Fighting Mind vs Warrior Mind

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[graham christian]

Hi. This is a post to explain what I feel is a not very well understood concept of 'martial' as in martial arts and indeed in martial training.

The confusion lies in a lack of differenciation between martial application and fighting. In competitive martial arts you can see the difference between the two and thus see if you study it how the martial or indeed warriors always rise to the top of the sport whilst the fighters get left behind, looking mean, talking big, but nonetheless stuck in themselves.

I say this because I have heard many times people talk about maintaining the integrity of their art and to remind them the integrity is undermined once you are led to believe that it's to do with fighting.

To understand what I mean let me introduce you to the warrior mind or mentality.

The warrior mentality is one of learning, really studying, the principles and techniques of his 'way' or 'jutsu' and continually polishing his skills and thus improving. A discipline.

Now a fighter does the same.

So far so good. The difference lies purely and squarely in purpose.

The fighter lives in fear, the fighting mind is based on fear and thoughts of 'what if?' To that degree a form of paranoia. This may even rise to the dizzy heights of anger and thus a person who wants to prove something, to show the world how strong and tough they are etc.etc. Having said that you can come across very strong and even very clever fighters.

The warrior is a different kettle of fish completely for he has no purpose of fighting. His purpose is a much higher purpose. It is one of being the best he can be on his chosen path.

To do this he studies hard, he practices hard, he developes necessary skills and perfects them and improves so that when called for he can use those skills, excecute those skills to the best of his ability.

Even if a warrior accepted a challenge due to some code or other he would see it merely as a test of his skill, a test of his maintaining of integrity and thus application of his art. He is therefore not interested in fighting or proving or even maiming or killing the opponent, he just knows he will enter and execute his skill. As to what the opponent thinks, says, appears to be or even deserves is of no concern.

This is the warrior mind, it reaches the opponent before anything has even occured and thus many opponents fold and there is no fight for they know there is no tricking this person or scaring him for he has no fear as such and only has a clear mind, a focussed mind, an immovable mind.

In life you can see the person who faces problems calmly, with acceptance. He looks for the best way to solve it and through disciplined application resolves it. This is the mind of the warrior. O n the other hand you have the fighting mind approach. This person gets angry with the problem, wants to fight it or even blame someone or something and fight that. If the fighting mind feels the problem is too big it goes into fear and runs away. Once again in life the person who does this pretends therefore it's not a problem, (for they have run away from accepting it is) and end up merely taking potshots at anyone else who doesn't have a problem with it or who is therefore more capable in that area than them.

This is also why a warrior in a competitive ring respects his opponent whether he 'wins' or 'loses' for his aim is not to destroy or belittle or any other proof. It's just two people being the best they can be. Thus the 'winner' who is a warrior respects the 'loser' too.

Hopefully this will help some make sense of what not only O'Sensei meant in some of his statements but also many other great teachers.

If nothing else I hope this is at least food for thought in your attitude towards training.

Regards.G.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

It's just two people being the best they can be. Thus the 'winner' who is a warrior respects the 'loser' too.

We do.....;)

[SeiserL]

IMHO, a warrior's mind is/includes a fighter's mind.

But a fighter's mind is not necessarily a warrior's mind.

Its a matter of ego.

[guest1234567]

Thanks Graham..
Lynn I don't think so, a warrior's mind is not necessarily aimed to fight, the fight is his work. But fighter's mind is always thinking about fight, about competition and to win..

[Demetrio Cereijo]

I'm with Lynn.

[guest1234567]

I'm with Lynn.
good for you..

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Royal Navy motto........ Si vis pacem bellum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_vis_pacem,_para_bellum

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Royal Navy motto........ Si vis pacem bellum

Trans.: Hello Sailor

:D

[jurasketu]

I'm with Lynn too...

I would also like to add this thought...

For me the difference between a warrior and a fighter is who they fight FOR - not necessarily their actual skills or prowess.

A Warrior stands ready to fight to protect others and see that as an important part of their "duty".

A Fighter fights first and foremost for their own self and doesn't think its their job or duty to protect others (even though they might if it provided an opportunity to fight and feed their ego).

Robin

[Hellis]

Graham

With all due respect I consider the following a large pile of crap.

The fighter lives in fear, the fighting mind is based on fear and thoughts of 'what if?' To that degree a form of paranoia. This may even rise to the dizzy heights of anger and thus a person who wants to prove something, to show the world how strong and tough they are etc.etc. Having said that you can come across very strong and even very clever fighters

Henry Ellis
http://aikido-controversy.blogspot.com/

[sakumeikan]

Trans.: Hello Sailor

:D
Demetrio,
Are you making me an offer I can scarcely refuse? Hello sailor is a catchy phrase not to be quoted to often unless you are lonely and need a bit of companionship.
Cheers, Joe.

[graham christian]

Thanks Graham..
Lynn I don't think so, a warrior's mind is not necessarily aimed to fight, the fight is his work. But fighter's mind is always thinking about fight, about competition and to win..

Hi Carina, you're welcome.

Yes, this is the main point.

Regards.G.

[graham christian]

It's just two people being the best they can be. Thus the 'winner' who is a warrior respects the 'loser' too.

We do.....;)

Tony, welcome back.

Regards.G.

[graham christian]

IMHO, a warrior's mind is/includes a fighter's mind.

But a fighter's mind is not necessarily a warrior's mind.

Its a matter of ego.

Lynn. Thanks for the response. I would say a warriors mind may include some ego until he is enlightened but a fighting mind IS ego.

Respect.G.

[graham christian]

I'm with Lynn too...

I would also like to add this thought...

For me the difference between a warrior and a fighter is who they fight FOR - not necessarily their actual skills or prowess.

A Warrior stands ready to fight to protect others and see that as an important part of their "duty".

A Fighter fights first and foremost for their own self and doesn't think its their job or duty to protect others (even though they might if it provided an opportunity to fight and feed their ego).

Robin

Robin. I agree with that differenciation also as I would say one is selfish and the other operates from the spirit of selflessness.

Regards.G.

[graham christian]

Graham

With all due respect I consider the following a large pile of crap.

Henry Ellis
http://aikido-controversy.blogspot.com/

Henry. 'C'est la vie.'

Regards.G.

[David Orange]

To understand what I mean let me introduce you to the warrior mind or mentality.

Graham,

Have you ever been in the military or worked as a law enforcement officer?

I haven't, and I would never kid myself that I even comprehend the "warrior mind" or that I could employ it. I would certainly never call myself "a warrior." To me, when people without military or police backgrounds talk about "warrior mind," they might as well dress in Gandalf robes and go about talking with Aslan: fantasy, in other words.

I think you mean well, but you should pay more attention to Sir T-Rex. In fact, I think you ought to drop all your teaching and go and ask to be his student. If you train with him as long as we're blessed to have him among us, you might earn the right to call yourself a warrior. But by then, I doubt that you would.

Best to you.

David

[Hellis]

Henry. 'C'est la vie.'

Regards.G.

Graham

Have you been watching Delboy again ?? :D

Henry Ellis
Silence is Approval
http://aikido-controversy.blogspot.com/

[dps]

The warrior mentality is

A romantic

(marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic, adventurous, remote, mysterious, or idealized ; http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/romantic)

notion

(impression: a vague idea in which some confidence is placed; http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:notion&sa=X&ei=KwtyTfLSL4PGgAec1dxE&ved=0CBQQkAE).

dps

[Marc Abrams]

The poster's choice of terms is what gets him in trouble. David and others raise the important point in regards to any REAL experience with being a warrior. Maybe the poster should spend some time speaking to some real warriors, then he could gain some understanding as to Henry's very succinct and to-the-point analysis.

There are important distinctions between the two types of "minds" that the poster talked about. That being said, his choice of terms was lacking at best....

marc abrams

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Trans.: Hello Sailor

:D

Heeelloooo ducky......!!

[Mark Freeman]

Graham,

Have you ever been in the military or worked as a law enforcement officer?

I haven't, and I would never kid myself that I even comprehend the "warrior mind" or that I could employ it. I would certainly never call myself "a warrior." To me, when people without military or police backgrounds talk about "warrior mind," they might as well dress in Gandalf robes and go about talking with Aslan: fantasy, in other words.



Hi David,

I'm not sure that the question you pose to Graham is a fair one. In that being a member of the forces or a LEO does not automatically give anyone the 'warrior' mindset. It does (potentially) put you in the line of fire in your daily work, with the opportunity to display and act in a 'warrior' like way. I do agree that those in the armed forces may well be the closest to actually achieving the true warrior mindset, in that life and death may be the choice they make to give or take away in an instant.

"In Search of the Warrior Spirit" by Richard Strozzi Heckler is a good book I read on this, have you seen it?

I just watched an interview with Geoff Thompson that David S posted here recently. He is someone I would say is neither soldier or LEO but I would quite happily judge as a having a warrior mindset.

I'm with you, I don't kid myself that I am a warrior (although I do strive to be a peaceful one:) ). But from a purely Aikido point of view, my teacher is constantly berating students who are not able to do what he is demonstrating, because they are employing a 'fighting mind'. So I get where Graham is coming from with this point. It is impossible to recreate what my teacher is doing with any desire to 'fight' as 'non-resistance' is the goal and ultimately the means of control over the other.

It is an interesting subject and I think Graham is doing us a service by positing points for discussion. I smile when he is dismissed out of hand, mainly because there is truth in what he says, it's not always in the language that everyone wants to read it in.

regards

Mark

[graham christian]

Graham,

Have you ever been in the military or worked as a law enforcement officer?

I haven't, and I would never kid myself that I even comprehend the "warrior mind" or that I could employ it. I would certainly never call myself "a warrior." To me, when people without military or police backgrounds talk about "warrior mind," they might as well dress in Gandalf robes and go about talking with Aslan: fantasy, in other words.

I think you mean well, but you should pay more attention to Sir T-Rex. In fact, I think you ought to drop all your teaching and go and ask to be his student. If you train with him as long as we're blessed to have him among us, you might earn the right to call yourself a warrior. But by then, I doubt that you would.

Best to you.

David

David. Interesting perspective.

I suggest you read it again. I have read some of your posts and see you have many stories of your travels in new york. Your meeting with various potentially dangerous situations and how you faced them, what you did, and the results that happened. All may I say without having to resort to 'fighting' yet a good example of what I wrote.

Maybe you put yourself down too much.

Your comments comparing military and police to is very vague as some will have but many won't, hence you end up with special forces and elite units. These are the ones who can raise themselves to warrior mind.

I have done much doorman and security work thank you and indeed have trained some policemen thank you very much. In fact may I inform you that a friend of mine who works in the police force came to me for training and the precise things we worked on not only saved his life but also led to him getting rewarded with a bravery medal, followed by two more since I might add.

However, I am more pleased by helping others to improve their lives with what I learn in Aikido and bring about a little more harmony, it's much more fun.

You seem to have more street experiences than many who post, I wonder if you have had as many as me? I worked in portobello market for ten years in london and have seen many sights and come across many situations. As I have said previously the world is my dojo and in those dangerous situations I have encountered over the years from gangs to guns to idiots and thugs it's been an opportunity to face without the fighting mind but to apply my training and thus I learn the true reality of what I teach my friend.

If you don't believe the principles are real and effective then that's your perogative. Who am I to judge you?

Harmony my friend is all powerful and comes from compassion and love and kindness and the disciplines of such. Hopefully one day you will see why.

Regards.G.

[graham christian]

Graham

Have you been watching Delboy again ?? :D

Henry Ellis
Silence is Approval
http://aikido-controversy.blogspot.com/

Henry. I prefer david carradine in kung fu although I on the comedy front I prefer fawty towers.

Regards.G.

[Mark Freeman]

Hi all,

this short film 'Bouncer' clipped from Geoff Thompson's site and starring the always excellent Ray Winstone is well worth a viewing (as long as you can stand a bit of earthy language).

http://www.geoffthompson.com/Bouncer.asp

Watch it and let me know where and who, if anyone, is the warrior / fighter.

I think this is a brilliant, thought provoking little film that is pertinent to the thread...enjoy

regards

Mark

[graham christian]

The poster's choice of terms is what gets him in trouble. David and others raise the important point in regards to any REAL experience with being a warrior. Maybe the poster should spend some time speaking to some real warriors, then he could gain some understanding as to Henry's very succinct and to-the-point analysis.

There are important distinctions between the two types of "minds" that the poster talked about. That being said, his choice of terms was lacking at best....

marc abrams

Marc. I do not say anything that is not based on real experience thank you. Maybe you want times, places etc. however that would be of no use to those who just want to throw away what I say.

Once again the choice of words I use are what I mean. I talk to many with the type of mind I describe from all walks of life.

I suggest it is not a matter of 'gets me in trouble' but rather it troubles some. I read similar views from many respected stalwarts from O'Sensei to Tohei to Musashi to people you well know in your own circles. In fact I wouldn't mind betting you say similar things when teaching sometimes.

Or maybe I'm wrong there.

Anyway your view of what a succinct and to-the-point analysis is did make me smile so thanks for that.

Keep up the good work.

Regards.G.

[graham christian]

Hi all,

this short film 'Bouncer' clipped from Geoff Thompson's site and starring the always excellent Ray Winstone is well worth a viewing (as long as you can stand a bit of earthy language).

http://www.geoffthompson.com/Bouncer.asp

Watch it and let me know where and who, if anyone, is the warrior / fighter.

I think this is a brilliant, thought provoking little film that is pertinent to the thread...enjoy

regards

Mark

Hi Mark. Excellent little film with a great message. The only example of warrior mind I saw was in the person who made the film.

I watched a video before of Geoff Thompson that was entitled 'the fence' if I remember correctly. Very good. I recommend it.

As far as warrior mind goes as I portrayed it I notice a few people including you said you don't consider yourself a warrior.

Once again I feel this is not the best thing to do with the concept but rather to see which things in your life you do approach with that mind compared to which things you approach with a fighting mind.

Then recognise where one leads to compared to the other.

For me saying I am this or I am not this stops one from learning. When am I this and when am I not this is far for fruitful an excercise from my point of view.

Thank you.

Regards.G.

[dps]

Hi all,

this short film 'Bouncer' clipped from Geoff Thompson's site and starring the always excellent Ray Winstone is well worth a viewing (as long as you can stand a bit of earthy language).

http://www.geoffthompson.com/Bouncer.asp

Watch it and let me know where and who, if anyone, is the warrior / fighter.

I think this is a brilliant, thought provoking little film that is pertinent to the thread...enjoy

regards

Mark
I would recommend that they watch all his films posted on his sight. Cautioned is recommended due to subject matter and language.

dps

[Marc Abrams]

Marc. I do not say anything that is not based on real experience thank you. Maybe you want times, places etc. however that would be of no use to those who just want to throw away what I say.

Once again the choice of words I use are what I mean. I talk to many with the type of mind I describe from all walks of life.

I suggest it is not a matter of 'gets me in trouble' but rather it troubles some. I read similar views from many respected stalwarts from O'Sensei to Tohei to Musashi to people you well know in your own circles. In fact I wouldn't mind betting you say similar things when teaching sometimes.

Or maybe I'm wrong there.

Anyway your view of what a succinct and to-the-point analysis is did make me smile so thanks for that.

Keep up the good work.

Regards.G.

Graham:

Maybe you should re-read my post. I talked about the value of the distinctions that you made in mind-sets. I basically agree with much of what you pointed out.

It is easy to talk about a "warrior" anything from the perspective of having never been a warrior. A typical definition of a warrior is "someone engaged in or experienced in warfare." Many people try and ascertain what those experiences are like without ever having to have had any first-hand experience as a warrior. For example, as a soldier if they have ever experienced fear. Ask a soldier if fighting has a purpose. I my own opinion, you have tendency to come to idiosyncratic uses of terms which does not assist you when you are trying to convey your ideas.

Marc Abrams

[graham christian]

Graham:

Maybe you should re-read my post. I talked about the value of the distinctions that you made in mind-sets. I basically agree with much of what you pointed out.

It is easy to talk about a "warrior" anything from the perspective of having never been a warrior. A typical definition of a warrior is "someone engaged in or experienced in warfare." Many people try and ascertain what those experiences are like without ever having to have had any first-hand experience as a warrior. For example, as a soldier if they have ever experienced fear. Ask a soldier if fighting has a purpose. I my own opinion, you have tendency to come to idiosyncratic uses of terms which does not assist you when you are trying to convey your ideas.

Marc Abrams

Marc. Accepted. I post in order to make people think. To question. To inspect.

Others may generally have 'someone engaged in or experienced in warfare' as their definition of a warrior. Is it true? Many have experienced warfare and many have engaged in it but do they consider themselves warriors? Many do not.

The mind set can be neared and experienced in life outside of war. For example when faced with danger, when faced with life threatening danger, when many are faced with life threatening danger. Some rise and face it with clear mind and actually go in to action. We can observe this in earthquake situations, scenes where most are panicking, or even points in life where all seems lost.

Then there is also times when faced by groups of muggers or football hooligans etc. If you approach and handle with the mindset I describe you are indeed therefore a warrior at that point under the definition I offer.

On the other hand if you ask a soldier or policeman of a time when they handled a situation and experienced this calm, clear, fearless, relaxed state in the face of great danger I'm sure they would tell you how extraordinary it was and how different it was and could relate to what I said.

Whether they would call that the warrior mind would be interesting to hear.

I have experienced it and then spent weeks wondering what to call it and thus found the concept I give as the only one that made sense. I then realized the difference between fighting and doing. Then quotes from those known as true warriors made more sense and so I knew I was nearer to understanding what they meant.

Maybe one day I will be a master of conveying via the written word for the multitude of differing recipients but for now I say as best I can.

Here's an interesting thought. From your quoted definition (i'm not saying it's yours personally) would that make an ant or a white blood cell a warrior? In fact your lymphatic system could be full of warriors and all they need is correct nutrition to function properly.

Regards.G.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Graham

Have you been watching Delboy again ?? :D

Henry Ellis
Silence is Approval
http://aikido-controversy.blogspot.com/

He's got nothing on plonker!!

[lbb]

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall

I think it's S. M. Stirling (an author of military SF who has regrettably been infected with Vampire Disease of late...but I digress...) makes the distinction between a soldier, which he defines as a skilled and disciplined fighter who fights for reasons other than his own impulses, glory and gratification, and a warrior, which he defines as a possibly skilled but almost completely undisciplined and unsophisticated fighter for whom glory and gratification are all. You'd have to read some of his books to understand the context. I'm not saying that his definition is the right one, merely using it as an example of how anyone can appropriate a term ("warrior" in this case) and use it to mean just about anything they want.

[graham christian]

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall

I think it's S. M. Stirling (an author of military SF who has regrettably been infected with Vampire Disease of late...but I digress...) makes the distinction between a soldier, which he defines as a skilled and disciplined fighter who fights for reasons other than his own impulses, glory and gratification, and a warrior, which he defines as a possibly skilled but almost completely undisciplined and unsophisticated fighter for whom glory and gratification are all. You'd have to read some of his books to understand the context. I'm not saying that his definition is the right one, merely using it as an example of how anyone can appropriate a term ("warrior" in this case) and use it to mean just about anything they want.

A fair enough point. However then a person who studies should take that viewpoint and apply it to life to see if it is valid.

I think all soldiers are told what to do for they are in a command stucture and have to do it. So they would be fighting for other than their own impulses and 'glory' of the unit or general.

His view on a warrior being un undisciplined fighter and unsophisticated doesn't fit any in life scenes that I can see. Quite the opposite in fact. A masai warrior for example is hardly ill disciplined and unsophisticated. Samurai warriors even had a code of honour which reinforced discipline and sophistication. Only the odd arrogant one might have glory as the goal but usually it is something that is lavished on them by others in all the history books I've read.

I could see a military man who is set on command structure and orders being obeyed like a machine having this kind of view though or even a dictator for that matter.

Regards.G

[Erick Mead]

This is an excellent meditation on this issue:

http://www.stevenpressfield.com/category/the-warrior-ethos/

If you are in a less meditative mood, there is always this raw unapologetic approach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a0ORdQU&feature=related

[Tony Wagstaffe]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-XbUL4-LEI&feature=fvw ......:straightf

[SeiserL]

IMHO, there are many soldiers (in the military) who, even though they have a code of conduct, are not warriors.

And there are many warriors who are not soldiers (in the military).

Fighters, soldiers, and warriors are very different and distinct perspectives and people.

[Erick Mead]

IMHO, there are many soldiers (in the military) who, even though they have a code of conduct, are not warriors.

And there are many warriors who are not soldiers (in the military).

Fighters, soldiers, and warriors are very different and distinct perspectives and people.Classically, the sword was the orienting image of war. Now it is the rifle. Pace my Marine cousins, I would leave it at 'rifle' but for the rest of y'all we'll use "gun."

But not in the Marine sense..... ;)

Putting the distinction in the three ways you have, I would say this:

1) The fighter wants a gun
2) The soldier prefers a gun
3) The warrior may use a gun

[lbb]

His view on a warrior being un undisciplined fighter and unsophisticated doesn't fit any in life scenes that I can see. Quite the opposite in fact. A masai warrior for example is hardly ill disciplined and unsophisticated. Samurai warriors even had a code of honour which reinforced discipline and sophistication. Only the odd arrogant one might have glory as the goal but usually it is something that is lavished on them by others in all the history books I've read.

He's a writer of fiction, Graham. He's got a good grasp of military history, and I'm sure he could cite many examples for you of warrior societies in which it was far more than the "odd arrogant one" who was a glory-seeker. As for Maasai and samurai "warriors", that's history if you're rigorous -- if you take the trouble to study and find out what they were really like, instead of telling yourself fancy stories. It's not here and it's not now. People love that word "warrior", but what do they even mean by it, and what relevance does it have to the contemporary reality of their lives? I think in most cases, it's a tenuous connection at best.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

I think Graham is a worrier.....;)

[Dazzler]

I think Graham is a worrier.....;)
Wasn't that Boney? :freaky:

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Graham,

Masai are high on drugs all day (and warriors even more (http://ip.aaas.org/tekindex.nsf/2a9c4e44835b04ea85256a7200577a64/62ad22f08eea8c2f85256b03006eaaf2/Body/M1?OpenElement)), and samurai code of honour is mostly romanticised orientalism.

[dps]

Pace my Marine cousins, I would leave it at 'rifle' but for the rest of y'all we'll use "gun."

Isn't there a distinction between the two.
One is for fighting and the other for fun?

dps

I

[Hellis]

I think Graham is a worrier.....;)

A true worrier with his trusty friend and dancing partner ``Jo`` they are invincible.......:straightf

Henry Ellis
http://aikido-books.blogspot.com/

[Tony Wagstaffe]

A true worrier with his trusty friend and dancing partner ``Jo`` they are invincible.......:straightf

Henry Ellis
http://aikido-books.blogspot.com/

Takes two to tango Henry..;) :D

[Hellis]

Takes two to tango Henry..;) :D

Now that sounds """cosy"""".......:D

Henry Ellis
http://aikidoarticles.blogspot.com/

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Wasn't that Boney? :freaky:

Naaaaa Wellington sorted him out!!;)

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Isn't there a distinction between the two.
One is for fighting and the other for fun?

dps

I

As oppose to rifles shoot little rounds and guns shoot bloody great big rounds.....:eek:

[lbb]

Now that sounds """cosy"""".......:D

Henry Ellis
http://aikidoarticles.blogspot.com/

The pot calls the kettle black? When you find yourself in a tete-a-tete, that's a sign that it should be taken to email or PM.

[SeiserL]

1) The fighter wants a gun
2) The soldier prefers a gun
3) The warrior may use a gun
IMHO, the distinction isn't the weapon or the occupation, but the person.

[phitruong]

1) The fighter wants a gun
2) The soldier prefers a gun
3) The warrior may use a gun

i thought

1. fighter wants to fight others
2. soldiers fight for each others
3. warrior fight with him/her-self.

isn't that one of the reason warrior needs "self-defense" because the other bugger is ugly and vicious? :)

[jurasketu]

Mary-

I couldn't locate a source for the quotation Stirling gives about warriors. Can you post a link or something? His definition doesn't square with (a) the dictionary (b) the encyclopedia (c) any contemporary slang usage I've ever heard (d) or mention in any of the military histories I've ever read (250+ books covering the entire span of human history).

Technically, the dictionary says a warrior is literally "one who wages war" or just "soldier". Which is kind of a "duh". It also lists the more contemporary civilian usage referring to sports and corporate competition.

Generally speaking, the bulk of historical evidence is that undisciplined "warriors" don't fare well in combat against disciplined "warriors".

Robin

[jurasketu]

Tony/Henry-

Man. Guys... The good points you guys make get lost when you act like Internet Trolls. Harsh banter can be fun and acceptable in person but it doesn't work well at all on the Internet.

Robin

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Tony/Henry-

Man. Guys... The good points you guys make get lost when you act like Internet Trolls. Harsh banter can be fun and acceptable in person but it doesn't work well at all on the Internet.

Robin

Part of being a "warrior" is being able to take it, as well as give it.... It was part of the training when I was in the Mob. It wouldn't hurt some on this site to sign up yourselves and do a bit of worrying or warrioring, then you would find out.....:rolleyes:
I believe conscription is still in force over the pond. It's voluntary here and one can be made redundant!!

[Hellis]

Part of being a "warrior" is being able to take it, as well as give it.... It was part of the training when I was in the Mob. It wouldn't hurt some on this site to sign up yourselves and do a bit of worrying or warrioring, then you would find out.....:rolleyes:
I believe conscription is still in force over the pond. It's voluntary here and one can be made redundant!!

Tony

You are so insensitive to many humourless members of this forum.
I think you should be banned again ( add me :)

Henry Ellis
http://aikido-blogs.blogspot.com/

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Tony

You are so insensitive to many humourless members of this forum.
I think you should be banned again ( add me :)

Henry Ellis
http://aikido-blogs.blogspot.com/

Who me insensitive Henry?

What made you think that.....:straightf :rolleyes:

[lbb]

Mary-

I couldn't locate a source for the quotation Stirling gives about warriors. Can you post a link or something? His definition doesn't square with (a) the dictionary (b) the encyclopedia (c) any contemporary slang usage I've ever heard (d) or mention in any of the military histories I've ever read (250+ books covering the entire span of human history).

He is a fiction writer. His books are works of fiction. He speaks through the voices of his characters, who are not real people. He is not writing a dictionary or an encyclopedia, whether a traditional one or one of contemporary slang, and he is not writing scholarly works of military history. He uses the term "warrior" to mean one thing. Graham uses "warrior" to mean something else. In my experience, people on Aikiweb generally use "warrior" in a rather ego-gratifying way, to be honest -- they're using "warrior" to fit their fantasies, and then arguing with other people about who's more warriorly. But nobody owns the word, not you, not me, not Graham, not S M Stirling, and not your 250+ books of military history -- so maybe it's time to stop squabbling and trying to own it. Or, alternately, maybe it's time to stop granting the term such stupidly slavish respect. When the word "warrior" can't be used without the testosterone stench starting to rise, maybe it's better abandoned altogether.

[jurasketu]

Aw man, Tony. I'm too old for military service. As a young man, I worked 5+ years as a carpenter (framing houses and office buildings), so verbal abuse doesn't even register with me and enduring physical suffering and discomfort I understand to a fair degree. I even understand what its like to suffer or risk harm to prevent a more serious injury or death to someone else - because I did more than once.

But calling me "humorless" - now that really hurts. You and Henry are funny - but I was just trying to point out that it comes across the wrong way.

Mary - Ah... I understand your point better now. Admittedly, I readily enjoy squabbling over the meaning of things.

Robin

[Mark Freeman]

Aw man, Tony. I'm too old for military service. As a young man, I worked 5+ years as a carpenter (framing houses and office buildings), so verbal abuse doesn't even register with me and enduring physical suffering and discomfort I understand to a fair degree. I even understand what its like to suffer or risk harm to prevent a more serious injury or death to someone else - because I did more than once.

But calling me "humorless" - now that really hurts. You and Henry are funny - but I was just trying to point out that it comes across the wrong way.
Mary - Ah... I understand your point better now. Admittedly, I readily enjoy squabbling over the meaning of things.

Robin

Hi Robin,

There's not a massive amount of humour to be had here on Aikiweb, we all seem to take things pretty seriously. Fun does get poked, but it is pretty kyu grade stuff. There are a few high grades around, at the monent Phi Truong is easily the best practitioner, his technique is pretty effortless. He can playfully burst a pompus bubble with a sharp observation. Irreverence, cheek and a healthy dollop of self depreciation, a true jestoka.:D

Tony and Henry are a bit like Statler and Waldorf (but without the benefit of script writers), when they get going. I hope they have sense of humour enough to see the funny side of that;)

There was a brit on here a while back (Ian Hurst - Happysod), now he was funny. Come back Ian, we need you...

playful regards :p

Mark

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Aw man, Tony. I'm too old for military service. As a young man, I worked 5+ years as a carpenter (framing houses and office buildings), so verbal abuse doesn't even register with me and enduring physical suffering and discomfort I understand to a fair degree. I even understand what its like to suffer or risk harm to prevent a more serious injury or death to someone else - because I did more than once.

But calling me "humorless" - now that really hurts. You and Henry are funny - but I was just trying to point out that it comes across the wrong way.

Mary - Ah... I understand your point better now. Admittedly, I readily enjoy squabbling over the meaning of things.

Robin

Robin, If that is the case, then you would still find it humorous, :D Us Brits do have a tendency for dryness and sardonic wit and I/We must have thicker skins than we realise? Or am I to blunt? Yes I am..... One of my faults I suppose, but I do have a wicked sense of humour and I'm sorry if it offends you that much.....

Take care buddy

[Hellis]

Tony

The funny little faces ? well, they are no longer funny.

Perhaps we can start a thread on the British economy, we can then all be miserable and depressed.

Henry Ellis
Positive Aikido
http://aikido-books.blogspot.com/

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Tony

The funny little faces ? well, they are no longer funny.

Perhaps we can start a thread on the British economy, we can then all be miserable and depressed.

Henry Ellis
Positive Aikido
http://aikido-books.blogspot.com/

Precisely Sensei...
With our economy we need a good sense of humour...
We have sod all else at present....
Will stop using little green man, can you suggest an alternative?

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Hi Robin,

There's not a massive amount of humour to be had here on Aikiweb, we all seem to take things pretty seriously. Fun does get poked, but it is pretty kyu grade stuff. There are a few high grades around, at the monent Phi Truong is easily the best practitioner, his technique is pretty effortless. He can playfully burst a pompus bubble with a sharp observation. Irreverence, cheek and a healthy dollop of self depreciation, a true jestoka.:D

Tony and Henry are a bit like Statler and Waldorf (but without the benefit of script writers), when they get going. I hope they have sense of humour enough to see the funny side of that;)

There was a brit on here a while back (Ian Hurst - Happysod), now he was funny. Come back Ian, we need you...

playful regards :p

Mark

Mark, who's Statler & Waldorf? I thought we were more like Morcambe & Wise....
Happysod sounds good....

[sakumeikan]

Mark, who's Statler & Waldorf? I thought we were more like Morcambe & Wise....
Happysod sounds good....
Stattler and Waldorf-sounds like couple of run down motels where I have bedded down in the U.S.A.
Cheers, Joe.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Stattler and Waldorf-sounds like couple of run down motels where I have bedded down in the U.S.A.
Cheers, Joe.

Ha, ha...!!

[CitoMaramba]

http://www.cbc.ca/nl/blogs/whatodds/Statler%20and%20Waldorf%20Demotivational%20Posters.jpg

[dps]

Mark, who's Statler & Waldorf? I thought we were more like Morcambe & Wise....
Happysod sounds good....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IVFaRTJmmY&feature=related

dps

[Erick Mead]

Isn't there a distinction between the two.
One is for fighting and the other for fun?

dps

IGive that man the Kewpie doll !!!

Jodie Lives! :D

[Erick Mead]

IMHO, the distinction isn't the weapon or the occupation, but the person. The distinction is the nature of the desire of the person for the weapon.

All human evil begins as a spiritual evil. A sword is a shiny chunk of refined rocks...

[graham christian]

He's a writer of fiction, Graham. He's got a good grasp of military history, and I'm sure he could cite many examples for you of warrior societies in which it was far more than the "odd arrogant one" who was a glory-seeker. As for Maasai and samurai "warriors", that's history if you're rigorous -- if you take the trouble to study and find out what they were really like, instead of telling yourself fancy stories. It's not here and it's not now. People love that word "warrior", but what do they even mean by it, and what relevance does it have to the contemporary reality of their lives? I think in most cases, it's a tenuous connection at best.

Mary,I know it's fiction but you used the writer as an example didn't you?

Read the original post properly and you'll find it's about two different states of mind.

As far as warriors go in relation to the topic and just for you bringing it up to nearer present time I could give you a big list. It's nothing to do with male or testosterone either.

In fact I would say Florence Nightingale and Mother Theresa are good historical examples. The woman I saw in the Egypt conflict recently who just set up a stall with medical equipment out in the open whilst all the fighting was going on around her was also a great example.

You could have Ghandi, Mandela, Buddha, Jesus. You could have people you know. None of those busied theirselves fighting and arguing and blaming and complaining. They decided and acted without fear, with compassion and immovable mind and not may I add for glory.

True warriors all. Then along come the fighters and fight about it.
Same ol same ol.

Regards.G.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

http://www.cbc.ca/nl/blogs/whatodds/Statler%20and%20Waldorf%20Demotivational%20Posters.jpg

Aaaaaaah the muppets!!

Which one are you Henry....?

I look like the geezer on the left......:) ;)

[lbb]

Mary,I know it's fiction but you used the writer as an example didn't you?

That's right. It's an example of how no one owns the words, and anyone can make up a definition for them.

Read the original post properly and you'll find it's about two different states of mind.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall...

[Hellis]

Re: Fighting Mind vs Warrior Mind

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Tony
Aaaaaaah the muppets!!

Which one are you Henry....?

I look like the geezer on the left......

Tony

You are bringing humour and funny faces to the forum again.
. I can see you getting another reprimand...Please note this is a serious forum.
I am on my best behaviour.....I am going to ```cosy``` up to Graham and learn from a true worrier.

Henry Ellis
Aikido Articles
http://aikidoarticles.blogspot.com/

[CitoMaramba]

That's right. It's an example of how no one owns the words, and anyone can make up a definition for them.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall...

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master— that's all."

Chapter 6 in Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There (1871), by Lewis Carroll

[Erick Mead]

:
Mary Malmros wrote: That's right. It's an example of how no one owns the words, and anyone can make up a definition for them.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall...

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master— that's all."


Such wisdom in the auld rhymes ...

"... and all the King's horses and all the King's men,
couldn't put Humpty together again. "

Shatter the wholeness in the complex pattern of Truth, and you lose the Way -- and you are well and truly lost...

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Re: Fighting Mind vs Warrior Mind

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tony

You are bringing humour and funny faces to the forum again.
. I can see you getting another reprimand...Please note this is a serious forum.
I am on my best behaviour.....I am going to ```cosy``` up to Graham and learn from a true worrier.

Henry Ellis
Aikido Articles
http://aikidoarticles.blogspot.com/

Now that really worries me......

[Tony Wagstaffe]

http://www.cbc.ca/nl/blogs/whatodds/Statler%20and%20Waldorf%20Demotivational%20Posters.jpg

Thanks Inocencio.... That made my day!!

[CitoMaramba]

Thanks Inocencio.... That made my day!!

You're welcome, Tony.. :D

[Hellis]

Now that really worries me......

Tony

You should be worried, we are taking our Jo's dancing to the Hammersmith Palais next Saturday...( I apologise in advace if I upset the ` humour mods ` )

Henry Ellis
Aikido Blogs
http://aikido-blogs.blogspot.com/

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Tony

You should be worried, we are taking our Jo's dancing to the Hammersmith Palais next Saturday...( I apologise in advace if I upset the ` humour mods ` )

Henry Ellis
Aikido Blogs
http://aikido-blogs.blogspot.com/

That wouldn't happen to be Jo Anna and her sister would it?.
Don't suppose you could get me an invite as well?
I've got a nice broom that I could bring....

[Hellis]

That wouldn't happen to be Jo Anna and her sister would it?.
Don't suppose you could get me an invite as well?
I've got a nice broom that I could bring....

Tony

I am sure that you would be welcome, I understand Joe Tetley's band is playing this season. could be a cosy get together.
Maybe even become the annual AW event....

Henry Ellis
Silence is Approval
http://aikido-controversy.blogspot.com/

[Ketsan]

A fair enough point. However then a person who studies should take that viewpoint and apply it to life to see if it is valid.

I think all soldiers are told what to do for they are in a command stucture and have to do it. So they would be fighting for other than their own impulses and 'glory' of the unit or general.

His view on a warrior being un undisciplined fighter and unsophisticated doesn't fit any in life scenes that I can see. Quite the opposite in fact. A masai warrior for example is hardly ill disciplined and unsophisticated. Samurai warriors even had a code of honour which reinforced discipline and sophistication. Only the odd arrogant one might have glory as the goal but usually it is something that is lavished on them by others in all the history books I've read.

I could see a military man who is set on command structure and orders being obeyed like a machine having this kind of view though or even a dictator for that matter.

Regards.G

Actually I was going to bring up Masai warriors. I doubt most of them have actually spent all that much time in combat but who would argue with them being defined as warriors?

Traditionally warriors are a part of the tribe that lives slightly appart and has it's own traditions and codes of conduct and ethos and they spend their whole lives like this; they're not paid to do it, it's who they are. They're naturally inclined to that kind of way of life.
Cf to a modern soldier there are simularities but we don't expect total dedication to a martial way of life from a soldier. At most we expect him to maintain fighting skills and fitness for about twenty years. He is what he is because he's paid to be that way often he's there because of socio-economic factors.

In really serious times everyone becomes a soldier via conscription and at the end they all cease being soldiers. Ex-soldiers do not usually seek to maintain their fighting skills though. They have no use for them in civil society and they discard them and learn new skills; they blend back into society.

But for a warrior these skills are integral to who they are and they find value in them outside of their immediate application. So a warrior IMO is simply someone who practices and prepares for conflict because it is part of their identity and because they find personal utility in doing so.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

"But for a warrior these skills are integral to who they are and they find value in them outside of their immediate application. So a warrior IMO is simply someone who practices and prepares for conflict because it is part of their identity and because they find personal utility in doing so"

I'd go with that....

[graham christian]

Warrior mind vs fighting mind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k1gu-OAgV4

G.

[jonreading]

I've been trying to think of a concise way to respond to this thread. I dunno if I buy the fighter v. warrior thing. I think we are talking about the spirit to fight for something and the strategic intelligence to do so successfully.

Warriors are to my knowledge persons who engage in warfare. Soldiers (or mercenaries) are persons who engage in war for compensation or conscription. Fighters are persons who engage in combat for personal reasons. I do not think any of these classifications would or should construct a hierarchy of morality.

I would concede that it is likely the professionalism and training of these classes may stratify them. A fighter trains in a method different than a soldier. Again, I do not think that difference reflects a moralism.

The argument sounds as if we are trying to moralize one class of person over another. Throw in the fact that in our community "warrior" is much romanticized and "fighter" is a neaderthal jock and the thread smacks of an ostracization tactic for those "fighters" who will never be real martial artists...

[Hellis]

Warrior mind vs fighting mind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k1gu-OAgV4

G.

Graham

I trust that you are not offering a loudmouth 18 year old yob as a fighter and a calmer middle aged man with a bit of Karate experience to validate you points ? :rolleyes:

Henry Ellis
British Aikido History
www.british-aikido.com

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Warrior mind vs fighting mind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k1gu-OAgV4

G.

See this every weekend.... Doormen put up with much the same, We cabbies get it as well when we refuse to take them, Chavs are every where... two a penny!!
Now when the sqaddies hit town, then it gets a bit more interesting....:hypno: :D

[Hellis]

See this every weekend.... Doormen put up with much the same, We cabbies get it as well when we refuse to take them, Chavs are every where... two a penny!!
Now when the sqaddies hit town, then it gets a bit more interesting....:hypno: :D

Tony

Perhaps we should rename the fred " Frightened Mind vs Worrier Mind " .......

Henry Ellis

British Aikido History
http://british-aikido.com

[graham christian]

Graham

I trust that you are not offering a loudmouth 18 year old yob as a fighter and a calmer middle aged man with a bit of Karate experience to validate you points ? :rolleyes:

Henry Ellis
British Aikido History
www.british-aikido.com

Henry.

If I could find one of you calmly handling some thug, which I no doubt that you have in your time, then maybe it would make more sense to you.

Regards.G.

[graham christian]

See this every weekend.... Doormen put up with much the same, We cabbies get it as well when we refuse to take them, Chavs are every where... two a penny!!
Now when the sqaddies hit town, then it gets a bit more interesting....:hypno: :D

No doubt it does.

[graham christian]

Actually I was going to bring up Masai warriors. I doubt most of them have actually spent all that much time in combat but who would argue with them being defined as warriors?

Traditionally warriors are a part of the tribe that lives slightly appart and has it's own traditions and codes of conduct and ethos and they spend their whole lives like this; they're not paid to do it, it's who they are. They're naturally inclined to that kind of way of life.
Cf to a modern soldier there are simularities but we don't expect total dedication to a martial way of life from a soldier. At most we expect him to maintain fighting skills and fitness for about twenty years. He is what he is because he's paid to be that way often he's there because of socio-economic factors.

In really serious times everyone becomes a soldier via conscription and at the end they all cease being soldiers. Ex-soldiers do not usually seek to maintain their fighting skills though. They have no use for them in civil society and they discard them and learn new skills; they blend back into society.

But for a warrior these skills are integral to who they are and they find value in them outside of their immediate application. So a warrior IMO is simply someone who practices and prepares for conflict because it is part of their identity and because they find personal utility in doing so.

I like it. Well put.

Regards.G.

[Ketsan]

The argument sounds as if we are trying to moralize one class of person over another. Throw in the fact that in our community "warrior" is much romanticized and "fighter" is a neaderthal jock and the thread smacks of an ostracization tactic for those "fighters" who will never be real martial artists...

I think maybe it comes down to this: in human history the soldier is the newcomer. The warrior is probably the oldest and the fighter is in the middle. The warriors of a tribe had a social function: they did the fighting. Most of the time though there was no fighting to do and so these men had to find a larger role in society to justify themselves and also simply to get on with the rest of the tribe who probably treated them like we treat soldiers today: with a certain amount of fear and suspicion. Warriors as a group had to be able to claim some kind of moral equality with if not superiority to the rest of the tribe to maintain tribal cohesion, which was in everyone's interests. There's always some social contract between warriors and the rest of the tribe.

Fighters though usually come from the civil population of the tribe and their fighting skills have always been for their own personal ends; no-one expected them to have a social function; there was no social contract and thus no requirement to demonstrate morality to the tribe because they were never a set aside, cohesive group like the warriors were.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

There's always some social contract between warriors and the rest of the tribe.

And we all know that is a pittance.....!!!

The way politicians treat our Warriors is nothing short of deplorable!!

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Henry.

If I could find one of you calmly handling some thug, which I no doubt that you have in your time, then maybe it would make more sense to you.

Regards.G.

For that matter how about one of you Graham...?

Video camera's weren't so much about in Henry's younger days, or at least I don't think they were, were they? :confused: :confused:

[Tony Wagstaffe]

"Cf to a modern soldier there are simularities but we don't expect total dedication to a martial way of life from a soldier. At most we expect him to maintain fighting skills and fitness for about twenty years. He is what he is because he's paid to be that way often he's there because of socio-economic factors.

In really serious times everyone becomes a soldier via conscription and at the end they all cease being soldiers. Ex-soldiers do not usually seek to maintain their fighting skills though. They have no use for them in civil society and they discard them and learn new skills; they blend back into society.

But for a warrior these skills are integral to who they are and they find value in them outside of their immediate application. So a warrior IMO is simply someone who practices and prepares for conflict because it is part of their identity and because they find personal utility in doing so."

It's also known that old soldiers, seamen and airmen get recalled in times of need to....
One may grow older, but one never forgets the training.....:straightf

[SeiserL]

Perhaps we should rename the fred " Frightened Mind vs Worrier Mind "
And then there is the prepared mind.

[dps]

Tony

Perhaps we should rename the fred " Frightened Mind vs Worrier Mind " .......

Henry Ellis

British Aikido History
http://british-aikido.com

Or "Mushiness, Mind of No Mind".

dps

[Tony Wagstaffe]

Or "Mushiness, Mind of No Mind".

dps

Coming from magic mushrooms?.... empty mind empty body?
Dead from the neck up...?

Or were you thinkin' of Mushin Mugamae.....:D ;)

[graham christian]

And then there is the prepared mind.

Indeed. Prepared for harmony. Shin shin toitsu.

G.

[graham christian]

To adhere to a path of non-resistance, non-control, non-opposition. To enter with non-disturbance. To guide with the spirit of loving protection. To bring heaven to earth. The warrior of true budo-love.

The Aikido Mind!!!

G.

[graham christian]

Actually I was going to bring up Masai warriors. I doubt most of them have actually spent all that much time in combat but who would argue with them being defined as warriors?

Traditionally warriors are a part of the tribe that lives slightly appart and has it's own traditions and codes of conduct and ethos and they spend their whole lives like this; they're not paid to do it, it's who they are. They're naturally inclined to that kind of way of life.
Cf to a modern soldier there are simularities but we don't expect total dedication to a martial way of life from a soldier. At most we expect him to maintain fighting skills and fitness for about twenty years. He is what he is because he's paid to be that way often he's there because of socio-economic factors.

In really serious times everyone becomes a soldier via conscription and at the end they all cease being soldiers. Ex-soldiers do not usually seek to maintain their fighting skills though. They have no use for them in civil society and they discard them and learn new skills; they blend back into society.

But for a warrior these skills are integral to who they are and they find value in them outside of their immediate application. So a warrior IMO is simply someone who practices and prepares for conflict because it is part of their identity and because they find personal utility in doing so.

Thank you Alex. Another well thought out explanation.

Regards.G.

[SeiserL]

Prepared for harmony.
Prepared for what is.

If we only prepare for harmony we miss the opportunity and beauty of discord.

Stay externally aware without internal sorting principles.

[graham christian]

Prepared for what is.

If we only prepare for harmony we miss the opportunity and beauty of discord.

Stay externally aware without internal sorting principles.

Interesting. I would put it a different way although I think we would be saying the same or similar thing.

I always say to practice acceptance, especially to accept what is. I relate this also to center.

Through doing this and becoming good at it then you find you are prepared for any changes for they are just more realities to be accepted.

In this way you will be prepared for harmony.

On the other hand if you specialize in non-acceptance, you find you're always complaining and protesting, always stressing and harmony seems like a foreign concept.

Liked that concept of 'internal sorting principles' though.

Regards.G.

[Insane Duane]

In a nutshell, to me a "fighting Mind" means you seek confrontation and a "Warriors Mind" is you do what needs to be done.

[Tony Wagstaffe]

I personally feel the two go together, having a fighting mind doesn't necessarily mean a contentious one. Being able to fight is a requirement to be a warrior, isn't that logical...?

[OwlMatt]

Prepared for what is.

If we only prepare for harmony we miss the opportunity and beauty of discord.

Has anyone ever read Thomas Crum's book about using aikido principles in life called The Magic of Conflict? This is a central point of the book.

[Hellis]

To adhere to a path of non-resistance, non-control, non-opposition. To enter with non-disturbance. To guide with the spirit of loving protection. To bring heaven to earth. The warrior of true budo-love.

The Aikido Mind!!!

G.

Graham

Even I found this very touching, really bootiful, kin bootiful.

Henry Ellis
Positive Aikido
http://aikido-books.blogspot.com/

[graham christian]

Graham

Even I found this very touching, really bootiful, kin bootiful.

Henry Ellis
Positive Aikido
http://aikido-books.blogspot.com/

Henry.

If you are being sincere then I thank you for the response. If not,well I thank you anyway.

Regards.G.

[Mark Freeman]

Henry.

If you are being sincere then I thank you for the response. If not,well I thank you anyway.

Regards.G.

Ah, Graham, nice non-resistant response:)

[graham christian]

Ah, Graham, nice non-resistant response:)

HI Mark.

If you are ....(ha ha!) just joking. Thank you.

Regards.G.

[Hellis]

Henry.

If you are being sincere then I thank you for the response. If not,well I thank you anyway.

Regards.G.

Ah Bisto Graham, would I jest with you ? :straightf

Henry Ellis
British Aikido History
www.british-aikido.com