Numbered Techniques (IKKYO, etc.)

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Don_Modesto]

Why are these numbered rather than named?

It might be thought that they somehow immobilize. But if you stop with UKE's arm behind his shoulder in SHIHO NAGE, he's immobilized; if you follow through with IKKYO, he's thrown...

One friend suggested a natural progression, at least from 1-4.

Where do 5-6 fit?

[Peter Goldsbury]

Originally posted by Don_Modesto
Why are these numbered rather than named?

It might be thought that they somehow immobilize. But if you stop with UKE's arm behind his shoulder in SHIHO NAGE, he's immobilized; if you follow through with IKKYO, he's thrown...

One friend suggested a natural progression, at least from 1-4.

Where do 5-6 fit?

Hello Don,

As far as I know, in the old Kobukan the Founder occasionally referred to techniques as ikkajo, nikajo, but these names do not appear in Budo Renshu (1933) or in Budo (1938), though in the former book, the 166 techniques are classified in terms of attacks.

Perhaps some indication can be given of the situation after World War II by two factors, the system used by Gozo Shioda in the Yoshinkai, which was the first postwar organisation to flourish; and Kisshomaru Ueshiba's "Aikido", published in Japanese in 1957. As far as I know Shioda used the 'kajo' counting system, plus a description of the techniques. Kisshomaru changed the 'kajo' counting system to 'kyo', which one of my non-aikido Japanese students said he understood as 'training principle', but also kept the descriptions.

So, 1-kyo has the description –Ê‚Ì’b˜B�i˜r‚¨‚³‚¦�j= Men no tanren (ude-osae).
2-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‰ô‚µ�j= tekubi no tanren (kote mawashi).
3-kyo has ŽèŽñ•IŠÖ�ß‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‚Ђ˂è�j= tekubi hiji kansetsu no tanren (kote hineri).
4-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì—}‚¦‹Z�iŽèŽñ—}‚¦�j= tekubi no osae waza (tekubi osae).

I have always been told by the disciples of the Founder that they themselves thought up the descriptions of the techniques as memory aids.

So I think the numbering, which varies from dojo to dojo for techniques which go beyond 1 to 4, is a matter of tradition as much as of logic.

Best regards,

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by Peter Goldsbury

As far as I know, in the old Kobukan the Founder occasionally referred to techniques as ikkajo, nikajo, but these names do not appear in Budo Renshu (1933) or in Budo (1938), though in the former book, the 166 techniques are classified in terms of attacks.


I note that Noriaki Inoue talked about watching Sokaku Takeda reorganize the techniques by number (and apparently disagreed with him on that point). I don't know how they were organized previously.

The current numbering systems used in Aikido have only a loose relation to the Daito-ryu variation, but it seems to me that they were probably an outgrowth of the earlier system.

Interestingly, the real organization of techniques in both Daito-ryu and Aikido appears to have been done by the respective sons, Tokimune and Kisshomaru. Neither Sokaku nor Morihei seem to have been all that rigorous about that kind of thing.

Best,

Chris

[Don_Modesto]

Originally posted by Peter Goldsbury
So, 1-kyo has the description –Ê‚Ì’b˜B�i˜r‚¨‚³‚¦�j= Men no tanren (ude-osae).
2-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‰ô‚µ�j= tekubi no tanren (kote mawashi).
3-kyo has ŽèŽñ•IŠÖ�ß‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‚Ђ˂è�j= tekubi hiji kansetsu no tanren (kote hineri).
4-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì—}‚¦‹Z�iŽèŽñ—}‚¦�j= tekubi no osae waza (tekubi osae).

Men no tanren (ude-osae).

What does "tanren" mean in this context? And is "men" the same as in shoMEN?

Thanks, Peter.

[Peter Goldsbury]

Originally posted by Peter Goldsbury


So, 1-kyo has the description –Ê‚Ì’b˜B�i˜r‚¨‚³‚¦�j= Men no tanren (ude-osae).
2-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‰ô‚µ�j= tekubi no tanren (kote mawashi).
3-kyo has ŽèŽñ•IŠÖ�ß‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‚Ђ˂è�j= tekubi hiji kansetsu no tanren (kote hineri).
4-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì—}‚¦‹Z�iŽèŽñ—}‚¦�j= tekubi no osae waza (tekubi osae).

Best regards,

Don,

When I wrote my last post, I thought giving Kisshomaru's original text was preferable to any translations, especially on a discussion forum such as this. I had a class, so did not have time to make a translation.

MEN is the same as in shoumen and yokomen and means 'face'. The original meaning of TANREN is tempering steel or metal, and here it means training. Which is probably why Kisshomaru chose the -kyou ending.

Finally, please note the difference in meaning between TEKUBI and KOTE. TEKUBI is the part which connects the UDE (arm) and the �¶ (tenohira, tanagokoro) of the hand; KOTE is the part beteen the TEKUBI and hiji (elbow). I mention this in view of our earlier discussion on kotegaeshi.

Best regards,

[Don_Modesto]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Peter Goldsbury
When I wrote my last post, I thought giving Kisshomaru's original text was preferable to any translations, especially on a discussion forum such as this. I had a class, so did not have time to make a translation.

I understand the constraints on your time. It was a stimulating post; thank you.

MEN is the same as in shoumen and yokomen and means 'face'. The original meaning of TANREN is tempering steel or metal, and here it means training. Which is probably why Kisshomaru chose the -kyou ending.

"So, 1-kyo has the description-Men no tanren (ude-osae). "

So we're...forging our faces?! or something like learning to walk through the fire, going right into the attack as IKKYO demands? The action on the forearm being one of locking it up?

"2-kyo has tekubi no tanren (kote mawashi)."

Strengthening the wrist by turning the forearm around?

"3-kyo has tekubi hiji kansetsu no tanren (kote hineri)."

Training the wrist and elbow by locking them up?

"4-kyo has tekubi no osae waza (tekubi osae)."

Locking the wrist?

Sorry to harry you with so many questions. I hadn't heard these descriptions before.

[Peter Goldsbury]

Originally posted by Peter Goldsbury


So, 1-kyo has the description –Ê‚Ì’b˜B�i˜r‚¨‚³‚¦�j= Men no tanren (ude-osae).
2-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‰ô‚µ�j= tekubi no tanren (kote mawashi).
3-kyo has ŽèŽñ•IŠÖ�ß‚Ì’b˜B�i�¬Žè‚Ђ˂è�j= tekubi hiji kansetsu no tanren (kote hineri).
4-kyo has ŽèŽñ‚Ì—}‚¦‹Z�iŽèŽñ—}‚¦�j= tekubi no osae waza (tekubi osae).



Hello Don,

The descriptions above are section headings which form part of a chapter in Kisshomaru Ueshiba's book. They are actually in the list of contents and are clearly abbreviated in some sense. The sectioon is entitled Šî–{ŒÅ‚ß‹Z = 'kihon katame waza' and comes after 'kihon nage waza'. 'Katameru' has the basic meaning of to harden, coagulate, arm oneself (even to get married and settle down!) and is his basic term for the arm pinning techniques.

Ueshiba spends some 15 pages giving very detailed descriptions of each of the four '-kyou', with foot diagrams and a few photographs. His uke is Nobuyoshi Tamura. I think these descriptions also apppear in the English version of the book, though they might have been shortened. (I do not have the English version to hand, so I cannot check).

Thus the MEN in 1-kyou is shorthand for shoumen-uchi, yokomen-uchi, katadori, but the explanation focuses on shoumen-uchi. If you remember that 'Budo' (1938) has tori initiating shoumen-uchi ikkyou with a strike to the face, which uke blocks, 'Men no tanren' would mean something like 'full frontal training' (including attacking and defending), and 'ude osae' something like 'controlling the arm by pushing' ('osae' has loads of meanings).

The other shorthand descrriptions would be:

2-kyou:'tekubi no tanren (kote mawashi)' = 'training of the wrist (rotating the upper arm)';

3-kyou: 'tekubi hiji no kansetsu (kote hineri)' = 'training of the wrist / elbow joint (twisting the upper arm)';

4-kyou: 'tekubi no osae waza (tekubi osae)' = 'waza for controlling the wrist (wrist control)'.

There are only 4 kyou-type techniques in Kisshomaru Ueshiba's book. However, this was written in 1957 and the English text "Aikido", which was published later, contains many more techniques.

It is VERY interesting to compare Kisshomaru Ueshiba's Japanese text (and later English version) with the manuals published by the present Doshu. Two have been published with the general title of ‹K”Í�‡‹C“¹ = Kihan Aikido, and the first volume (Šî–{•Ò: Basics), has just been published in English. It is published by Kodansha International and has the title (rather unhappily in my opinion) of "Best Aikido". I think "Standard Aikido" makes better sense of the Japanese and the context in which Doshu is using the term and also allows the reader to make the value judgement, rather than the author. I think that Kisshomaru Ueshiba would never have said that his own aikido was the "best".

Best regards,

[Ron Tisdale]

Dear Dr. Goldsburry,

Fantastic! Thanks for that post. One of the questions that frequently comes up in black belt tests and gakatsu(sp) classes is "what is the meaning of 1st control?"

Yours is the best answer I've ever seen...I think I need to get a copy of this book.


Ron Tisdale