PDA

View Full Version : Ueshiba's Aiki


Pages : 1 2 [3]

Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Gary David
11-17-2011, 12:33 PM
Dan. You mention someone doing power displays and that you do these things and that his isn't aiki. That sounds like you do 'power' displays also then. Aiki wise. Does he say yours is Aiki and if so what does he call his?

The demos you describe show what? Effectiveness of your aiki? (I assume so) However I don't see it as significant or unusual myself. Maybe 'out there' it is.

For instance, lifting someone up back to their feet from kokyu dosa. When you say power display equalling collision of forces are you implying you havn't met anyone who can do that without such?

Sword tricks. Are you saying you havn't met anyone who can cut through your sword held as you describe?

Regards.G.

Graham
I think these are areas that you have expressed your understanding of here on Aikiweb, especially sword and bokken. With that background these seem to be questions that best could have been ask in person while Dan Harden was in London recently. You could have had your answers first hand so to speak.

Gary

Ken McGrew
11-17-2011, 12:38 PM
Mr. McGrew,
From your posts you seem to be passionate about your study of aikido. I wonder if there is any reason that would keep you from going and checking out some of this "IS" stuff in person?

With all respect,
Steve Trinkle

Steve,

If you had read all my posts (a hard thing to do at this point) you would know that I have said all along that it's ok to look at different arts. Doshu said so himself in the Preface to Aikido and the Chinese Martial Arts (Sugawara and Xing) in 1995.

It is difficult to know what the IS being discussed is. Hunter gives us an example of a Sensei he trains with. Harden says what I do is better. Harden says he can see that he can see from a video that it's not the real Aiki he's showing, and yet it is often said that we cannot see the secret he has, and that O Sensei had, unless we know the secret. Starts to sound like invisible clothing of the finest invisible silk. So I don't know what this Aiki is supposed to be. No one has bothered to define it. Some say it's Daito-ryu. Others say its Chinese. If "it" exists it can be described. The failure to do so raises my suspicions.

That does not mean that what they are doing, whatever it is, is not good on it's own terms. The fact that it may be good does not tell us how it translates to Aikido and does not support the wild claims that have been made. They are describing a skill set which is not Aikido. It may be PART of Aikido already. It is not Aikido. O Sensei continued to develop the art of Aikido up until the end. It was never perfected. Saotome Sensei told me this personally. That's good enough for me.

Having said that, I personally will not train with people who repeatedly make such bold statements that contradict what my teacher has told us about what O Sensei told him. For example, we again have Mark claiming that O Sensei didn't teach much. Completely false. Saotome Sensei has written that he took ukemi from O Sensei almost every day. Mark is implying that Saotome is not telling the truth. I will not, personally, train with people who do such things. I don't care how good they are. You asked me a personal question, so I answered it on a personal level.

I have been exposed to other complimentary arts and their application to Aikido far more than you realize. Though I am reminded often that I am a low rank non Budo man, I have been around many great martial artists. I am not opposed to people doing whatever they want outside of Aikido and bringing in the parts that don't get in the way of other people continuing to train AIKIDO. If they start insisting on their notion of Aiki (meaning whatever this IS Aiki is) then I have a problem with it. Smoke if you want. Just don't smoke next to me.

graham christian
11-17-2011, 12:41 PM
You can find it "interesting" all you want. The research is there to prove that fact. Yes, fact.

"later on" in Ueshiba's life:

1. There was no exhaustive, extensive training with Ueshiba later on in his life.
2. The students didn't get a whole lot of hands on time with Ueshiba. NOTE: This does *NOT* mean that they didn't get hands on time, didn't learn from him, or didn't train with Ueshiba. It means that the myths of having extensive training are wrong. I'm certain that all of them wished they had much more time with Ueshiba than they actually got.
3. The training schedule of both Iwama and Tokyo are out there. Look them up and let us know just how long Ueshiba actually taught each day.
4. Ueshiba had a very busy training schedule and he also had many visitors. Look it up. Where was he and when and for how long? What happened when visitors came?
5. Kisshomaru, Tohei, and other seniors taught most of the classes. Kisshomaru taught most of the "private" classes. Tohei taught a lot of students.
6. A lot of students went outside of hombu to learn. Dig into it and find where some of them went and then come back here and let us know what you've found.
7. Ueshiba trained a lot. He was probably obsessive/compulsive about it. But, he did not teach a lot.

I find it amazing that people would not do the actual research and understand a bit better before they think they are "experts" on him.

For the rest, please do not take this as detracting from the students of Ueshiba. A lot were young and eager to learn. They wanted to learn. They had felt Ueshiba at some point and wanted what he had. Some of them did everything they could to learn or "steal" the secret, even going outside aikido or going to private dojos or going to pre-war students. Their dedication and desire to learn is never in question.

1) I disagree. Those who didn't get that say that.

2) I know of no myths of people saying they had long extensive training periods with Ueshiba. I do know mentioned in this forum a number of times the myth that he was a virtual figurehead doing not much teaching at all.

3) He taught wherever he was. He wouldn't therefore be on a schedule sheet would he.
4) So he's so busy training and hosting that he does no teaching? When you are the capo de capo and have teachers teaching for you then you are supervising many things including those teachers. Including personal training, research and developement etc.etc. Always teaching.

5) All teachers taught. A heirarchy developed. People assigned different tasks. So what? That doesn't equal so he was sitting on his backside somewhere twiddling his thumbs.

6) Why? What's a lot of students? How many didn't go elsewhere? How many were actually sent for various reasons? What's your point?

7) He never stopped teaching. It's not in his make up.

Regards.G.

kewms
11-17-2011, 12:47 PM
5) All teachers taught. A heirarchy developed. People assigned different tasks. So what? That doesn't equal so he was sitting on his backside somewhere twiddling his thumbs.

Mostly he was praying and doing his own solo training, by all accounts.

During periods when he was physically present in Iwama, he probably was not teaching in Tokyo. No one has claimed that he had the ability to teleport...

There are plenty of modern examples of teachers with such heavy seminar schedules that they do very little teaching at their own dojos.

Katherine

graham christian
11-17-2011, 12:48 PM
Graham
I think these are areas that you have expressed your understanding of here on Aikiweb, especially sword and bokken. With that background these seem to be questions that best could have been ask in person while Dan Harden was in London recently. You could have had your answers first hand so to speak.

Gary

My questions are quite apt for a forum. Those questions don't need personal meeting. You still go on about first hand experience. I don't need it. I don't need first hand experience of taikwondo either or many other things. So I'm missing your point once again.

Regards.G.

kewms
11-17-2011, 12:54 PM
My questions are quite apt for a forum. Those questions don't need personal meeting. You still go on about first hand experience. I don't need it. I don't need first hand experience of taikwondo either or many other things. So I'm missing your point once again.

It's very difficult to assess the validity of, say, the "sword trick" via forum posts.

Also, as pointed out up-thread, ability to write clearly has no particular correlation with physical skills. Ueshiba Sensei himself was completely illiterate in English :eek: and by most accounts difficult at best to understand in Japanese.

Katherine

Demetrio Cereijo
11-17-2011, 12:58 PM
For example, we again have Mark claiming that O Sensei didn't teach much. Completely false. Saotome Sensei has written that he took ukemi from O Sensei almost every day. Mark is implying that Saotome is not telling the truth.

Are you 100% sure Saotome Sensei was telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

kewms
11-17-2011, 12:59 PM
I was just thinking....

Aikido is not only a physical art, but a very subtle one. Internal skills are more subtle yet.

Maybe we should just ignore any post (or poster) who says things like "I don't need first hand experience," or "I will not train with X." Such people are clearly not interested in actually testing their preconceived notions.

Of course, then we would immediately have to abandon almost all threads like this one. And where's the fun in that? :rolleyes:

Katherine

Demetrio Cereijo
11-17-2011, 01:01 PM
During periods when he was physically present in Iwama, he probably was not teaching in Tokyo. No one has claimed that he had the ability to teleport...
Add Shingu and Osaka.

Ken McGrew
11-17-2011, 01:04 PM
There must be a video, somewhere, that is a good representative of the application to Aikido of what is being described. Even if those with the secret don't think we can see it, they could humor us if they had confidence in their claims. They could point to specific screen shots and sections of the video to highlight what it is they think they see. If you point to O Sensei do not merely point to the grounding displays. I want to see the application to attack situations. I'm sure the responses will take the form of you can't see it and why should we prove anything to you... but you are already trying to prove something to me and the majority of Aikido practitioners who still believe in the "modern" Aikido notion of Aiki. That's why you are posting. Unless it is merely to create a buzz to support seminars and books.

By the way, does Harden teach the secret to breaking the bundle of arrows under the arm? Do IS people claims that display was the result of the same skill they want to call Aiki?

graham christian
11-17-2011, 01:05 PM
Mostly he was praying and doing his own solo training, by all accounts.

During periods when he was physically present in Iwama, he probably was not teaching in Tokyo. No one has claimed that he had the ability to teleport...

There are plenty of modern examples of teachers with such heavy seminar schedules that they do very little teaching at their own dojos.

Katherine

So you believe that? By all accounts? Aikido was all part of his spiritual training, not sitting somewhere praying. That was part of his disciplined regime yes. As a replacement leaving him solo training? Come on....

Hunt around and you'll find plenty of people who had many lessons from him up to the day he died.

A master never stops teaching. If no one was around he'd be teaching the insects taisabaki. That's the reality of someone like him. The reality of that position and type of person is what needs to be understood in my opinion not what bill or jack said.

I have a friend and when he hasn't been seen for a while and students complain they are missing him and ask where he is I just laugh and say he's somewhere no doubt teaching someone something.

You know the person then you know what they will be doing no matter where they are in the world.

Those who don't know then say he wasn't just because they cant see him.

Add to this sometimes, probably much more than sometimes for a master, he has to let others carry on for a while with what he has given them to practice for it's not worth giving them more until they have reality and indeed ability in what they were left to learn.

Regards.G.

Gary David
11-17-2011, 01:10 PM
My questions are quite apt for a forum. Those questions don't need personal meeting. You still go on about first hand experience. I don't need it. I don't need first hand experience of taikwondo either or many other things. So I'm missing your point once again.

Regards.G.

Graham
You have made my point.

Thanks
Gary

MM
11-17-2011, 01:12 PM
Having said that, I personally will not train with people who repeatedly make such bold statements that contradict what my teacher has told us about what O Sensei told him. For example, we again have Mark claiming that O Sensei didn't teach much. Completely false. Saotome Sensei has written that he took ukemi from O Sensei almost every day. Mark is implying that Saotome is not telling the truth. I will not, personally, train with people who do such things. I don't care how good they are. You asked me a personal question, so I answered it on a personal level.


You know, some people like to say that they read somewhere that clouds are actually fluffy marshmallows filled with helium to keep them up there. They read this and they see pictures of the clouds and think, gee, that must be right. So, when people say, no, clouds are, in reality, "a visible mass of liquid droplets or frozen crystals made of water and/or various chemicals suspended in the atmosphere above the surface of a planetary body", why those people say you're lying. Maybe Chicken Little was right and those marshmallows are losing their helium. I dunno. It's just amazing that some people don't do any research. A small example from my upcoming book:

Ueshiba split his time between the Tokyo hombu dojo and Iwama for a short period. Stan Pranin notes that Ueshiba actually lived in Iwama for 15 years after the war ended. (20) Kanai responds that after he started at hombu around 1958, Ueshiba split his time between Iwama and Tokyo. (21)

Until 1955, hombu dojo was not very active. Between 1955 and 1959, more students started coming to the dojo to train, including foreign students. Even then, Ueshiba was not a regular teacher there. He would show up whenever he wanted. (22)

Nishio remarks that when he started, around 1951, it was six months before he saw Ueshiba. (23) In fact, Nishio goes on to note that there weren't many students and that Kisshomaru Ueshiba and Koichi Tohei were the teachers. (24)

Robert Frager remarks that he only saw Ueshiba occasionally during his first year, which would be sometime in the mid 1960s. (25) Walther Krenner also notes that Ueshiba wasn't teaching regularly around 1967. (26)

Kisshomaru Ueshiba states that his father was "besieged by visitors starting from early in the morning and he spent large amounts of time in receiving them". Kisshomaru also notes that his father traveled often. (27)

Taking a closer look when Ueshiba was at the Tokyo hombu dojo, what time, or times, did he teach?

The uchideshi's day begins around 6 a.m., when he cleans the dojo and the grounds outside. The first class of the day starts at 6:30. This class is usually taught by Uyeshiba himself, the Osensei, which means the old teacher. The young uchideshi sit on their knees during this hour, which can be an uncomfortable and tiring experience. The first class is usually taken up mostly with discussions about God and nature - Uyeshiba doing the talking and the uchideshi listening. It is in this hour that the young uchideshi is exposed to Zen philosophy and the deeper meanings of aikido - its nonviolent and defensive perfection and understanding. If this all sounds rather remote and difficult to grasp for a Western reader, he may be interested to know that the young Japanese uchideshi often feels the same way. The 83-year-old Uyeshiba many times speaks about highly abstract topics, lapsing usually into ancient Japanese phraseology, so that his listeners often find it difficult to follow him. When this long hour is over, the young uchideshi exuberantly spill out onto the dojo floor for a half-hour exercise break. All the restless energy pent up within seems to come out and they throw themselves into the practice of their techniques with each other. At 8 a.m. begins the real study of aikido techniques. This class is taught by a different instructor every day, and is attended by a large number of persons from outside the dojo. Sometimes this hour is taught by Uyeshiba's son, or Waka sensei as he is called. Sometimes Tohei sensei, the greatest of Uyeshiba's followers, instructs the class. (28)

When Ueshiba did teach, he often spent a large amount of time talking and the students just wanted to practice techniques. (28) (29) Ueshiba traveled often. He also entertained visitors. He only taught the morning class at hombu dojo when he was there. From the mid 1940s to the mid 1950s, he was rarely in Tokyo. From the mid 1950s to the mid 1960s, he split his time between Iwama and Tokyo and still traveled occasionally to various other places. In the late 1960s, Ueshiba's health was declining and he rarely taught. Not even getting into the subject of just how confusing Ueshiba's teaching style was, the students of Ueshiba never had extensive training time with him, either pre-war or post-war. What time there was, the post-war students focused on techniques and throwing each other around.

20. Aiki News Issue 038
21. Aiki News Issue 038
22. Aiki News Issue 070
23. Aiki News Issue 060
24. Aiki News Issue 060
25. Yoga Journal March 1982
26. Training with the Master by John Stevens
27. Aiki News Issue 031
28. Black Belt 1966 Vol 4 No 5
29. Yoga Journal March 1982

kewms
11-17-2011, 01:34 PM
A master never stops teaching. If no one was around he'd be teaching the insects taisabaki. That's the reality of someone like him. The reality of that position and type of person is what needs to be understood in my opinion not what bill or jack said.

I have a friend and when he hasn't been seen for a while and students complain they are missing him and ask where he is I just laugh and say he's somewhere no doubt teaching someone something.

Sure. But if Ueshiba Sensei is off teaching tai sabaki to the insects in Iwama while Saotome Sensei is training in Tokyo, Saotome Sensei probably isn't learning much from him. The question is not whether Ueshiba Sensei was teaching, but what and to whom.

Katherine

graham christian
11-17-2011, 01:39 PM
Sure. But if Ueshiba Sensei is off teaching tai sabaki to the insects in Iwama while Saotome Sensei is training in Tokyo, Saotome Sensei probably isn't learning much from him. The question is not whether Ueshiba Sensei was teaching, but what and to whom.

Katherine

Maybe, but it's not a question at all to me. To me the question is were they, Saotome or whoever getting on with what they were meant to be learning sufficiently instead of wondering where he was.

Regards.G.

Ken McGrew
11-17-2011, 01:51 PM
Mark,

Let no person forget that you are trying to sell a book. Let no person forget why you are trying to make the case that O Sensei did not teach after the war. You want to claim that the only real AIKI Aikido occurred before the war. That is not what O Sensei himself said. He said Aikido became something new after the war. That is not what students of his report that he said. Numerous students.

So though I don't want to bother to check on the actual sources in Aiki News that you draw upon, Etc., some basic points become obvious rather quickly... in relation to Saotome Sensei, who you imply with your statements about people believing made up things, obviously, given that you are responding to my reporting of the things he said:

1) Saotome Sensei met O Sensei in 1955
2) The spiritual talks that O Sensei gave were part of the instruction. I know you don't like that, but it's true.
3) Your slippery definition of what substantial training was not withstanding, O Sensei supervised the people who were teaching under him, often walking into classes unannounced for a short mini lesson, and this was his way of teaching his instructors. He also spoke with them, at least some of them, which also was instruction.
4) Saotome Sensei often traveled with O Sensei.

You and company have an agenda. Do you have training in historical analysis? I do. I don't intend to teach you for free. You need to go get a Ph.D. if you are going to play historian. I am not interested in all the work that would be involved in undermining your agenda and efforts to support it based on your historical research. Others will. If you want to do a good job you will have to deal with ALL of the available evidence. I can tell you, here's a hint, that personal narratives (like diaries) carry a great deal of weight in historical analysis. More so than edited newspaper articles.

It is simply not the case that "modern" Aikido, that is real Aiki, was not passed down by O Sensei to his students. Even if, before the war, he would have accepted your definition of Aiki (whatever that is) - though this is unlikely given how Takeda Sensei and his son described Aiki - It is abundantly clear that he developed a new definition of Aiki for Aikido after the war (I don't believe that but I'm just throwing you a bone).

At any rate, I was answering a personal question about why I don't want to train with you and others. You have answered it again. To train with you is to accept your claims about Saotome Sensei's allegedly faulty memory or outright dishonesty. I don't accept your claims.

You know, some people like to say that they read somewhere that clouds are actually fluffy marshmallows filled with helium to keep them up there. They read this and they see pictures of the clouds and think, gee, that must be right. So, when people say, no, clouds are, in reality, "a visible mass of liquid droplets or frozen crystals made of water and/or various chemicals suspended in the atmosphere above the surface of a planetary body", why those people say you're lying. Maybe Chicken Little was right and those marshmallows are losing their helium. I dunno. It's just amazing that some people don't do any research. A small example from my upcoming book:

Ueshiba split his time between the Tokyo hombu dojo and Iwama for a short period. Stan Pranin notes that Ueshiba actually lived in Iwama for 15 years after the war ended. (20) Kanai responds that after he started at hombu around 1958, Ueshiba split his time between Iwama and Tokyo. (21)

Until 1955, hombu dojo was not very active. Between 1955 and 1959, more students started coming to the dojo to train, including foreign students. Even then, Ueshiba was not a regular teacher there. He would show up whenever he wanted. (22)

Nishio remarks that when he started, around 1951, it was six months before he saw Ueshiba. (23) In fact, Nishio goes on to note that there weren't many students and that Kisshomaru Ueshiba and Koichi Tohei were the teachers. (24)

Robert Frager remarks that he only saw Ueshiba occasionally during his first year, which would be sometime in the mid 1960s. (25) Walther Krenner also notes that Ueshiba wasn't teaching regularly around 1967. (26)

Kisshomaru Ueshiba states that his father was "besieged by visitors starting from early in the morning and he spent large amounts of time in receiving them". Kisshomaru also notes that his father traveled often. (27)

Taking a closer look when Ueshiba was at the Tokyo hombu dojo, what time, or times, did he teach?

The uchideshi's day begins around 6 a.m., when he cleans the dojo and the grounds outside. The first class of the day starts at 6:30. This class is usually taught by Uyeshiba himself, the Osensei, which means the old teacher. The young uchideshi sit on their knees during this hour, which can be an uncomfortable and tiring experience. The first class is usually taken up mostly with discussions about God and nature - Uyeshiba doing the talking and the uchideshi listening. It is in this hour that the young uchideshi is exposed to Zen philosophy and the deeper meanings of aikido - its nonviolent and defensive perfection and understanding. If this all sounds rather remote and difficult to grasp for a Western reader, he may be interested to know that the young Japanese uchideshi often feels the same way. The 83-year-old Uyeshiba many times speaks about highly abstract topics, lapsing usually into ancient Japanese phraseology, so that his listeners often find it difficult to follow him. When this long hour is over, the young uchideshi exuberantly spill out onto the dojo floor for a half-hour exercise break. All the restless energy pent up within seems to come out and they throw themselves into the practice of their techniques with each other. At 8 a.m. begins the real study of aikido techniques. This class is taught by a different instructor every day, and is attended by a large number of persons from outside the dojo. Sometimes this hour is taught by Uyeshiba's son, or Waka sensei as he is called. Sometimes Tohei sensei, the greatest of Uyeshiba's followers, instructs the class. (28)

When Ueshiba did teach, he often spent a large amount of time talking and the students just wanted to practice techniques. (28) (29) Ueshiba traveled often. He also entertained visitors. He only taught the morning class at hombu dojo when he was there. From the mid 1940s to the mid 1950s, he was rarely in Tokyo. From the mid 1950s to the mid 1960s, he split his time between Iwama and Tokyo and still traveled occasionally to various other places. In the late 1960s, Ueshiba's health was declining and he rarely taught. Not even getting into the subject of just how confusing Ueshiba's teaching style was, the students of Ueshiba never had extensive training time with him, either pre-war or post-war. What time there was, the post-war students focused on techniques and throwing each other around.

20. Aiki News Issue 038
21. Aiki News Issue 038
22. Aiki News Issue 070
23. Aiki News Issue 060
24. Aiki News Issue 060
25. Yoga Journal March 1982
26. Training with the Master by John Stevens
27. Aiki News Issue 031
28. Black Belt 1966 Vol 4 No 5
29. Yoga Journal March 1982

SteveTrinkle
11-17-2011, 01:55 PM
Steve,

If you had read all my posts (a hard thing to do at this point) you would know that I have said all along that it's ok to look at different arts. Doshu said so himself in the Preface to Aikido and the Chinese Martial Arts (Sugawara and Xing) in 1995.

It is difficult to know what the IS being discussed is. Hunter gives us an example of a Sensei he trains with. Harden says what I do is better. Harden says he can see that he can see from a video that it's not the real Aiki he's showing, and yet it is often said that we cannot see the secret he has, and that O Sensei had, unless we know the secret. Starts to sound like invisible clothing of the finest invisible silk. So I don't know what this Aiki is supposed to be. No one has bothered to define it. Some say it's Daito-ryu. Others say its Chinese. If "it" exists it can be described. The failure to do so raises my suspicions.

That does not mean that what they are doing, whatever it is, is not good on it's own terms. The fact that it may be good does not tell us how it translates to Aikido and does not support the wild claims that have been made. They are describing a skill set which is not Aikido. It may be PART of Aikido already. It is not Aikido. O Sensei continued to develop the art of Aikido up until the end. It was never perfected. Saotome Sensei told me this personally. That's good enough for me.

Having said that, I personally will not train with people who repeatedly make such bold statements that contradict what my teacher has told us about what O Sensei told him. For example, we again have Mark claiming that O Sensei didn't teach much. Completely false. Saotome Sensei has written that he took ukemi from O Sensei almost every day. Mark is implying that Saotome is not telling the truth. I will not, personally, train with people who do such things. I don't care how good they are. You asked me a personal question, so I answered it on a personal level.

I have been exposed to other complimentary arts and their application to Aikido far more than you realize. Though I am reminded often that I am a low rank non Budo man, I have been around many great martial artists. I am not opposed to people doing whatever they want outside of Aikido and bringing in the parts that don't get in the way of other people continuing to train AIKIDO. If they start insisting on their notion of Aiki (meaning whatever this IS Aiki is) then I have a problem with it. Smoke if you want. Just don't smoke next to me.

Mr. McGrew,
Thank you for your response. While I wish it were otherwise, you've made your position very clear.
Sincerely,
Steve Trinkle

Ken McGrew
11-17-2011, 01:56 PM
Thank you Steve, you seem to be a real gentleman.

kewms
11-17-2011, 01:59 PM
How objective are any of us, really, about our teachers? Or our parents? How much less objective are we likely to be about a teacher or parent who is a towering, larger than life figure?

I think expecting every word that any of the uchi deshi says about Ueshiba Sensei to be the complete, literal truth is setting an unreasonable standard.

No, I do not claim that any of the uchi deshi are lying. Just that their recollections are only part, and not necessarily the most accurate part, of the historical record. This is why historians (in any field) seek out as many sources as they can find.

Katherine

phitruong
11-17-2011, 02:03 PM
I can tell you, here's a hint, that personal narratives (like diaries) carry a great deal of weight in historical analysis. More so than edited newspaper articles.
.

did you not questioning Ellis's personal narratives of Terry Dobson in one of the earlier post?

Howard Prior
11-17-2011, 02:08 PM
12. Terry was a story teller and he told a few about O'Sensei, one of which revolves around Terry telling O'Sensei how impressed he (Terry) was with Wang Shu Jin and O'Sensei's physical response which is nothing anyone else has every talked about being able to do.

What was it, please?

kewms
11-17-2011, 02:13 PM
did you not questioning Ellis's personal narratives of Terry Dobson in one of the earlier post?

Yes, I believe he did. And quite a few posts have used (questionable) English translations of books written after the fact to argue against claims based on contemporaneous Japanese-language records.

Katherine

DH
11-17-2011, 02:26 PM
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=35083&postcount=4

On the origins of the usage of the "aiki" term, there are various narratives around, one of the most interesting is this one:
Inue hated Takeda. Interestngly, there are other favorable reports statng that Deguchi was quite taken by Takeda's aiki, so much so that he suggested Taked change the name of his art.
Dan

DH
11-17-2011, 02:30 PM
Interestingly it was the Shihan that Stan trained with who revealed that Ueshiba was not a daily presence at Hombu. I know someone else who personally trained there who echoe's that same comment, and also said when he showed up training would change and they would begin....pushing on each other.
So I guess Mr McGrew is calling Stan Pranin and a veritable host of Aikido's shihan all liars.
Poo poo Mr. McGrew. ;)
Dan

MM
11-17-2011, 02:38 PM
Mark,

Let no person forget that you are trying to sell a book. Let no person forget why you are trying to make the case that O Sensei did not teach after the war. You want to claim that the only real AIKI Aikido occurred before the war. That is not what O Sensei himself said. He said Aikido became something new after the war. That is not what students of his report that he said. Numerous students.


Mr. McGrew,

Please address me as Mr. Murray until such time as you actually understand what my claims are. Up to this point, you have been completely,utterly, and entirely wrong in your deductions of them. Also, please do not denigrate my abilities until you have a complete understanding of what they are. I would ask that you address the subject and issues provided rather than the character of the person posting.


So though I don't want to bother to check on the actual sources in Aiki News that you draw upon,


So much for you addressing the subject and the issues ...

Gary David
11-17-2011, 02:42 PM
What was it, please?

Howard
My bad...I was mixing stories and sources.....was reminded by another that what I was remembering was not the case.......Hey...it has been 30 years ago and a lot miles since I last talked to Terry..
Gary

Nicholas Eschenbruch
11-17-2011, 02:48 PM
Do you have training in historical analysis? I do. I don't intend to teach you for free. You need to go get a Ph.D. if you are going to play historian. I am not interested in all the work that would be involved in undermining your agenda and efforts to support it based on your historical research. Others will. If you want to do a good job you will have to deal with ALL of the available evidence. I can tell you, here's a hint, that personal narratives (like diaries) carry a great deal of weight in historical analysis. More so than edited newspaper articles.


Mr McGrew, you have no methodological reason for the arrogance you display. I should think that personal narratives may carry weight when you research personal experience, but when you are trying to establish a higher degree of facticity of events, personal narratives are known to be quite unreliable unless backed up by other sources, which you dont have. The mere fact that you make the sweeping statements you make is not exactly reassuring regarding the quality of the training you are claiming.

For the record, I have differed with Mark on historical method on more than one occasion, and no, I do not think his evidence is academically sound, but it is a lot better than your claims to Saotome Sensei's memory.

Demetrio Cereijo
11-17-2011, 02:52 PM
Inue hated Takeda. Interestngly, there are other favorable reports statng that Deguchi was quite taken by Takeda's aiki, so much so that he suggested Taked change the name of his art.
Dan

Let me say it again:

On the origins of the usage of the "aiki" term, there are various narratives around, one of the most interesting is this one:

Clearer now?

DH
11-17-2011, 03:10 PM
Dan. You mention someone doing power displays and that you do these things and that his isn't aiki. That sounds like you do 'power' displays also then. Aiki wise. Does he say yours is Aiki and if so what does he call his?

The demos you describe show what? Effectiveness of your aiki? (I assume so) However I don't see it as significant or unusual myself. Maybe 'out there' it is.

For instance, lifting someone up back to their feet from kokyu dosa. When you say power display equalling collision of forces are you implying you havn't met anyone who can do that without such?

Sword tricks. Are you saying you havn't met anyone who can cut through your sword held as you describe?

Regards.G.
Hello Graham
I always call it IP/aiki. Internal power or strength is created from a balance of ki in yourself. From there you create aiki between you and someone else.
A quick study of that is Ueshiba's discussion of Heaven/earth/man. Where he notes that after you can manifest the energy between heaven and earth staning on the golden bridge do you release the mountain echo.
This is a well known concept and has to do with a balance of opposites and what it does to your body to remove slack and be full and stand suspended, thus any force-in "echos" back-out. Kuzushi on contact that can then be manipulated.

I am not much for tricks. Once you know how these things work there are many ways to display them. Some prefer to use power displays. I occasionally do that too. But power displays while profound and exceptional (and Ark is very good) are not where I am at. I prefer a softer approach-don't show them your power and dissolve their strength while entering in. Ark can do more than those videos show. We are only discussing what he chose to show in a particular video.

For instance, lifting someone up back to their feet from kokyu dosa. When you say power display equalling collision of forces are you implying you havn't met anyone who can do that without such?
Yes I have-not in Aikido though.
Again it is more important not to get hung up on individuals. There are others who can do these things, some accent one type of work others do another, some are better than others. The real question is where are we and what are our skills. To be in an aiki art and to demonstrate a profound lack of understanding, and any real ability to display these high level skills is simply sad.
Dan

DH
11-17-2011, 03:13 PM
Interestingly it was the Shihan that Stan trained with who revealed that Ueshiba was not a daily presence at Hombu. I know someone else who personally trained there who echoe's that same comment, and also said when he showed up training would change and they would begin....pushing on each other.
So I guess Mr McGrew is calling Stan Pranin and a veritable host of Aikido's shihan all liars.
Poo poo Mr. McGrew. ;)
Dan
I meant to say this
Interestingly it was the Shihan that Stan trained with and interviewed from all over Japan who revealed that Ueshiba was not a daily presence at Hombu. I know someone else who personally trained there who echoe's that same comment, and also said when he showed up, training would change and they would begin....pushing on each other.
Stan was the one who originally was shocked to find this out. Did he have an agenda too Mr. McGrew? He was also stunned to find out about Daito ryu and Ueshiba's true training history. All you have to do is ask him.

So I guess Mr McGrew is calling Stan Pranin and a veritable host of Aikido's shihan all liars who somehow had diverse but similar agenda's. Isn't that a bit ridiculous?
Poo poo Mr. McGrew. ;)
Dan

Fred Little
11-17-2011, 03:22 PM
Do you have training in historical analysis? I do. I don't intend to teach you for free. You need to go get a Ph.D. if you are going to play historian. I am not interested in all the work that would be involved in undermining your agenda and efforts to support it based on your historical research. Others will. If you want to do a good job you will have to deal with ALL of the available evidence. I can tell you, here's a hint, that personal narratives (like diaries) carry a great deal of weight in historical analysis. More so than edited newspaper articles..

Dr. McGrew:

With all due respect, you really don't want to go there. The historiographic record furnishes abundant evidence of signal contributions made by individuals with no formal training. Moreover, you are entering a highly contested field on which you are far from the only individual with formal training in historical theory and method.

Broadly speaking: While personal narratives carry personal weight in some instances, any consideration of such narratives also demands the examination of the reliability of the narrator(s), both with regard to questions of fact and with regard to the presence of personal, partisan, or sectarian agendas which have gone into the formation of that narrative, and the relative level of prominence and emphasis given to those facts which are not disputed.

Even in a Western context, public examination of such questions can be very uncomfortable for those narrators, and they may not be terribly kindly disposed to the individual who caused such an examination to take place. In a Japanese context, dominated as the practice of history is by in-group hagiography, the tension between orthodox narrative and open empirical inquiry is much greater.

This is a matter worthy of consideration, as is the question of whether you wish to put your professional credentials as an academic on the line in an argument about competing sectarian narratives, when you have already provided quite a bit of evidence that you have already picked a side, as distinct from taking a stance as a disinterested historical observer engaged in historical reasoning and analysis.

I would respectfully request that you give the above remarks serious consideration.

Best regards,

FL

DH
11-17-2011, 03:30 PM
Good God, Fred.
Well done. I got your P.M. years ago as you mentioned in #4 on your list. It only goes to prove that few can be accomplished in all things. I accept defeat!! :cool:
Dan

Fred Little
11-17-2011, 03:32 PM
Good God, Fred.
Well done. I got your P.M. years ago as you mentioned in #4 on your list. It only goes to prove that few can be accomplished in all things. I accept defeat!! :cool:
Dan

Dude, you're the one getting plane tickets to Hawaii. If that's defeat, I could use a taste.:D

FL

DH
11-17-2011, 03:41 PM
Dude, you're the one getting plane tickets to Hawaii. If that's defeat, I could use a taste.:D

FL
Well there is a special place in life when your son says "Dad, you're brilliant, but you need an editor!!"
Or worse when he was seventeen and it suddenly dawned on him "Dad!! Oh my God...you're a nerd!"
Yes, yes. Things that make you all warm and fuzzy inside. I go to Hawaii to console myself and face my many failings.......:D
It works!
SCUBA!!
Sorry I lost track. I just like saying it. Forgive me.
SCUBA!!
Oops, there it is again!:(
Bye bye
Dan

hughrbeyer
11-17-2011, 03:47 PM
I wonder if Takeda leaving Ueshiba crying in the corner helped Ueshiba develop Aikido as I understand it.

I don't believe the "crying in a corner" story at all. It came from a Takeda partisan passed, passed down through several people. Kisshomaru, I believe, has his own story of their meeting and I don't believe that one either. I think the plain story is interesting enough: young budo wanna-be meets master who knocks his tabi off. Life is transformed. History is made. No snark necessary.

gregstec
11-17-2011, 04:07 PM
You and company have an agenda. Do you have training in historical analysis? I do. I don't intend to teach you for free. You need to go get a Ph.D. if you are going to play historian. I am not interested in all the work that would be involved in undermining your agenda and efforts to support it based on your historical research. Others will. If you want to do a good job you will have to deal with ALL of the available evidence. I can tell you, here's a hint, that personal narratives (like diaries) carry a great deal of weight in historical analysis. More so than edited newspaper articles.



Ken, just stop with the group insults. Previously you requested that insults stop, for the most part they have, and I apologized for any part of what I may have said that may have offended you. However, you continue with personal and group insults - Just stop it - it comes across immature and unprofessional - if you have an issue with an individual, go toe to toe with them, but leave the rest of us out of it - period.

This may come as a surprise to you, but not everyone that has jumped in here to disagree with you has trained with Dan; some have and some have not - even tough it may appear to you that it is some type of group conspiracy with an agenda against you, that is just not the case; it truly is just independent opinions with similar viewpoints addressing your various arguments.

Just a little piece of advise if I may - if you tone down your style here, you just may get a little less push on some topics as you are getting at the moment - take a clue from my good friend Graham, in my opinion, most of his posts are pretty whacky and our views on Aiki are at different ends of the spectrum - however, he conducts himself in a professional and calm manner and that allows for discussion - even though we rarely agree with one another, we respect each other and carry on accordingly.

FWIW

Greg

kewms
11-17-2011, 04:13 PM
This may come as a surprise to you, but not everyone that has jumped in here to disagree with you has trained with Dan; some have and some have not - even tough it may appear to you that it is some type of group conspiracy with an agenda against you, that is just not the case; it truly is just independent opinions with similar viewpoints addressing your various arguments.


Indeed. And the internal strength/aiki community is at least as fragmented and full of disagreements as the aikido community itself. It isn't that people are refusing to give straight answers, it is that they all have different points of view. The requested clarity simply isn't going to happen in this venue.

Katherine

graham christian
11-17-2011, 04:13 PM
Hello Graham
I always call it IP/aiki. Internal power or strength is created from a balance of ki in yourself. From there you create aiki between you and someone else.
A quick study of that is Ueshiba's discussion of Heaven/earth/man. Where he notes that after you can manifest the energy between heaven and earth staning on the golden bridge do you release the mountain echo.
This is a well known concept and has to do with a balance of opposites and what it does to your body to remove slack and be full and stand suspended, thus any force-in "echos" back-out. Kuzushi on contact that can then be manipulated.

I am not much for tricks. Once you know how these things work there are many ways to display them. Some prefer to use power displays. I occasionally do that too. But power displays while profound and exceptional (and Ark is very good) are not where I am at. I prefer a softer approach-don't show them your power and dissolve their strength while entering in. Ark can do more than those videos show. We are only discussing what he chose to show in a particular video.

Yes I have-not in Aikido though.
Again it is more important not to get hung up on individuals. There are others who can do these things, some accent one type of work others do another, some are better than others. The real question is where are we and what are our skills. To be in an aiki art and to demonstrate a profound lack of understanding, and any real ability to display these high level skills is simply sad.
Dan

O.K. I like that differentiation IP/AIKI.

As far as heaven and earth goes, well that's a new description to me re:force in echoes back out. Not my description but interesting showing me more of where you're coming from. Balancing opposites also different to my view on aikido aiki or should I give mine it's own name? Maybe I should call it uni/aiki (universal aiki)

I agree that once you know the basics on the different things you can them demonstrate these tricks. For me each and every one is merely a training tool and not for display purposes as they give the wrong impression and usually attract the wrong people.

Now your where are we comment. This I find interesting and more to my liking. To be an aiki art.

Now those you mention as doing these things, some accenting one type of work and others another. That implies different aspects of aiki done by different people to varying degrees of ability. That I could agree with.

I could say that in the field of Aikido I too look foreward to seeing more ability in that broad side of things. Personally, my (whatever you want to call it) uni/aiki I find very lacking.

Regards.G.

Toby Threadgill
11-17-2011, 04:54 PM
This is a matter worthy of consideration, as is the question of whether you wish to put your professional credentials as an academic on the line in an argument about competing sectarian narratives, when you have already provided quite a bit of evidence that you have already picked a side, as distinct from taking a stance as a disinterested historical observer engaged in historical reasoning and analysis.

Ouch!

Mr McGrew....You might consider this if you continue down the path you've chosen.

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experimentation, it's wrong. - Richard P. Feynman

Put the keyboard away and go get a feel......

Toby Threadgill / TSYR

Howard Prior
11-17-2011, 05:12 PM
Howard
My bad...I was mixing stories and sources.....was reminded by another that what I was remembering was not the case.......Hey...it has been 30 years ago and a lot miles since I last talked to Terry..
Gary

No problem. I was just hoping....

Thanks.

Ken McGrew
11-17-2011, 06:28 PM
Interestingly it was the Shihan that Stan trained with who revealed that Ueshiba was not a daily presence at Hombu. I know someone else who personally trained there who echoe's that same comment, and also said when he showed up training would change and they would begin....pushing on each other.
So I guess Mr McGrew is calling Stan Pranin and a veritable host of Aikido's shihan all liars.
Poo poo Mr. McGrew. ;)
Dan

YOu have repeatedly claimed that O Sensei did not pass on what you call the body conditioning of Aiki. Now you say that when he taught they pushed on each other, which is to imply they trained in what you allege they should have trained in. Which is it?

When I say Harden and company the intent is to let people decide if they are in that company or not. How about, those who would agree with them, some of those who are posting certainly do... on every claim.

I do not intend to be drawn into the distraction of debating what the meaning of "is" is. The point here is that O Sensei taught the Aiki that he wanted to teach. He called what he taught Aiki. All within Aikido.

It's funny that no one jumped on the scientist commenting on his training. I have historical training. What has been presented so far looks rather one sided, doesn't dispense will the totality of evidence, and doesn't seem to support the agenda that is being advanced. I expect there will be ample problems trying to make the claims that are being made. I've seen enough counter evidence to believe this. Even the evidence presented that says that O Sensei traveled a lot does nothing to support the underlying claim that some people are trying to support. Does the head of a dojo teach every class? Does that mean he doesn't teach the students in his dojo as a whole? But I'm not going to be the one to present that historical fight as I'm doing other things. There are those who will.

No magic number of days of teaching in Tokyo will change the fact that O Sensei instructed his students in Aiki as he understood and wanted the concept to be understood after the war. He used the approach to instruction that he wanted to use. And Saotome Sensei in particular traveled with him often. It is simply not true that everyone after O Sensei turned the art into some watered down version that he was opposed to (one claim that is made) or alternatively that O Sensei was such a bad teacher that he couldn't convey his Aiki (another claim that is alternatively made).

Ken McGrew
11-17-2011, 06:41 PM
So much of what is presented as evidence simply falls apart on closer examination. It's either not there or doesn't support what it is said to support. Here's another quote from the Dobson seminar:

"What I'm looking for... is this person's energy... If Scott grabs me properly and digs down I'm going to have a much more difficult time to deal with him... than I do if I'm able to use the energy [shows using the energy of the grab]. This is basic stuff. I can't use force. I can't force him. I can use, however, what he is kind enough to give me."

Now this is just one example of claims being made by people who in some general way were on the other side, they were certainly dismissing what I had said about Aikido. Some people tried to claim Dobson Sensei as supporting their position. Obviously he did not. Nothing in the quote contradicts what I describe as Aiki. What most people the world over understand as Aiki.

Do your thing and build your body conditioning. But it won't stop you from getting punched in the face. Apparently there is no art there so the skills still must be incorporated in some art, like modern Aikido.

The problem is all the bold claims that are made and which are not needed in order for what you do to be of value. So play word games all you (meaning some people) want. The totality of the agenda at hand is pretty clear and has been in posts going back years and years here and on other forums.

Here's another contradiction, if Aikido works without your IS notion of Aiki, then Aikido doesn't need you. If it doesn't work without your Aiki, then you have to explain away all the examples of it working. If it works, by your definition, then it must already have the IS Aiki in it that you claim it needs but lacks. It's going to be hard to convince experienced Aikido students that Aikido doesn't work. Too many lives have been saved for us to buy that.

stan baker
11-17-2011, 06:54 PM
Hi Ken

Like I said, ask your teachers to explain it to you.

stan

raul rodrigo
11-17-2011, 07:36 PM
Ken, how can anyone here enlighten you when (you say) you know more about Terry Dobson than his friend and uchideshi Ellis Amdur, more about aikido history than Stan Pranin, more about translating Japanese than Chris Li. You know more about Saotome than his rokudan students like Ledyard and Gleason. You're on the verge of saying that you know more about Akuzawa (not Ukazawa) than his student Rob John. Their knowledge of their subjects is demonstrable and has been demonstrated on Aikiweb. Your knowledge? Not so much.

Cady Goldfield
11-17-2011, 09:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wWUc8BZgWE

wxyzabc
11-17-2011, 09:48 PM
Lol...nice one Cady :D

Chris Knight
11-18-2011, 04:07 AM
Broadly speaking: While personal narratives carry personal weight in some instances, any consideration of such narratives also demands the examination of the reliability of the narrator(s), both with regard to questions of fact and with regard to the presence of personal, partisan, or sectarian agendas which have gone into the formation of that narrative, and the relative level of prominence and emphasis given to those facts which are not disputed.

what fred said :eek:

Gary David
11-18-2011, 08:19 AM
Here's another contradiction, if Aikido works without your IS notion of Aiki, then Aikido doesn't need you. If it doesn't work without your Aiki, then you have to explain away all the examples of it working. If it works, by your definition, then it must already have the IS Aiki in it that you claim it needs but lacks. It's going to be hard to convince experienced Aikido students that Aikido doesn't work. Too many lives have been saved for us to buy that.

Mr. McGrew
My car works fine if I only drive it in first gear, I can get to the market and anyway else I want to go, all be it at a reduced speed. This is fine in a world were everyone is in first gear. The rub here is that many now are not. Wouldn't it be nice to find out your car had a 2nd, 3rd, 4th and maybe a 5th gear.......and be able to use them. Not changing the car....just improving the performance. That is all Dan is providing....the possibility of improved performance through the practice and drills he uses.

If you are fine with where you are then go with it, but I didn't grow up wanting to drive a low performance car with only one gear.........

Talking about cars....mine is starting to show some body rust and the paint is starting to fade.....you are at least 30 years younger than me...why not get out there to see what can be added before you get to my age....

Just saying

Gary

Mark Freeman
11-18-2011, 08:47 AM
Here's another contradiction, if Aikido works without your IS notion of Aiki, then Aikido doesn't need you. If it doesn't work without your Aiki, then you have to explain away all the examples of it working. If it works, by your definition, then it must already have the IS Aiki in it that you claim it needs but lacks. It's going to be hard to convince experienced Aikido students that Aikido doesn't work. Too many lives have been saved for us to buy that.

Hi Ken,

I don't get what you mean in the last sentence, maybe it's just me being thick? Who's lives have been saved? and who is us?

regards

Mark

HL1978
11-18-2011, 08:48 AM
So much of what is presented as evidence simply falls apart on closer examination. It's either not there or doesn't support what it is said to support. Here's another quote from the Dobson seminar:

"What I'm looking for... is this person's energy... If Scott grabs me properly and digs down I'm going to have a much more difficult time to deal with him... than I do if I'm able to use the energy [shows using the energy of the grab]. This is basic stuff. I can't use force. I can't force him. I can use, however, what he is kind enough to give me."

Now this is just one example of claims being made by people who in some general way were on the other side, they were certainly dismissing what I had said about Aikido. Some people tried to claim Dobson Sensei as supporting their position. Obviously he did not. Nothing in the quote contradicts what I describe as Aiki. What most people the world over understand as Aiki.

Do your thing and build your body conditioning. But it won't stop you from getting punched in the face. Apparently there is no art there so the skills still must be incorporated in some art, like modern Aikido.

Therein lies the rub as that above quote can be taken to mean someting a bit different from an IS perspective which might sound the same but isn't preformed the same. Off course if you want to get into self defense/fighting you have to practice that sort of thing but wouldn't the same be true in terms of the conventional approach for aiki?

Here's another contradiction, if Aikido works without your IS notion of Aiki, then Aikido doesn't need you. If it doesn't work without your Aiki, then you have to explain away all the examples of it working. If it works, by your definition, then it must already have the IS Aiki in it that you claim it needs but lacks. It's going to be hard to convince experienced Aikido students that Aikido doesn't work. Too many lives have been saved for us to buy that.

It would be fair to say that Aikido, like tai chi, has the reputation among the martial arts community for "not working" under duress, except perhaps by very experienced exponents who understand timing, have excellent waza or great mass? Both seem to attract similar types of people. Now we could go into the how any why thats the case, though to summarize my opnion and probably those who are interested in IS, its because in either case most practioners aren't moving/studying how to move properly to make various "waza" work. Now if understanding IS makes tai chi work on a fully resisting opponent, why wouldnt the same be true for Aikido when it has the same issues?

It is really quite enlightening actually, because a lot of the foundational warmup exercises in aikido actually start to make sense as to why they are included. Dan's comments regarding "pushing" are rather interesting, because if that is true, it shows quite a bit as to why there was a disconnect between the founder and how the founders traditions were carried on, because being pushed on in a static position makes it fair easier to learn how to deal with energy coming into you than moving along with a partner to blend with them.

Mary Eastland
11-18-2011, 09:29 AM
Lol...nice one Cady :D
How is that a nice one?

Keith Larman
11-18-2011, 10:10 AM
How is that a nice one?

Well, the point of it was "wouldn't it be nice if things worked this way". They were discussing the meaning of someone else's words. So Woody Allen goes off screen and grabs the guy in question to have him answer the issue directly. There's been a lot of discussion about what Terry Dobson "really" meant in his writing. It would be nice (very nice on a number of levels) if he were still with us to actually address it rather than a continued discussion that most likely will never be resolved.

Having Terry pop in and say "Yeah, Ellis is right." or "Yeah, Ken is right." or "You're both missing it -- this is what I meant." would be great.

But it ain't gonna happen, unfortunately.

Ken McGrew
11-18-2011, 10:52 AM
I provided the other side a great hint which they failed to recognize. Here it is spelled out in great detail for them: A trained historian would be trying to access original documents like O Sensei's travel diary and his callendars. As well as those of the people around him. As well as any related receipts Etc. Only with these will you be able to establish how much he traveled during different periods and with whom.

Of course, this is a waste of time. It is not the sort of evidence that will prove what the other side wants to prove, which is that O Sensei did not have time to teach the Aiki of Aikido. The definition of instuction that they want to use is rediculously narrow.

They also fail to recognize that the things they have documented, like O Sensei lecturing on spiritual matters rather than showing technique, are actually support for the positions that I and others have presented - the positions that are supported by the current translations Etc. of his written words and all the other accounts that they want to dispute - as they suggest that Aiki, for O Sensei, was about blending and joining and that this had a largely spiritual basis in his understanding of how the Aiki of Aikido worked. Lecturing on spiritual matters was lecturing on Aiki, which the students then tried to apply.

These three paragraphs point to the obvious lack of rigor so far as methodology, and in particular analysis, are concerned. Of course, similar mistakes have been made throughout by the other side (who pretend to speak with one voice when it's helpful and then object when they are referred to as one group when it's helpful to their efforts to win rather than determine the truth). A few new translationed lines don't undermine the bulk of written work by O Sensei. It would be necessary to retranslate everyting, have the new translations examined by others for confirmation, and then only if they completely changed the meaning of what O Sensei was writing would it matter. There are also all the spoken interviews he gave that support the blending notion of Aiki. And so on and so forth. All the evidence given on several fronts just doesn't hold up.

The Dobson seminar transcription really points to the way the other side is using evidence. Because they can't dispute Dobson Sensei's own words, they accuse me of claiming to know him better than his own student and say they wish Dobson Sensei was here to speak for himself. He did speak for himself. It's on video. Any historian would agree. You have to show how he didn't mean what he said, maybe he was saying it under duress, maybe someone had a gun pointed at him from across the room. Otherwise he said what he said and we must assume he meant what he said (and showed as the video is unambiguous when you watch it). Methodological rigor.

The advocates this IS notion of Aiki make great claims that their Aiki is missing from Aikido and is in fact the secret of Aikido. Above we have two recent posts from the other side. One says that Aikido doesn't work. The other says that Aikido may work like a car in first gear but IS training will make it better. Neither back up their speculation with anything. These are just statement. If IS training is merely a way to make Aikido better, then it is not the secret to making Aikido work. If Aikido doesn't work, then IS training may be the missing link to make Aikido work. That statement, however, that Aikido doesn't work under duress or against bigger people is just rediculous. The other side is on an Aikido forum, rather than an IS forum, in order to recruit Aikido people. You won't recruit many Aikido people by trying to convince them that Aikido doesn't work. There is no concensus of that on this forum. Maybe on an MMA forum. We've all felt Aikido work. We may have had to use it. Our students may have been forced to use it.

It goes round and round with circular reasoning and circular argumentation, contradictory arguments from one post to another as if they could have it both ways to score points, and little evidence to support their claims. Lots of personal attacks. And still no concrete discussion of what they do and how it applies in martial situations. They say what it is not and yet claim that it is impossible to say what it is. It slices, it dices, it cures cancer, it will grow your hair back, change your body, and make you into a real budo man. We can't tell you what it is, but we can prove that it's the secret of Aikido when you come to the siminar, play by our rules of ukemi, and we can prove that we are right. Problem is that this does't prove your claims. It just proves that you are good at doing whatever it is that you are doing. You claim it's the secret to the jo trick. So what. The jo trick is not necessary to be able to do Aikido. Can Mr. Harden do the jo trick? Then maybe he hasn't proven that he found the secret to jo trick after all.

kewms
11-18-2011, 11:17 AM
I provided the other side a great hint which they failed to recognize. Here it is spelled out in great detail for them: A trained historian would be trying to access original documents like O Sensei's travel diary and his callendars. As well as those of the people around him. As well as any related receipts Etc. Only with these will you be able to establish how much he traveled during different periods and with whom.

Yes, definitely. So, have you done that?

You really should look at your own methodology before you lecture other people about theirs.

Katherine

raul rodrigo
11-18-2011, 11:33 AM
How could he, Katherine? He can't read Japanese. We could wave laundry lists and restaurant menus at him, and say these are Morihei's daily calendars, and Ken wouldn't know the difference. Ken holds people to a standard that he and his arguments could never survive. He hasn't done the work. But he has the effrontery to criticize those who actually have done it.

Gary David
11-18-2011, 11:47 AM
I
It goes round and round with circular reasoning and circular argumentation, contradictory arguments from one post to another as if they could have it both ways to score points, and little evidence to support their claims. Lots of personal attacks. And still no concrete discussion of what they do and how it applies in martial situations. They say what it is not and yet claim that it is impossible to say what it is. It slices, it dices, it cures cancer, it will grow your hair back, change your body, and make you into a real budo man. We can't tell you what it is, but we can prove that it's the secret of Aikido when you come to the siminar, play by our rules of ukemi, and we can prove that we are right. Problem is that this does't prove your claims. It just proves that you are good at doing whatever it is that you are doing. You claim it's the secret to the jo trick. So what. The jo trick is not necessary to be able to do Aikido. Can Mr. Harden do the jo trick? Then maybe he hasn't proven that he found the secret to jo trick after all.

Mr. McGrew
There is an old saying about the proof is in the pudding.....All this ends if you just get on the mat with Dan or any one of a number of folks posting on here who have trained IS/IP and show that what you have is all there is and all that is needed.....show that it trumps the IS/IP training. You do that and we all shutup......... otherwise you are just spitting into the wind and whisling in the dark........

So get out there...
Gary

hoi
11-18-2011, 11:51 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wWUc8BZgWE

Although quite humorous, this clip is a quick digest distilling the essence of this thread in 59 seconds.
Great find!

ChrisMoses
11-18-2011, 12:33 PM
I provided the other side a great hint which they failed to recognize. Here it is spelled out in great detail for them: A trained historian would be trying to access original documents like O Sensei's travel diary and his callendars. As well as those of the people around him. As well as any related receipts Etc. Only with these will you be able to establish how much he traveled during different periods and with whom.

This is what the people you are arguing with have done. YOU are the one that needs to do this. Quit treating the Dobson and Saotome books as scholarly works, they aren't.

When I was in college I had a history class that the ENTIRE grade was based on one paper that we had the whole term to write. It was simply to answer "Was Constantine a Christian?" We were only allowed to use primary sources from within 50 years of his death. It was incredibly difficult and really drove home the point of just how much room for interpretation there is behind a textbook statement like, "Constantine converted to Christianity in the year 312 AD." To the best of my ability, I have tried to apply that same critical thinking to how I view OSensei and what he was doing.

Fred Little
11-18-2011, 12:38 PM
The Dobson seminar transcription really points to the way the other side is using evidence. Because they can't dispute Dobson Sensei's own words, they accuse me of claiming to know him better than his own student and say they wish Dobson Sensei was here to speak for himself. He did speak for himself. It's on video. Any historian would agree. You have to show how he didn't mean what he said, maybe he was saying it under duress, maybe someone had a gun pointed at him from across the room. Otherwise he said what he said and we must assume he meant what he said (and showed as the video is unambiguous when you watch it). Methodological rigor.

This historian disagrees. Any such spontaneous remark made in a particular situation must be viewed, from a Certeauvian point of view, as a highly contingent bricolage which arose in a specific cultural context which presented a limited toolkit. From a Bordieuvian perspective, it must be regarded as conditioned by the habitus in which it occurred and considered with reference to the specific cultural, geographical, and architectural features of that habitus Viewed through a neo-Foucauldian lens, one might suggest that you are engaged in a violent act of hegemonic (mis)appropriation and re-valuation of a conditional statement which ignores or denies the statement's originally contingent and fluid nature, then reifies it for the express purpose of delineating and enforcing a disciplinary boundary.

Any academic historian worth his or her salt operating in the 21st Century would be well aware of the work of de Certeau, Bordieu, and Foucault, and even if proceeding along alternative lines of analysis, would provide a substantive argument as to why the sort of "contingency analysis" found in their work is not appropriate to the matter at hand, even if only implicitly. This element is entirely lacking in your presentation and all that is left is a corollary assertion to a reductio ad absurdum that because no such gun is visible that the the remark is (as you said explicitly) unambiguous and (as you suggest implicitly) supports your position. As historical reasoning, this is sophomoric at best, meretricious at the mid-point, and intellectually dishonest at worst.

The onus is not on another individual to prove the negative of your assertion -- this is a classic near-impossibility. Even were one to concede that there is no clear disagreement between the selected quote and your broad assertion, that does not make the quote a confirmation of your assertion. If you assert that a spontaneous statement made by a specific individual to correct a single aspect of a single individual's technical capacity on a particular occasion at a particular site may be taken to have a broader and more universal meaning, the onus is on you to effectively bound and nullify any and all contingencies that might undercut your claim. You have done no such thing, choosing rather to make emphatic but poorly grounded assertions based on cherry-picked evidence. This would suggest that while you know the phrase "methodological rigor," the efforts of your instructors to introduce any significant measure of such rigor to your working process, or to give you any working knowledge of what methodological rigor might entail, seem to have been less successful than one might hope.

You may wish to consider the extent to which your position is rather different from that of a non-academic individual who takes an amateur and avocational interest in a historical subject, to the extent that such an individual is wholly responsible for his or her own views and argumentation in advocacy of those views. Inasmuch as you have asserted your credentials as a professional academic, you may wish to consider that both the quality of reasoning which underlies the historical and historiographic arguments you present and the mode in which you advocate those arguments reflects, not solely on you as an individual, but also on multiple institutions with which you have been or continue to be affiliated.

You should also reflect on another reality -- there are a great many practitioners of aikido and readers of this board who both have advanced academic training which included basic methodology courses of one kind or another -- whether humanist, social scientific, technological, or scientific. They will have their own, no less professionally or formally informed, views about your method. And even in the absence of such formal methodology, there is always bricolage and tact. On that last, Terry had quite a bit to say about tact, and as he noted when he taught a seminar at Bond Street -- at a time when his health was not good and he knew these would be his last classes at his old dojo -- he said that "everything I know about tact was hard-won, (at which point the room erupted in knowing laughter) so I commend it to your attention."

And echoing that observation, in all of its particulars, I close.

FL

gregstec
11-18-2011, 01:01 PM
Yaaaaawn - I see we are all still at it and the banter continues. Below are some quotes that I feel are somewhat appropriate to the general drift of this thread:

"There are no facts, only interpretations."
― Friedrich Nietzsche

"The reason I talk to myself is because I'm the only one whose answers I accept."
― George Carlin

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."
― Aldous Huxley, Complete Essays 2, 1926-29

"The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off."
― Gloria Steinem

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened."
― Winston S. Churchill

"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't."
― Mark Twain

"No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong."
― François de La Rochefoucauld

"All good books are alike in that they are truer than if they had really happened and after you are finished reading one you will feel that all that happened to you and afterwards it all belongs to you: the good and the bad, the ecstasy, the remorse and sorrow, the people and the places and how the weather was. If you can get so that you can give that to people, then you are a writer."
― Ernest Hemingway

"Books are mirrors: you only see in them what you already have inside you."
― Carlos Ruiz Zafón, The Shadow of the Wind

"There are some things one remembers even though they may never have happened."
― Harold Pinter

"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth."
― Marcus Aurelius

"Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it."
― Mark Twain

I think I am going to take the advise of the last quote from Mark Twain and just bow out at this point - the thread has ran its course and nothing more of any worth will be coming out of it.

So, folks - Ken is right and we are all wrong - he won - time for us unenlightened ones to move on in our blindness :rolleyes:

Greg

Toby Threadgill
11-18-2011, 02:12 PM
This historian disagrees. Any such spontaneous remark made in a particular situation must be viewed, from a Certeauvian point of view, as a highly contingent bricolage which arose in a specific cultural context which presented a limited toolkit. From a Bordieuvian perspective, it must be regarded as conditioned by the habitus in which it occurred and considered with reference to the specific cultural, geographical, and architectural features of that habitus Viewed through a neo-Foucauldian lens, one might suggest that you are engaged in a violent act of hegemonic (mis)appropriation and re-valuation of a conditional statement which ignores or denies the statement's originally contingent and fluid nature, then reifies it for the express purpose of delineating and enforcing a disciplinary boundary.

Any academic historian worth his or her salt operating in the 21st Century would be well aware of the work of de Certeau, Bordieu, and Foucault, and even if proceeding along alternative lines of analysis, would provide a substantive argument as to why the sort of "contingency analysis" found in their work is not appropriate to the matter at hand, even if only implicitly. This element is entirely lacking in your presentation and all that is left is a corollary assertion to a reductio ad absurdum that because no such gun is visible that the the remark is (as you said explicitly) unambiguous and (as you suggest implicitly) supports your position. As historical reasoning, this is sophomoric at best, meretricious at the mid-point, and intellectually dishonest at worst.

The onus is not on another individual to prove the negative of your assertion -- this is a classic near-impossibility. Even were one to concede that there is no clear disagreement between the selected quote and your broad assertion, that does not make the quote a confirmation of your assertion. If you assert that a spontaneous statement made by a specific individual to correct a single aspect of a single individual's technical capacity on a particular occasion at a particular site may be taken to have a broader and more universal meaning, the onus is on you to effectively bound and nullify any and all contingencies that might undercut your claim. You have done no such thing, choosing rather to make emphatic but poorly grounded assertions based on cherry-picked evidence. This would suggest that while you know the phrase "methodological rigor," the efforts of your instructors to introduce any significant measure of such rigor to your working process, or to give you any working knowledge of what methodological rigor might entail, seem to have been less successful than one might hope.

You may wish to consider the extent to which your position is rather different from that of a non-academic individual who takes an amateur and avocational interest in a historical subject, to the extent that such an individual is wholly responsible for his or her own views and argumentation in advocacy of those views. Inasmuch as you have asserted your credentials as a professional academic, you may wish to consider that both the quality of reasoning which underlies the historical and historiographic arguments you present and the mode in which you advocate those arguments reflects, not solely on you as an individual, but also on multiple institutions with which you have been or continue to be affiliated.

You should also reflect on another reality -- there are a great many practitioners of aikido and readers of this board who both have advanced academic training which included basic methodology courses of one kind or another -- whether humanist, social scientific, technological, or scientific. They will have their own, no less professionally or formally informed, views about your method. And even in the absence of such formal methodology, there is always bricolage and tact. On that last, Terry had quite a bit to say about tact, and as he noted when he taught a seminar at Bond Street -- at a time when his health was not good and he knew these would be his last classes at his old dojo -- he said that "everything I know about tact was hard-won, (at which point the room erupted in knowing laughter) so I commend it to your attention."

And echoing that observation, in all of its particulars, I close.

FL

Well....,

I've been waiting for this post to reveal itself. I knew in time it had to.

Logical fallacies bring forth such things, and Fred, you are priceless.

Toby

Nicholas Eschenbruch
11-18-2011, 02:15 PM
This historian disagrees. Any such spontaneous remark made in a particular situation must be viewed, from a Certeauvian point of view, as a highly contingent bricolage which arose in a specific cultural context which presented a limited toolkit. From a Bordieuvian perspective, it must be regarded as conditioned by the habitus in which it occurred and considered with reference to the specific cultural, geographical, and architectural features of that habitus Viewed through a neo-Foucauldian lens, one might suggest that you are engaged in a violent act of hegemonic (mis)appropriation and re-valuation of a conditional statement which ignores or denies the statement's originally contingent and fluid nature, then reifies it for the express purpose of delineating and enforcing a disciplinary boundary.
FL

Rolling on the couch laughing, thanks Mr. Little!!! Together with the Woody Allan clip, that made my day.

Demetrio Cereijo
11-18-2011, 02:23 PM
Any academic historian worth his or her salt operating in the 21st Century would be well aware of the work of de Certeau, Bordieu, and Foucault,

But, but... these people are french!!!

Great post btw. Epic ownage I'd say.

DH
11-18-2011, 02:36 PM
Dan Harden wrote:
Interestingly it was the Shihan that Stan trained with who revealed that Ueshiba was not a daily presence at Hombu. I know someone else who personally trained there who echoe's that same comment, and also said when he showed up training would change and they would begin....pushing on each other.
So I guess Mr McGrew is calling Stan Pranin and a veritable host of Aikido's shihan all liars.
Poo poo Mr. McGrew.
Dan
YOu have repeatedly claimed that O Sensei did not pass on what you call the body conditioning of Aiki. Now you say that when he taught they pushed on each other, which is to imply they trained in what you allege they should have trained in. Which is it?

When I say Harden and company the intent is to let people decide if they are in that company or not. How about, those who would agree with them, some of those who are posting certainly do... on every claim.

I do not intend to be drawn into the distraction of debating what the meaning of "is" is. The point here is that O Sensei taught the Aiki that he wanted to teach. He called what he taught Aiki. All within Aikido.

It's funny that no one jumped on the scientist commenting on his training. I have historical training. What has been presented so far looks rather one sided, doesn't dispense will the totality of evidence, and doesn't seem to support the agenda that is being advanced. I expect there will be ample problems trying to make the claims that are being made. I've seen enough counter evidence to believe this. Even the evidence presented that says that O Sensei traveled a lot does nothing to support the underlying claim that some people are trying to support. Does the head of a dojo teach every class? Does that mean he doesn't teach the students in his dojo as a whole? But I'm not going to be the one to present that historical fight as I'm doing other things. There are those who will.

No magic number of days of teaching in Tokyo will change the fact that O Sensei instructed his students in Aiki as he understood and wanted the concept to be understood after the war. He used the approach to instruction that he wanted to use. And Saotome Sensei in particular traveled with him often. It is simply not true that everyone after O Sensei turned the art into some watered down version that he was opposed to (one claim that is made) or alternatively that O Sensei was such a bad teacher that he couldn't convey his Aiki (another claim that is alternatively made).
Here is yet another example of why so many people are telling you that you are embarrasing yourself.
You went after us for calling Saotome a Liar. You went on and on about it.
We let you know in no uncertain terms that we were doing no such thing , but were quoting others.
Your response? All but obtuse. You did not address Stans research, you did not address so many of the Shihan that were interviewed, you did not address Mark.

You claim it's the secret to the jo trick. So what. The jo trick is not necessary to be able to do Aikido. Can Mr. Harden do the jo trick? Then maybe he hasn't proven that he found the secret to jo trick after all.
Aahh...there ya go people!
I was quite certain that someone in the ASU was behind his efforts here. I can now guess who. It was clear that was 100% agenda driven as no one with an open and inquisitive mind would arrive at his conclusions this late in the game. This tact of using my name to recite rhetoric and opinions I do not hold and put words in my mouth was all too familiar.

Mr. McGrew
I have listened to the attacks on my name, to people taking about how much I make, and those sitting idly by and watching the train wreck with humor.
You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me. While I would greet you in a friendly exchange, your opinions and your skills, would simply fail you and all you would have left -when it comes to aiki-would be your words. In fact you would be helpless to do aikido on me...at all. Why? You would have to know Ueshiba's aiki in order to do anything to me. And it remains clear, you do not. I will continue to train with the senior staff or your organization, and eventually put hands on Ikeda and Saotome. I will let you know where and when that is. You might want to attend and learn something about what aiki is and can do and what professional behavior is all about. Your behavior is anything but!

As Fred tried to spell out for you and Toby tried to tell you....
Ouch! :o
Oh well.
Dan

Ken McGrew
11-18-2011, 05:52 PM
No person in ASU is behind, meaning putting me up to or even advising me, ANYTHING that I have written. Please don't be paranoid. I have only expressed my own views.

Harden's ending here really speaks to what seems to be behind the entire approach of those who would side with him. It boils down to machismo, doesn't it? I certainly hope the comments about showing Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei Aiki wasn't meant the way it might be interpreted.

We have heard over and over again that the proof is in the pudding. If I felt the power of Harden and Ark Sensei I would be convinced that all that their admirers have stated on such a range of topics. If the proof that O Sensei was doing the Aiki that these folks describe is found in the jo trick display, and if Harden knows the secret that O Sensei knew, then why can't he do the jo trick? I realize that he may not have perfected the skill yet to that level. Fine. But until he does how can the proof be in the pudding? I'm just asking what I take to be a logical question based on the standard of proof that Harden and others have repeatedly presented. I guess I struck a nerve.

I don't know how to get this across any clearer to people who 1) don't do Aikido and 2) have convinced themselves that Aikido doesn't work because it lacks their notion of Aiki. Harden says I would be helpless to do aikido to him as I lack O Sensei's Aiki (as he defines it). I am helpless TO DO Aikido ON anyone. Aikido is not about domination by force. That is to say if an attacker is not really attacking, then there is little reason to do anything. If an attacker is attacking, then the idea is to avoid being damaged by the attack and to lead the energy of the attack to resolution.

I'll respond to the historical argument when I respond to the postmodern gibberish above.

Here is yet another example of why so many people are telling you that you are embarrasing yourself.
You went after us for calling Saotome a Liar. You went on and on about it.
We let you know in no uncertain terms that we were doing no such thing , but were quoting others.
Your response? All but obtuse. You did not address Stans research, you did not address so many of the Shihan that were interviewed, you did not address Mark.

Aahh...there ya go people!
I was quite certain that someone in the ASU was behind his efforts here. I can now guess who. It was clear that was 100% agenda driven as no one with an open and inquisitive mind would arrive at his conclusions this late in the game. This tact of using my name to recite rhetoric and opinions I do not hold and put words in my mouth was all too familiar.

Mr. McGrew
I have listened to the attacks on my name, to people taking about how much I make, and those sitting idly by and watching the train wreck with humor.
You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me. While I would greet you in a friendly exchange, your opinions and your skills, would simply fail you and all you would have left -when it comes to aiki-would be your words. In fact you would be helpless to do aikido on me...at all. Why? You would have to know Ueshiba's aiki in order to do anything to me. And it remains clear, you do not. I will continue to train with the senior staff or your organization, and eventually put hands on Ikeda and Saotome. I will let you know where and when that is. You might want to attend and learn something about what aiki is and can do and what professional behavior is all about. Your behavior is anything but!

As Fred tried to spell out for you and Toby tried to tell you....
Ouch! :o
Oh well.
Dan

Toby Threadgill
11-18-2011, 06:19 PM
You know....

It's like watching a car wreck really.... On the one hand you're mesmerized by the event itself but want to look away. On the other hand you cannot look away because the inevitable tragedy transfixes your attention. Alas I'm off to teach in New Zealand tomorrow and must cast my gaze in a more rewarding direction. How will the accident end? Well most of us already know. We've seen this car wreck before.

Honk, honk....screeeeech! All that's missing is the "bang".

Toby Threadgill / TSYR

Ken McGrew
11-18-2011, 06:23 PM
Fred,

There may be those who are impressed by impenetrable language that ultimately says little. I am not one of them.

The accusation made by Ellis was that I have said not one thing that Dobson Sensei would have ever agreed to the in slightest. That's an easy challenge to overcome. He threw down the gantlet in the most bold manner possible. Everything I said was completely wrong, and my evidence, including Dobson Sensei's commentaries, were completely wrong.

The things I had said, that Katherine, Ellis and others rejected as nonsense? That Aiki is about blending, joining, body positioning, leading and so forth. Now we have multiple quotes from the seminar with Dobson Sensei that refute the claim made by Ellis. It's quite obvious and clear for everyone to see:

"What I want to do is use non-resistance. That’s one of the basic things. So as it comes I lead his energy in the way it’s already going. That’s called Aiki. That’s called meeting. That’s called joining, blending, what not" (Dobson Sensei from the Seminar).

I have read through quite a bit of the historical evidence and analysis that has been alluded to in this discussion. I have done so to be fair. It all amounts to little. The fact that people gave interviews or otherwise reported that O Sensei traveled often does not support the claim that he had retired from teaching in 1941. People's memories of how often he traveled can be confused in time. There may have been periods when he traveled more and periods when he traveled less. So you'd still want to get your hands on the calendars wouldn't you? Just to nail it all down beyond dispute?

None of this matters much. It's just not the sort of evidence that can support the claims that Harden and others are trying to make. Rather than just say that they've found something cool that can help Aikido that maybe hasn't been explored much lately, they collectively support a web of claims: That they know the secret to Aiki, that it is the secret that O Sensei learned from Daito-ryu, that none of the teachers after the war learned the secret from O Sensei (because he either didn't want to teach them, was a bad teacher, or because he wasn't teaching at all), and that his own son was responsible for distorting the true nature of Aiki in both practice and literature.

Saotome Sensei is presented as one point of evidence. He describes training often with O Sensei, traveling with him, and having many relevant conversations with him. He quotes O Sensei related to these experiences. Harden and company would have us believe that this is not possible given the claims they are making and what they take as evidence to support them. They have presented evidence for the modern notion of Aiki themselves, though they don't want to acknowledge it, when they state that O Sensei often lectured on spiritual matters (which related no doubt to Aiki). It is circular reasoning. They believe that real Aiki is related to the process they are engaged in. They don't see the Aiki they believe in represented in students after O Sensei. Therefore they conclude that the students did not engage in the process in which they are engaging. They won't consider the possibility that O Sensei had endorsed a notion of Aiki that is different from theirs, one that was spiritually inspired, one that was ethically based, and one that was as Dobson Sensei describes in the video.

We know that O Sensei's notion of Aiki after the war (if it was ever different before the war I doubt) was the same notion of Aiki described by Dobson Sensei, Doshu, Saotome Sensei, and many others. We know this not only because they say so based on their interpretation. We know this because they quote him word for word at times. We know this because he wrote many things that support this understanding of Aiki in Aikido. All the people who are presented as authorities are selling something that relies on this web of claims. That alone doesn't make them wrong. But it may explain why they are so invested on insisting on them. I'm sorry that this group of folks take my responses as some sort of agenda or unwillingness to consider their evidence. I am considering their evidence, have taken the time to read things that people have been sending me, and simply don't see the evidence presented supporting the claims that are made.

Immagine if I said that he secret to Aikido, and the real power of Aiki, are pressure points. Pressure points are not stressed in modern Aikido as they seem to have been stressed by O Sensei as part of his art. Therefore modern Aikido has lost the true power of Aiki. Now if I were good at pressure points (which I'm not) and was able to impress people with that ability display, would it make my claims true?

People disagree all the time regardless of good faith. Calling me a train wreck is just short of calling names. Calling me a fool is name calling. Now I'm seeing border line suggestions of violence. What does it matter what I think, folks? Should I now have to fear Harder or people who train with him? Was that the intention of the comments by Harden? It's not worth getting hurt over. You win. You silenced the critic.

This historian disagrees. Any such spontaneous remark made in a particular situation must be viewed, from a Certeauvian point of view, as a highly contingent bricolage which arose in a specific cultural context which presented a limited toolkit. From a Bordieuvian perspective, it must be regarded as conditioned by the habitus in which it occurred and considered with reference to the specific cultural, geographical, and architectural features of that habitus Viewed through a neo-Foucauldian lens, one might suggest that you are engaged in a violent act of hegemonic (mis)appropriation and re-valuation of a conditional statement which ignores or denies the statement's originally contingent and fluid nature, then reifies it for the express purpose of delineating and enforcing a disciplinary boundary.

Any academic historian worth his or her salt operating in the 21st Century would be well aware of the work of de Certeau, Bordieu, and Foucault, and even if proceeding along alternative lines of analysis, would provide a substantive argument as to why the sort of "contingency analysis" found in their work is not appropriate to the matter at hand, even if only implicitly. This element is entirely lacking in your presentation and all that is left is a corollary assertion to a reductio ad absurdum that because no such gun is visible that the the remark is (as you said explicitly) unambiguous and (as you suggest implicitly) supports your position. As historical reasoning, this is sophomoric at best, meretricious at the mid-point, and intellectually dishonest at worst.

The onus is not on another individual to prove the negative of your assertion -- this is a classic near-impossibility. Even were one to concede that there is no clear disagreement between the selected quote and your broad assertion, that does not make the quote a confirmation of your assertion. If you assert that a spontaneous statement made by a specific individual to correct a single aspect of a single individual's technical capacity on a particular occasion at a particular site may be taken to have a broader and more universal meaning, the onus is on you to effectively bound and nullify any and all contingencies that might undercut your claim. You have done no such thing, choosing rather to make emphatic but poorly grounded assertions based on cherry-picked evidence. This would suggest that while you know the phrase "methodological rigor," the efforts of your instructors to introduce any significant measure of such rigor to your working process, or to give you any working knowledge of what methodological rigor might entail, seem to have been less successful than one might hope.

You may wish to consider the extent to which your position is rather different from that of a non-academic individual who takes an amateur and avocational interest in a historical subject, to the extent that such an individual is wholly responsible for his or her own views and argumentation in advocacy of those views. Inasmuch as you have asserted your credentials as a professional academic, you may wish to consider that both the quality of reasoning which underlies the historical and historiographic arguments you present and the mode in which you advocate those arguments reflects, not solely on you as an individual, but also on multiple institutions with which you have been or continue to be affiliated.

You should also reflect on another reality -- there are a great many practitioners of aikido and readers of this board who both have advanced academic training which included basic methodology courses of one kind or another -- whether humanist, social scientific, technological, or scientific. They will have their own, no less professionally or formally informed, views about your method. And even in the absence of such formal methodology, there is always bricolage and tact. On that last, Terry had quite a bit to say about tact, and as he noted when he taught a seminar at Bond Street -- at a time when his health was not good and he knew these would be his last classes at his old dojo -- he said that "everything I know about tact was hard-won, (at which point the room erupted in knowing laughter) so I commend it to your attention."

And echoing that observation, in all of its particulars, I close.

FL

Cady Goldfield
11-18-2011, 06:35 PM
You know....

It's like watching a car wreck really.... On the one hand you're mesmerized by the event itself but want to look away, on the other hand you cannot because the inevitable tragedy transfixes your attention. Alas I'm off to teach in New Zealand tomorrow and must cast my gaze in a more rewarding direction. How will the accident end? Well most of us already know. We've seen this car wreck before.

Honk, honk....screeeeech! All that's missing is the "bang".

Toby Threadgill / TSYR

It's much worse than that. It's the horror of feeling totally helpless to stop someone from twisting others' words and denigrating some of the finest martial-arts scholars and historians of our time, and even worse, hurling direct ad hominems and insults at the one person who has been the most generous with his skills and knowledge.

Demetrio Cereijo
11-18-2011, 06:40 PM
It's much worse than that. It's the horror of feeling totally helpless to stop someone from twisting others' words and denigrating some of the finest martial-arts scholars and historians of our time, and even worse, hurling direct ad hominems and insults at the one person who has been the most generous with his skills and knowledge.
Seconded.

By a guy who does not support Harden et al theories in their entirety.

DH
11-18-2011, 07:24 PM
Hi Tobs
Big wreck!!:eek: :eek:
He has taken on Me, Ellis, Fred, Chris, I am sure you're next. And now he is once again taking my words and twisting them in ugly ways.
I said... I would greet you in a friendly exchange,
He is now stating I and "my followers" (I can't even say that with a straight face :D ) are suggesting violence.
Folks
I just heard from people who know this guy. Thank you for the heads up. While his repeated exchanges like this seem outrageous to us, you should understand that the disconnected and weird responses that are a surprise to us, are real and relevant....to him. Folks, We all know each other enough to have heated but fair and equal exchanges. Right now, we should all just walk away. Mary, Ron, Demetrio, Graham - I can debate with you guys later- I respect each of you, even when we disagree. This is different okay? I'll see you on another thread.

Happy thanksgiving to everyone.
Dan

gregstec
11-18-2011, 07:33 PM
this is a genuine question, before people start attacking my intent on the subject

many of the people currently teaching aiki and Aikido follow the thinking that O Sensei was a martial genius who had a mastery of "Aiki"

As most of these people training "aiki" nowadays have never met O Sensei, how do they know this? Disregarding second hand stories, and verbal accounts.

Looking at video footage, can this be seen through body movement, training methods, mechanics etc of Ueshiba Sensei or not?? What is it that can be seen? How do proponents of today's aiki know this immense skill was present??

Everything is a circle and all things flow around it; as so it appears that this thread does too as we come back to your original post:)

So, Chris, let me just say that your questions above have no definitive answer - absolutely no one alive today can say for sure exactly what Ueshiba's aiki was really about - period. No speculation, perception, or vast amount of evidence can be considered conclusive because it is all speculative without the opportunity to obtain clarification from Ueshiba today.

With that said, you need to form your own conclusions based upon you own consideration of other opinions coupled with your personal experiences. Personally, I give way more credence to those that have the experiences to back up their positions along with corroboration from others - these are the hands on people that have immersed themselves into the dirt of life and have come away with the wisdom of those that can say: 'been there, done that.' The people I give the least credibility to are the ones that do desk top exercises and flaunt their achievements as badges of accomplishments that demand respect and acknowledgment; respect has to be earned and not demanded -humility is the first virtue required for enlightenment and arrogance will perpetually strip you of that opportunity. Please note, there is a difference between confidence and arrogance - the former can personally back up what they say and the latter cannot.

In summary, you really stirred up a hornets nest here - I hope you obtained some useful information out of the myriad amount of BS - maybe the topic of your next thread should be "Ki, and who really had it" :D

Best

Greg

raul rodrigo
11-18-2011, 08:12 PM
"Now I'm seeing border line suggestions of violence. What does it matter what I think, folks? Should I now have to fear Harder or people who train with him? Was that the intention of the comments by Harden? It's not worth getting hurt over. You win. You silenced the critic."

Only time will tell if the silence will hold.

Toby Threadgill
11-18-2011, 11:18 PM
"Now I'm seeing border line suggestions of violence. What does it matter what I think, folks? Should I now have to fear Harder or people who train with him? Was that the intention of the comments by Harden? It's not worth getting hurt over. You win. You silenced the critic."

Only time will tell if the silence will hold.

Mr Rodrigo,

I'm really too busy for this, but.....Seriously?

I have had my differences with Mr Harden over the years, and we've really locked horns a couple of times, but I have never heard Mr Harden, or any of Mr Harden's friends/training partners threaten anyone with physical violence. Quite the contrary, all I've heard is a "show me yours and I'll show you mine" offer, with a promise of friendly interaction. It is Mr McGrew who keeps irrationally "poking" people to the point that most of us are having a "Tennenhouse" moment (An aiki car wreck if there ever was one). "Tennenhouse, The Sequel" is a theatrical release none of us wish to waste our time on...again.

Au revoir,

Toby Threadgill / TSYR

raul rodrigo
11-18-2011, 11:57 PM
Mr. Threadgill:

What exactly in my post were you questioning? I was quoting Ken McGrew, not saying that he had actually been threatened.

best

RAUL RODRIGO

PS For what it's worth, I don't think he will actually stay silent. Ken swore to stay away from Aikiweb before, during some dustup with David Orange. Didn't last.

Toby Threadgill
11-19-2011, 12:50 AM
Mr. Threadgill:

What exactly in my post were you questioning? I was quoting Ken McGrew, not saying that he had actually been threatened.

best

RAUL RODRIGO

PS For what it's worth, I don't think he will actually stay silent. Ken swore to stay away from Aikiweb before, during some dustup with David Orange. Didn't last.

Mr Rodrigo,

Ahhhh the imperfections of the internet discussion board. From the way it appears, I thought you were you speaking for yourself, not quoting Mr McGrew. From perusing your previous posts I now have a better handle on your position. Sorry about the confusion.....I need sleep.

Regards....

graham christian
11-19-2011, 12:54 AM
Everything is a circle and all things flow around it; as so it appears that this thread does too as we come back to your original post:)

So, Chris, let me just say that your questions above have no definitive answer - absolutely no one alive today can say for sure exactly what Ueshiba's aiki was really about - period. No speculation, perception, or vast amount of evidence can be considered conclusive because it is all speculative without the opportunity to obtain clarification from Ueshiba today.

With that said, you need to form your own conclusions based upon you own consideration of other opinions coupled with your personal experiences. Personally, I give way more credence to those that have the experiences to back up their positions along with corroboration from others - these are the hands on people that have immersed themselves into the dirt of life and have come away with the wisdom of those that can say: 'been there, done that.' The people I give the least credibility to are the ones that do desk top exercises and flaunt their achievements as badges of accomplishments that demand respect and acknowledgment; respect has to be earned and not demanded -humility is the first virtue required for enlightenment and arrogance will perpetually strip you of that opportunity. Please note, there is a difference between confidence and arrogance - the former can personally back up what they say and the latter cannot.

In summary, you really stirred up a hornets nest here - I hope you obtained some useful information out of the myriad amount of BS - maybe the topic of your next thread should be "Ki, and who really had it" :D

Best

Greg

Greg my old mate. Still going in circles? ha,ha. Just wanted to say I hope you don't believe that arrogant vs confidence quote you made above. That could lead you all kind of wrong places.

Regards.G.

Nicholas Eschenbruch
11-19-2011, 04:46 AM
Mr. McGrew,

I think you missed the irony in Fred Little's post. (Also, I find it hard to class Bourdieu as post-modern gibberish, but anyway. I take it your own book is published in a series "Studies in the Postmodern Theory of Education"?)

So what is your academic posturing about again? If you are saying that the evidence for some claims that Mark and Dan are making does not hold up to strict academic standards, well yeah, it probably does not, which has been discussed before. It is still the best evidence we have, and from it, a pretty complex argument can be constructed across a variety of different types of sources, against a complex back-drop of the history of the internal arts, referencing a number of published texts (Amdur, Goldsbury etc.).

Now just because the evidence could be better it does not follow that even more spurious evidence you bring up (Saotome Sensei's memory...) will automatically invalidate it.

You could have noticed by now that there are a number of people here who are not in the least deterred by your intellectual chest-beating. You are not the only average intellectual around. I suggest you stop it. First of all, because your students could be reading this, and you are embarassing yourself doing stuff like arguing translation from a language you do not know, and second, more importantly, because this is not an academic argument in the first place. Your appeals to your own authority get you nowhere.

gregstec
11-19-2011, 08:29 AM
Greg my old mate. Still going in circles? ha,ha. Just wanted to say I hope you don't believe that arrogant vs confidence quote you made above. That could lead you all kind of wrong places.

Regards.G.

Hi, Graham, buddy - Oh, I don't know - IMO, there is difference in the source of both, but their behavioral outputs can appear similar, thereby causing confusion to the casual observer.

As far as circles? yes, all that yin and yang stuff, as you know... :)

Greg

Mary Eastland
11-19-2011, 08:44 AM
Hi Tobs
Big wreck!!:eek: :eek:
He has taken on Me, Ellis, Fred, Chris, I am sure you're next. And now he is once again taking my words and twisting them in ugly ways.
I said... I would greet you in a friendly exchange,
He is now stating I and "my followers" (I can't even say that with a straight face :D ) are suggesting violence.
Folks
I just heard from people who know this guy. Thank you for the heads up. While his repeated exchanges like this seem outrageous to us, you should understand that the disconnected and weird responses that are a surprise to us, are real and relevant....to him. Folks, We all know each other enough to have heated but fair and equal exchanges. Right now, we should all just walk away. Mary, Ron, Demetrio, Graham - I can debate with you guys later- I respect each of you, even when we disagree. This is different okay? I'll see you on another thread.

Happy thanksgiving to everyone.
Dan

Happy thanksgiving to you.
M

hughrbeyer
11-19-2011, 09:50 PM
Hey, just to throw some gas on the fire, I'm at an Ikeda Sensei seminar right this minute (well, earlier today).

He's been doing, guess what, static drills, finding center, unbalancing, showing how to use interior connection to move uke. No big throws, no momentum, no blending if by that you mean matching uke's movement and extending it. Oh, and he says if uke lets himself stay in an unsafe position, you should just punch him. :-)

Think he's got it wrong? We have one more day to go, shall I tell him so?

By the way, I like the Richard Feynman quote. But this is the guy who, when an experimental scientist disproved his favorite theory, said "Let's ignore him. He's a smart guy, he'll figure out he's wrong."

Not long later, the experimental scientist published a retraction.

raul rodrigo
11-20-2011, 04:03 AM
Mr. Threadgill, the terseness of that post of mine made it easy to misinterpret my meaning. Sorry about that.

R

Janet Rosen
11-20-2011, 12:15 PM
Mr. Threadgill, the terseness of that post of mine made it easy to misinterpret my meaning. Sorry about that.

R

Actually, Raul, it was the formatting: your quoting from the OP was not in a quote box per above so easy to read it as something you were writing.

graham christian
11-20-2011, 01:26 PM
Hi, Graham, buddy - Oh, I don't know - IMO, there is difference in the source of both, but their behavioral outputs can appear similar, thereby causing confusion to the casual observer.

As far as circles? yes, all that yin and yang stuff, as you know... :)

Greg

Yeah, if only. The theory of opposites, oh dear.

Regards.G.

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 01:27 PM
Hugh,

Do you claim to be speaking for ASU?

I suggest that you tell Ikeda Sensei that you are using your time with him at the seminar to support people who say he all but lacks Aiki compared to Harden and company. Tell him the things they say or imply about Saotome Sensei. Better yet, show sensei the whole discussion start to finish. Hugh, I challenge you to do so.

You fail to understand at all what Sensei is doing. I have hosted Sensei on two occasions and have had numerous conversations with him about these issues. I have private video footage of him discussing these very issues. I have sat and discussed the meaning of Aiki with both Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at the same table. Ikeda sensei is blending and joining and applying gravity once he has a balance advantage. Because you can't see everything that he's doing doesnt mean that its' not there. He is doing so with an internal emphasis. Some of this he learned from Ushiro Sensei. He sees no contradiction. Often what he shows is at the level of exercise. He has shown me the level of application. Blending is always part of this. So is timing. Etc. and so forth. He does not reject the mainstream notion of Aiki to do so. There is nothing that Sensei is doing that contradicts what Saotome Sensei says about Aiki. Ask him if he contradicts Saotome Sensei. Even the statement about punching an uke who stays in a dangerous place is an endorsement of the need for ukemi.

I am sick of a few people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden, either speaking in support of him or allowing him to claim to speak for them without the courage to do so themselves. Harden and those who defend him reject what Ikeda does as not what they do and now you try to use him in your embrace of them. You will not use Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei in an attempt to attack me in a public forum and support people like Harden who who are advancing an agenda that says that Saotoome Sensei has not been teaching real Aiki all these years. I won't have it Hugh. Should we ask Sensei what he thinks of this? Harden has implied violence and has suggested, at a minimum, that he plans to cause trouble for Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at a seminar in the future. Are you on the record to support this man after that challenge? Are you speaking for Gleason Sensei and for your dojo?

Harden has implied violence with the sentence:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me." Then tries to cover this up by saying, "While I would greet you in a friendly exchange." Then he implies he'll teach Saotome and Ikeda Senseis a lesson. Do you support this man? Do you do so formally as a representative of your dojo? Would you like to bring this to the attention of Sensei? Let Sensei put me in my place? I challenge you to do so, Hugh.

His full statement is copied below:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me. While I would greet you in a friendly exchange, your opinions and your skills, would simply fail you and all you would have left -when it comes to aiki-would be your words. In fact you would be helpless to do aikido on me...at all. Why? You would have to know Ueshiba's aiki in order to do anything to me. And it remains clear, you do not. I will continue to train with the senior staff or your organization, and eventually put hands on Ikeda and Saotome. I will let you know where and when that is. You might want to attend and learn something about what aiki is and can do and what professional behavior is all about. Your behavior is anything but!"

Hey, just to throw some gas on the fire, I'm at an Ikeda Sensei seminar right this minute (well, earlier today).

He's been doing, guess what, static drills, finding center, unbalancing, showing how to use interior connection to move uke. No big throws, no momentum, no blending if by that you mean matching uke's movement and extending it. Oh, and he says if uke lets himself stay in an unsafe position, you should just punch him. :-)

Think he's got it wrong? We have one more day to go, shall I tell him so?

By the way, I like the Richard Feynman quote. But this is the guy who, when an experimental scientist disproved his favorite theory, said "Let's ignore him. He's a smart guy, he'll figure out he's wrong."

Not long later, the experimental scientist published a retraction.

DH
11-20-2011, 01:59 PM
Hugh,

Do you claim to be speaking for ASU?

I suggest that you tell Ikeda Sensei that you are using your time with him at the seminar to support people who say he all but lacks Aiki compared to Harden and company. Tell him the things they say or imply about Saotome Sensei. Better yet, show sensei the whole discussion start to finish. Hugh, I challenge you to do so.

You fail to understand at all what Sensei is doing. I have hosted Sensei on two occasions and have had numerous conversations with him about these issues. I have video footage of him discussing these very issues. Ikeda sensei is blending and joining and applying gravity once he has a balance advantage. He is doing so with an internal emphasis. Some of this he learned from Ushiro Sensei. He sees no contradiction. He does not reject the mainstream notion of Aiki to do so. There is nothing that Sensei is doing that contradicts what Saotome Sensei says about Aiki. Ask him if he contradicts Saotome Sensei. Even the statement about punching an uke who stays in a dangerous place is an endorsement of the need for ukemi.

I am sick of people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden. They reject what Ikeda does as not what they do and now you try to use him in your embrace of them. You will not use Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei in an attempt to attack me in a public forum and support people like Harden who who are advancing an agenda that says that Saotoome Sensei has not been teaching real Aiki all these years. I won't have it Hugh. Should we ask Sensei what he thinks of this? Harden has implied violence and has suggested, at a minimum, that he plans to cause trouble for Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at a seminar in the future. Are you on the record to support this man after that challenge? Are you speaking for Gleason Sensei and for your dojo?
Yes why don't you ask him?
Gleason and many of your own arts Shihan would probably tell you things about me in such strong terms that you would fall over. It is unseemly for me to say it.
Ikeda not only supports what I do and teach, he has expressed an interest in meeting me in writing. His students want us to meet and train together.
Gleason trains with me regularly
George Ledyard does as well
Josh Drackman -the fellow who tranlates for Saotmes books does as well
I have lost track of so many others who are seniors under Saotome, who himself has commented favorably on my work.

Why don't you mind your own business, or at least check things out before you continue to embarrass yourself by demonstrating that you are out of touch with what the higher level shihan are doing.

You can keep trying, eventually you might realize that you simply don't know what you're talking about and the art has moved past you while.... you're standing there trying to figure out what happened to you. You won't be alone though.

As Mochizuki said to Tamaru, prewar-deshi to post-war deshi (which has not been publicly translated to English yet) "What you guys are doing is not the real Aikido."
Which echoes Shioda "They were no longer practicing Ueshiba's Aikido."
Which echoes Ueshiba himself when he walked in to the Modern Dojo. "This is not my Aikido!"
And when he said. "No one is following me."
We can add many others, but you have not demonstrated an ability to comprehend.
Your delusional re-interpretations of my comments into a new language in "Ken-land" and trying to convince hundreds of people here who know me that I am threatening violence, will only serve to continue to separate you from the rest of us folk reading.
I meant what I said. On any level you care to choose your art will fail with me standing in front of you. Every Aikido Shihan (and every other teacher) who has met me has asked to train with me and we have become friends. This without me doing much at all. Why?
Ueshiba's aiki. It's a truth that stands on it's own....on contact.



Harden has implied violence with the sentence:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me." Then tries to cover this up by saying, "While I would greet you in a friendly exchange." His full statement is copied below:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me. While I would greet you in a friendly exchange, your opinions and your skills, would simply fail you and all you would have left -when it comes to aiki-would be your words. In fact you would be helpless to do aikido on me...at all. Why? You would have to know Ueshiba's aiki in order to do anything to me. And it remains clear, you do not. I will continue to train with the senior staff or your organization, and eventually put hands on Ikeda and Saotome. I will let you know where and when that is. You might want to attend and learn something about what aiki is and can do and what professional behavior is all about. Your behavior is anything but!"

kewms
11-20-2011, 02:10 PM
I think Hugh has made it abundantly clear that he speaks only for himself. As do I.

As has been pointed out before, you should feel free to take your concerns to Saotome Sensei and/or Ikeda Sensei. From Alabama, ASU Winter Camp in Florida is not so far. Ledyard Sensei will be there as well. You should have ample opportunity to raise your questions, and the so-called "Harden Faction" will be well-represented.

Katherine

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 02:15 PM
This is a matter for Hugh to respond to. I won't have you bury it for him. He has used Ikeda Sensei in an effort to "put fuel on the fire" against what I have written. I'm not having it, Hugh. Why not ask Sensei to put me in my place?

Is it true that Ikeda and Saotome Sensei's can't hold a candle to Harden in terms of Aiki?

Is it true that the things Saotome Sensei wrote and said about Aiki and Aikido were mistaken?

Is it true that Saotome Sensei did not receive much instruction from O Sensei?

Is it true that O Sensei did not teach real Aiki to Saotome and others?

Hugh,

Do you claim to be speaking for ASU?

I suggest that you tell Ikeda Sensei that you are using your time with him at the seminar to support people who say he all but lacks Aiki compared to Harden and company. Tell him the things they say or imply about Saotome Sensei. Better yet, show sensei the whole discussion start to finish. Hugh, I challenge you to do so.

You fail to understand at all what Sensei is doing. I have hosted Sensei on two occasions and have had numerous conversations with him about these issues. I have private video footage of him discussing these very issues. I have sat and discussed the meaning of Aiki with both Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at the same table. Ikeda sensei is blending and joining and applying gravity once he has a balance advantage. Because you can't see everything that he's doing doesnt mean that its' not there. He is doing so with an internal emphasis. Some of this he learned from Ushiro Sensei. He sees no contradiction. Often what he shows is at the level of exercise. He has shown me the level of application. Blending is always part of this. So is timing. Etc. and so forth. He does not reject the mainstream notion of Aiki to do so. There is nothing that Sensei is doing that contradicts what Saotome Sensei says about Aiki. Ask him if he contradicts Saotome Sensei. Even the statement about punching an uke who stays in a dangerous place is an endorsement of the need for ukemi.

I am sick of a few people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden, either speaking in support of him or allowing him to claim to speak for them without the courage to do so themselves. Harden and those who defend him reject what Ikeda does as not what they do and now you try to use him in your embrace of them. You will not use Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei in an attempt to attack me in a public forum and support people like Harden who who are advancing an agenda that says that Saotoome Sensei has not been teaching real Aiki all these years. I won't have it Hugh. Should we ask Sensei what he thinks of this? Harden has implied violence and has suggested, at a minimum, that he plans to cause trouble for Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at a seminar in the future. Are you on the record to support this man after that challenge? Are you speaking for Gleason Sensei and for your dojo?

Harden has implied violence with the sentence:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me." Then tries to cover this up by saying, "While I would greet you in a friendly exchange." Then he implies he'll teach Saotome and Ikeda Senseis a lesson. Do you support this man? Do you do so formally as a representative of your dojo? Would you like to bring this to the attention of Sensei? Let Sensei put me in my place? I challenge you to do so, Hugh.

His full statement is copied below:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me. While I would greet you in a friendly exchange, your opinions and your skills, would simply fail you and all you would have left -when it comes to aiki-would be your words. In fact you would be helpless to do aikido on me...at all. Why? You would have to know Ueshiba's aiki in order to do anything to me. And it remains clear, you do not. I will continue to train with the senior staff or your organization, and eventually put hands on Ikeda and Saotome. I will let you know where and when that is. You might want to attend and learn something about what aiki is and can do and what professional behavior is all about. Your behavior is anything but!"

DH
11-20-2011, 02:21 PM
This is a matter for Hugh to respond to. I won't have you bury it for him. He has used Ikeda Sensei in an effort to "put fuel on the fire" against what I have written. I'm not having it, Hugh. Why not ask Sensei to put me in my place.


Listen Fella. I will address you when you attempt to destroy my name.
What I am doing is approved and supported by your teacher and also teachers in the ASU, the Aikikai, the Birenkai, and the under Imaizuma. Not to mention, Daito ryu, Koryu, Karate, Judo, ICMA and others.
And we are making friends and improving the arts.
It seems the only one who doesn't know that....is you.
And there are no Harden followers of any kind. They are teachers in their own arts, separate from me, with strong views, experiences and opinions of their own. Many times they dissagree with me and we have great fun arguing. No one is going to tell these guys what to do or think or say anytime soon. In fact, I find the idea of telling Bill Gleason what to do to be fecking hilarious.
No one is going to answer some of your questions in public. But, good God man are you barking up the wrong tree!!! You have no idea what these men really think and what is really going on. And trust me, you don't really want to know. You couldn't deal with it. You think ...I...am bold!!

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 02:34 PM
Hugh,

You have allowed these folks to speak as if everything they say is endorsed by Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei (at least when it's convenient). Now you have posted in support of them again, attempting to use Ikeda Sensei to do so, and in an effort to somehow discredit me as completely mistaken in my understanding of Aikido (even though my rank is from Saotome Sensei).
I tried to get away from this thread after the implied threats and the libel (that Jun removed). You added "fuel to the fire." So fine. Let's go, Hugh.

Answer the questions, Hugh. I'm done playing these games. They and you have implied that you speak for ASU and that I misrepresent the teachings of our head instructors. You want to make it about ASU. Fine. This is between us and our head instructors. Answer the questions, Hugh. I won't be distracted by their attempts to deflect. I'll keep asking forever. Have Sensei put me in my place by embracing all that these people, and you, say.

Is it true that Ikeda and Saotome Sensei's can't hold a candle to Harden in terms of Aiki?

Is it true that the things Saotome Sensei wrote and said about Aiki and Aikido were mistaken?

Is it true that Saotome Sensei did not receive much instruction from O Sensei?

Is it true that O Sensei did not teach real Aiki to Saotome and others?

Has Ikeda Sensei rejected the importance of leading, blending, timing, and joining in Aikido?

Does Ikeda Sensei claim to contradict anything that Saotome Sensei has taught?

Hugh,

Do you claim to be speaking for ASU?

I suggest that you tell Ikeda Sensei that you are using your time with him at the seminar to support people who say he all but lacks Aiki compared to Harden and company. Tell him the things they say or imply about Saotome Sensei. Better yet, show sensei the whole discussion start to finish. Hugh, I challenge you to do so.

You fail to understand at all what Sensei is doing. I have hosted Sensei on two occasions and have had numerous conversations with him about these issues. I have private video footage of him discussing these very issues. I have sat and discussed the meaning of Aiki with both Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at the same table. Ikeda sensei is blending and joining and applying gravity once he has a balance advantage. Because you can't see everything that he's doing doesnt mean that its' not there. He is doing so with an internal emphasis. Some of this he learned from Ushiro Sensei. He sees no contradiction. Often what he shows is at the level of exercise. He has shown me the level of application. Blending is always part of this. So is timing. Etc. and so forth. He does not reject the mainstream notion of Aiki to do so. There is nothing that Sensei is doing that contradicts what Saotome Sensei says about Aiki. Ask him if he contradicts Saotome Sensei. Even the statement about punching an uke who stays in a dangerous place is an endorsement of the need for ukemi.

I am sick of a few people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden, either speaking in support of him or allowing him to claim to speak for them without the courage to do so themselves. Harden and those who defend him reject what Ikeda does as not what they do and now you try to use him in your embrace of them. You will not use Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei in an attempt to attack me in a public forum and support people like Harden who who are advancing an agenda that says that Saotoome Sensei has not been teaching real Aiki all these years. I won't have it Hugh. Should we ask Sensei what he thinks of this? Harden has implied violence and has suggested, at a minimum, that he plans to cause trouble for Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at a seminar in the future. Are you on the record to support this man after that challenge? Are you speaking for Gleason Sensei and for your dojo?

Harden has implied violence with the sentence:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me." Then tries to cover this up by saying, "While I would greet you in a friendly exchange." Then he implies he'll teach Saotome and Ikeda Senseis a lesson. Do you support this man? Do you do so formally as a representative of your dojo? Would you like to bring this to the attention of Sensei? Let Sensei put me in my place? I challenge you to do so, Hugh.

His full statement is copied below:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me. While I would greet you in a friendly exchange, your opinions and your skills, would simply fail you and all you would have left -when it comes to aiki-would be your words. In fact you would be helpless to do aikido on me...at all. Why? You would have to know Ueshiba's aiki in order to do anything to me. And it remains clear, you do not. I will continue to train with the senior staff or your organization, and eventually put hands on Ikeda and Saotome. I will let you know where and when that is. You might want to attend and learn something about what aiki is and can do and what professional behavior is all about. Your behavior is anything but!"

DH
11-20-2011, 02:44 PM
Hugh,
You have allowed these folks to speak as if everything they say is endorsed by Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei (at least when it's convenient). Now you have posted in support of them again, attempting to use Ikeda Sensei to do so, and in an effort to somehow discredit me as completely mistaken in my understanding of Aikido (even though my rank is from Saotome Sensei).
Answer the questions, Hugh. I'm done playing these games. They and you have implied that you speak for ASU and that I misrepresent the teachings of our head instructors. Answer the questions, Hugh. I won't be distracted by their attempts to deflect. I'll keep asking forever. Have Sensei put me in my place by embracing all that these people, and you, say.........

I am sick of a few people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden, either speaking in support of him or allowing him to claim to speak for them without the courage to do so themselves. Harden and those who defend him reject what Ikeda does as not what they do and now you try to use him in your embrace of them. You will not use Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei in an attempt to attack me in a public forum and support people like Harden who who are advancing an agenda that says that Saotoome Sensei has not been teaching real Aiki all these years. I won't have it Hugh. Should we ask Sensei what he thinks of this? Harden has implied violence and has suggested, at a minimum, that he plans to cause trouble for Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at a seminar in the future. Are you on the record to support this man after that challenge? Are you speaking for Gleason Sensei and for your dojo?.....

Harden has implied violence with the sentence:

"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me." Then tries to cover this up by saying, "While I would greet you in a friendly exchange." Then he implies he'll teach Saotome and Ikeda Senseis a lesson. Do you support this man? Do you do so formally as a representative of your dojo? Would you like to bring this to the attention of Sensei? Let Sensei put me in my place? I challenge you to do so, Hugh.

I see you are still twisting my words to mean something completely different than what I said! The disconnect is truly revealing.

We speak boldly because we can.
Bill supports everything I have said and Hugh has said, and is far...far...oh good God...so much more strident and strong in support of this in very clear and definitive terms. Terms that I would never write here or use about myself.
You poor kid. You really have no idea of what you are in the middle of.
There is no contention, fella. It's all a big, grand, community effort bigger than the ASU, and everyone is having fun.
You are defending a view that they will not defend...they are on my side. You don't understand the work very well, or the nature of their work and mine and how it fits seemlessly. There is nothing to defend, and you're looking the fool in trying to do so by attacking people out of hand in a meandering, disconnected delusional fashion.
Forget Hugh. He's covered and he knows it.
There are things you say in public and others you handle behind the scene. A man chosen to teach represents more than himself. The real question for you, is whether Saotome and Ikeda would ever support what you are presently doing and saying here as a representative of their art.

Dan

DH
11-20-2011, 03:54 PM
Ken McGrew wrote:
You will not use Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei in an attempt to attack me in a public forum and support people like Harden who who are advancing an agenda that says that Saotoome Sensei has not been teaching real Aiki all these years. I won't have it Hugh. Harden has implied violence and has suggested, at a minimum, that he plans to cause trouble for Ikeda and Saotome Senseis at a seminar in the future. Are you on the record to support this man after that challenge? Are you speaking for Gleason Sensei and for your dojo?.....

Harden has implied violence with the sentence:
"You are wise to make a public statement you are not interested in meeting me." Then tries to cover this up by saying, "While I would greet you in a friendly exchange." Then he implies he'll teach Saotome and Ikeda Senseis a lesson. Do you support this man? Do you do so formally as a representative of your dojo? Would you like to bring this to the attention of Sensei? Let Sensei put me in my place? I challenge you to do so, Hugh.
This is just incredible eh folks?
Let's see
I have spoken in favor of both Saotome and Ikeda for years now-in the presence of teachers under other branches!
I have spoken all over the states and in Europe in favor of them- compared to other Japanese Shihan- in public rooms full of Aikido people who are members here.
So....
1. Please step up to the podium once more and address the thousand or more people here who have heard me speak in public and read what I have placed here, particularly regarding Ikeda.
Why am I going to give them a hard time?
And
2. In "Ken-land" just how does my "offering to meet you in a friendly exchange.." translate to me and my "followers practicing violence."
I will keep in mind that I have never once in my life did what you suggest, yet last year several of your teachers thought it just grand to have an uninvited BJJer jump me at one of my own seminars and try to cold cock me with a right hook and thought what I did to him was just great!! This is the second time this has happened to me, and they expected me to handle it without hurting him.
I cannot begin to think what would have happened were I Saotome giving a seminar on aiki.
So please bear in mind I am now educated in seminar-do. This is the type of equanimity I have been taught to expect. Therefore, please feel free to say whatever you want. So far your misquotes to make me sound awful, pale in comparison to what I have read from those interested in attacking me personally in a myriad of ways on Aikiweb.
Threatening to sue me
Threatening to sue Dojo that host me
Calling me a liar
Spreading unsupported (non researched) lies repeatedly
Calling me a Con man
A snake oil Salesman
Even discussing how much I make

All while your arts teachers say the grandest things; to me....and about me... behind closed doors!!
So, not to worry. Don't hold back. You can expound to grand heights. Please, feel free to go at it. Maybe even talk about my family to boot.
At this point, nothing is going to surprise me.
Dan

sakumeikan
11-20-2011, 04:01 PM
Listen Fella. I will address you when you attempt to destroy my name.
What I am doing is approved and supported by your teacher and also teachers in the ASU, the Aikikai, the Birenkai, and the under Imaizuma. Not to mention, Daito ryu, Koryu, Karate, Judo, ICMA and others.
And we are making friends and improving the arts.
It seems the only one who doesn't know that....is you.
And there are no Harden followers of any kind. They are teachers in their own arts, separate from me, with strong views, experiences and opinions of their own. Many times they dissagree with me and we have great fun arguing. No one is going to tell these guys what to do or think or say anytime soon. In fact, I find the idea of telling Bill Gleason what to do to be fecking hilarious.
No one is going to answer some of your questions in public. But, good God man are you barking up the wrong tree!!! You have no idea what these men really think and what is really going on. And trust me, you don't really want to know. You couldn't deal with it. You think ...I...am bold!!

Dear Dan,
Out of curiosity would you care to name the Birankai teachers who have met you? Hope you are well.Cheers, Joe.

kewms
11-20-2011, 04:14 PM
I am sick of a few people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden, either speaking in support of him or allowing him to claim to speak for them without the courage to do so themselves.

Hahahahahahahahaha.... That's funny.

If you had ever been in the same room with Gleason Sensei or Ledyard Sensei for more than about ten minutes you would realize just how ridiculous it is to suggest that either of them is *anybody's* pawn.

ROFL.

Katherine

MM
11-20-2011, 04:17 PM
Hugh,

Do you claim to be speaking for ASU?

I suggest that you tell Ikeda Sensei that you are using your time with him at the seminar to support people who say he all but lacks Aiki compared to Harden and company. Tell him the things they say or imply about Saotome Sensei. Better yet, show sensei the whole discussion start to finish. Hugh, I challenge you to do so.


You know, someone in ASU should *please* tell Ledyard, Ikeda, Gleason, and Saotome about you. I sincerely hope that they do. It's truly amazing that you have stated that you have read the previous posts but yet have somehow not read the glowing recommendations that I, and others, have heaped upon Ikeda, Ledyard, Gleason, and Saotome.


You fail to understand at all what Sensei is doing.


and


I am sick of a few people in ASU being pawns for Harden and people like Harden


Will you please stop degrading people, their abilities, and their characters. While we are at it, will you please stop misrepresenting the views of others. You have been told several times that your understanding of our views is completely and utterly wrong. I fail to understand why you continue with the same rhetoric when we keep answering you that our views are not what you are presenting.

This thread is about Ueshiba's aiki. Please keep to the subject of the thread. If you truly wish an open venue, there is a forum here called "Open Discussions". Start a thread there for off topic conversation, but please keep it civil.

Mark

DH
11-20-2011, 04:19 PM
Dear Dan,
Out of curiosity would you care to name the Birankai teachers who have met you? Hope you are well.Cheers, Joe.
After the how much money I make thread you started, can you think of any reason at all I should talk to you?

Even those who don't like me thought it an outrage.
It did help to once again clarify and put me in my place here as well as understand the fluidity of what no personal attacks means to all of you.

Ellis was right in urging me to teach publicly. I have met and formed friendships with some incredible Aikido teachers and Budo-ka in general.
But...in Aikido and aikido alone.... it has also taught me the type of equanimity I should expect. I will not make the same mistakes I did before.
MMA is far....far...more respectful of each other. If you are the 600lb. gorilla in the room..they're smart enough to listen. Aiki arts -DR included-do with words, what they cannot do with their bodies.
Dan

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 04:22 PM
Hugh,

Are you going to answer the questions like a real Budo Man? Or was your post just a pot shot because you thought I was gone. Will you allow Harden and others to attempt to answer for you? I'll repeat the questions, Hugh:

Is it true that Ikeda and Saotome Sensei's can't hold a candle to Harden in terms of Aiki?

Is it true that the things Saotome Sensei wrote and said about Aiki and Aikido were mistaken?

Is it true that Saotome Sensei did not receive much instruction from O Sensei?

Is it true that O Sensei did not teach real Aiki to Saotome and others?

Has Ikeda Sensei rejected the importance of leading, blending, timing, and joining in Aikido?

Does Ikeda Sensei claim to contradict anything that Saotome Sensei has taught?

Is it true that leading, blending, body positioning, and joining as a means to unbalance Uke are mere tricks? Does Ikeda Sensei agree? Does Saotome Sensei?

Hugh,

You have allowed these folks to speak as if everything they say is endorsed by Saotome Sensei and Ikeda Sensei (at least when it's convenient). Now you have posted in support of them again, attempting to use Ikeda Sensei to do so, and in an effort to somehow discredit me as completely mistaken in my understanding of Aikido (even though my rank is from Saotome Sensei).
I tried to get away from this thread after the implied threats and the libel (that Jun removed). You added "fuel to the fire." So fine. Let's go, Hugh.

Answer the questions, Hugh. I'm done playing these games. They and you have implied that you speak for ASU and that I misrepresent the teachings of our head instructors. You want to make it about ASU. Fine. This is between us and our head instructors. Answer the questions, Hugh. I won't be distracted by their attempts to deflect. I'll keep asking forever. Have Sensei put me in my place by embracing all that these people, and you, say.

Is it true that Ikeda and Saotome Sensei's can't hold a candle to Harden in terms of Aiki?

Is it true that the things Saotome Sensei wrote and said about Aiki and Aikido were mistaken?

Is it true that Saotome Sensei did not receive much instruction from O Sensei?

Is it true that O Sensei did not teach real Aiki to Saotome and others?

Has Ikeda Sensei rejected the importance of leading, blending, timing, and joining in Aikido?

Does Ikeda Sensei claim to contradict anything that Saotome Sensei has taught?

raul rodrigo
11-20-2011, 04:30 PM
That was a short silence.

Marc Abrams
11-20-2011, 04:44 PM
I can only hope that when the senior people from the ASU get together for the their winter camp in Florida next month, they sit down with Ikeda Sensei and Saotome Sensei and clear this situation up. It would also be nice if Jun could either have Ken stick to the original topic, take a time out, or simply shut-up. His distorted, venom is a sad and frankly irrelevant in all aspects of things.

Marc Abrams

Fred Little
11-20-2011, 04:47 PM
That was a short silence.

"SSSHHHHHH! I'm hunting wabbits!"

Marc Abrams
11-20-2011, 04:55 PM
"SSSHHHHHH! I'm hunting wabbits!"

Fred:

As you sure that you are ejucated enuf to be hunten them wabbits?

:D

Marc Abrams

kewms
11-20-2011, 05:01 PM
Asking the same questions three times in less than three hours is just rude. It takes me longer than that to answer substantive questions from my clients, and they're paying me. Go watch a football game or something, okay?

Katherine

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 05:06 PM
Hugh,

This is between us. When I tried to leave this discussion you attempted to use one of our mutual head instructors in an effort to support the wide variety of statements that have been made against my basic understanding of Aikido and Aiki in Aikido. Though I have only been speaking for myself on this forum, these attacks that you make and support, directly and indirectly, undermine my legitimacy as an ASU instructor. That is the claim, implied at times and stated outright at times, is that I haven't a clue and that Ikeda Sensei would agree that I haven't a clue. You forced me to respond. So I ask again, Hugh:

Is it true that Ikeda and Saotome Sensei's can't hold a candle to Harden in terms of Aiki?

Is it true that the things Saotome Sensei wrote and said about Aiki and Aikido were mistaken?

Is it true that Saotome Sensei did not receive much instruction from O Sensei?

Is it true that O Sensei did not teach real Aiki to Saotome and others?

Has Ikeda Sensei rejected the importance of leading, blending, timing, and joining in Aikido?

Does Ikeda Sensei claim to contradict anything that Saotome Sensei has taught?

Is it true that leading, blending, body positioning, and joining as a means to unbalance Uke are mere tricks? Does Ikeda Sensei agree? Does Saotome Sensei?

Janet Rosen
11-20-2011, 05:08 PM
I believe from a reading of the text that our Dear Poster has chosen to misconstrue Dan's "putting hands on" Ikeda and Saotome Senseis as a threat of fight rather than as simply meeting them for hands-on training so they can feel what each other are doing.

FWIW I am a follower of nobody - I train at a totally independent dojo - when I was at an Ikeda Sensei seminar for the first time this past spring I found what he was teaching was explicitly in line with the internal explorations I've been working on: literally moving the entire center - NOT metaphorically but literally - encouraging students to work on this as solo exercise - and in partner practice, not just doing waza but incorporating into waza that connection, visualizing and energetically moving one's center into one's hands to effect movement in uke (he didn't verbalize it that way but having now trained once with Dan, I would say they are equivalent concepts) - I see NO CONTRADICTION BETWEEN WHAT DAN WAS TEACHING AND WHAT IKEDA SENSEI WAS TEACHING.

Ellis Amdur
11-20-2011, 05:21 PM
From the Utsusemi Dojo's (http://www.utsusemiaikikai.com/philosophy.html) website

Roughly speaking aikido training has three dimensions: physical, applied philosophical, and spiritual. All training in Aikido begins on the physical level. Aikidoka (practioners of aikido) learn a series of techniques adapted to respond to a variety of attacks and to multiple attackers.
Embodied in those techniques are various principles which can be applied to everyday situations such as arguments or dealing with a difficult boss. At Utsusemi Aikikai it is important to us to explore these principles, their applications, and the larger philosophy in which they are grounded.
The third dimension of training, the spiritual, aims at eliminating the spirit of conflict and experiencing our unity with all things and all beings.

Chris Knight
11-20-2011, 05:28 PM
Jun. Time to close the thread. This should move to inboxes? ?

Demetrio Cereijo
11-20-2011, 05:30 PM
Hugh,

This is between us.
Then use the PM.

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 05:33 PM
Hugh posted to the public forum in order to "add fuel to the fire." He would not allow me to leave this discussion.

What a double standard this group of Harden supporters has.

Hugh has some questions to answer.

After a while I start to see the tag team nature of the people taking turns posting.

Ken McGrew
11-20-2011, 05:43 PM
I used to think that Ikeda Sensei was showing something different but very good from what Saotome Sensei shows, wrote, and teaches. It was Ikeda Sensei himself who made a special effort to help me to understand that what he is doing, as he understands it, is emphasizing another side of the same thing. He told me blending and take musu aiki is happening inside. The internal unbalancing is a micro version. He continues to blend with something. He can blend with momentum or with strength, much like sumi atoshi. This is all shown and explained in detail in the 2008 internal balance and power video:

"Before partner grabs already I moves. Partner cannot stop [shows tenkan from grab with internal unbalancing]. He cannot stop because grabbing time he’s already tippy toes… this is exactly the same as movement but later everything is inside… my line and his line get together [blending Aiki]."

Internal unbalancing prevents Uke from regaining his balance. It is one of many ways to do this. It does not alone make Uke fall down. That's why Sensei discusses adding gravity:

"Later on my weight going to his center. If you have 110 pounds that is enough if you put on top of partner, partner goes."

Sensei describes a blending of centers. He calls this "unity." it is not about some internal just who you are body conditioning. It is a subtle form of blending.

Demetrio Cereijo
11-20-2011, 05:43 PM
But if he does not want to answer, why have we to read your questions again and again and again? Do you think we can force him to post or what?

kewms
11-20-2011, 06:18 PM
Though I have only been speaking for myself on this forum, these attacks that you make and support, directly and indirectly, undermine my legitimacy as an ASU instructor.

Honestly? You have done more damage to your own credibility in this thread than the rest of us could do if we tried.

Katherine

raul rodrigo
11-20-2011, 06:22 PM
Hugh posted to the public forum in order to "add fuel to the fire." He would not allow me to leave this discussion.

What a double standard this group of Harden supporters has.

Hugh has some questions to answer.

After a while I start to see the tag team nature of the people taking turns posting.

"He would not allow me to leave this discussion." You need permission to leave?

graham christian
11-20-2011, 06:48 PM
Hugh posted to the public forum in order to "add fuel to the fire." He would not allow me to leave this discussion.

What a double standard this group of Harden supporters has.

Hugh has some questions to answer.

After a while I start to see the tag team nature of the people taking turns posting.

Hi Ken. A lot of dust flying around, ha, ha.

However, how to communicate without insult or accusation is the missing art here on both sides on occasion. Too much 'he said' and blame and accusation going on. I see you have also been described as a car wreck. Learn to laugh at such things.

I don't know the politics involved, asu etc. But Hugh? Sounds a bit personal to me. He may not even have been online yet. Plus Demetrio is right in saying no one can force him to answer even if he were.

Maybe you know him better than me but I have had a few 'debates' with Hugh and accept we have differing views, no problem.

I believe you are making some points in response to things said by others. That's fine by me.

But basically there is an underlying misunderstanding going on. What it is I don't know. Is it you defending your teachers and line of teaching? Is that it versus this 'aiki' way of doing things and thus others defending their main instructor in it? That's what it looks like to me.

Overall you have the right to state your views without others ganging up and ridiculing but such is the nature of the beast at times so don't worry about it or be led off into complaint.

Remember, there are no real enemies but ourselves. They may be wrong in what they say or believe but how is that a problem to you?

I disagree that what they say is Ueshibas Aiki but they know that and even call me wacky (amongst other things) but but it's all just dust to me, it can make me choke and cough a bit though.

I believe we should look at our own manner of addressing others rather than how they address us and yet have failed a few times in that myself. If you are getting too insistent or angry or upset then you are losing your own center, having your own mind led, losing balance.

As you know Aikido is universal and even here on this forum. It's quite a game. I prefer a game where everyone wins. High hopes.

Regards.G.

DH
11-20-2011, 07:04 PM
Hugh posted to the public forum in order to "add fuel to the fire." He would not allow me to leave this discussion.

What a double standard this group of Harden supporters has.

Hugh has some questions to answer.

After a while I start to see the tag team nature of the people taking turns posting.
There are no HARDEN Supporters posting as a group as your continued refrain suggests.
That means you are either stupid, or calling us all lairs.
I have not even met half the people talking to you. And others, while they do not agree with my take on things, do not support what you are saying.
I see no real ability or desire for you to be able to process this.
You are taking on all comers, to include people here with VERY diverse backgrounds that are not in line with my own.
Your choice to ingore that and call everyone liars is on you.
As was in the case with the How much should Dan make thread...people who do not support my efforts were appalled and were gentlemen in expressing how one should carry on- on the internet.
This is not it.
Dan

stan baker
11-20-2011, 07:14 PM
Hi Ken
stop talking like a child this is not the way you investigate
budo.

stan

DH
11-20-2011, 07:22 PM
However, how to communicate without insult or accusation is the missing art here on both sides on occasion. Too much 'he said' and blame and accusation going on. I see you have also been described as a car wreck. Learn to laugh at such things.

Maybe you know him better than me but I have had a few 'debates' with Hugh and accept we have differing views, no problem.

I believe you are making some points in response to things said by others. That's fine by me.
Overall you have the right to state your views without others ganging up and ridiculing but such is the nature of the beast at times so don't worry about it or be led off into complaint.
Remember, there are no real enemies but ourselves. They may be wrong in what they say or believe but how is that a problem to you?
I disagree that what they say is Ueshibas Aiki but they know that and even call me wacky (amongst other things) but but it's all just dust to me, it can make me choke and cough a bit though.
As you know Aikido is universal and even here on this forum. It's quite a game. I prefer a game where everyone wins. High hopes.

Regards.G.
Graham
You have never done what he does. You listen and process even when we disagree. There is no agenda. We both honestly approach the topic differently. Good grief we have argued heatedly- both thinking the other ignorant of a larger picture -with none of this crap going on.

Neither have you lumped the widely diverse people who train with Ushiro, Ikeda, Ark, Mike, Sam Chin, etc....and me.....as Harden followers.
Were we to take a poll they train with a number of internal guys.
It's functionally dishonest. I am only one of the many teachers these people train with. And oddly enough Ikeda now trains with a Daito ryu guy....surpriiiiise!!
This is a body of work that transcends a single teacher. Which make it almost unstoppable. It has many faces and methods all based on a common theme. Internal power and aiki

This guy came in on the attack and got personal. I dismissed it until we got deeper into it and I saw he was intentionally misquoting me in order to defame me and refused to offer cogent replies. He is arguing points that make no sense and defending teachers..WHO TRAIN THIS WAY ALSO.
Janet pegged it. Anyone telling me that Ikeda and I are heading in different directions doesn't know what they are talking about. I have a letter stating Ikeda wants to meet me. So, telling people I am against Ikeda and Saotome, who I have publicly stated are among the few who are training aiki (and took heat for saying it in open rooms with students of other Shihan) is a lie.
Putting words in my mouth that I am going to attack them should not be allowed without supporting it.
I would demand a retraction or a censuring of this person, but I won't get one. Nothing has changed. Like I said, ya might as well start attacking my family here as well.
It's open season.

Dan

hughrbeyer
11-20-2011, 07:55 PM
This is a matter for Hugh to respond to. I won't have you bury it for him. He has used Ikeda Sensei in an effort to "put fuel on the fire" against what I have written. I'm not having it, Hugh. Why not ask Sensei to put me in my place?

To give you the cold, hard answer to your question: Because I really don't care much about you. I certainly respect Ikeda Shihan far too much to parade this kind of garbage in front of him.

I have attended seminars with Saotome Shihan and found them fantastic.
I've attended seminars with Ikeda Shihan and found them very insightful, including this one.
I've learned from Ledyard Sensei and found his teaching wonderful.
I study with Gleason Sensei and find him amazing.
I've worked with Dan and found his teaching incredibly helpful.

I've certainly learned things from Dan (directly and indirectly) that I learned from no one else, the kind of thing that makes your partner's eyes pop when you use them on the mat. If that gives you heartburn--take an alka-seltzer. it's not my problem.

And, dude, can I just say, you've totally gone non-linear, you know? Chill. It's not for me to speak for the ASU. It's not for you to speak for Saotome. They're big fish and can take care of themselves. As I said not so long ago here, when the minnow leaps to the defense of the shark... the shark just smiles.

Except maybe I'll just add that, yeah, what Dan says about modern aikido is nothing to what some of my seniors in ASU say about modern aikido. If you love the art--really--you want it to be strong. You don't try to hide its flaws.

Sorry to keep you waiting for my answer to your questions but you know, I told you I was at the seminar today. I've got lots more important things in my life than keeping up with Aikiweb.

graham christian
11-20-2011, 07:56 PM
There are no HARDEN Supporters posting as a group as your continued refrain suggests.
That means you are either stupid, or calling us all lairs.
I have not even met half the people talking to you. And others, while they do not agree with my take on things, do not support what you are saying.
I see no real ability or desire for you to be able to process this.
You are taking on all comers, to include people here with VERY diverse backgrounds that are not in line with my own.
Your choice to ingore that and call everyone liars is on you.
As was in the case with the How much should Dan make thread...people who do not support my efforts were appalled and were gentlemen in expressing how one should carry on- on the internet.
This is not it.
Dan

Ha, ha. Correction. Dan, there are people who support your views and there are people who admire what you are doing and thus spring to your defence whenever that view, which is now shared by some, is challenged. There are people who are following your way of practising what you teach. Hence followers in that way. Admit it, for those who were looking for what you have to offer you are a, let's say breath of fresh air. Come on, don't be shy now.

Regards.G..

DH
11-20-2011, 07:58 PM
So Mr. McGrew
Following in your weird labyrinth of logic:
Why are you stating that Saotome is against Ellis Amdur? Can you tell us when and how this occured? Did it happen over you and your teaching?
Why are you stating that Saotome says that Ueshiba was wrong and didn't understand aiki. You implied that this is the reason he left hombu (to bring aiki to the world through you) was based on his placing Terry Dobsons teachings as his method of Aiki. Your discussions of his teachings; that yo ho makes fire that is ki based on mingling with water, that will restore harmony to nature and allow Satome to restore the world seems at odds to cutting at it with swords. But this could be a balance of the yodel ho in kia that creates the mountain echo from the trees
Since your stating he teaches these things, does he know you are saying this in public or is this the gooie yee of the art?
I wat this explained to me in detail right now.
I want answers!!!
I have had enough
I demand answers!!:rolleyes:
Mr. Harder. Or HD

MM
11-20-2011, 08:09 PM
Ha, ha. Correction. Dan, there are people who support your views and there are people who admire what you are doing and thus spring to your defence whenever that view, which is now shared by some, is challenged. There are people who are following your way of practising what you teach. Hence followers in that way. Admit it, for those who were looking for what you have to offer you are a, let's say breath of fresh air. Come on, don't be shy now.

Regards.G..

No. Emphatically no.

Let me explain. People don't support Dan's views. You have no idea how many times his views have been challenged and are continually challenged, even by those who train with him. If he had a nickel, he'd be rich.

People do admire that he got out there among other martial artists (all because of Ellis Amdur) and happily shares what he has accomplished in his hard earned training. But we do *not* come to his defense because, well, really, I don't think any of us are better at defending Dan than Dan is. Forged in fire and all that.

What some of us do is to speak up on those that challenge the merits of this training. IP/aiki is the secret of the martial arts, kept hidden, kept safe. We follow the art that is bigger than all of us. The one true secret to bring us all together and in the world bind us. Had it been Tom, Dick, or Harry who had kept IP/aiki going, we'd be there. In fact, we are. Dan, Ikeda, Sam Chin, Akuzawa, Saotome, Heiny, Liu Chengde, etc, etc, etc.

So, no, there are no followers of Dan. There are aikido people following the trail to the Holy Grail that Ueshiba shone so brightly with. IP/aiki. That is bigger than us all and worthy of the flack we get.

Mark

Marc Abrams
11-20-2011, 08:10 PM
So Mr. McGrew
Following in your weird labyrinth of logic:
Why are you stating that Saotome is against Ellis Amdur? Can you tell us when and how this occured? Did it happen over you and your teaching?
Why are you stating that Saotome says that Ueshiba was wrong and didn't understand aiki. You implied that this is the reason he left hombu (to bring aiki to the world through you) was based on his placing Terry Dobsons teachings as his method of Aiki. Your discussions of his teachings; that yo ho makes fire that is ki based on mingling with water, that will restore harmony to nature and allow Satome to restore the world seems at odds to cutting at it with swords. But this could be a balance of the yodel ho in kia that creates the mountain echo from the trees
Since your stating he teaches these things, does he know you are saying this in public or is this the gooie yee of the art?
I wat this explained to me in detail right now.
I want answers!!!
I have had enough
I demand answers!!:rolleyes:
Mr. Harder. Or HD

Dan:

I think that you would be better off sipping a nice single malt right about now........ Trying to bring yourself down to that level will require a very large backhoe. Best to sit on the surface and ask yourself "one or two rock with that single malt?" ;)

Marc Abrams

hughrbeyer
11-20-2011, 08:10 PM
OK, I've finished the thread now. One or two more points:

I owe you an apology for the "fuel to the fire" comment. I meant it in jest, but I knew already you have no capacity to take anything in jest on this topic. I posted it to get up your nose, and it did. So I'm sorry for that. Sorta like taking an uke who's already off balance and slamming him into the mat.

I wasn't going to say anything more about what Ikeda was teaching, for exactly the reason you posted--it's his teaching, and it's not for me to represent or mis-represent it. But I agree entirely with Janet. I spent the whole seminar consciously turning off the whole IP/aiki part of my brain so I could understand Ikeda on his own terms. But I think they're clearly working on the same concepts.

DH
11-20-2011, 08:11 PM
Ha, ha. Correction. Dan, there are people who support your views and there are people who admire what you are doing and thus spring to your defence whenever that view, which is now shared by some, is challenged. There are people who are following your way of practising what you teach. Hence followers in that way. Admit it, for those who were looking for what you have to offer you are a, let's say breath of fresh air. Come on, don't be shy now.

Regards.G..
You are missing the key point.
Just about everyone who train with me ALSO train with others. I was typically LAST on their list. The late comer to the party. Ellis had to talk me into this. Sometimes I regret it. And I have an exit plan.
So logic would dictate that all harder farters, are also Sigman-iods, Ark-angels, Ikeda-raiders, Yanagi harpies, San Chin-thins, and Ushiro-heros.
In fact, when I teach, I insist people go see others as it supports the material itself as a broad based multi-cultural technology thousands of years old.
Once you hear, and read and then see Ueshiba's own words and teachings that predate him...sometimes word for word, from many different sources (who do not know each other, and sometimes don't even like each other) most people smarten up and accept that Ueshiba was one of many internal artists the world has known and his Doka were in may cases....copied from the Chinese.:rolleyes:
You guys can try to personalize this to me all day long but all the people you keep trying to pigeon hole have trained with a whole bunch of the people on that list.
Your logic fails
Your argument fails
Dan

graham christian
11-20-2011, 08:20 PM
Graham
You have never done what he does. You listen and process even when we disagree. There is no agenda. We both honestly approach the topic differently. Good grief we have argued heatedly- both thinking the other ignorant of a larger picture -with none of this crap going on.

Neither have you lumped the widely diverse people who train with Ushiro, Ikeda, Ark, Mike, Sam Chin, etc....and me.....as Harden followers.
Were we to take a poll they train with a number of internal guys.
It's functionally dishonest. I am only one of the many teachers these people train with. And oddly enough Ikeda now trains with a Daito ryu guy....surpriiiiise!!
This is a body of work that transcends a single teacher. Which make it almost unstoppable. It has many faces and methods all based on a common theme. Internal power and aiki

This guy came in on the attack and got personal. I dismissed it until we got deeper into it and I saw he was intentionally misquoting me in order to defame me and refused to offer cogent replies. He is arguing points that make no sense and defending teachers..WHO TRAIN THIS WAY ALSO.
Janet pegged it. Anyone telling me that Ikeda and I are heading in different directions doesn't know what they are talking about. I have a letter stating Ikeda wants to meet me. So, telling people I am against Ikeda and Saotome, who I have publicly stated are among the few who are training aiki (and took heat for saying it in open rooms with students of other Shihan) is a lie.
Putting words in my mouth that I am going to attack them should not be allowed without supporting it.
I would demand a retraction or a censuring of this person, but I won't get one. Nothing has changed. Like I said, ya might as well start attacking my family here as well.
It's open season.

Dan

Dan, I think Ken saying that you wished to 'attack' them was a classic misunderstanding on his part. It's due to how you said it rather than what you meant by what you said. Come on, you do use a bit of colourful language like 'putting hands on' and 'they will be left helpless' and such terminology. This can easily be misconstrued as a threat or implied threat. As I said, a misunderstanding.

You say you know about spirals? Then how about this one. He misunderstands and takes it as a threat. He then accuses you of threatening violence. Everyone piles in blah, blah, blah, You then accuse him of accusing you falsely. He then repeats his accusation. You then accuse him of false accusation again and say he may as well attack your family while he's at it. Woahhhh. I call that a downward spiral which can only result in nothing any good.

What's new? Same ol same ol. (apart from calling you lairs. Maybe that implies you are wild animals ha, ha.) ref: post 613.

Regards.G.

DH
11-20-2011, 08:23 PM
Dan Harden wrote:

So Mr. McGrew
Following in your weird labyrinth of logic:
Why are you stating that Saotome is against Ellis Amdur? Can you tell us when and how this occured? Did it happen over you and your teaching?
Why are you stating that Saotome says that Ueshiba was wrong and didn't understand aiki. You implied that this is the reason he left hombu (to bring aiki to the world through you) was based on his placing Terry Dobsons teachings as his method of Aiki. Your discussions of his teachings; that yo ho makes fire that is ki based on mingling with water, that will restore harmony to nature and allow Satome to restore the world seems at odds to cutting at it with swords. But this could be a balance of the yodel ho in kia that creates the mountain echo from the trees
Since your stating he teaches these things, does he know you are saying this in public or is this the gooie yee of the art?
I wat this explained to me in detail right now.
I want answers!!!
I have had enough
I demand answers!!
Mr. Harder. Or HD

Dan:

I think that you would be better off sipping a nice single malt right about now........ Trying to bring yourself down to that level will require a very large backhoe. Best to sit on the surface and ask yourself "one or two rock with that single malt?" ;)

Marc Abrams
Well you're probably right.
It's been a long day working, then a dinner party, two gimlets....you're probably right.
Of course I assume that no one in the right man took that seriously.
It's just as deranged as his mis-quotes of me. :rolleyes:
All the best
Dan

akiy
11-20-2011, 08:35 PM
Hi folks,

I'm closing the thread, at least for the time being.

In the mean time, I invite everyone to take a walk outside, drink something warm and toasty (or cold and refreshing, if you're in the Southern Hemisphere), go talk with friends (about something other than aikido), and listen to that album you used to listen to so much but haven't in such a long time.

No, really. I'll be doing the same myself. Go! Shoo!

-- Jun