Ichi no ken ?

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[ravenest]

Hello all. Just joined the forum. I have been training in Aiki-kai for about 30 years with vast periods missing (no teacher in area), last year our area got a resident teacher and opened a club - great!!! I have also trained in a few styles of karate, including Matsamura Sieto Shorin-Ryu - (quiet different from any karate I have done before and different from other Shorin styles I have observed) and some Kobudo (Bo, Jo, Kama, Sai, Eku). Our Aikido club practices Bokken, Jo and sometimes Tanto.

I have been slowly going through some very interesting posts here - mostly in weaponry section. Wow, so much to read and respond to, but a lot of was posted some time ago, so .... ?

I am looking for some info on Ichi, Ni and San no Ken, exercises with the Bokken (actually all of them, I think there are 5 in this series). I tried a search and a visual through weapons but cant seem to find any refs.

Anyone familiar with these exercises?

Thanks.

[scott.swank]

There are a few videos on Birankai's youtube channel.

Chiba sensei, ichi no tachi
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/47/thuHZxLoHGY

Chiba sensei, ni no tachi
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/46/EBDR8WB69Z4
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/61/PwxBlFu-pbo

Waite sensei, ni no tachi
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/33/yPLDdrzvNkY

Chiba sensei, yon no tachi
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/45/gnYfrf9zy7M

San Miguel and Savoca senseis, ichi through go
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/51/e_k0mxkK1e4

Chiba sensei, ki misubi no tachi
http://www.youtube.com/user/BiranOnline#p/u/52/PLuTbjWgiEk

[sakumeikan]

Hello all. Just joined the forum. I have been training in Aiki-kai for about 30 years with vast periods missing (no teacher in area), last year our area got a resident teacher and opened a club - great!!! I have also trained in a few styles of karate, including Matsamura Sieto Shorin-Ryu - (quiet different from any karate I have done before and different from other Shorin styles I have observed) and some Kobudo (Bo, Jo, Kama, Sai, Eku). Our Aikido club practices Bokken, Jo and sometimes Tanto.

I have been slowly going through some very interesting posts here - mostly in weaponry section. Wow, so much to read and respond to, but a lot of was posted some time ago, so .... ?

I am looking for some info on Ichi, Ni and San no Ken, exercises with the Bokken (actually all of them, I think there are 5 in this series). I tried a search and a visual through weapons but cant seem to find any refs.

Anyone familiar with these exercises?

Thanks.

Hi,
Sounds like you are looking for the 5 kumitachi exercises.These are usually found on the Web.

[ravenest]

Thanks guys. problem is I have no internet (only when I at the library) and the amount of time it takes to get through one of these clips ... if it works. But thanks again, I'll check those sites out.

The problem is I thought I had them, 1-5, down pretty good. Then our instructor left, now we either have no teacher or a series of visiting teachers or 'advanced students' who dont know them or dont want to do them or has a v.unusual take on whats going on with them.

Its also quiet frustrating, I've invested a bit of time and energy in learning them. I'm pretty sure of a movement, then its bought into question and when I ask the questioner to show me they cant :grr: Now, I feel, unless I can practice these with someone sensibly I am going to loose what I learnt.

I'm sure there are a few variations. There certainly are a lot of variations in WHAT people think they are doing with it?

Anyone know of a thread discussing this anywhere?

[ravenest]

Okay, I checked those clips and they are nothing like it. Also I search 5 kumitachi exercises - they are also nothing like it.
I searched Ichi, ni, san, no ken, no direct result.

Hmmm. These were taught by Sensai Sugano.
Each exercise has a student and teacher, student makes the first move, teacher always 'dies' at the end,

1. S moves in to break mai, T moves back. S attacks the top of head and T holds his sword horizontal (this is mai and target exercise). T cuts down, S receives. T slips sword tip under S's sword to other side and lunges at chest. S steps back and deflects, then lunges back, T steps back and deflects. S offers arm, T moves in to cut arm, S steps off line and cuts to T's head.

2. As above but T does not hold sword horizontal over head but steps back and cuts down as well. Continues as in 1

3. The same but T follows his first thrust with a leg attack, S, deflects and continues to end as above.

4. Same as 2 but on other side.

5. Same as 2 but T slips straight in and S drops tip and folds back to an outside deflection (his arms end up crossed and tip points down). Ends the same as others.

Is this familiar to anyone here?

(Sorry, not down with the correct Japanese terminology for each movement)

[ninjaqutie]

Based on your description, I have no idea what you are talking about.... sorry :(

[Chris Farnham]

I am not familiar with the weapons techniques taught by Sugano Sensei but I am familiar with the 5 Kumitachi as taught by Chiba Sensei as well as the classical Iwama stlye. From what I can tell, Chiba sensei's kumitachi are the Iwama kumitachi with minor alterations added to reflect Chiba sensei's weapons. It is possible that Sugano Sensei either made his own adjustments, or taught them as they were taught in Iwama, I don't know. If you want to see the Iwama style search for "Saito sensei kumi tachi".I couldn't find any clips of Sugano Sensei doing the Kumi tachi but there are a number of Sugano Sensei weapons clips on YouTube. It is also possible that Sugano Sensei's ichi no Ken has nothing to do with the five Kumi tachi since Ichi no Ken just means first sword or sword movement 1, (Ichi=1, no=possessive grammatical particle, ken=sword) and could be an exercise of Sugano sensei's design.

[Janet Rosen]

For Sugano Sensei, OP will need someone from USAF ER to address the issue....
You may want to go to http://www.aikidoonline.com/ and contact someone there.

[Cliff Judge]

Incidentally, I was trying to research ichi no tachi last week and found this interesting clip on youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHCvvx5o7tI

What's the story with aikiken kata number one being the same thing as Kashima Shinto Ryu's kata number one?

I am aware that O Sensei and Kisshomaru both trained Kashima Shinto Ryu, and there seems to be a strong Kashima Shinryu influence, I guess via Inaba, in mainstream aikiken.

Now...was it Saito Sensei who came up with the kumitachi that Chiba Sensei teaches? Did he just lift the first kata straight out of Kashima Shinto Ryu?

I have never formally learned the Saito / Chiba aikiken, so I appreciate any thoughts you guys might have on the relationship.

[Chris Farnham]

For Sugano Sensei, OP will need someone from USAF ER to address the issue....
You may want to go to http://www.aikidoonline.com/ and contact someone there.

But since the OP is in Australia I am sure that there are as many if not more people in the Australia Aikikai that can provide information on Sugano Sensei and his weapons. While Sugano Sensei was an instructor at NY Aikikai and a respected Shihan by everyone in the USAF, in my experience, most USAF Eastern region instructors consider themselves to be primarily students of Yamada Shihan or Kanai Shihan.

Cliff: I don't know anything about Kashima Shinto Ryu, but I believe that the kumitachi that Chiba sensei teaches come from O sensei. He learned them from Osensei and Saito sensei in Iwama. I thinks he later made some adjustments to accommodate the way his own Bukiwaza had developed, which included Iaido. Saito sensei, I believe, claimed that the way he presented them was exactly as O sensei taught them.

[grondahl]

What's the story with aikiken kata number one being the same thing as Kashima Shinto Ryu's kata number one?

It seems that Ueshiba took it more or less as it was and incorporated it into his own training.


I am aware that O Sensei and Kisshomaru both trained Kashima Shinto Ryu, and there seems to be a strong Kashima Shinryu influence, I guess via Inaba, in mainstream aikiken.
At least Kisshomaru trained, O Sensei observed classes.

Is there a strong Kashima Shinryu-influence in mainstream aikiken? I know that Yamaguchi-line aikido seems to practice Kashima Shinryu-influenced aikiken but outside of that lineage it really doesn´t seem that common.

[Cliff Judge]

It seems that Ueshiba took it more or less as it was and incorporated it into his own training.

At least Kisshomaru trained, O Sensei observed classes.

Is there a strong Kashima Shinryu-influence in mainstream aikiken? I know that Yamaguchi-line aikido seems to practice Kashima Shinryu-influenced aikiken but outside of that lineage it really doesn´t seem that common.

I guess it depends on where you stand, but from my perspective its a strong flavoring. The primary hombu guy to bring Kashima Shinryu in seems to be Inaba Sensei. I am not sure if Yamaguchi learned from him, or also trained officially, but Tissier Sensei picked a lot of it up, and Gleason Sensei as well. These teachers were quite upfront about how they had found all of this great Aikido-like movement in Kashima Shinryu and for awhile they practiced it without re-branding.

(Eventually the Kashima Shinryu people got irritated with all of this and insisted that Aikido teachers stop using the name of their art without permission.)

I am not sure what influence Kashima Shinryu has had on Saotome Sensei's aikiken but their heavy, straight bokken with the solid wood tsubas were quite popular around Shobukan in the 90s.

[Carsten Möllering]

Please be aware: The mainline of KSR denies that the derivate taught by Inaba sensei has the right, to be named Kashima shin ryu. Please respect this issue.

... and there seems to be a strong Kashima Shinryu influence, I guess via Inaba, in mainstream aikiken.
No, there is no influence of the kashima shin ryu derivate as taught by Inaba sensei on aiki ken.
Where or when it ist taught, ken jutsu normally will be distinguished from aiki ken.

I know that Yamaguchi-line aikido seems to practice Kashima Shinryu-influenced aikiken but outside of that lineage it really doesn´t seem that common.
Yes, the ken of Inaba Sensei is practiced in the Yamgauchi - line. But it is distinguished from aiki ken which is also practiced.

I would really like it, but I am sure those students like Tissier or Inaba (he isn't aikikai shihan?) or some other can be seen as represantetives of the mainstream within the aikikai /aikiken.

And as I said: At least Tissier teaches ken jutsu (> Inaba) and (!) also aiki ken. These are different kata, different forms, different ways to use the sword.
So the aikido we practice may be influenced by the kashima shin ryu derivate as taught by Inaba sensei to some degree. But the aiki ken is not.

Yamaguchi sensei himself didn't practice KSR at all. Neither as an official student nor learning systematically from Inaba (who was his student). He himself did some Yagyu ryu ken jutsu as a young man and "was able to pick up teh movements and integrate them".
The KSR main line says that Inaba sensei has only the permission to teach some basic kata ( and not KSR) and to do this only at Meiji jingu.

[grondahl]

I think a bit of the problem lies in the definition of aikiken. When I read aikiken, I think of the sets of solo and paired excercises put together by Saito sensei.

[Aikilove]

One should distinguish between Kashima Shin ryu and Kashima Shinto ryu and not confuse the two. The former a 500 year old school popularized by Kunii Zen'ya. Inaba Minoru (sword teacher of e.g. Tissier shihan) studied it for about a year, and NEITHER are formally connected with the ryu. Ueshiba Morehei was never a student in this school. The latter ryu has an unbroken succession line going back to Bokuden Tsukuhara (a student of Kashima Shinto Ryu). In the 1930's Ueshiba signed a Keppan, blood oat, together with his son, Kisshomaru, and a deshi Akazawa. An instructor from the school would then teach at the old Kobukan dojo, where Osensei would observe intently. The school's first ken vs. ken kata (Kumitachi no Ichi) bears the same name as the first kumitachi of Saito, and is virtually identical in form. Many of the following kata also bears resemblance to the aikiken kumitachi.

Is Kashima shin-ryu a valid koryu to train in? Absolutely! Like any of the other extant koryu out there.
Does it have any historical connections with aikido and aikiken of Ueshiba Morehei? NOPE!
And it should be said that Kashima Shinto ryu, although connected with aikiken through history, doesn't automatically teach you aikiken. There is a reason the forms differ, and to paraphrase 2nd doshu Kisshomaru :
- The founder would say (about a ken kata) 'This is how that is done WITH aiki!'

With that in mind it's good to remember that Inaba's (and Tissier's) Kashima Shinryu derived sword work has been heavily influenced by his long time practice in aikido and is probably consistent with aikido principles in a way that the actual Kashima Shinryu (or Kashima shinto ryu) is not!

/J

[Cliff Judge]

I think a bit of the problem lies in the definition of aikiken. When I read aikiken, I think of the sets of solo and paired excercises put together by Saito sensei.

When I use the term aikiken, I mean "sword kata that are designed to express and teach Aikido principals." I'm an ASU guy so I am more familiar with Saotome Sensei's kumi tachi than Saito Sensei's. I think a lot of folks apply the term aikiken more generally than to just Saito Sensei's stuff.

One should distinguish between Kashima Shin ryu and Kashima Shinto ryu and not confuse the two. The former a 500 year old school popularized by Kunii Zen'ya. Inaba Minoru (sword teacher of e.g. Tissier shihan) studied it for about a year, and NEITHER are formally connected with the ryu.


Inaba Minoru apparently had quite a close relationship with Kunii, and it seems it was a fairly intense year of training. Just saying.


The latter ryu has an unbroken succession line going back to Bokuden Tsukuhara (a student of Kashima Shinto Ryu). In the 1930's Ueshiba signed a Keppan, blood oat, together with his son, Kisshomaru, and a deshi Akazawa. An instructor from the school would then teach at the old Kobukan dojo, where Osensei would observe intently. The school's first ken vs. ken kata (Kumitachi no Ichi) bears the same name as the first kumitachi of Saito, and is virtually identical in form. Many of the following kata also bears resemblance to the aikiken kumitachi.

Thanks for the validation of that thought.

Tsukahara Bokuden was a student of Katori Shinto ryu and the founder of Kashima Shinto ryu. :)


With that in mind it's good to remember that Inaba's (and Tissier's) Kashima Shinryu derived sword work has been heavily influenced by his long time practice in aikido and is probably consistent with aikido principles in a way that the actual Kashima Shinryu (or Kashima shinto ryu) is not!

Right....so its aikiken now. Informed / flavored by some principals of the Kashima Shinryu.

(Similar to how Kashima Shinryu was informed by principals of Katori Shinto ryu and Shinkage ryu. )

Please be aware: The mainline of KSR denies that the derivate taught by Inaba sensei has the right, to be named Kashima shin ryu. Please respect this issue.


No. I am not beholden to the Kashima Shinryu and I will say anything I want to about their art, whether or not it is practiced under their auspices.


No, there is no influence of the kashima shin ryu derivate as taught by Inaba sensei on aiki ken.
Where or when it ist taught, ken jutsu normally will be distinguished from aiki ken.

Yes, the ken of Inaba Sensei is practiced in the Yamgauchi - line. But it is distinguished from aiki ken which is also practiced.


I think we're having the branding issue again. Here's what I propose:

kenjutsu - kata and waza performed to study how to kill a man with a sword
aikiken - kata and waza that are performed to study aikido principals

Therefore, if Inaba Sensei bows to the shomen and claps twice, then any practice of swordwork that he leads the class in until the next time he bows to the shomen and claps twice, is aikiken.

I think if you guys want to reserve the term "aikiken" to mean "Saito Sensei's aikiken," you should at least start capitalizing it.


I would really like it, but I am sure those students like Tissier or Inaba (he isn't aikikai shihan?) or some other can be seen as represantetives of the mainstream within the aikikai /aikiken.


I think you mean "I am not sure what Tissier and Inaba are doing can be seen as mainstream aikiken" and I don't see why not. its at least as relevant to many of us as what Saito's folks are doing.


Yamaguchi sensei himself didn't practice KSR at all. Neither as an official student nor learning systematically from Inaba (who was his student). He himself did some Yagyu ryu ken jutsu as a young man and "was able to pick up teh movements and integrate them".


There's no such thing as "Yagyu ryu kenjutsu," FYI. Do you mean Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, or Yagyu Shingan Ryu?


The KSR main line says that Inaba sensei has only the permission to teach some basic kata ( and not KSR) and to do this only at Meiji jingu.

That's really neat when you think about it. Its kind of like how O Sensei broke from Takeda and only took the first set of Daito ryu kata with him.

[Carsten Möllering]

When I read aikiken, I think of the sets of solo and paired excercises put together by Saito sensei.Yes. That is how I understand it.

... NEITHER are formally connected with the ryu. [
Inaba was official student of Kunii Zen'ya. He got a formally permission to teach Kashima shin ryu (and using the name of the ryu) at Meiji jingu from the widdow of Kunii.
This is not in question as far as I know.

Question is, what exactly he was allowed to teach.
Whether he was allowed to teach the art elsewhere.
Whether his students could call what they do and now teach KSR.

At last question is also whether the widdow of Kunii had the rigth to give this permission.

Does it have any historical connections with aikido and aikiken of Ueshiba Morehei? NOPE!Yes. Thats right.

With that in mind it's good to remember that Inaba's (and Tissier's) Kashima Shinryu derived sword work has been heavily influenced by his long time practice in aikido and is probably consistent with aikido principles in a way that the actual Kashima Shinryu (or Kashima shinto ryu) is not!
This is how the KSR sees it.

We - on the other side - think that the swordwork derived from the Kashima shin ryu has influenced the aikido we do. And not the other way round.

Well, the Japanese ways of swordwork where always present around O Sensei and aiki budo / aikido: He himself had learned some, there was the Katori shinto ryo (Sugino), Kendo (Nakakura), Kashima shinto ryu, taught in the kobukan. Kashima shin ryu some years later, Yagyu ryu (Yamaguchi) and so on.

Endo sensei as far as I remember once said: When O sensei talked about the relations of aikido to the ken, which form of ken did he mean then? ...
(Isn't the aiki ken we know today (> Saito sensei) a follower of aikido, not a predessecor?)

So there always where influences. And are today ...

[Carsten Möllering]

sorry, I didn't see your replie ...


Right....so its aikiken now. Informed / flavored by some principals of the Kashima Shinryu.
I'm not sure: Do you yourself practice this form swordwork in your line of aikido?
If so, I'm at a loss with your statement.

Because in our practice (following Endo shihan and Tissier shihan) the distinction between the ken jutsu coming from Inaba sensei and aiki ken is always made clear.
And this distinction is explicitly taught. It's just a different way to use the sword and to understand the swordwork. (It's just as different from aikiken as TSKSR is.)

In very very short words aikiken teaches ki musubi. The ken jutsu of Inaba sensei teaches kiri otoshi.

No. I am not beholden to the Kashima Shinryu and I will say anything I want to about their art, whether or not it is practiced under their auspices.
Hm, but they claim that it isn't their art and that the name is used without permission.
So are you able to decide, who is right?

I think we're having the branding issue again. Here's what I propose:
kenjutsu - kata and waza performed to study how to kill a man with a sword
aikiken - kata and waza that are performed to study aikido principals
Oh ...
Every kata I know ends with the killing of uchi dachi. Be it aiki ken or ken jutsu.
But the ken jutsu cuts just through the attakc of uchi dachi.
The aiki ken tries to blend with the attack.
The aiki ken I know uses go no sen. Ken jutsu tries to use sen no sen.
And more such difference.

Therefore, if Inaba Sensei bows to the shomen and claps twice, then any practice of swordwork that he leads the class in until the next time he bows to the shomen and claps twice, is aikiken.
What about bowing and clapping???
This is part of how to behave in the dojo. And does say nothing about what is practiced???

I think you mean "I am not sure what Tissier and Inaba are doing can be seen as mainstream aikiken" and I don't see why not. its at least as relevant to many of us as what Saito's folks are doing.In Europe only few people follow Tissier. And he is the only shihan over here teaching the derivate of KSR stemming from Inaba sensei.
Where I live we have more then twenty dojo teaching aikido. We are the only ones who do this form of kenjutsu.
Even not everyone following Tissier does it. There are also a lot of people practicing TSKSR or just aikiken.

There's no such thing as "Yagyu ryu kenjutsu," FYI. Do you mean Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, or Yagyu Shingan Ryu?Yes, I 'm aware oft that, but I'm not sure which one he practiced.

That's really neat when you think about it. Its kind of like how O Sensei broke from Takeda and only took the first set of Daito ryu kata with him.
Yes.
But iIt's not that the (aikido) kata changed. It's more about the "spirit". It's about "how does aikido feel".

[raul rodrigo]

Carsten, Inaba's relation to Kashima Shin ryu is not a simple as you put it.

Karl Friday wrote:

This is not really an issue that reduces to opinion; the facts could not be clearer. There are currently only two places in Europe (one group in Helsinki and one in Frankfurt) where KSR is taught under authorization by the current (or past) KSR headmasters.

The swordwork taught at various Aikido schools in England and France that Ulf refers to derives from Kashima-Shinryu, via Inaba Minoru, the head Aikido instructor at the Meiji Grand Shrine in Tokyo. It is NOT, however, Kashima-Shin ryu--in either a formal or a practical sense.

Inaba has worked a bit of Kashima-Shinryu kenjutsu and some other weapons training into his aikido curriculum at the Meiji Grand Shrine. Neither he nor his teacher, Tanaka Shigeo, however, has any formal connections with the current Kashima-Shinryu soke or shihanke, and neither has any Kashima-Shinryu license or credentials from either Kunii Zen'ya (the previous soke/shihanke) or Seki Humitake (the current shihanke).

The Inaba connection with KSR began when Tanaka wished to learn Kashima Shinryu from Kunii, because he was teaching Aikido at the University of Tokyo, and his students were becoming discouraged by their inability to hold their own in friendly matches with the karate club students, who practiced at the same time. Determining that what his students needed was some weapons training, he went to Kunii to learn kenjutsu. But, as he was already 40 at the time, he found he was not learning well, and so he brought one of his senior students, Inaba, at the time an undergraduate university student, to study with Kunii as well.

Inaba studied KSR for less than a year, and never received any diploma from Kunii Zen'ya, from Seki, or from the Kashima-Shinryu Federation of Martial Sciences. Sometime after Kunii's death in 1966, however, one of Inaba's supervisors asked Kunii Zen'ya's widow for permission for him to teach Kashima-Shinryu to the shrine attendants, arguing that Shinto authorities did not recognize Aikido as proper martial training for shrine attendants, because it lacks any form of *harai* (exorcism). Under the circumstances, it was determined that this request could not be refused.

Nevertheless, because his period of training was far too short to learn and understand the arcana of Kashima-Shinryu, the permission granted Inaba extends only to the teaching of fundamental kenjutsu techniques (but NOT other weapons; he had never actually trained at any KSR weapons other than the sword), at the dojo of the Meiji Grand Shrine. He has no authority to issue Kashima-Shinryu diplomas, nor does he have any right to use the name Kashima-Shinryu or to allow any of his students to use it.

Thus Inaba's formal status within Kashima-Shinryu is that of teaching basic sword techniques within the framework of Aikido instruction at the Meiji Grand Shrine dojo. His students and the students of his students have no formal relationship whatsoever to KSR.

[raul rodrigo]

Dr. Karl Friday is professor of history at the University of Georgia and is the author of Hired Swords: The Rise of Private Warrior Power in Early Japan (1992), Legacies of the Sword: The Kashima-Shinryu and Samurai Martial Culture (1997), and Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan (2003). He has spent a number of years living, training, and doing research in Japan; he presently holds the menkyo kaiden license and is a certified shihan in Kashima-Shinryu.

[Carsten Möllering]

Carsten, Inaba's relation to Kashima Shin ryu is not a simple as you put it.
What part of my simple statements contradicts which part of your detailed version?

I just didn't want to become this special issue the main discussion of this thread. As it allways happen when mentioned ...

Karl Friday wrote: This is not really an issue that reduces to opinion: ... Sure.
But it is - as always when dealing with similar problems of tracing the lines of a koryu - an issue that relies on first knowing and second evaluating the facts.

... Ulf refers to ... Who do you mean?
Do I get something wrong?

... derives from Kashima-Shinryu, via Inaba Minoru, the head Aikido instructor at the Meiji Grand Shrine in Tokyo.That's just what I said.
And knowing all the facts and of all the problems you describe and outline, I hoped the posters to be aware, that "the mainline of KSR denies that the derivate taught by Inaba sensei has the right, to be named Kashima shin ryu." And aksed: "Please respect this issue."

I myself use this formulation "derivate of / ... derives from Kashima-Shinryu, via Inaba Minoru" and a member of the german dojo of KSR found it ok.

It is NOT, however, Kashima-Shin ryu--in either a formal or a practical sense.This now is not a fact but a result of evaluating the facts.

[raul rodrigo]

"It is NOT, however, Kashima-Shin ryu--in either a formal or a practical sense."

I don't think this is a matter of opinion, since Karl Friday has menkyo kaiden in KSR and Inaba doesn't.

I like Inaba's sword work myself and I am very interested in what he and Tissier teach with regard to sword. But I don't call it KSR. I think even Tissier doesn't these days.

Karl Friday also wrote: "Mr. Tissier has been apprised of these facts, and has indicated that while he had been unaware of the situation, he will no longer call what he teaches KSR."

[Carsten Möllering]

I myself speak of "the swordwork of Inaba sensei".

... since Karl Friday has menkyo kaiden in KSR and Inaba doesn't.I learn from the history of other koryu that sometimes things it only seem to be clear ...
Have you ever heard Inaba sensei?

But to get back perhaps.
Important to me in the context of this thread:
This way of using the sword differs from aikiken. Be it the classical form taught by Saito sensei. Be it other forms of aiki ken. And it differs from the TSKSR which is popular here. (But which I don't practice.)

[Cliff Judge]

Carten, I am very interested in hearing more about why you won't allow Inaba's Kashima Shinryu to be defined as aikiken.

I am guessing Tissier and Inaba will teach it during Aikido class? Or is it a separate class that is held?

What I am saying is that, if the sword is used to study Aikido, it's aikiken. I trained for an evening with an Aikido group in Tokyo whose main instructor is a high-level exponent of Ono-ha Itto ryu. He would get his deshi up there and do straight Itto ryu kata to demonstrate principals he wanted to work on. He does this with permission of the Soke. In fact, the concept of kiri otoshi that you invoked to distinguish Inaba Sensei's KSR from aikiken, was one of the principals that I worked on that evening! It was related to irimi.

That was aikiken.

Do you feel like you'd lose something if you dropped the distinction between "aikiken" and the Kashima Shinryu that Inaba Sensei taught to Tissier? I could see that, perhaps you revere one set of kata over the other and don't want it brought down to the other's level. I would still call it aikiken, personally.

Oh! I keep forgetting to ask you this, since you sound somewhat familiar with these kata: what's the first kata like? Is it anything like Kashima Shinto Ryu's first kata?

[ravenest]

It is also possible that Sugano Sensei's ichi no Ken has nothing to do with the five Kumi tachi since Ichi no Ken just means first sword or sword movement 1, (Ichi=1, no=possessive grammatical particle, ken=sword) and could be an exercise of Sugano sensei's design.

Yes, this is my understanding also: Sword movement No 1 - 5, not Kumi tachi.

[ravenest]

For Sugano Sensei, OP will need someone from USAF ER to address the issue....
You may want to go to http://www.aikidoonline.com/ and contact someone there.

Thanks, I'll give them some time as some of their pages are still 'under construction'. (Must be a new site?)

[Janet Rosen]

Thanks, I'll give them some time as some of their pages are still 'under construction'. (Must be a new site?)

It's a long established site and comes in just fine.

[ravenest]

It's a long established site and comes in just fine.

Oh, okay, thanks Janet. I did get a window saying page unavailible site under construction????

I'll try again later. Thanks for steering me in that direction.

[Carsten Möllering]

Carten, I am very interested in hearing more about why you won't allow Inaba's Kashima Shinryu to be defined as aikiken.
Hm, I'm not the one to allow this or that. I just try to explain, how we name things like we do, how we practice and teach, and why we do so.

As far as I know, Inaba sensei teaches ken jutsu through "independent" seminars: There is no aikido taught at these seminars, I think. At least when visiting Europe he does it this way. To be clear: I never practiced with him. But know some people who do.

When Tissier sensei teaches, he separates weapons classes from aikido classes. This is common practice in all the dojo I know: We do aikido and weapons in different classes.
When teaching weapons the forms of ken jutsu and aiki ken normally are not mixed up. It is made clear whether we do ken jutsu or whether we do aiki ken at the moment. And the differences in using the sword one way or another are explained when taught.

And there are also dojo which offer the practice of ken jutsu with a proficient teacher independent from doing aikido. So you can just do the swordwork of Inaba sensei without practicing aikido also.
As you can do in other dojo where aikido is taught with Tenshin shoden katori shinto ryu or styles of Itto ryu. Depending on the teacher.
Some time ago I learned that there are even people who do just aiki ken without practicing aikido.

Do you feel like you'd lose something if you dropped the distinction between "aikiken" and the Kashima Shinryu that Inaba Sensei taught to Tissier? How could this distinction be "dropped"? However you may call it, it's a different way of the sword. It's a different ryu, different "philosophy", different technique, even different etiquette in some ways. …
If you just call everything "aiki ~" what is done in relation to teach and learn aikido, what do you gain?
I've practiced during aikido class forms of koryu yawara in order to examine nikyo. (If I remember right.) I've practiced during aikido class forms of karate do in order to examine atemi and some other things. And so on. This all doesn't become "aikido" because being used to learn aikido?

I could see that, perhaps you revere one set of kata over the other and don't want it brought down to the other's level. ? But this all is not about "This is ‘better' than that"?
It's just different. And that is what makes it interesting.
Around me there is at least TSKSR (My teacher is student of Sugino sensei), KSR (our aikido is heavily influenced by our shihan Tissier sensei) and aiki ken (which just belongs to aikido I think). Each different, each of them a very own, independent way to use the sword, to stand, to move, to handle the opponent.

The five basic kata performed by Tissier sensei (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs8miUVQ_2Y)
If you look for "Inaba" and "Kashima" at youtube you will find a lot.

[Cliff Judge]

Well thats really all very interesting. I didn't realize how actual the distinction between training in the KSR and Aikido was in that area of the Aikido world.

I would agree with you that if an instructor has two separate classes for Aikido and kenjutsu, particularly with students who just do the kenjutsu and not the Aikido, then there is a distinction there. But, if an instructor includes something eclectic into an Aikido class, as in your example about karate or yawara technique, then that's Aikido. I mean, Aikido is a study of principals, and for better or worse doesn't have the same structural baggage that a koryu tradition does. If your teacher makes you throw Shotokan punches or practice a rigid koryu kats during class it doesn't matter...you are on the mat to do Aikido. You aren't practicing the eclectic stuff with enough depth to say you are a karatedoka or what have you. You are on the mat working on these things to progress in your aikido training.

FWIW, I have been surfing youtube and I am quite satisfied that Kashima Shinto Ryu's Ichi no Tachi is, in basic form, present in Kashima Shinryu, Saito Sensei's aikiken, Inaba Sensei's KSR, and incidentally Saotome Sensei's second kumi tachi as well.

[grondahl]

I think that this is more of an opinion than a fact. In the tradition I study, there is a pretty well defined curriculum and little room for variations or own interpretations. There are also other martial arts that share common principals with aikido, but that does not make them aikido.

But, if an instructor includes something eclectic into an Aikido class, as in your example about karate or yawara technique, then that's Aikido. I mean, Aikido is a study of principals, and for better or worse doesn't have the same structural baggage that a koryu tradition does.

[graham christian]

Hello all. Just joined the forum. I have been training in Aiki-kai for about 30 years with vast periods missing (no teacher in area), last year our area got a resident teacher and opened a club - great!!! I have also trained in a few styles of karate, including Matsamura Sieto Shorin-Ryu - (quiet different from any karate I have done before and different from other Shorin styles I have observed) and some Kobudo (Bo, Jo, Kama, Sai, Eku). Our Aikido club practices Bokken, Jo and sometimes Tanto.

I have been slowly going through some very interesting posts here - mostly in weaponry section. Wow, so much to read and respond to, but a lot of was posted some time ago, so .... ?

I am looking for some info on Ichi, Ni and San no Ken, exercises with the Bokken (actually all of them, I think there are 5 in this series). I tried a search and a visual through weapons but cant seem to find any refs.

Anyone familiar with these exercises?

Thanks.

Hi Michael. You are talking about solo execises with the bokken which are called suburi. There are seven of them, the names merely coming from numbers.

When practicing these with a partner they are called kumitachi exercises.

This comes under Aikiken and you will find the information you are looking for on wikepedia if you type in Aikiken.

Good luck, (but not in the cricket) G.

[Aikilove]

FWIW, I have been surfing youtube and I am quite satisfied that Kashima Shinto Ryu's Ichi no Tachi is, in basic form, present in Kashima Shinryu, Saito Sensei's aikiken, Inaba Sensei's KSR, and incidentally Saotome Sensei's second kumi tachi as well. YOUTUBE you say. I would bet many men and women, who have trained in said koryu for many years, including formal representativs, would wholeheartedly disagree with you.

[ravenest]

Hi Michael. You are talking about solo execises with the bokken which are called suburi. There are seven of them, the names merely coming from numbers.

When practicing these with a partner they are called kumitachi exercises.

This comes under Aikiken and you will find the information you are looking for on wikepedia if you type in Aikiken.

Good luck, (but not in the cricket) G.

No I am not talking about solo exercises. It takes two to do this tango. I do know what a suburi is and I can count to 10 in Japanese so I understand where the names come from. Kumitachi seems an unfamiliar term and practice in my neck of the woods. I checked the ref you gave but it seems to come up kumitachi again. I already checked the kumitachi I was given reference to above and they are not like the 5 sword movements I described above.

But thanks for your (on topic ;) ) response anyway. :)

[grondahl]

I assume that you already have tried http://www.aikido.org.au/sword-technique.html ?
No I am not talking about solo exercises. It takes two to do this tango. I do know what a suburi is and I can count to 10 in Japanese so I understand where the names come from. Kumitachi seems an unfamiliar term and practice in my neck of the woods. I checked the ref you gave but it seems to come up kumitachi again. I already checked the kumitachi I was given reference to above and they are not like the 5 sword movements I described above.

But thanks for your (on topic ;) ) response anyway. :)

[graham christian]

Thanks guys. problem is I have no internet (only when I at the library) and the amount of time it takes to get through one of these clips ... if it works. But thanks again, I'll check those sites out.

The problem is I thought I had them, 1-5, down pretty good. Then our instructor left, now we either have no teacher or a series of visiting teachers or 'advanced students' who dont know them or dont want to do them or has a v.unusual take on whats going on with them.

Its also quiet frustrating, I've invested a bit of time and energy in learning them. I'm pretty sure of a movement, then its bought into question and when I ask the questioner to show me they cant :grr: Now, I feel, unless I can practice these with someone sensibly I am going to loose what I learnt.

I'm sure there are a few variations. There certainly are a lot of variations in WHAT people think they are doing with it?

Anyone know of a thread discussing this anywhere?

Hi again. It seems to me that if you had them down pretty good then you did. Plus, if you did then you won't lose what you learned so don't worry about that.

I'm more interested in the part about a move being brought into question and what you mean by that. G.

[Cliff Judge]

YOUTUBE you say. I would bet many men and women, who have trained in said koryu for many years, including formal representativs, would wholeheartedly disagree with you.

They'd be missing my point, though.

[Carsten Möllering]

They'd be missing my point, though.
Could you please elabortate?

[Cliff Judge]

Could you please elabortate?

That aiki-ken is descended primarily from Kashima sword traditions.

[ravenest]

I assume that you already have tried http://www.aikido.org.au/sword-technique.html ?

Yes, I havent noticed the movements in there, but in any case I was hoping for varient discussion on the exercises (aside from what I have had here) and not instruction.

[ravenest]

Hi again. It seems to me that if you had them down pretty good then you did. Plus, if you did then you won't lose what you learned so don't worry about that.

I'm more interested in the part about a move being brought into question and what you mean by that. G.

eg. I believe I was always told number 5 is on the same side as 1,2 and 3, only 4 is on the other side, I train with soeone one week, we agree. Next week, that person doesnt show but another one does and says, oh no, number 5 is on the other side too.

Or

Number 1 first movement; student attacks the head of teacher with, I believe, kira ski - (Sic? Which I understand to mean 'thrusting cut to the face'? [now I've done it haven't I ? :D ] ) I have been told this is just an exercise so the student can get a feel of ma'ai and other things. The teacher just stands there giving the student a target and forcus, he holds his sword horizontally over his brow, as I was told, to just give a focus and so teacher is not constantly bokked on the head by unfocused student technique.

Somehow, with some, this seems to have turned into a 'block', and IMO a very innefectual one, Some have realised this and tried to turn it into a better 'block' thus defeating the purpose (?) of the exercise in the first place? *

I was hoping to find others who were familiar with these exercises and compare notes beyond the small range of my immediate training environs..

* And who knows how some things evolved in most martial traditions ... with a 'Do' at least. I was learning Chinto Kata for a while and was always baffled at the sloppiness of the last move evryone was doing. previously, and in other kata, the last move and final position is very formal and strong ... you are often judged quiet harsly on your last final move and pose. When I asked why I was shown an old film of that stlyes Okinawan master performing Chinto, he was very old and by then probably, ( in retrospect) quiet ill. By the end of the kata (quiet vigorous with jumping double kicks and spinning crane stances),on the film, he looked quiet beat and stiff. They had been exactly copying him. At least now - in my old age I can finally perform the kata properly :laugh:

[Cliff Judge]

Okay, seriously...who told my instructors that I have been trolling on the forums about aiki-ken without having actually done Saito's kata? Because just last night I actually did a couple of them for the first time. :confused:

The teacher just stands there giving the student a target and forcus, he holds his sword horizontally over his brow, as I was told, to just give a focus and so teacher is not constantly bokked on the head by unfocused student technique.

Somehow, with some, this seems to have turned into a 'block', and IMO a very innefectual one, Some have realised this and tried to turn it into a better 'block' thus defeating the purpose (?) of the exercise in the first place? *

I think what is happening here is the instructor is executing a technique called a nagashi that is present in Shinkage ryu and Kashima styles. It's not a block in the sense that you apply counterforce to halt your opponents attack. It's more a way to negate an attack in such a way that an opening is created that can be instantly exploited.

I believe you are correct that there is a lot going on about maai and that both partners are supposed to maintain a certain maai throughout the kata. This probably means that the nagashi is never "fully realized." But it is still THERE, in a way that traditional kumitachi have layers of unrevealed techniques.

Anyway, some visual aids. First, I think what you are referring to is what the guy on the right does at about 00:18 of this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rb2NN46uro

Now look at what the guy on the right (but actually both of them) do at about 00:16 of this clip of Kashima Shinto Ryu:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z67-IKg-vyI

[ravenest]

Okay, seriously...who told my instructors that I have been trolling on the forums about aiki-ken without having actually done Saito's kata? Because just last night I actually did a couple of them for the first time. :confused:

Well, some instructors just ... 'know' these things :)


I think what is happening here is the instructor is executing a technique called a nagashi that is present in Shinkage ryu and Kashima styles. It's not a block in the sense that you apply counterforce to halt your opponents attack. It's more a way to negate an attack in such a way that an opening is created that can be instantly exploited.

Yes, except: (Unless my sword training is v.questionible) would one do that in a v.casual stance, hold the sword in a way (straight / horizontal) that is very difficult to stop a stong blow, not move off line, etc ?

Some, in this exercise, seem to want to cut straight back from this positon, expecting the other to move back and recieve the cut down their sword, with the hands out of range from the cut. Except they started that cut with my sword 1 inch from their head ... all I have to do is move off line to the outside and cut down their face, turn to my right - their outside - meet their cut and exit.

I am starting to wonder if I have been shown a corrupted or at least misunderstood exercise. The only point I can see is if the original statement holds true, beginers wacking practice and DONT hit my head. :confused:

I believe you are correct that there is a lot going on about maai and that both partners are supposed to maintain a certain maai throughout the kata. This probably means that the nagashi is never "fully realized." But it is still THERE, in a way that traditional kumitachi have layers of unrevealed techniques.

Anyway, some visual aids. First, I think what you are referring to is what the guy on the right does at about 00:18 of this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rb2NN46uro

Now look at what the guy on the right (but actually both of them) do at about 00:16 of this clip of Kashima Shinto Ryu:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z67-IKg-vyI

I can see the similarity but it looks totally different. The guy in the vid isnt just standing there with the end of the sword over his forehead and staying on line.
That vid move reminds me of ; One cuts to the head, the other thrusts to the throat, moves off line, cuts under the arm muscle as the others sword descends (and here is that pose from the vid) moves slightly more off the line and from this position thrusts into the head through the ear or continues the movement around into a diagonal cut down - virtually from the rear (again sorry about my lack of correct Japanese fencing terminology).

[Cliff Judge]

Yes, except: (Unless my sword training is v.questionible) would one do that in a v.casual stance, hold the sword in a way (straight / horizontal) that is very difficult to
stop a stong blow, not move off line, etc ?


In my opinion, "casual" is not a proper attitude to have when studying Aikido with swords, ever. You get the most out of training with swords when you approach it with an attitude of "shit has just gotten really real."

I think he should be projecting the intention to cut you down at that point in the kata and you should be trying to read his intention to cut you down.

On a technical note, if the posture in question here is actually an implied nagashi, then it is not necessarily bad if it look like it could not "stop a strong blow." It's a combined offensive / defensive movement that is blending or deflecting in nature.


Some, in this exercise, seem to want to cut straight back from this positon, expecting the other to move back and recieve the cut down their sword, with the hands out of range from the cut. Except they started that cut with my sword 1 inch from their head ... all I have to do is move off line to the outside and cut down their face, turn to my right - their outside - meet their cut and exit.

I am starting to wonder if I have been shown a corrupted or at least misunderstood exercise. The only point I can see is if the original statement holds true, beginers wacking practice and DONT hit my head. :confused:


The problem is more that you and possibly your training partners are spinning your gears trying to feel a martial narrative that is not there. Kumitachi are meant to instill principals. Sometimes they instill principals by making you worry about something basic like not getting hit or completing a complex move with a certain timing. Other times, its something that looks nothing at all like combat.

The solution for you is to find yourself a well-qualified instructor, have him or her show you the kata, and simply do your best to do exactly what you are taught, nothing more or less. If you must analyze, do so with a very open mind.

[fisher6000]

Hello!

Sounds like you are referring to Seichii Sugano Shihan's 5 paired bokken exercises--ichi no ken through go no ken, which were taught widely by Sugano in Australia, and I think are still taught widely in Australia by his son, I think his name is Jikou?

We are doing a lot of work on these right now at NY Aikikai as Sugano Shihan recently passed away and left very little by way of videotape of this legacy. Here is one video that gives a bit of information. Toward the end he goes over some of the paired exercises that make up the ken series:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7c82ieleBg

They're amazing exercises, not the same as suburi or kumitage because while they are somewhat scripted, they depend much more on reaction and relationship than form. Sugano talks in the youtube clip about "feeling pressure on your body" and forcing movement in the exercise by breaking maai rather than starting because nage has signaled readiness by presenting an opening. This emphasis on forcing and reacting is quite strong, and in my limited experience somewhat unique. It's been positively affecting my training.

[ravenest]

Hello!

Sounds like you are referring to Seichii Sugano Shihan's 5 paired bokken exercises--ichi no ken through go no ken, which were taught widely by Sugano in Australia, and I think are still taught widely in Australia by his son, I think his name is Jikou?

We are doing a lot of work on these right now at NY Aikikai as Sugano Shihan recently passed away and left very little by way of videotape of this legacy. Here is one video that gives a bit of information. Toward the end he goes over some of the paired exercises that make up the ken series:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7c82ieleBg

They're amazing exercises, not the same as suburi or kumitage because while they are somewhat scripted, they depend much more on reaction and relationship than form. Sugano talks in the youtube clip about "feeling pressure on your body" and forcing movement in the exercise by breaking maai rather than starting because nage has signaled readiness by presenting an opening. This emphasis on forcing and reacting is quite strong, and in my limited experience somewhat unique. It's been positively affecting my training.

:D AAAHHHH! Someone does know what I'm talking about (Thats a relief!) Thanks heaps Deborah. I'll go through that ref. you posted.
yes, I agree with what you wrote (and to an extent also what Cliff wrote about sword exercises. It has been pointed out numerous times to me about our exercises (by the instructiors) that 'This is NOT sword fighting!"

The 'feeling pressure' thing is interesting. Also a type of reverse pressure, like getting sucked into an attack, like a vacuum. I felt it, didnt lknow why I did it, just drawn forward.

How would you desribe the first few moves of Ichi no Ken? (I'm not assuming any particul;ar way is right or wrong as Instructors may use variations to teach different things. But I would be interested to hear your take on it. Jikou has visited and done some training with us a while back, - I cant remember if we went through these exercises with him though, it was some time ago.

[fisher6000]

Hello, glad to help!

To clarify where this is coming from, I am a 4th kyu learning this from a handful of yudansha in NYC where Sugano did not do a ton of weapons work. My knowledge is seriously limited--you have the real source in Jikou, who came here in summer at the time of Sugano Shihan's memorial and taught at couple of classes that focused on this work.

That said, I did do ichi no ken on Thursday.

Ichi no ken: Teacher and student are in hamni (Sugano goes over this concept extensively in youtube clip) and student breaks maai with a direct ski or thrust. Teacher steps back and anticpates student's next move, which is kiritske (sp?), a strike to the head, by blocking and checking the student's accuracy and maai. Then teacher returns with a strike, which student parries. Teacher goes under the student's blade and skis, student changes hamni and parries again, and then thrusts deeply to force teacher to move back. This kind of resets maai and forces a conclusion. Student raises and presents an opening--sets a trap if you will. Teacher goes for the wrist of student, student steps off the line and delivers a strike to the head. Teacher dies, student lives.

If you are learning weapons from Jikou Sugano Sensei then surely this is what you are learning...

Have fun, this type of weapons training is really inspiring me right now.
Deborah

[Josh Reyer]

I'm sorry to be a pedantic jerk, but this going to bug me in what is otherwise an interesting conversation:

thrust - tsuki
cut to a particular point - kiritsuke
oblique stance - hanmi (han - half, mi - body)

[Keith Larman]

I'm sorry to be a pedantic jerk,

I for one appreciate fine distinctions and corrections.

Funny how the mind works, too. Once I was listening to someone talking about how you should stand "ham knee". Okay, that's what I was hearing and I spent a few seconds thinking "okay, knees like a pig? 'Fat' knees? What?" Then it occurred to me -- hanmi. I laughed at myself since although it was *so* close in pronunciation the "meaning" of his mispronunciation kept me from realizing he simply didn't know how to say hanmi correctly. His insistence on reversing the n and m along with a pause he put between the syllables threw me completely off for a few seconds.

[fisher6000]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29_VEGPTxGk

[sorokod]

Detecting a deficiency of Saito sensei's kumitachi's (to which incidently he reffered as 'ichi no tachi' etc... ):

kumitachi 1,2,3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51xsumatrJw

kumitachi 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5TTI4Yi_Xw

kumitachi 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDe4o9PB2zE

[Cliff Judge]

Detecting a deficiency of Saito sensei's kumitachi's (to which incidently he reffered as 'ichi no tachi' etc... ):

What's the deficiency?

[sorokod]

Ahhh... not enough of them :-)

[Josh Reyer]

You know, it's interesting that Ueshiba flipped the roles of uchidachi and shidachi in ichi-no-tachi.

[ravenest]

Hello, glad to help!

To clarify where this is coming from, I am a 4th kyu learning this from a handful of yudansha in NYC where Sugano did not do a ton of weapons work. My knowledge is seriously limited--you have the real source in Jikou, who came here in summer at the time of Sugano Shihan's memorial and taught at couple of classes that focused on this work.

That said, I did do ichi no ken on Thursday.

Lucky you! I went to training last night and no ichi no ken for me (no weapons at all actually ... for a while). I finally got to watch that clip, yes EXCELLENT this is exactly what I am talking about.


Ichi no ken: Teacher and student are in hamni (Sugano goes over this concept extensively in youtube clip) and student breaks maai with a direct ski or thrust. Teacher steps back and anticpates student's next move, which is kiritske (sp?), a strike to the head, by blocking and checking the student's accuracy and maai.
Yes, he says it is a block but "blocking is practice only". See how at times he is extending the sword forward on an angle (not at 90 deg to the side), at times he just holds it there (near 90 deg. to side), but this is where he takes one hand off, holds the others sword, raises and lowers it, checks mai, etc and other training helps and hints. Then he cuts back.

My issue is this is seen as block by some ie. they do it quickly, no chance to check accuracy and other things and then come straigt back with a cut, which - under these circumstances is very hard to keep out of distance. If that was the case I'd be in, cutting and out of there and bugger checking accuracy and technique.

Even so, I notice Sensai Sugano's partner in this demo also seems to have trouble getting back out of range after Sensai cuts back, there is a distinct 'double-shuffle' there. That was annoying me as it seemed the only solution I could come up with.

I also loved what he said about making an opening to recieve a specific attack and then countering that attack - as a technique - instead of just fighting. I also encounter this with empty hand; I was training with a karate-ka, he is showing me some of his style and I am showing him some Shorin-ryu, we are practicing defense from head attacks, his turn, he is all guarded up, my turn is making him so discombobulated he has to stop, as I am not standing there with my arms and hands up protecting my head "Why dont you do that, I am told to start this way by my instructor." my response was "because I WANT you to attack my head, then I know what might be coming, The way you stand its too hard for me to attack your head, so I'd come in with a faint to the head and kick you in the gonzales while all your defense is up there." (unless he's good with leg blocks ;) )


Then teacher returns with a strike, which student parries. Teacher goes under the student's blade and skis, student changes hamni and parries again, and then thrusts deeply to force teacher to move back. This kind of resets maai and forces a conclusion.
Yes! This is the part that I was 'sucked in' to; this forcing the 'teacher' to move back then drawing away and offering the arm seemed to have some 'gravity' attached to it, the 'student' forcing back and then retreating a bit, a bit like a wave braking on the shore and running back ... sorta :freaky:

Student raises and presents an opening--sets a trap if you will. Teacher goes for the wrist of student, student steps off the line and delivers a strike to the head. Teacher dies, student lives.

If you are learning weapons from Jikou Sugano Sensei then surely this is what you are learning...
yep! Surely it is. Thanks for posting and re-affirming to me Im not (that) crazy:D

Have fun, this type of weapons training is really inspiring me right now.
Deborah

Yep, its great isnt it!

My understanding is that No 2 is the same as No 1 but there is no 'block', teacher steps back and meets the cut. I like that one, student can really get into the attack ... and now the cut back at the student, at this point (IMO) makes a lot more sense.

I'd love your take on 3. My understanding is teacher goes under the students blade and parries and then steps forward with a cut to the knee (ie no back and forward ski but one ski followed by knee attack)

Ermmm, better leave number 4 for now ... this is where confusion really set in ... but I think I have worked out, its just others disagree with me (which is fine IF they can offer a solution or a movement as to what it might be -I just get really annoyed by the: "Thats not it." 'Okay what is it then" 'I dont know." :grr: )

[Carl Thompson]

You know, it's interesting that Ueshiba flipped the roles of uchidachi and shidachi in ichi-no-tachi.

Do you mean how the “good guy” starts it all?

[Cliff Judge]

You know, it's interesting that Ueshiba flipped the roles of uchidachi and shidachi in ichi-no-tachi.

You mean how the Aikiken kata begins with the kata "winner" / nage advancing on the kata "loser" / uke? But in the Kashima kata, it's the kata "loser" / shidachi who advances.

In every real sword system I have seen, uchidachi and shidachi start five steps away, and the kata begins with that space being closed somehow. There is a lot going on in those three to five steps before contact. (Is there a generic technical term for the coming together part of a kumitachi?)

Aikiken doesn't seem to have that. I don't see it in these videos. In Saotome Sensei's kata, uke and nage start in seigan with kissaki touching. (Is there a generic technical term for the distance at which two swordsmen in seigan can touch the tips of their swords together?) I've always been curious why O Sensei / Kissomaru / Saito didn't think it was worthwhile to include that.

[sorokod]

There is a partner practice called ki musubi no tachi which starts at a (non kissaki touching) distance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKjGXHrko4k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9EpY6PirZw

[Carsten Möllering]

In every real sword system I have seen, uchidachi and shidachi start five steps away, and the kata begins with that space being closed somehow.Oh?
I think there are a whole lot of kata starting within a nearer distance, often with kissaki even touching?

[Josh Reyer]

Do you mean how the "good guy" starts it all?
You mean how the Aikiken kata begins with the kata "winner" / nage advancing on the kata "loser" / uke? But in the Kashima kata, it's the kata "loser" / shidachi who advances.
In both the KSR and aikiken versions, "shidachi" makes the first move - this is a step in and threatened tsuki (or cut to the hands) in KSR, and a straight cut in aikiken. Shidachi induces the first straight cut in KSR, and then responds to it with the evasion and cutting the wrist with an upward strike. In aikiken, his advancement/threatened tsuki is delayed until after shidachi raises to cut. So in both, shidachi makes the first move, and uchidachi responds and counter-attacks. But which side of the kata is doing shidachi has been flipped, and the timing thereby changed. So far beyond simply being the Kashima Shinto-ryu ichi-no-tachi structure modified for aikiken technique, the whole nature of the kata has been changed, the lessons therein completely different. Which is not surprising, but rather interesting, I thought.

In every real sword system I have seen, uchidachi and shidachi start five steps away, and the kata begins with that space being closed somehow. There is a lot going on in those three to five steps before contact. (Is there a generic technical term for the coming together part of a kumitachi?)
There's no universal general term -- in the Nippon Kendo Kata, probably the widest practiced style, the term "susumi/susumu" is used -- "advance forward." Some old styles use the term "shikakeru", meaning, roughly, "to set upon". As noted above, though, such movement is not always done in old styles.

Aikiken doesn't seem to have that. I don't see it in these videos. In Saotome Sensei's kata, uke and nage start in seigan with kissaki touching. (Is there a generic technical term for the distance at which two swordsmen in seigan can touch the tips of their swords together?) I've always been curious why O Sensei / Kissomaru / Saito didn't think it was worthwhile to include that.
Just a guess, but I'd hazard this is one of the clearer demonstrations of aikiken being about improving one's taijutsu, rather than an independent weapons system. One big part of that movement forward in old styles is training maai -- finding the point where you can strike without being struck, where the enemy most wants to strike you, and so on. Aikido is not focused on such questions of distance with long weapons, it's focusing on a much shorter maai -- initial attack and contact happening much closer than with two swordsmen. Particularly if you're using swordwork to demonstrate a principle, it's quicker and easier to just start from the maai that can demonstrate it, rather than doing the whole closing distance thing.

[phitruong]

Aikido is not focused on such questions of distance with long weapons, it's focusing on a much shorter maai -- initial attack and contact happening much closer than with two swordsmen. Particularly if you're using swordwork to demonstrate a principle, it's quicker and easier to just start from the maai that can demonstrate it, rather than doing the whole closing distance thing.

yup, we prefer closer distance, because at longer distance, it will take all day to be close enough for a strike, which would take time away from us going out drinking and carousing. maai is important, but the other factors are more important. :D

[Aikilove]

I've always been curious why O Sensei / Kissomaru / Saito didn't think it was worthwhile to include that.Because osensei wasn't doing Kashima shinto ryu. He used some old forms as tools but (in his mind) included aiki in the forms and made up new ones to augment the old ones. It was ALL about aiki for Ueshiba. Therefore: "This is how you would do that WITH aiki". Not about fighting techniques. That is why if you're going to do bukiwaza as part of you aikido training then you better know how it should fit in, and be consistent with your empty hands forms.

What actually is interesting to me is the talk about aiki lately, found at these forums and elsewhere, as a form of internal training/power and how it is different from the standard aiki (of timing and blending type also referred to as ki no musubi - tying your ki with that of your partner). However, it's quite clear to me (and Saito M sensei talk about this as well) that the aiki of aikiken, as bequeathed by the founder, was not so much of the former kind (IP) as that of the latter (ki no musubi).

So that when the founder stated: "This is how you would do that WITH aiki" the aiki part would be basically the difference in what you see between ichi no tachi of KSR and Aikiken (Saito); i.e essentially how you control openings (and how you are without openings!) thereby completely negating all attacks except the one you intend to draw out. In that way you are in complete control of time and space and in fact transcends time and space and concepts like sen no sen, sen sen no sen or go no sen, It becomes a matter of instant victory (masakatsu agatsu katsu hayabi)

*enough rambling*

[Ellis Amdur]

Jacob wrote:
What actually is interesting to me is the talk about aiki lately, found at these forums and elsewhere, as a form of internal training/power and how it is different from the standard aiki (of timing and blending type also referred to as ki no musubi - tying your ki with that of your partner). However, it's quite clear to me (and Saito M sensei talk about this as well) that the aiki of aikiken, as bequeathed by the founder, was not so much of the former kind (IP) as that of the latter (ki no musubi).

Jacob - This is a really important statement. I think you are absolutely correct, in so far as Saito sensei's weapon's work, and all of it's off-shoots. However, let me add a caveat. Note this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozp3OPyX3eo&feature=related) Through most of it, Ueshiba is doing the blending you are talking about. But here and there, he demonstrates internal strength. We have two alternative explanations, in my view:
1. Ueshiba M. only wanted to teach the blending/musubi, which comprised most of his demonstrations, but to demonstrate his mastery/how wonderful he <alone> was, he added these internal strength manifestations that he learned from Daito-ryu.
2. The organization of the body and mind that occurs with internal strength training is absolutely essential to achieve ki no musubi abilities at a high level. Those abilities enable the practitioner to elicit certain responses from aite which are NOT dependent on them taking "good" ukemi or becoming a "dive bunny."

Ellis Amdur

[ravenest]

... the whole nature of the kata has been changed, the lessons therein completely different. Which is not surprising, but rather interesting, I thought.
Yes, interesting. This can also occur by changing the bunkai of a kata while the actuall move in the kata can be exactly the same. (When a kata has a single performer but each move is demonstarted by two in a 'bunkai'.) eg. Nobudi Nogata (sic?), supposedly an empty hand defense against Bo and other attacks. One set of bunkai demonstrate, well basically, brute strength. I prefer not to try to break baseball bats with my forearm, then after kick, then after do a series of unrelated moves that dont seem to flow together. Exactly the same moves can be used in a different way if one swaps sides (ie. the attack comes in yokoman from the left instead of right, or, you reverse sides with the pattern) utalising principles I learnt in Aikido, then all subsequent moves flow together unto the next obvious set of moves ( a new bunkai).

One way you learn strength and oppostion, the other way you learn to utalise the opponnnts strength and flow one move 'economically' into the other.

I just whish teachers would spend more time explaining WHY certain moves and interpretations are required.


Just a guess, but I'd hazard this is one of the clearer demonstrations of aikiken being about improving one's taijutsu, rather than an independent weapons system. One big part of that movement forward in old styles is training maai -- finding the point where you can strike without being struck, where the enemy most wants to strike you, and so on. Aikido is not focused on such questions of distance with long weapons, it's focusing on a much shorter maai -- initial attack and contact happening much closer than with two swordsmen.

Yes, in the above clip Sensai Sugarno stops, just as he attacks, takes the sword from his hand and grasps the others hand saying this is the correct maai

Particularly if you're using swordwork to demonstrate a principle, it's quicker and easier to just start from the maai that can demonstrate it, rather than doing the whole closing distance thing.
Yes, its just that as soon as one picks up a sword ... thats all most of us can see - look out, he has a sword! Whereas perhaps we should view it more as ... say a boxer sees a skipping rope?

[Cliff Judge]

I just think having uke and nage each take five steps back and then come forward would create an opportunity to work on the part of aiki that is about communication between uke and nage. Attention / intention type stuff that George Ledyard Sensei has developed a lot of material on, and has written about.

Something that has come up in this thread with regard to Sugano Sensei's paired sword exercises is that there is one where nage is supposed to make uke feel like they are being drawn into the attack. That's the kind of thing I am talking about. I think some of you guys are pretty quick to wave that away as though its just a component of swordfighting and isn't useful to Aikido.

[Josh Reyer]

Yes, but one can work just as easily on that from swordtip distance as from five steps away. More to the point, you don't even need swords. Why do the five step thing for swords, but not for empty hand?

[grondahl]

This is an interesting question; the main line of Daito Ryu seems to do the closing distance thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLrC5niLBQ

Why do the five step thing for swords, but not for empty hand?

[Aikilove]

Jacob wrote:

Jacob - This is a really important statement. I think you are absolutely correct, in so far as Saito sensei's weapon's work, and all of it's off-shoots. However, let me add a caveat. Note this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozp3OPyX3eo&feature=related) Through most of it, Ueshiba is doing the blending you are talking about. But here and there, he demonstrates internal strength. We have two alternative explanations, in my view:
1. Ueshiba M. only wanted to teach the blending/musubi, which comprised most of his demonstrations, but to demonstrate his mastery/how wonderful he <alone> was, he added these internal strength manifestations that he learned from Daito-ryu.
2. The organization of the body and mind that occurs with internal strength training is absolutely essential to achieve ki no musubi abilities at a high level. Those abilities enable the practitioner to elicit certain responses from aite which are NOT dependent on them taking "good" ukemi or becoming a "dive bunny."

Ellis Amdur

Couldn't say it better myself. Brilliant! Man we really need to get together someday over drinks! (I'm frequently visiting the east coast...;))

[Cliff Judge]

This is an interesting question; the main line of Daito Ryu seems to do the closing distance thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLrC5niLBQ

Yeah, everything about the attack is very defined in koryu jujutsu. A lot of Aikido organizations - mine included - have embraced the opposite dynamic. Less dictation of how the attack comes in. Some people prefer to train that way, I kind of do, but not with weapons.

[fisher6000]

Hi Michael, glad we are talking about the same thing! Again, my knowledge is limited, but this is such an exciting part of my practice right now that it's great to discuss it with someone.


Yes, he says it is a block but "blocking is practice only". See how at times he is extending the sword forward on an angle (not at 90 deg to the side), at times he just holds it there (near 90 deg. to side), but this is where he takes one hand off, holds the others sword, raises and lowers it, checks mai, etc and other training helps and hints. Then he cuts back.

My issue is this is seen as block by some ie. they do it quickly, no chance to check accuracy and other things and then come straigt back with a cut, which - under these circumstances is very hard to keep out of distance. If that was the case I'd be in, cutting and out of there and bugger checking accuracy and technique.

Even so, I notice Sensai Sugano's partner in this demo also seems to have trouble getting back out of range after Sensai cuts back, there is a distinct 'double-shuffle' there. That was annoying me as it seemed the only solution I could come up with.

Yes, to me this is an interesting paradox about what Sugano Sensei was doing. On one hand, everything's about speed, and not about form. There are only two strikes. Each strike is to be completed quickly. I took a small handful of Sugano's weapons classes before he stopped teaching due to illness, and I could never come close to keep up with his expectations re: speed, and assumed that this was the only goal. But this system is really more about (to my eye anyway) developing a sense of connection with your partner. Stopping as "teacher" to check your "student's" accuracy is an interesting doorway to understanding a lot of things about reaction and timing. So on one hand, you have this system based on two cuts and this notion that a sword is a smashing tool, not so much a delicate slicing tool. And on the other you wind up with these very intense moments of connection--the sensations of drawing and forcing, or understanding that if your hanmi is rigid you give your partner too much information--that are much harder to get in an empty hand practice. For me, anyway. It's much easier for me to learn how to keep my sword "empty" than it is for me to keep my arm "empty."

Regarding footwork and getting where you need to be in time, the emphasis I am being taught is on sliding and shuffling, and staying in right hanmi and keeping your feet close together. If you're in a relatively tight hanmi, you can spring back or forth, but if you plant yourself, you're done.

The thing I've been finding most interesting these days is where to focus my eyes. In that video Sugano says that thing about not looking at the weapon, not looking at the opponent, and talks about how hard that is. No kidding!! I find that if I kind of try to focus on the wall behind my partner, my reaction times are better. But that if I am looking at my partner directly, I get really jumpy and anticipatory. Interesting.

I also loved what he said about making an opening to recieve a specific attack and then countering that attack - as a technique - instead of just fighting. I also encounter this with empty hand; I was training with a karate-ka, he is showing me some of his style and I am showing him some Shorin-ryu, we are practicing defense from head attacks, his turn, he is all guarded up, my turn is making him so discombobulated he has to stop, as I am not standing there with my arms and hands up protecting my head "Why dont you do that, I am told to start this way by my instructor." my response was "because I WANT you to attack my head, then I know what might be coming, The way you stand its too hard for me to attack your head, so I'd come in with a faint to the head and kick you in the gonzales while all your defense is up there." (unless he's good with leg blocks ;) )

Right, again, I'm new at this, and I know nothing about karate. But I think I get what you are saying. I don't do a whole lot of fighting elsewhere in my life. So this weapons practice, because it's so focused on reaction and timing, has given me my first clear sense of what it means to be "open" or to have a strategy or understand what your attacker thinks or any of these other concepts. I feel like I am approaching my empty hand practice with more basic martial common sense, and taking better/more active ukemi because I am understanding that part of my role is to find and exploit openings.


Yes! This is the part that I was 'sucked in' to; this forcing the 'teacher' to move back then drawing away and offering the arm seemed to have some 'gravity' attached to it, the 'student' forcing back and then retreating a bit, a bit like a wave braking on the shore and running back ... sorta :freaky:

When it works, it's amazing. And thinking about how it works is really thrilling. I can't say I understand it but today is weapons class and I am really looking forward to spending some time with this.

My understanding is that No 2 is the same as No 1 but there is no 'block', teacher steps back and meets the cut. I like that one, student can really get into the attack ... and now the cut back at the student, at this point (IMO) makes a lot more sense.

Yes, that's my understanding as well. Blocking is stupid, it ruins your sword. It's for training purposes only. But it's hard to return that first strike with any accuracy at all without some practice just getting your boken up there, IMO.

I'd love your take on 3. My understanding is teacher goes under the students blade and parries and then steps forward with a cut to the knee (ie no back and forward ski but one ski followed by knee attack)

Yes, this is #3, and this is as far as I've gone. It's a knuckle scraper! I can't talk about it, I've only done it a handful of times.

[ravenest]

Hi Michael, glad we are talking about the same thing! Again, my knowledge is limited, but this is such an exciting part of my practice right now that it's great to discuss it with someone.
Hi Deborah, ditto (finally the discussion is about the thread title :D )


Yes, to me this is an interesting paradox about what Sugano Sensei was doing. On one hand, everything's about speed, and not about form. There are only two strikes. Each strike is to be completed quickly. I took a small handful of Sugano's weapons classes before he stopped teaching due to illness, and I could never come close to keep up with his expectations re: speed, and assumed that this was the only goal. But this system is really more about (to my eye anyway) developing a sense of connection with your partner.
I havent done this exercise looking at speed, all instructors have focused on different aspects; relationship, music and rythym (the first time I ever understood what the hell Mushashi was talking about when he goes; 'Dont go; ho-hum ho-ha hum, go; ha-ho, ha ho, HUM (or something like that?) There seem to be a LOT of levels of learning in this. I've encountered the mad speed thing with students ... but maybe thats not what you mean?

Stopping as "teacher" to check your "student's" accuracy is an interesting doorway to understanding a lot of things about reaction and timing. So on one hand, you have this system based on two cuts and this notion that a sword is a smashing tool, not so much a delicate slicing tool.

Hmmm ... I've encountered that with students too, but I dont get that from this exercise. I learnt a totally differnt way of attacking with the sword from these exercises compared to sword work I did in another school, they used it like an axe! In my understanding the the two strikes are KIRITSUKI (there ya go Josh ;) ) I see this as a thrusting cut to the forhead. The way I was taught is that the sword comes down, when hands are at eye level the sword more or less maintains its position and the body 'surges' forward 'following' the sword ... sorta. In Kyu-shin-ryu they charge forward and crash the sword down on top of the head. This leaves the attacker very open to a thrusting off line attack. When I tried this against kiritsuki the oncoming blade deflected my thrust, ran up my blade and straight in to the top of the forehead. I see the other type of attack as a type of di-jodan (?) , by that I mean, a cut straight down on to the top of the head ... a bit like an axe blow ... I see its use more as a follow up technique for close quarters, where one doesnt have space to lead with the sword. I'd say the knee attack in 3 seems to be a slice?

And on the other you wind up with these very intense moments of connection--the sensations of drawing and forcing, or understanding that if your hanmi is rigid you give your partner too much information

Yes ... I've deffinatly changed that! Look at some clips of sowrd that have been linked here and other places ... not much classic hanmi there.

--that are much harder to get in an empty hand practice. For me, anyway. It's much easier for me to learn how to keep my sword "empty" than it is for me to keep my arm "empty."

Regarding footwork and getting where you need to be in time, the emphasis I am being taught is on sliding and shuffling, and staying in right hanmi and keeping your feet close together. If you're in a relatively tight hanmi, you can spring back or forth, but if you plant yourself, you're done.
So glad to hear that, I got sick of being told (in the other school) not to do little springs or jumps ... but they worked! - when nothing else seemed to.

The thing I've been finding most interesting these days is where to focus my eyes. In that video Sugano says that thing about not looking at the weapon, not looking at the opponent, and talks about how hard that is. No kidding!! I find that if I kind of try to focus on the wall behind my partner, my reaction times are better. But that if I am looking at my partner directly, I get really jumpy and anticipatory. Interesting.
No ... LOOK at you partner ... ALL of him (or her), not just a bit of them. Look at them like you look at a distant mountain or a tree. You see the tree as a whole, not looking at all the seperate leaves branches twigs and trunk, take the whole lot in in one go. Its a type of spherical awareness and should extend in a sphere around you (you will pick it up from Ju-waza - unless your teacher instructs people not to attack if you arent looking at them ????? :confused: ) or years as a (surviving) motorcycle rider. Look at all of them but dont be attached to them. Throw a handfull of something on a table or the ground and count the objects all at once without individual counting ... that sorta stuff. I guess one is also looking at other things with this 'holistic' vision ,,, the persons 'demenour', spirit, ki 'stream', etc?

When it works, it's amazing. And thinking about how it works is really thrilling. I can't say I understand it but today is weapons class and I am really looking forward to spending some time with this.
Lucky you! I damaged my back at training last week AGAIN! No training for me - bummer. In so much pain I thought ... okay, I gotta give this up. Today I can walk again and I'm thinking ... hmmm wonder how long before .... ? But G. F. has given me a little lecture about it and responsibility :( . (Note; JIC - I have serious back issues and dont blame the actuall aikido, its good for it! I flu through the air, wrestle and roll, then walk a cross the mat, turn and step funny . wack! out it goes _ I can lift up the back of the car but last time I injured it it was lifting a 2kg, water bottle? - So - if you are new and reading this - thats why I get injured ... actually Nikyo seems to be the only thing that fixes my shoulder!)


Yes, that's my understanding as well. Blocking is stupid, it ruins your sword. It's for training purposes only. But it's hard to return that first strike with any accuracy at all without some practice just getting your boken up there, IMO.

Yes, this is #3, and this is as far as I've gone. It's a knuckle scraper! I can't talk about it, I've only done it a handful of times.

Three seems to have this nice fluidity to it, the way the sword is returned to its 'up' position after the knee deflection (when the wrist is 'offered' )seems crucial to create this 'wave' - 'sucked into the attack' effect I was talking about above

No 4 awaits you - easy ... just remember all the rest but do it on the other side .... HA ... a real brain twister! (for some)

[edshockley]

There is a clear recording of the late Sugano Shihan's unique bokken series in a film called BETWEEN HEAVEN AND EARTH by Henry Smith Shihan(Aikikai of Philadelphia). It is completely dissimilar to Seito's famous katas. Also Sugano Shihan taught his series in the same week as the Waite Shihan example in the second post. (I happened to be there for both of the classes that year.) To my knowledge the Sugano footage from USAF summer camp has yet to be posted.