) You volunteered without firsthand knowledge that he just hasn't been fortunate enough to have had that transformative experience yet. That's a bit insulting. You don't know what he's done, and maybe he won't get the religion, or won't be quite as rabid about it. He has a lot of practice tolerating different viewpoints, and you're going to find that not everyone is going to convert the way you did. He will always be entitled to have a different opinion than you, and here that means you lose. Your opinion has been duly noted, and the decision rendered for now. In the future, who knows. As Dan has noted, in the future people who question whether internal skills are part of Aikido may well be in the minority, but until then there's no reason to get huffy about it. The way to spread the word is by worrying about what you do on the mat, not obsessing over how things are categorized here. As others have noted, it's enough that the discussion is even allowed.

[DH]

Hi Dan
Since we seem to agree on the matter-would you mind not referring to me? FWIW, I am by no means alone. We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that these skills are in the Asian arts. I frequently mention there are guys trained in internal methods in DR, Aikido, and the ICMA as well. That way everyone can look in multiple places and form their own opinions. I think we have seen quite enough "cult of personality" in the martial arts. If I thought I was "all that" I'd hang a shingle and be a sensei. I'm sharing on- going research with my equals on this earth. And if you want to consider rank important? These days I am mostly sharing with my betters.
I remain an advocate for the method, not the person. It's far more important for all of us to keep in mine what is right not who is right. That way everyone keeps a strong sense of themselves and their wits about them.
My Aikido V aiki...do thread was thought out long before I posted it, to respect Jun's reasonable request and to have folks talk about independent Aiki research and how it is affecting their aikido. It was my hope to keep the sources in the background and to highlight more of their training experiences. Jun was correct when certain folks decided to talk about DR to dump it into his NAMT area.
Again though, Rob is not being unreasonable with certain points. He teachers aikido in three dojos. He has determined on his own-trust me, I have zero control over that man-that this aiki is THEE aiki he has experienced in aikido and he is now incorporating and teaching it in his aikido every week. For that reason he wants to discuss it in the aikido forums. I think he and Jun have reached some clarity and understanding of how to make that happen in the Aikido sections. So It's probably a dead issue.
I am not being gratuitous when I say how thankful I am about all of this. It was a daunting task to get the message out-more so through such a flawed method; both me and my writing skills:o, and certain others. For Jun to come up with a way to try and make everyone happy was quite a task on his end.
Has anyone considered all the complaints and hate mail he got wanting all this banned? I think we all need to really consider the larger picture (yes both sides) and the rather glaringly obvious positve position he took (I've P.M'd him and was surprised) and what Jun had to deal with in making such a decision?.
I'll settle with a place to talk about it outside of aikido, and the burgeoning success of my other goal-to now begin talking about its use in aikido from those training and teaching Aikido.
Again, thank you Jun.
And Dan, thanks for your patience, I'm trying to improve my method of communicating..

[rob_liberti]

You volunteered without firsthand knowledge that he just hasn't been fortunate enough to have had that transformative experience yet.

That's just not true to my knowledge. My best guess (assuming you are not simply mistaken about who said what or a liar) is that the meaning of something I wrote was greatly misunderstood from what I intended to say. Please provide the cite on that one.

Okay now to address you concerns:
1) I should be thankful my opinions in a feedback forum are tolerated. I am. The fact that there is a feedback forum about the subject I wanted to discuss gave me the idea that posting about it was ENCOURAGED.

2) I am the only one dissatisfied. Okay. Well, what if say 10 other people are also dissatisfied and they all use the logic that since no one has posted about this yet they must be the only 1 so it's not worth trying. In fact, Mark Murray posted about it. He was 1. I saw the thread and posted about it too. That makes 2. MAYBE just maybe a bunch of other people were going to post in as well. I can't know that at the time! Maybe just 1 or 2 people is enough to encourage Jun to think "well changing the name wouldn't be to difficult, seems like a reasonable enough request" or not. Can't know if you don't try.

3) the silly analogy. Okay fine. I didn't say that Jun and I worked for the same political election commitees! If we did, and we were out of synch with 'what was what' I would be concerned - yes...

And stop calling me huffy. I'm getting huffy about THAT! :)

Rob

[Dan Austin]

That's just not true to my knowledge. My best guess (assuming you are not simply mistaken about who said what or a liar) is that the meaning of something I wrote was greatly misunderstood from what I intended to say. Please provide the cite on that one.

My mistake, that was a post by Mark Murray.

Your posts just sounded very arrogant, but I think you've been ribbed enough. ;)

[jennifer paige smith]

My mistake, that was a post by Mark Murray.

Your posts just sounded very arrogant, but I think you've been ribbed enough. ;)

Just don't call him 'Huffy'.

[rob_liberti]

Exactly! You so get me... :)

Thanks for the support. -Rob

[akiy]

Hi folks,

I wanted to take a minute to clarify some things regarding the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum in light of my reading comments such as:

That's not ironic, it is simply because Jun banned discussions of 'IT' from the aikido subforums a long time ago. Without that incredible restriction lots of 'IT' threads would be in the General, or Techniques, or Spiritual sub-forums since many aikidoka believe such discussions are extremely pertinent to aikido itself and would have started such threads there, given the opportunity.

To clarify, I have never "banned" discussions of internal training methods from the aikido forums. Such discussions, just like any other discussion, are welcome in the aikido forums, provided that the discussions place their focus within the milieu of the martial art of aikido. In fact, I will just say that I feel that I have been very open about what topics can be discussed here on AikiWeb -- provided that they are in what I consider to be the appropriate section of the forums and adhere to the forum rules of conducting oneself with respect while contributing positively to the discussion.

Please understand, folks, that all I am trying to do is keep this website's focus on the art of aikido in the clearest and simplest way that I feel able; and, no matter how carefully I may try to draw the lines (delineating subject matter, in this instance), I know that a number of people will feel offended or disrespected as the lines I draw may not correspond to theirs. I truly hope that people do not take this to be demeaning of their personal experience nor thoughts.

Lastly, I will say that "pertinency," I believe, is a tricky topic -- almost a can of worms in my mind. I'm sure we can all agree that just because something is pertinent to a subject does not make that something into that subject; in other words, just because people believe that a certain topic is pertinent to aikido doesn't make that topic aikido. If a discussion focuses around a certain topic that is only "pertinent" to aikido but does not, for instance, explicitly discuss its relationship to aikido, then I ask that it be discussed in the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum (if said topic is about a martial art) or in the Open Discussion forum.

Thank you,

-- Jun

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi Jun,

Just wanted to take a moment to thank you again for all your hard work and the simple fact that you enable ALL of the conversations. You show MUCH more patience than I ever would.

Best,
Ron

[Fred Little]

Hi Jun,

Just wanted to take a moment to thank you again for all your hard work and the simple fact that you enable ALL of the conversations. You show MUCH more patience than I ever would.

Best,
Ron

What Ron said.

Best,

FL

[akiy]

Thanks, Ron and Fred, for your thoughts and support.

Best,

-- Jun

[MM]

While we don't always agree, Jun, I still very much appreciate what you do, and have done, here at Aikiweb.

Mark

[akiy]

Thanks, Mark. I appreciate your thoughts and your participation here on AikiWeb.

Best,

-- Jun

[oisin bourke]

There is a preponderance of seminar announcements on the NAMT
forum. Perhaps you should set up a seperate seminar announcements forum in order to keep the NAMT discussion-based? This could also make it easier to follow seminar information/updates etc.

[Hanna B]

Dear AikiWeb Members,

I have just created a new Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum in the AikiWeb Forums.

Please direct all discussions on martial traditions not specifically regarding aikido into this forum. This includes topics based on "aiki" concepts rooted outside of aikido proper, discussions which rely upon non-aikido jargon, and threads otherwise focusing on non-aikido martial traditions. Both the explicit content as well as the implicit intent of each topic will be considered.

I ask for your cooperation in moving and starting discussions of these kinds to the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78) forum from now on; please respect these wishes as a part of your responsibiliy in participating in the AikiWeb community.

Thank you,

-- Jun

Has this really worked? It seems to me it hasn't. There's non-aikido jorgon (IP, IT, IHTBF, jin, etc) all over the place. Probably most people how discuss these things feel they are doing it in aikido context, and so they feel the discussions don't belong in a "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum.

I think Aikiweb needs a sforum called "Internal training in aikido", or something similar. It would make the structure more clear. I do think we could ask of the forumites to avoid IT/IP-jargon (including the beforementioned abbreviations without an explanation) outside of that forum.

It's not that I can't understand the enthusiasm. I have trained a seminar with Okamoto sensei of the Roppokai in... 2002, I think, well before this "putting aiki back into aikido" trend began. I trained with aikido teachers who regularly train with Okamoto sensei. We did some cool stuff, doing ikkyo so it didn't felt like a technique - you just went down without knowing why :) in a way, it is this "inner strenght/aiki"-trend that brought me back to Aikiweb, after a couple of years near abscense.

But I think we should understand that there are plenty of people who don't see any need to "put aiki back in aikido". And I don't think we should assume that those who think they see such a need "have seen the light" and we should wait for the rest to do the same. Assuming that those not intersted just don't get it because they haven't felt it (yet) is a bit arrogant, really. It's the same kind of arrogance that makes newly born-again Christians so irritating to all others than their peers.

When this web board was created, internal training in aikido wasn't a subject very likely to be discussed - it certainly wasn't big enough a topic to warrant a specific forum for it. Today I think it is. My hope is that this way we can meet the interest both of those very interested in discussing internal training, and those who want to discuss aikido without their threads about for instance aikido techniques getting "hijacked" and converted into discussions on internal training, and filled with uncomprehensible acronyms. (I have read HIPS - Ellis Amdur's Hidden in Plain Sight. It was a good read. I still ponder on some things in it, and I'll probably reread it sooner or later. But I don't think we should expect of everyone on this forum, in every kind of thread, to know that HIPS is. In a forum for internal training - yes, perhaps. But not on the forums as a whole.)

This is my first suggestion. I have a second one, which is more far-reaching.

If Jun wants this place to be about aikido in general, I think it is time to rename it to, for instance, Aikidoweb. The way things have evolved, with "aiki" often being treated like the correspondent term to the results of internal training in Chinese martial arts, the name Aikiweb is kind of an invitation to those interested in internal training in general. The name Aikiweb has become ambiguous. A name change to Aikidoweb plus a specific forum named "Internal training" or something similar would hopefully make the aikido identity of this website more clear, while creating a well-defined space for those very interested in the subject of internal training and making the discussions on that subject easier to find for the interested reader and forumites.

[Nicholas Eschenbruch]

Hi Hannah,

I think your idea is good and merits some broad discussion. As much as I myself like "IS" and its proponent, and do my best to practice, I think there can be a weird tendency to delegitimate any other aikido through IS discussions. I also find there sometimes is a sort of unholy alliance between the "aikido is for fighting" and the "aikido is about IS" that can turn into a sort of fundamentalism of sorts ("if we just (re)turned to IS we could make this an ass-kicking fighting art again and get rid of all the other stuff").... now again, I can very much sympathise with the first part of that point of view, but I think aikido has developed into lots of things that are as legitimate - and beautiful and worth practising on their own.

So yes, I would be interested in hearing hat others think about your proposals.

(Jun, maybe this should be moved to "Feedback" so it is seen by more people?)

[gregstec]

Hanna makes a good point about the URL name of 'Aikiweb' - Aikido certainly does not have a lock on the term Aiki, and in some people's minds, most modern Aikido practice does not even include the use of Aiki :D

Just a comment folks that is not meant to stir anything up, so don't anyone get their shorts twisted over it :)

Greg

[dps]

But I think we should understand that there are plenty of people who don't see any need to "put aiki back in aikido".


The vast majority of people doing Aikido ( well over 1 million ) don't see the need to "put aiki back in Aikido" because they know that it never left Aikido.

A few, very few, well two to be exact, people outside of Aikido were overwhelming almost every thread with their self promotion and bickering to the point where many members quit visiting and posting on Aikiweb.

There was a need to isolate the non- Aikido from the Aikido.

There was an attempt to have a separate Internal Strength website by a few members of Aikiweb but I don't think it lasted very long because only a few people posted to it.

I visited it a few times but very few people were posting and I never saw Dan or Mike posting.

In the end it is Jun's website and he can do with it whatever he wants.



dps

[dps]

Here is the post about the "Internal-Aiki" website,

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13988&highlight=forum

the website,

http://www.internal-aiki.com/

and info from The Way Back Machine,

http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.internal-aiki.com/

If there is enough interest from the people who post about internal strength on the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" Forum maybe they can start it up again.

dps

[gregstec]

Here is the post about the "Internal-Aiki" website,

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13988&highlight=forum

the website,

http://www.internal-aiki.com/

and info from The Way Back Machine,

http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.internal-aiki.com/

If there is enough interest from the people who post about internal strength on the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" Forum maybe they can start it up again.

dps

Wow, has this IS/IP/AIKI bickering been going on that long ? - looks like nothing has really changed much in all that time; which is a good thing for us older folks with the onset of Alzheimers - keeps things fresh in our minds :)

Greg

[dps]

Wow, has this IS/IP/AIKI bickering been going on that long ? - looks like nothing has really changed much in all that time; which is a good thing for us older folks with the onset of Alzheimers - keeps things fresh in our minds :)

Greg

Oh yeah.

Google Mike Sigman or Dan Harden and you will find other martial art forums they have posted with before Aikiweb.

It can be quite entertaining and shows the neccisity of the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum.

dps

[akiy]

If Jun wants this place to be about aikido in general, I think it is time to rename it to, for instance, Aikidoweb.
Quickly, as I'm needing to work on some projects this afternoon...

Simply, I named this website "AikiWeb" to contrast it with the term "aikido" so that this site would engage people in a more "web" like manner with many different strands crossing than a single, linear "path" (such as what we each practice in the dojo). I am in no position here to get into a semantic discussion about the term "aiki" (a term which precedes Morihei Ueshiba's art of aikido by many centuries in arts such as Kashima Shinryu). But, suffice it to say that the main, underlying, topic of this website is the martial art of aikido as founded by Morihei Ueshiba.

At the moment, I do not have any plans on creating a new subforum. With that said, though, I am willing to entertain such an idea if I hear enough discussion around that topic. But, please understand that even if another subforum were to be created, the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum will still continue to exist and all discussions outside the purview of the topic of aikido will be asked to take place there (as I have delineated, I hope, in my posts above in this very thread).

I hope that clarifies some things...

Best,

-- Jun

[gregstec]

Quickly, as I'm needing to work on some projects this afternoon...

Simply, I named this website "AikiWeb" to contrast it with the term "aikido" so that this site would engage people in a more "web" like manner with many different strands crossing than a single, linear "path" (such as what we each practice in the dojo). I am in no position here to get into a semantic discussion about the term "aiki" (a term which precedes Morihei Ueshiba's art of aikido by many centuries in arts such as Kashima Shinryu). But, suffice it to say that the main, underlying, topic of this website is the martial art of aikido as founded by Morihei Ueshiba.

At the moment, I do not have any plans on creating a new subforum. With that said, though, I am willing to entertain such an idea if I hear enough discussion around that topic. But, please understand that even if another subforum were to be created, the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum will still continue to exist and all discussions outside the purview of the topic of aikido will be asked to take place there (as I have delineated, I hope, in my posts above in this very thread).

I hope that clarifies some things...

Best,

-- Jun

Hi Jun,

I understand you on the point about discussing semantics; that will not clear anything up but just make things more vague. I also understand why you named the site aikiweb at the time you did it. However, the topic of Aiki has grown and has taken on a life of its own. I also understand the term aiki pre-dates aikido and is very prominent in a lot of Japanese martial systems.

However, with that said, IMO, I think a sub forum for Internal Skills would make a logical place for all discussion of that nature where the posters would not have to worry about whether what they are saying has an obvious link to Aikido, Daito Ryu, or whatever system. In my personal opinion, internal skills are a core requirement for ALL martial art systems regardless of whether they are Japanese, Chinese, Korean, or from elsewhre.

Best
Greg

[Budd]

In my personal opinion, internal skills are a core requirement for ALL martial art systems regardless of whether they are Japanese, Chinese, Korean, or from elsewhre.


Yes, exactly.

I think it would be useful to be able to have the discussion around the different reasons for how each system/tradition/practice incorporates IP/IS/Whatever into their system. I understand whe some folks aren't discussing details for various reasons, but even elevating the discussion to the layer of "here's where it fits into the foundational work" of the system I practice.

And some folks still won't participate - which is fine. But then there should be enough at least having the discussion to get people thinking about some of the why's and how-to's. That way if people are interested, great, there's a newbie-to-amateur-friendly place for us to hash some things out.

And maybe Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum is the place to do that, I dunno. Things can continue on like they have, too, that's fine, it'll be what it'll be. I just thin that this segment of aikiweb space has an opportunity to differentiate itself from the "aiki is love" or "my sensei will tell me all I need to know" rubric of discussions (not objecting to them, either, just haven't found them very helpful in dissecting the "how-to's" of IS/IP).

But even keeping the discussion points at how are you training to connect your body as a single unit, while manipulating the natural forces of gravity pulling you down and the ground pushing you up. Those are very useful "single toe in the doorway" concepts that can be an easy gate into the IS/IP discussions (and if you disagree, I'd love to hear why, from a socialization of concepts perspective). So there can still be allowances for keeping the "proprietary" stuff on the down low as folks are likely wont to do.

That way, you can allow the conversations to range from "here's my take" to "here's the only way it can possibly work" and everything i between.

Anyway, dems some thoughts on the matter. Please carry on.

[dps]

In my personal opinion, internal skills are a core requirement for ALL martial art systems regardless of whether they are Japanese, Chinese, Korean, or from elsewhre.



Start up the "Internal Aiki" website again.




That way, you can allow the conversations to range from "here's my take" to "here's the only way it can possibly work" and everything i between.



dps

[gregstec]

Start up the "Internal Aiki" website again.
dps

Was not mine in the beginning - However, I am in the position to create a public Internal Skills forum if there is enough interest to create one outside Aikiweb.

Greg

[Keith Larman]

Was not mine in the beginning - However, I am in the position to create a public Internal Skills forum if there is enough interest to create one outside Aikiweb.

Greg

Brave man...

[gregstec]

Brave man...

Well, it is not hard to set up and I have some spare space on the servers I use for my part time business - it all depends on the overall interest of the community if it is worth the effort.

Greg

[Keith Larman]

Just as someone who spent a few years moderating and administering a forum covering martial arts, well, it is a thankless job. The server space is trivial. The mental energy is tremendous. Best of luck if you do it.

[gregstec]

Just as someone who spent a few years moderating and administering a forum covering martial arts, well, it is a thankless job. The server space is trivial. The mental energy is tremendous. Best of luck if you do it.

Thanks - I know what you are saying since it won't be my first if it happens :) besides, there is always Rum Soaked Fist out there as well.

Greg

[Hanna B]

Was not mine in the beginning - However, I am in the position to create a public Internal Skills forum if there is enough interest to create one outside Aikiweb.

Try and see if you can make Dan Harden and Mike Sigman interested in the place. If not, you won't get that much activity and the situation here won't change much either.

I agree with David Skaggs that Aikiweb is being used for self promotion, in a way that doesn't always look very pretty.

[lbb]

Try and see if you can make Dan Harden and Mike Sigman interested in the place. If not, you won't get that much activity and the situation here won't change much either.

I agree with David Skaggs that Aikiweb is being used for self promotion, in a way that doesn't always look very pretty.

What Hanna said. If the goal of the IS people is to discuss IS, I'm not really sure why they're here in the first place, but hypothetically, if a space were created for them, they might go play there. Or, they might not. Who would their audience be? Presumably there are other IS/IP/IP/IQ/whatever people out there on the interwebs, right? Or maybe not. If there was an audience, it seems like a forum would have been created by now, but who knows? If what you really want is a soapbox, a vehicle for self-promotion and a handy pot to stir, Aikiweb is serving that function, and there's no reason why the ISTPQ contingent would go elsewhere.

[chillzATL]

IMO the only purpose a dedicated "aiki" forum would serve is to highlight that there is an area of this site that discusses "aiki" separately from the art in general. Which might drive new or more casual visitors to enter it in order to figure out what it means. From that point on it would be no different than the current NAMT forum, back biting, bickering and non-discussions included.

[gregstec]

Some good points made recently - so, let's just forget another forum and let Jun create a sub-forum if he likes; or just leave things as they are and see what evolves. A few months ago I ran the thought through my head about creating another forum and eventually decided not to pursue it - thanks to all for reminding why i came to that conclusion.

However, the thought of creating a site that ONLY Dan and Mike can post to does have a somewhat perverse appeal to it - It be like Saturday night at the IS fights - great entertainment for all :D

Greg

[DH]

Hanna
I understand your view. However, I find the notion that Aikiweb is being "used" a rather strong statement. When you speak this way, you also speak ill of your peers.

And for self promotion?
I will agree that we are promoting. Where we disagree is on ...what... we are promoting.
We are promoting ideas and methods, and teachers of different styles.

The main issue I see is one of education. Aikido-ka are finding out what ki and aiki mean in the history of the martial arts of the world, spanning many cultures and eras. Discussions of ki and aiki ...are...discussions of aikido, and that is the basis of our discussions here. It's puzzling for me to see it placed in Non-Aikido Martial Traditions, when your entire art is based on it.

On a personal level I find myself surrounded by teachers and students of Aikido these days (from all branches of the art) and every one of them sees this as foundational to what aikido is.
All the best
Dan

[Budd]

On a personal level I find myself surrounded by teachers and students of Aikido these days (from all branches of the art) and every one of them sees this as foundational to what aikido is.
All the best
Dan

I think that's the part I have the most difficulty in understanding is that you have testimonial after testimonial of senior persons that have gotten hands on with people, then saying, at the very least, typically, "There's value here", if not calling it part of the foundational "stuff" of the art they practice. (I know where I fall on the value spectrum, but I'm allowing for those that still consider IS/IP a "nice to have").

So, it seems that there would at least be an impetus to "get out and see" rather than write it off wholesale, like I've seen done by those without direct experience. For those that aren't interested, don't care, then fine - ignore it and move on. Why spend the energy combating the notion of it if you aren't going to follow up and get hands-on experience?

Along the lines of what Greg and others have been mentioning in terms of discussions specifically addressing this stuff. I think there's merit in having designated threads/forums where everyone comes to the table to air their side/approach/perspective. Call it a transparency forum where people can say, here's what I'm working on, how to apply it, etc. Understanding upfront that there will be folks that contribute from the perspective of "I already know all that and you're doing it wrong" - I would ask that they be challenged based on the logic of their points, rather than "You're a big meanie!!".

Anyways, I'm still optimistic as more people get demonstrable skills it will be more a clinical discussion and less a philosophical one. I know they're best had in person, but as someone still very limited in my travelability, I gotta make do with what I got. So I'm selfishly an advocate for these types of discussions to be fruitful and go somewhere productive, ultimately. Even if the end state is that it gets you to figure out who you want to meet up with in person.

[DH]

I think Jun's decision of the Non aikido martial traditions is fine and works well.
Other issues that have not been brought up:
1. What is the response to teachers and students in aikido bringing up IP/aiki and wanting to discuss it? 2. What is the response when aikido members constantly bring up other arts, such as Chris Hein recently bringing up koryu, Kevin Leavitt bringing up BJJ? It happens all the time, and the discussion will often, at least partially veer from the main topic. Good conversations, that we love to be part of -those long sit on the porch and sip...are the ones that meander and we lose track of time. It's much the same here.
3. What is the response to DR people being asked to teach aiki at Ikeda's school, Ledyards, Gleasons, Abrams, two of Chiba's as well and people want to discuss it? Much more so that the discussions are not heated and are anything but controversial. As one teachers noted "Its aiki for God sake, what the hell are we debating?"

Jun's response has typically been "keep it aikido related," so its' really up to Jun to decide what HE THINKS is and is not related to aikido. Even that has led to some debate as well, I know Rob Liberti left over that. His feelings were that after 30yrs in the art, who the hell has the right to tell him that what is or is not "aikido related."
I can't print Gleasons or Ledyards response to the same idea.
All that said, it is his house, and since it is a thankless Job that most people in their right mind would never do, all that is left to do is just say thanks. :D
Cheers
Dan

[akiy]

Discussions of ki and aiki ...are...discussions of aikido, and that is the basis of our discussions here. It's puzzling for me to see it placed in Non-Aikido Martial Traditions, when your entire art is based on it.
I'll just quote something that you, yourself, wrote, Dan:

I think Juns point is precise though.
a) Talk about aiki training in context of aikido, how it relates, in the larger forums.
b) Talk about where it came from or how it used in other arts in the Non-Aikido forum.
And, to quote myself (which feels funny):
I am very happy to have people discussing historical, technical, and other aspects of arts outside of aikido and how it relates to aikido in the general aikido forums here -- as long as those discussions are focused on their relationship to aikido. Once it starts to focus outside of aikido, I believe the discussion should be moved to the Non-Aikido Martial Traditions forum. As I have written in the past, I created the AikiWeb Forums for people to discuss the art of aikido and their experiences in the art. There may be many influences that people have had in their experiences that have helped elucidate certain elements of their aikido practice. I sure have. And, I'm frankly happy to hear people discussing their experiences from non-aikido sources in the general forums -- as long as they discuss how their experiences relate directly to their on-going aikido practice.
Lastly, to quote myself again:
Hi folks,

Can you please take discussions not pertaining directly to the formation of the "Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" forum outside of this thread? Thanks.
-- Jun

[DH]

Hi Bud
I just don't see why the NAMT doesn't already service both discussions and debate of ANYTHING non aikido related?
Dan

[akiy]

Jun's response has typically been "keep it aikido related," so its' really up to Jun to decide what HE THINKS is and is not related to aikido.
Regarding "pertinency," here's a link to an earlier post in this thread that I wrote that may address those issues:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=236083&postcount=63

-- Jun

[Budd]

Hi Bud
I just don't see why the NAMT doesn't already service both discussions and debate of ANYTHING non aikido related?
Dan

Yeah, I guess I wasn't clear - not arguing that it does or does't so much as I'm trying to encourage people that want to agree to discuss their approaches and how-to's (to the extent they're comfortable sharing, obviously) to voice if it's working for them to do so here or if somewhere else would be better. I'm game to participate either way, but I know some of the outlets to date have their own baggage attached.

I'm so hit and miss in the time I spend online that I basically resort to going where the action is, but am not reliably a regular contributor either way, even if I have skin in the game for advancing the discussion.

[DH]

Jun
I see us in utter agreement.
Both of my statements line up.
If folks"
in aikido
are discussing their experiences in training IP aiki and that THEY believe it is foundational to the art
and others
in aikido
get angry that they keep hearing it....
and yet all of them are...
in aikido
then it just seems like a bunch of aikido folk arguing ki and aiki!
Same ol same ol.

If they swtich to ICMA, DR, or Koryu..then they do it in NAMT.

I'm starting to wonder if the real issue is that folks
in aikido
are sick and tired of hearing about IP/aiki from other folks
in aikido
and that NAMT really has nothing to do with it anymore?
Cheers
Dan

[DH]

Yeah, I guess I wasn't clear - not arguing that it does or does't so much as I'm trying to encourage people that want to agree to discuss their approaches and how-to's (to the extent they're comfortable sharing, obviously) to voice if it's working for them to do so here or if somewhere else would be better. I'm game to participate either way, but I know some of the outlets to date have their own baggage attached.

I'm so hit and miss in the time I spend online that I basically resort to going where the action is, but am not reliably a regular contributor either way, even if I have skin in the game for advancing the discussion.
So you agree that NAMT is servicing the need then?
I think the discussions from aikido-ka, to, aikido-ka and about aikido and IP/aiki, will naturally evolve. AIkiweb has evolved with it and has become a known source for the discussion of Aikido and other arts as well.
Vocal minorities can make a lot of noise either way.
Only Jun knows how positive or negative that has been or will be in the long run.
Cheers
Dan

[lbb]

So, it seems that there would at least be an impetus to "get out and see" rather than write it off wholesale, like I've seen done by those without direct experience. For those that aren't interested, don't care, then fine - ignore it and move on. Why spend the energy combating the notion of it if you aren't going to follow up and get hands-on experience?

Budd, are you familiar with the concept of signal and noise? The "ignore it and move on" approach works in some circumstances, not in others. A forum ceases to be useful for its intended purpose when the signal -- the posts and comments that are on the topic of the forum -- are drowned out by an incessant high volume of posts and comments on another topic, any other topic. If I go to a physics forum and start posting about grilled cheese sandwiches (because after all, don't the laws of physics apply to grilled cheese sandwiches?), and for every post on a real physics topic I post one or two grilled cheese posts, it's a bit disingenuous to say that the solution is for the people who want to discuss physics to "just ignore it".

[DH]

And thus brings the debate to its head, Mary.
Seriously and kindly, I suggested that only Jun can solve it, because our very real debate IS... one of pertinence, IS...one of relevance. Your opening comment regarding "signal to noise" in itself suggests a lack of relevance; noise as opposed to good signal.
Gees... I cannot see how the two sides will meet in the middle. It's just like the ki wars.

Group a. Are all aikido-ka. They are convinced that this is foundational to the art. So much so that it would naturally permeate many discussions. Sure its not the entirety, but it is damn close to being unavoidable.

Group b. Are all aikido-ka. They don't see it that way. They see it as a part of aikido. and not even one that is overly relevant.

Both groups are aghast at each others position.

Jun is left to be the arbiter of different aikido-ka debating.The real point is not even about non-aikido related material anyway.
The NAMT is a very decent solution for a while. And Jun can monitor and send things there if it gets to heavy.
So where I can respect where you are coming from with the signal to noise, I am sorry to disagree. That said, can we try a middle?
All the best
Dan

[Budd]

Budd, are you familiar with the concept of signal and noise? The "ignore it and move on" approach works in some circumstances, not in others. A forum ceases to be useful for its intended purpose when the signal -- the posts and comments that are on the topic of the forum -- are drowned out by an incessant high volume of posts and comments on another topic, any other topic. If I go to a physics forum and start posting about grilled cheese sandwiches (because after all, don't the laws of physics apply to grilled cheese sandwiches?), and for every post on a real physics topic I post one or two grilled cheese posts, it's a bit disingenuous to say that the solution is for the people who want to discuss physics to "just ignore it".

Hi Mary,

I guess I have to agree with Dan on this item, too, in that I find the IS subject to be foundational to the discussion around ki, aiki, and aikido. And the debate seems to be ongoing from people now within aikido regarding its merit (I don't count myself among them, at present)

Regarding signal to noise. I think your analogy of physics and grilled cheese is a bit inaccurate. If I were on a physics forum and I spent a lot of time being interested in the subject of force * mass . . which I'd regard as foundational to the idea of physics - but then others said to me that their type of physics does that already, or another faction said I didn't need to worry about force * mass . . I might get a bit tetchy then, too. Does that make sense?

In terms of people contributing useful information rather than debating personalities, I think that's a valid argument from the signal to noise perspective, but that's all I'll say about it. I don't participate and try to keep my own contributions/interests to the IS how-to's. If someone doesn't care, I don't mind, I don't need to evangelize. If someone does seem to care, but doesn't have experience or an educated viewpoint, I try to give them ideas to get some.

Either way, I'm good with live and let live, I just think there's enough of a legitimate debate within aikido about this, that on one hand it's interesting to watch - on the other, it's still fun to participate in the discussion.

[lbb]

And thus brings the debate to its head, Mary.
Seriously and kindly, I suggested that only Jun can solve it, because our very real debate IS... one of pertinence, IS...one of relevance. Your opening comment regarding "signal to noise" in itself suggests a lack of relevance; noise as opposed to good signal.

Dan, I'd have a much easier time accepting the relevance of IS, if you ever approached any aikido topic as aikido, and didn't always try to turn it into a discussion about IS. I understand the limitations of the signal vs. noise analogy, in that it can be seen as too rigidly dualistic -- but to you, it's all IS and that's all we should be talking about. There are no boundaries, nothing's off limits to be turned into an IS discussion/proselytization, and to be honest, it seems to me that you don't have any genuine interest in aikido per se -- only as a vehicle to promote your views on IS. If I want to read IS discussions, I'll go find an IS website. Is IS relevant to aikido? Maybe, but how can I tell when you're constantly clubbing me over the head with it? You are forcibly dragging the horses to water, and constantly berating and mocking them as willfully ignorant when they don't want to go at your pace, or not at all right now, thank you very much. Well, we've all got a few truths that we think we've got a handle on, and we're not all wrong in the head just because we don't want to march in the IS parade. As for signal vs. noise? To paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Noisy is as noisy does."

[Mike Sigman]

Dan, I'd have a much easier time accepting the relevance of IS, if you ever approached any aikido topic as aikido, and didn't always try to turn it into a discussion about IS. I understand the limitations of the signal vs. noise analogy, in that it can be seen as too rigidly dualistic -- but to you, it's all IS and that's all we should be talking about. There are no boundaries, nothing's off limits to be turned into an IS discussion/proselytization, and to be honest, it seems to me that you don't have any genuine interest in aikido per se -- only as a vehicle to promote your views on IS. If I want to read IS discussions, I'll go find an IS website. Is IS relevant to aikido? Hi Mary:

Well, to be honest, it appears to me that IS was such a big deal that it pretty much dominates Asian martial-arts discussions. Qi/ki/prana. Dantien/Hara. Jin/Kokyu/Shakti. Blending with an opponent and "becoming One" with him (Or blending your forces/ki with all things around you and "becoming One with the Universe"). Concentrating the qi/ki at the dantien/hara. Putting the mind in the dantien/hara (sinking the qi). Breathing exercises to develop the body. And so on. I.e., the point is that it is supposed to be an overwhelming criterion and if you understand that, a lot of O-Sensei's writings begin to make sense, as does Ikeda's, Saotome's, Tohei', Shioda's, etc., etc., fixation on ki in the training and techniques of Aikido. Is it different from what you call 'Aikido'? Probably. And aye, that's the rub.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

[gregstec]

Dan, I'd have a much easier time accepting the relevance of IS, if you ever approached any aikido topic as aikido, and didn't always try to turn it into a discussion about IS. I understand the limitations of the signal vs. noise analogy, in that it can be seen as too rigidly dualistic -- but to you, it's all IS and that's all we should be talking about. There are no boundaries, nothing's off limits to be turned into an IS discussion/proselytization, and to be honest, it seems to me that you don't have any genuine interest in aikido per se -- only as a vehicle to promote your views on IS. If I want to read IS discussions, I'll go find an IS website. Is IS relevant to aikido? Maybe, but how can I tell when you're constantly clubbing me over the head with it? You are forcibly dragging the horses to water, and constantly berating and mocking them as willfully ignorant when they don't want to go at your pace, or not at all right now, thank you very much. Well, we've all got a few truths that we think we've got a handle on, and we're not all wrong in the head just because we don't want to march in the IS parade. As for signal vs. noise? To paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Noisy is as noisy does."

Mary,

As Dan, Mike, Budd, and others have already mentioned, IS is integral to Aikido and any conversation about Aikido can very easily lead to a comment about IS. If someone is talking about how to do a certain technique and someone jumps in with the IS perspective on it, that is a valid input. If you disagree and consider that as noise, so be it - ignore it and move on.

Greg

[dps]

And for self promotion?
I will agree that we are promoting.

Its good that you finally admit it.



dps

[DH]

Its good that you finally admit it.
dps
David
Jun asked for this to be a discussion about the NAMT forum.
Is it useful to take things out of context?
Do you think you've made some kind of point?
Dan

[Budd]

Perhap where the line to draw in the discussions is keeping the NAMT forum to discuss internal strength as it's own thing in terms of how it works, how it's exhibited in other martial arts, sparring, fighting, etc. How it's developed automatically in more limited forms through some types of activity (i.e. the notion that Weightlifters have strong "ki", but it's more limited in functional use and doesn't give the same longterm benefits to wellness, martial capability etc. that more fleshed out appoach to IS might). Even vetting out some of the definitions that different groups pursuing it might have, the historical contexts that support them, etc.

That way, the folks that do believe their practice already incorporates IS can contribute in NAMT to the degree in which their understanding allows, while also getting some martial art agnostic views into the discipline of internal strength building. My only point would be if you're going to say "we already do that" just prepare to have a clinical discussion around the methods you're using and expect some feedback and even disagreements. My challenge to us all (myself included, of course) is to allow for some spirited debate while keeping things respectful and on subject.

Then for aikido specific parts of aikiweb, the subject of internal strength can/even should be addressed, but specifically within how it's has been, currently is and maybe even should be trained in aikido as practiced before, today and going forward. One issue as I see it is that many infrastructures within the model of practice are so based on hierarchies and protocols that place the "sensei" on a pedestal of unquestioned correctness - that actual debate may be difficult or at the very least more challenging. :)

That said, I think enough people inside and outside the structure of the art are getting together to learn and try things out, the momentum - at least as viewed by this outsider on the aikiweb side of things, seems to be building to be more inclusive as more folks get hands on and feet in the doorway. It is interesting to watch but I'm hopeful that the trend in the discussions keeps moving forward to content without being focused on personalities.

[Keith Larman]

I would second (or is that third?) what Budd has written.

Aikido has gone in a lot of directions and I'm the first to say I have zero problem with that. Some groups focused on certain things, others on others. Evolution happens and will continue to happen. There are guys out there doing things I'd never do, but hey, if it works for them more power to them.

So I think it is understandable that *some* will circle back and try to recover what *they* think may have been lost (or maybe better yet overlooked) during the changes of evolving. Others will see little or no value in that and again, I have no problem with that. Arts evolve and Aikido certainly went in a whole lot of directions for a myriad of reasons well beyond the scope of this discussion. The differences will continue to grow. Of course the question of "what is aikido" will still remain, but honestly I think it is unanswerable given the multiple levels upon which the question can be asked. Meaning unless we all agree to a whole lot of ground rules and defining contexts we're just going to keep right on talking past each other.

So all that said, "Aiki" as a concept and practice wasn't an invention of O-Sensei. Other arts have it to varying degrees as well. I think the IS component of Aikido varies tremendously today within various groups. Of course even the idea of what it is (or should be) vary tremendously. But in the end how things *should* be is a value statement that I'm really not interested in debating personally. I can answer it for myself but I'll leave everyone else to their own conclusions. So given the variety of practice that now falls under the general rubric of Aikido I see little reason to debate these things.

As such a forum dedicated to IS (or just NAMT) is just fine with me. It can be discussed outside the context of Aikido on its own terms. That's cool. Those who find the discussions silly or "we already do that" or "it isn't relevant to us" are perfectly right to ignore the discussion. And that is probably easier in a separate forum they can ignore all together. Those who want to read but not participate, great, I have zero problem with that as well.

WRT to signal to noise. That analogy assumes we agree as to what is signal and what is noise. Personally I find the topic of IS to be signal. While others see it as nothing but nails on a chalkboard.

Just random thoughts.

[DH]

1. My only point would be if you're going to say "we already do that" just prepare to have a clinical discussion around the methods you're using and expect some feedback and even disagreements. My challenge to us all (myself included, of course) is to allow for some spirited debate while keeping things respectful and on subject.
2. One issue as I see it is that many infrastructures within the model of practice are so based on hierarchies and protocols that place the "sensei" on a pedestal of unquestioned correctness - that actual debate may be difficult or at the very least more challenging.
Hi Bud
Just some thoughts on what these discussions sometimes looks like.

Statement one:
A clinical discussion by definition: extremely objective and realistic; dispassionately analytic; unemotionally critical:
I have seen the nature of these clinical discussions. Who is providing analysis...based on what experience, who is the teachers/authority/ source to define correct or incorrect?
This of course leads to
Statement two:
Seems to me that FAVORABLE terms such as "authorities" "Big Dogs" "real experts" and other phrases are part of the vernacular used for teachers approved of in these "so called" clinical discussions.
"Senseis placed on pedestals" "you're the expert you tell me" and other times providing ill disguised contempt for established teachers efforts are shots across the bow, some seriously ugly and are reserved for aikiweb members and teachers that a group of amateurs with barely any experience don't approve of...and all based on what?
To use your own terminology- who's unquestioned correctness or supposed expertise?
Just how does that kind of behavior and commentary fit ...into a dispassionate clinical discussion?
It doesn't
Which is most of the reason real discussion will never happen here anymore. I would guess, ever.
Having some measure of respect for the people we are supposed to be interested in sharing with goes a long way...and that has nothing to do with the subject itself. I agree with Keith, that many may not care at all either way, but others that might be interested in exploring this may see the message, killed by the messenger. We need to ask ourselves: Just how much "signal" are we really delivering

I again vote for NAMT as it is. Real discussion about IP/aiki isn't going to happen here anymore.
Related discussion of how it fits into arts will appear here and there; if it is aikido related it will be above, non aikido related it will be in NAMT.
There is simply no need for any change.
Dan

[JW]

Really great points have already been made -- I'm thinking about action and behavioral change now. The NAMT forum is great for what it is, and what I am looking forward to is real aikido discussion in the general forums slowly changing.

Those of us who are aikidoka and see IS as part of (or the core of) our art need to learn how to talk about it firmly within the context of aikido. Of course non-aikidoka would feel welcome to join in.
Yes, we benefitted from the NAMT forum, and threads on CIMA and Daito Ryu for a while, as we started to understand and synthesize things, but now it is time to graduate and talk about aikido.

We have to learn to talk in a way that doesn't completely alienate others, and other aikidoka should be able to hear from IS people without getting upset -- WITHIN aikido-focused threads.

For decades, if a beginner says "I'm having trouble doing it right," people have said "welcome, be sure to use your center, extend ki," that kind of thing. People may have been unsure of how to interpret that, but they didn't get upset and accuse the seniors of polluting aikido with internal strength terminology.

IS terminology is congruent with aikido terminology to the degree that IS is involved in the nature of aikido. We aren't trying to start new conversations, we just want to go a bit beyond "use your center" or "extend ki." Surely no aikidoka would protest that?

[Marc Abrams]

I would frame this discussion in a larger perspective in that this "debate" has been going on for a very long time. I am re-reading (multiple reads) again the Aikido Journal's book of the interviews of the early deshi of O'Sensei. Some common threads are: 1) Today's Aikido is seriously missing some things and resembles dancing to some; 2) The various deshi had their own unique "take" on directions which were acknowledged as separate but related paths; 3) O'Sensei took a foundation based in Daito Ryu and made significant modifications to it. Even with those modifications, he was considered as a one of the top martial artists around during that time period; 4) O'Sensei did NOT explicitly teach how do do various things. He appeared to be aware of how each student "translated" what he did into how they did their techniques; 5) O'Sensei's teachings appeared to center around principles of movements and philosophical/religious ideas (as opposed to teaching techniques).

A number of us are struggling to try and emulate or even surpass (hopefully) our teachers. They obviously figured some things out that we are still apparently clueless about (relatively speaking). Our teachers did not limit themselves to a single-source learning model. I think that it is safe to say that our teachers also recognized the limits of the teaching model that they were exposed to and they to sought to address that is some manner, shape or form.

People who have directly experienced the IP/IT models that are out there, almost to a person, have spoken (in public and private) about how important these models have become to the raising of the level of his/her Aikido. Helping to facilitate this process and encourage it will always be difficult for some of the following reasons: 1) the strong personalities amongst the people out there teaching this stuff leads to strong personal likes and dislikes; 2) the material involves a genuine "rewiring" and "reprogramming" of how we operate. The deeper you go into this, the more complex it becomes, so that it will be easy for people to find convenient stopping points and say that they have arrived; 3) The amount of people out there who have NOT directly experienced this stuff are obviously threatened by this material and respond by saying that they already know it, it's really something else, it won't work........ as a means of protecting what they think that they know (what about the prince and clothing....).

The issue of noise to signal ratio is not all that helpful, because what one person might interpret as noise, another can tease out important signals that lead to genuine, positive change.

Budd's suggestions are sound. I also can appreciate Dan's position of looking at the overall history and looking to see how things usually end up (or down for that matter).

I am thankful for all of the on-line and personal experiences that I have had (not all have been positive). These discussions challenged my thinking and I sought out to experience what I was hearing about. That has forever changed the direction that I am heading in (not that it might not turn to another direction as some point in the future). I have learned to tune out a lot of the nonsense and I am trying harder to learn more so that maybe one day, I might be able to pass on some of this knowledge to another generation of dedicated students. Right now, I do not believe that I understand enough to make much of a useful impact upon these discussions, other than to say the following: 1) If you have not directly experienced some of these models/teachers, you should do so; 2) If you have not directly experienced some of these models/teachers, you add nothing to these discussions by assuming knowledge based on a genuine lack of direct experience and understanding; 3) If you are learning from one of these teachers, be as open as you can to encourage and allow others to experience the process that you are engaged in; 4) If you are teaching one of these models, then abide by the following rule with the other teachers-> If you do not have anything nice to say, keep those opinions private. Partisan wars diminish from the wealth of what is out there. The educated consumer is your best customer. Allow this process to occur.

Marc Abrams

[RonRagusa]

A number of us are struggling to try and emulate or even surpass (hopefully) our teachers.

Hi Marc -

I'm curious; how will you know if and when you have managed to "surpass" Imaizumi Sensei? By what yardstick will you measure a comparison? I'm pretty sure that if I got on the mat with Maruyama Sensei today he would still have no trouble handling me, and I've come a long way in the 10 years since I last saw him. He always said that his goal was continued growth; do you think that your teacher also continues to grow in his Aikido? I would be very surprised to find it otherwise.

Best,

Ron

[Marc Abrams]

Ron:

I train directly under Imaizumi Sensei every week since 1989. I have personally experienced his own development and my own. I tend to be brutally honest in my assessment of myself. I know full well how far I have to go. He would be the first one (certainly before I would) to acknowledge if my skill level equaled or surpassed his. I do not believe that I am close yet. He keeps getting better and so do I. The race has always been on. No egos are won or lost in this race. We both desire to be the best that we can be and to help our students be the best that they can be. One of my sayings (yes, I created it) is: "Reality is the ultimate trump card". If I get there, it will be obvious to those people who know both of us. The destination is not what matters, but the journey.

Regards,

Marc

[Budd]

Hi Bud
Just some thoughts on what these discussions sometimes looks like.

Statement one:
A clinical discussion by definition: extremely objective and realistic; dispassionately analytic; unemotionally critical:
I have seen the nature of these clinical discussions. Who is providing analysis...based on what experience, who is the teachers/authority/ source to define correct or incorrect?

Well, I think it's going to be case by case. If people choose to be transparent regarding where they've gotten their info, then cool, people can choose whether or not o factor that into the weight somebody gives their theories and discussion contributions. I don't think I am looking for anyone to define correct or incorrect on a discussion board. Others can choose to if they wish but it ain't my bag. My thinking is that it's a combination of one's ability to do what they say they can do, along with their "authority" based on methods either developed or learned from self-exploration and exposures to a legitimate system/lineage/teacher. Others may have laxer or more stringent criteria, but for my money it's not something you solve in online interactions.

This of course leads to
Statement two:
Seems to me that FAVORABLE terms such as "authorities" "Big Dogs" "real experts" and other phrases are part of the vernacular used for teachers approved of in these "so called" clinical discussions.
"Senseis placed on pedestals" "you're the expert you tell me" and other times providing ill disguised contempt for established teachers efforts are shots across the bow, some seriously ugly and are reserved for aikiweb members and teachers that a group of amateurs with barely any experience don't approve of...and all based on what?

I'm not in a position nor disposition to argue that with you - people will be and contribute what they will, judge them as you like, take it or leave it if it's useful or not. There's too much "pack mentality" going on at work over what should be an academic discussion in forums like these. What I will say is that amongst a group, if there's going to be agreed upon terms, there should be consensus around what the terms mean. But I think in a setting like NAMT, where the aim is bringing to the table what a term means in your approach (the collective "your"), there should be room for broader definitions and terms.

To use your own terminology- who's unquestioned correctness or supposed expertise?
Just how does that kind of behavior and commentary fit ...into a dispassionate clinical discussion?
It doesn't
Which is most of the reason real discussion will never happen here anymore. I would guess, ever.

I'm not interested in saying that person X or Y is the real authority. I expect people to make their own individual judgements based on experience, etc. I don't think a discussion around the academics and "how-to's" needs to have an associated pecking order. If you're getting hung up on terminology in either respect, it should be a fairly simple matter to ask, "What do you mean by XYZ?" and expect a plainly spoken answer.

Having some measure of respect for the people we are supposed to be interested in sharing with goes a long way...and that has nothing to do with the subject itself. I agree with Keith, that many may not care at all either way, but others that might be interested in exploring this may see the message, killed by the messenger. We need to ask ourselves: Just how much "signal" are we really delivering

I don't disagree that there are people who will be turned off the whole subject just based on what they've witnessed in how the messengers, evangelists, prosthelytists and otherwise advocates have conducted themselves publicly. We're all adults, responsible for our actions, etc. Choose to participate or not. We can all do our part to reach out to those on the fence, if we want, or just do our thing and have those that want to seek us out do so. But in terms of having a conversation online - use whatever standards you wish and accept that others will do the same.

I again vote for NAMT as it is. Real discussion about IP/aiki isn't going to happen here anymore.
Related discussion of how it fits into arts will appear here and there; if it is aikido related it will be above, non aikido related it will be in NAMT.
There is simply no need for any change.
Dan

At the basic level, I agree, use the outlets that exist already. I disagree that real discussions won't happen here and I encourage those that want to to participate. But again, I can't make anyone do anything and I won't begrudge anyone their preference either way.

[dps]

There is a presupposition in the ISTPQ contingent that aiki is missing in everyone's Aikido and that they have the answer.

With over one million practitioners of Aikido worldwide the amount they have had contact with is well below 1/2 of 1%.

They are unwilling to admit and meet with those that do have aiki in thier Aikido because this would not profit them to do so.

I think that the the forum should be renamed to Non-Aikido Non-Traditional Martial Arts because the ISTPQ contingent does not promote traditional martial arts like Tai Chi or Daito Ryu or Aikido.

dps

[Mike Sigman]

There is a presupposition in the ISTPQ contingent that aiki is missing in everyone's Aikido and that they have the answer.

With over one million practitioners of Aikido worldwide the amount they have had contact with is well below 1/2 of 1%.

They are unwilling to admit and meet with those that do have aiki in thier Aikido because this would not profit them to do so.

I think that the the forum should be renamed to Non-Aikido Non-Traditional Martial Arts because the ISTPQ contingent does not promote traditional martial arts like Tai Chi or Daito Ryu or Aikido.

dpsIt's pretty commonly recognized by actual experts in Taiji, Xingyi, you-name-it, that most practitioners only do 'external' copies of the actual style. I.e., it's a given that most people are not doing the "traditional" style. Tohei, to use a handy example, went outside of Aikido to learn some internal-strength skills and brought them back into his Aikido training. Then later Tohei attempted to tell people about the ki skills that a lot of people were missing.

The guy Tohei got a lot of his skills from (Tempu Nakamura) did not do a traditional martial art, either... so what's your point?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[dps]

Tohei, to use a handy example, went outside of Aikido to learn some internal-strength skills and brought them back into his Aikido training.
Regards,

Mike Sigman

Not true.

He did not go outside of Aikido to bring the skills back into Aikido.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koichi_Tohei

Koichi Tohei was born 1920 in Shitaya ward (下谷区), presently Taitō, in Tokyo. As a boy he was sickly and frail, leading his father to recommend Tohei for judo studies. He trained hard and his body prospered, but soon after he began his pre-college studies at Keio University, he developed a case of pleurisy, an inflammation of the lining of the lung cavity which causes pains when breathing. This forced Tohei to take a year off.

Tohei was distressed at the thought of losing his newfound strength of body and his means of training it, so he decided to replace his judo studies with Zen meditation and misogi exercises. As with his judo studies, Tohei entered the training of the mind with fervor and soon excelled despite his serious health issues. After his recovery from pleurisy, of which the doctors could find no trace, Tohei became convinced that it was his efforts in training his mind and cultivating his ki that had helped him to heal and recover. This stimulated his later development of Kiatsu, a system of treating physical illness by pressing with the fingers and extending the ki into the ill persons body[citation needed]. Tohei describes this as "priming the pump" allowing the person to heal themselves.

After recovering from pleurisy he returned to judo, but Tohei he wanted more than just physical training and did not think that judo was the right art for him to practise, although he did continue with studying judo until he started with aikido.

dps

[Budd]

David, is your argument that, "If Tohei had gone outside aikido to learn about ki, it would have been mentioned in Wikipedia"?

[Mike Sigman]

Nakamura taught "Shin-shin Toitsu Do". Tohei's style was "Shin-shin Toitsu Aikido". Might be worth doing some reading, David.

Mike

[gregstec]

There is a presupposition in the ISTPQ contingent that aiki is missing in everyone's Aikido and that they have the answer.

With over one million practitioners of Aikido worldwide the amount they have had contact with is well below 1/2 of 1%.

They are unwilling to admit and meet with those that do have aiki in thier Aikido because this would not profit them to do so.

I think that the the forum should be renamed to Non-Aikido Non-Traditional Martial Arts because the ISTPQ contingent does not promote traditional martial arts like Tai Chi or Daito Ryu or Aikido.

dps

David,

Not sure where you are coming from on this post.

First, no one ever said that no one has aiki in their Aikido - all I ever heard was that most don't have it and those that do have some, don't have it to a high degree like Ueshiba did,

Second, let's talk quality and not quantity here as well as some math permutations. Dan has met and trained with 782 people worldwide so far - mostly senior ranked individuals and teachers that do their own seminars. Collectivity, they have experienced thousands and thousands of people - this represents more that your 1/2 %,

Third, I never heard of anyone being turned away who wanted to sincerely train - actually, it's those type of naysayers who think they may have something in aiki that we all would like to see as long as they are sincere and don't have any personal agendas. As far as your profit statement, I know of no one making money off of any of this stuff.

Fourth, most of the people I know outside of Aikido that are training IS are from Daito Ryu, Yi Chuan, Tai Chi, and some other Chinese and Korean martial arts, and some have used this forum to discuss aspects of their arts other than IS - so I am not sure what you mean by your last paragraph.

Greg

[DH]

They are unwilling to admit and meet with those that do have aiki in thier Aikido because this would not profit them to do so.
Care to give me a list of people in aikido who have aiki?
I don't think you find that it is us are unwillling to meet with them.
How would it not profit us to do so? Do you think there is some sort of competition going on? For what? Do you think I plan on doing this for very long? Has it dawned on you that my end game is to hand it over to...aikido teachers and leave?
I think that the the forum should be renamed to Non-Aikido Non-Traditional Martial Arts because the ISTPQ contingent does not promote traditional martial arts like Tai Chi or Daito Ryu or Aikido.
dps
I guess Jun has abandoned the thread to be specific to NAMT and leave it as a sounding board for gripes. Okay, then

David,
This is yet another example of the illogical, and uninformed arguments we get. I have heard more bitching and bellyaching about aikido from aikido-ka then you will hear from me. I keep trying to talk them INTO the potentials in aikido. I am quite sure if I asked them, dozens of teachers would address it.
Aikido has much that is wrong with the way it is practiced and much that is right with it. In most events I have been involved with, people have had reasoned discussion for both the positive and negative aspects about the way Aikido and aiki-weapons are practiced. Most have some eye opening experiences that are beneficial...to.... their aikido practice.

I will close with the one issue you and others like you NEVER address; the teachers and students who keep attending.
You can't address it because you cannot assemble an intelligent discourse for engaging and negating thousands of years of combined experience that is being offered from teachers and students offering an almost 100% positive review of this practice.
,
Instead, I see some people here sum up the attendees, group them and reduce their impact as acolytes, fan boys, brainwashed, and every other ploy to reduce their impact and experienced judgement. Then reduce my efforts as being a con man and snake oil salesman who is "bereting and mocking aikido people" etc..
There is no reasonable discussion, no intelligent recognition of hundreds of teachers and students judgment of the value of this work. Instead we get people who are almost completely uninformed, emoting all over their keyboard.
Dan

[dps]

Care to give me a list of people in aikido who have aiki?


Shuji Maruyama Sensei
Tetsuro Nariyama Sensei
Yoshimitsu Yamada Sensei
et al
dps

[dps]

David,

Dan has met and trained with 782 people worldwide so far - mostly senior ranked individuals and teachers that do their own seminars.



(one half) percent of one million = five thousand
dps

[dps]

David,Not sure where you are coming from on this post.


Putting things in context.

dos

[Chris Li]

I again vote for NAMT as it is. Real discussion about IP/aiki isn't going to happen here anymore.
Related discussion of how it fits into arts will appear here and there; if it is aikido related it will be above, non aikido related it will be in NAMT.
There is simply no need for any change.
Dan

I'd like to see the posts in NAMT appear in the "Active Forum Threads" on the top page - it would make it easier for me to follow things - but I'm just lazy.

Best,

Chris

[Keith Larman]

Not true.

He did not go outside of Aikido to bring the skills back into Aikido...

What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't...

There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training.

My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side.

Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc.

Anyway, shades of grey here.

[chillzATL]

What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't...

There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training.

My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side.

Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc.

Anyway, shades of grey here.

Thumbs = up

[dps]

What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't...

There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training.

My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side.

Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc.

Anyway, shades of grey here.

Excellent.

dps

[gregstec]

(one half) percent of one million = five thousand
dps

I am sure that the collective experience of those that have felt Dan's aiki and have not felt that elsewhere exceeds your five thousand - if there are others out thee at that same level, why aren't people swarming to them to get the stuff ?

Greg

[gregstec]

Putting things in context.

dos

Actually, I find your posts on this subject somewhat twisted in logic and coming across as putting things out of context.

[gregstec]

What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't...

There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training.

My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side.

Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc.

Anyway, shades of grey here.

Good points. Tohei did not bring ki to Aikido - he brought his own take on it and his own methodology of teaching it, which a lot came from outside the Aikido community. Prior to Tohei's split, ki was talked about openly by all in Aikido - just look at Kisshomaru's books published prior to the Tohei split. However, after the split, ki was not talked about openly because the lack of attention to ki in honbu was the public reason for the split - no one was talking about the political and personality issues that were the true reasons for the split.

No one is saying ki and aiki were never in Aikido - Ueshiba had it, but unfortunately, not much of it got passed down.

Greg

[Lorel Latorilla]

Everybody should just ignore David Skaggs to keep the discussion going.

[DH]

Everybody should just ignore David Skaggs to keep the discussion going.
Very good point!

Keiths idea of shades of grey is more akin to how I think of these things. I like to think of it as this type of work "informs people about their aikido."
I agree that you couldn't likely find anyone who would claim their way is the only way. I do think there are ways that are more directly related and usable than others to Aikido. Hell, I have been writing about how the softness of DR is more akin to taiji than Aikido™ since aikido mailing list days, Aikido-ka always seemed either too stiff, or they noodled. Once you understand what is really supposed to be going on though you find there is an underlying logic; IP/aiki, that is inescapable. The comedy being it has indeed escaped most MA people. Back then, I had no idea that noodling, and the external evasion of force syndrome, was so prevelent in taiji as well.

And to address Aiki directly: Ueshiba obviously considered "the way of aiki" as fluid and changing, and never as a brand name or fixed practice, hence my calling it Aikido™. Since he, like Takeda, never repeated techniques and did solo training, I would even wonder if they were much interested at all in what became of the "brand" as demonstrated through waza.
As my signature line suggests from one of Ueshiba's peers:
"Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing." Sagawa

We have to understand that many cannot see beyond the brand, as even that body of work is daunting enough when looking at it from the bottom up. There is no way they are going to see the universality of aiki much less understand how the "way of aiki" is a superior and more encompassing pursuit than a collection of movement drills, waza, connection exercises, what have you. So there will not be a freedom from form at that stage of progress, and possibly even a level of resistance to that way of thinking.
hence my opting to teach the more informed group among them, the teachers. I love Gleasons Comment: 'This is like graduate school for teachers. You really can't expect everyone to understand."

This is yet another reason for NAMT as a forum. People who cannot see the universality of IP/aiki cannot help but to see it as a separate entity an assignment of sorts only related to individual arts that is only partially related. It's the old "This comes from that, that comes from the other and this is mine." mentality. I've met any number of men who actually pride themselves on their understanding of things that way. Like tools in a box they pick and choose the use, and don't see the toolbox that houses everything.
Cheers
Dan

[dps]

Everybody should just ignore David Skaggs to keep the discussion going.

Good advice.

I do.

dps