The use of weapons

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[sorokod]

Lewis Bernaldo de Quiros teaching ken solo work in Dorset at a seminar organised by Wellsprings Aikido.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYsowgp2pgI

[Cliff Judge]

This is very interesting...I haven't been able to watch it with sound yet but I am hoping there is some explanation for the twitch at the end of the stroke, and also why the neutral, seigan posture is tilted off to the side a bit.

[sorokod]

The "twitch" is Kime (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kime), also here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y1iXm89jI0).

[Cliff Judge]

Far out. So it's hard to cut through?

[sorokod]

It demonstrates that at the point of impact hands do not over dominate each other and allow the centre to do its job.

[sorokod]

Part 2 - pair practice. Mostly third kumitachi with variations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OmBu6VHY1c

[Cliff Judge]

It demonstrates that at the point of impact hands do not over dominate each other and allow the centre to do its job.

Why does this make it look like the cut has been disrupted? I would think the tip of the sword would simply stop, very smoothly, as though it had met a gelatinous material.

Is there maybe, supposed to be a sort of projection of ki outward along the length of the blade?

[sorokod]

Why does this make it look like the cut has been disrupted? I would think the tip of the sword would simply stop, very smoothly, as though it had met a gelatinous material.

Is there maybe, supposed to be a sort of projection of ki outward along the length of the blade?

Don't know about cutting - this is striking, with the body and a blunt weapon. Or, another way, a striking exercise to develop body skills, using a blunt weapon.

[Cliff Judge]

Don't know about cutting - this is striking, with the body and a blunt weapon. Or, another way, a striking exercise to develop body skills, using a blunt weapon.

Right! It's an impact weapon. That is refreshingly straightforward.

I enjoyed watching the clips of Mr Lewis, he is good and the whole system has a lot of very good body mechanics.

[sorokod]

Right! It's an impact weapon. That is refreshingly straightforward.


Things do get more nuanced outside of suburi.


I enjoyed watching the clips of Mr Lewis, he is good and the whole system has a lot of very good body mechanics.

Glad you liked it.

[JW]

also why the neutral, seigan posture is tilted off to the side a bit.

I was taught the same thing-- to allow incoming things (swords) to be deflected off to the side away from you. In other words some measure of passive protection is built into the posture, while any active defense would be on top of that. (Like a boxer's hands being up-- but since the sword is thin, it would only guard one sliver of your body if not tilted)

[sorokod]

I was taught the same thing-- to allow incoming things (swords) to be deflected off to the side away from you. In other words some measure of passive protection is built into the posture, while any active defense would be on top of that. (Like a boxer's hands being up-- but since the sword is thin, it would only guard one sliver of your body if not tilted)

In the Iwama system the "tilt" is a manifestation of the hanmi stance with all it entails. In the start of the second video, for example, it is there on the finishing cut preventing the ai-uchi (mutual kill) situation.

[Tim Ruijs]

I wonder why they step of the line? Especially visible in pair practise...

Katana as striking weapon? That is new to me. I was always taught it to be a cutting tool...

The tilt I do not get either. I understand one would project its center through the bokken and remain balanced.

[sorokod]

I wonder why they step of the line? Especially visible in pair practise..
.

The uketachi keeps line, the uchitachi "weaves" around into the openings allowed by uketachi..


Katana as striking weapon? That is new to me. I was always taught it to be a cutting tool...


Bokken - not shinken.

[Cliff Judge]

In the Iwama system the "tilt" is a manifestation of the hanmi stance with all it entails. In the start of the second video, for example, it is there on the finishing cut preventing the ai-uchi (mutual kill) situation.

This makes sense. I noted the part in one of the Lewis videos where he talks about hanmi vs keeping both hips forward.

In Yagyu Shinkage ryu we call it holding your sword "naturally" or jun. And if you've got your hips turned a bit, it is in fact natural to have your sword turned a bit.

Training to use the bokken as a bokken is actually really fascinating, in that a couple of hundred years of swordsmen engaging in rather serious duels with bokken to demonstrate their skills or the virtues of the system they trained, nobody ever systematized "bokutojutsu."

(Well, somewhere online is an essay written by Karl Friday speculating that such a thing must have been a thing, but there isn't any evidence of it).

[sorokod]

This makes sense. I noted the part in one of the Lewis videos where he talks about hanmi vs keeping both hips forward.

In Yagyu Shinkage ryu we call it holding your sword "naturally" or jun. And if you've got your hips turned a bit, it is in fact natural to have your sword turned a bit.


This makes sense to me, hips follow feet, shoulders follow hips and hands follow shoulders.

Training to use the bokken as a bokken is actually really fascinating, in that a couple of hundred years of swordsmen engaging in rather serious duels with bokken to demonstrate their skills or the virtues of the system they trained, nobody ever systematized "bokutojutsu."


The other side of this coin is the body skills one acquires. In the spirit of "you reap what you sow", the mechanics you develop from practising striking are different from those you get practising cutting. This in turn makes for different taijitsu.

[sorokod]

Part 3 - 31 Jo kata

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP_7rkBX2SA

[Tim Ruijs]

The uketachi keeps line, the uchitachi "weaves" around into the openings allowed by uketachi..
Bokken - not shinken.

I watched the vid again (pair training) and aite crosses the line big time. I wonder what their shikko looks like. All this talk about hip placement...they step decimeters 'over the line'. Why not more tight/narrow, more centered?
This is still irimi, not tenkan or am I mistaken?

and why allow striking with bokken when with shinken this is considered bad? the one is training material for the other. it is like saying: "we do this in practise, but in a fight we do that." No, you will not.

I am confused as what they are trying to accomplish....

[sorokod]

I watched the vid again (pair training) and aite crosses the line big time. I wonder what their shikko looks like. All this talk about hip placement...they step decimeters 'over the line'. Why not more tight/narrow, more centered?
This is still irimi, not tenkan or am I mistaken?


The video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OmBu6VHY1c) starts with 5th awase (uchitachi initiates a right yokomenuchi - uketachi blends with a finishing shomenuchi). To attack, uchitachi can't remain on the line as he will get a piece of wood in his face, consequently he goes off the line to the right.
To recive, the uketachi stays on the line while turning into the strike and blends.


and why allow striking with bokken when with shinken this is considered bad? the one is training material for the other. it is like saying: "we do this in practise, but in a fight we do that." No, you will not.


I don't know much about shinken so I defer to you when you say that something is 'bad'. In this context however it is not the intent for one to be a training material for the other.


I am confused as what they are trying to accomplish....

Have a look here (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=345851&postcount=8) . I hope this clarifies things.

[Tim Ruijs]

Thanx for taking time to explain further. Much appreciated ;)

So it is not in fact irimi, but a 'tight' form of tenkan. We practise a form where tori 'takes' the center and deflects the bokken of aite. Tori in this case does not (should not) move away from the center line.

The training material was meant for bokken being practise instrument of the shinken and basically there is no difference in handling them.
Bokken is simply safer in practise, especially when 'searching'/'exploring'.

[sorokod]

Thanx for taking time to explain further. Much appreciated ;)
.

No problem - it's tricky especially if you come from a different perspective.


So it is not in fact irimi, but a 'tight' form of tenkan. We practise a form where tori 'takes' the center and deflects the bokken of aite. Tori in this case does not (should not) move away from the center line.


Unless I misunderstand your terminology something along these lines is demonstrated at about 4:40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OmBu6VHY1c&t=4m40s


The training material was meant for bokken being practise instrument of the shinken and basically there is no difference in handling them.
Bokken is simply safer in practise, especially when 'searching'/'exploring'.


Not sure if this is a statement about your own practice. My take here is that bokken is not a safe substitute for shinken but rather a weapon and a tool for self development in itself.

[Tim Ruijs]

Unless I misunderstand your terminology something along these lines is demonstrated at about 4:40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OmBu6VHY1c&t=4m40s

something like that, but not exactly. Lewis starts movement without connection,but probably does so for explaining things...
We would create small opening so aite would attack (i.e. move bokken slightly to the side). Then we would enter (on the line) and make similar movement as shown in vid. We train this go tai, ju tai and ryu tai. The first two emphasize kimusubi (control ma-ai and move backwards) and the latter is irimi (and move forward and deflect in one single action).

So many exercise exist that it is sometimes hard to 'see' what the exercise is for (especially when coming from different perspective)

Thanx for your explanation :D

[sorokod]

Part 4 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsoVBUI4myY

Tachidori and taijitsu

[Alex Megann]

Don't know about cutting - this is striking, with the body and a blunt weapon. Or, another way, a striking exercise to develop body skills, using a blunt weapon.

So, David, I wonder what you think of the following questions.

- In view of the general belief in the Iwama community that Saito Sensei came the closest to full transmission of O-Sensei's aikido, do you believe that O-Sensei viewed the bokken primarily as a striking weapon, rather than a cutting weapon?

- Is there any training exercise in the Iwama curriculum that is understood to be using the bokken as if it were a cutting instrument?

These questions are very interesting to me, as my own feeling is that the experience of aikido as uke is very different if tori has the intent to cut, rather than to strike.

Alex

[JW]

Like Alex, I'd like to know when/where this "bokken is not an imitation shinken" business started, and what O-sensei would have to say about it.
To add to his great questions:

- Why in Iwama practice is the bokken held at the left hip just past the tsuka while you find you partner and walk to your practice spot, then raised in a symbolic sword draw motion to begin practice?
- Why do all bokken techniques/exercises involve hands being strictly on the tsuka at all times? (unlike the Iwama jo, a blunt weapon where you use many different hand positions and motions)
- Why do takeaway techniques never involve grasping the attacker's weapon except at the tsuka?
- Why is it shaped so specifically like a sword anyway, if it is supposed to be a blunt weapon rather than a sword replica?
- Why is it improper to hand bokken to others except by giving them the tsuka?
- Why do you start and end weapons sessions using specific locations (bokken on your left vs on right) for bowing in vs out?

I know none of these questions are damning on their own but in total it feels to me like bokken practice in general was designed/intended at its core to be imitation sword practice. Maybe the "but the bokken is a blunt weapon on its own, too" idea was added (or over-emphasized) later, in contradiction to the original intent of the practice?


These questions are very interesting to me, as my own feeling is that the experience of aikido as uke is very different if tori has the intent to cut, rather than to strike.


Although I have limited experience, I started in a club with heavy Iwama influence, and I've trained at several places also with Iwama flavor... the vernacular of "cut" in taijutsu has been almost universal. And of course the point was that doing "cut" action would have a uniquely desireable effect. So I guess even within Iwama tradition "cut" rather than strike is also similarly important?

[Tim Ruijs]

I am not sure if this source is reliable, but after searching the web (bokken, shinken,musashi wooden) I found:

https://books.google.nl/books?id=1N9UhkonzK4C&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=bokken+shinken+musashi+wooden&source=bl&ots=UNYrQKTwF_&sig=XnfgWo3QTTJkWsqpMlppCWWwxug&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBGoVChMIlP677dCKyQIVhusUCh0NVwSA#v=onepage&q=bokken%20shinken%20musashi%20wooden&f=false

this preview chapter informs us that indeed some fighters preferred bokken over shinken....
but I do not know the period this refers too....some truth might be in there though...

[sorokod]

So, David, I wonder what you think of the following questions.

- In view of the general belief in the Iwama community that Saito Sensei came the closest to full transmission of O-Sensei's aikido, do you believe that O-Sensei viewed the bokken primarily as a striking weapon, rather than a cutting weapon?

- Is there any training exercise in the Iwama curriculum that is understood to be using the bokken as if it were a cutting instrument?

These questions are very interesting to me, as my own feeling is that the experience of aikido as uke is very different if tori has the intent to cut, rather than to strike.

Alex

Saito Morihiro was extremely respectful of the material the founder left behind (e.g. "Osensei will be cross at me if we don't do tainohenko" (glances at the picture of the founder on the kamiza). Given this, I believe that his teaching was faithful to the original in general, and with regards to the use of the bokken in particular.
Having said this, when a kami was possessing the founder, the weapon he was wielding was probably an extension of his persona and so it could have been a cutting weapon a striking weapon or a photon torpedo launcher for all I know ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_TmFosN6bE ).
Many of us have an expectation that the subject we study is coherent and contradiction free. Even if the founder had the same expectations of his own work, I find it quite unlikely that he and I share the same underlying assumptions so that even if his system was coherent in his judgement, it may not look like this to me.

In post 10 I said that "Things do get more nuanced outside of suburi" but things are already not quite clear cut "inside". To save time I will borrow from JW's post and note that all his "Why"s do point to the use of bokken in Iwama system being rooted in the shinken.

In pair practice we have many other examples e.g: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geIIkMkG4Jw#t=3m0s around 3 minutes timestamp. I have seen the uchitachi's first move done as a slice, a tsuki followed by a slice and a strike to the sternum followed by more of a protective move then a slice.

So there you have, not contradiction free as I would like it to be, but what part of Aikido is?

[sorokod]

...my own feeling is that the experience of aikido as uke is very different if tori has the intent to cut, rather than to strike.
Alex

I am sure that is the case.

It is pretty clear to me how developing solid striking is applicable to taijitsu and developing cutting/slicing skills, using bokken as a shinken substitute, is applicable to kenjitsu, My question to you Alex is how, in your opinion, does developing cutting/slicing skills, using bokken as a shinken substitute contributes to taijitsu?

[Alex Megann]

I am sure that is the case.

It is pretty clear to me how developing solid striking is applicable to taijitsu and developing cutting/slicing skills, using bokken as a shinken substitute, is applicable to kenjitsu, My question to you Alex is how, in your opinion, does developing cutting/slicing skills, using bokken as a shinken substitute contributes to taijitsu?

Hi David,

For many years, my teacher assiduously studied Saito Sensei's books and taught Aiki-ken and jo. In the late 1970s he took a left turn and started practising and teaching the kesagiri style of cutting from the Kashima-shinryu, which he himself learned from Minoru Sekiya. I believe that this was much more helpful for him in understanding the aikido of his teacher (Gozo Shioda) and of Seigo Yamaguchi: it certainly made is body much softer and improved his kuzushi skills. This way of cutting is not obviously "stopped", as I understand the Iwama shomen and yokomen cuts are, even though I have vivid memories of him making strong and clean shomen cuts that made the wooden tsuba on his heavy Kashima bokken rattle.

My understanding is that cutting, as a kind of metaphor for hand/arm movement in taijutsu, is through the partner, rather than into or onto them. I currently teach both shomenuchi and kesagiri (a diagonal cut through uke's torso from shoulder to hip) with bokken, but the kesagiri movement, which ends with the sword tip at ground level, feels much more relevant to the way my aikido is going. In particular, it emphasises the spiral use of the body I am learning from my internal power teacher. And, as I said earlier, ukemi feels very different in the two cases.

I'm not sure how well that answers your question.

Alex

[sorokod]

Hi David,

For many years, my teacher assiduously studied Saito Sensei's books and taught Aiki-ken and jo. In the late 1970s he took a left turn and started practising and teaching the kesagiri style of cutting from the Kashima-shinryu, which he himself learned from Minoru Sekiya. I believe that this was much more helpful for him in understanding the aikido of his teacher (Gozo Shioda) and of Seigo Yamaguchi: it certainly made is body much softer and improved his kuzushi skills. This way of cutting is not obviously "stopped", as I understand the Iwama shomen and yokomen cuts are, even though I have vivid memories of him making strong and clean shomen cuts that made the wooden tsuba on his heavy Kashima bokken rattle.

My understanding is that cutting, as a kind of metaphor for hand/arm movement in taijutsu, is through the partner, rather than into or onto them. I currently teach both shomenuchi and kesagiri (a diagonal cut through uke's torso from shoulder to hip) with bokken, but the kesagiri movement, which ends with the sword tip at ground level, feels much more relevant to the way my aikido is going. In particular, it emphasises the spiral use of the body I am learning from my internal power teacher. And, as I said earlier, ukemi feels very different in the two cases.

I'm not sure how well that answers your question.

Alex

Don't know what weapons Shioda had but didn't Yamaguchi came from Kashima-shinryu background? It makes sense (no disrespect intended) that if a teachers taijitsu is shaped by Kashima-shinryu it would be difficult to graft any other weapons system onto a student's taijitsu. This applies both to your teacher and to you.

Metaphor is a super useful tool when tangible feedback is not available and it is great that this particular one advances your practice. I will take a tangible practice (of striking) over metaphor any day.

As I am getting dangerously close to "my martial art is better then your martial art" territory, so i'll step away from all this to ask - why do care what the founder did. I mean, Yamaguchi probably had minimal exposure to the founder as most early post war students in Tokyo and found his own way with taijitsu and weapons.

[Alex Megann]

Don't know what weapons Shioda had but didn't Yamaguchi came from Kashima-shinryu background? It makes sense (no disrespect intended) that if a teachers taijitsu is shaped by Kashima-shinryu it would be difficult to graft any other weapons system onto a student's taijitsu. This applies both to your teacher and to you.

I understand that Shioda Sensei studied kendo at least partly with his father, but I don't know what exposure he had to other koryu, or even how much of O-Sensei's sword work he emulated.

Yamaguchi Sensei was famously eclectic, as far as weapons training went, and claimed he had no formal training at all. Where his style came from in aikido is a mystery to many as well, since his body movement is rather different from anyone else of his generation. He encouraged his direct students to study with Noguchi Sensei, who had some training at the Kashima Dojo, as he seems to have felt that there was an affinity with his aikido.

There are hints that both Yamaguchi and Shioda were influenced at least in part directly by Daito Ryu, in addition to training they had with O-Sensei - in fact there appears to be documentary evidence of the latter having close personal contact with one of Sokaku Takeda's other eminent students. That would make sense to me, as his aiki skills were very distinctive, and the more I find out about the Horikawa/Sagawa branch of Daito Ryu the more I recognise in both Yamaguchi's and Shioda's aikido.

Metaphor is a super useful tool when tangible feedback is not available and it is great that this particular one advances your practice. I will take a tangible practice (of striking) over metaphor any day.

Perhaps "metaphor" wasn't the right choice of word. Visualisation? Riai?

As I am getting dangerously close to "my martial art is better then your martial art" territory, so i'll step away from all this to ask - why do care what the founder did. I mean, Yamaguchi probably had minimal exposure to the founder as most early post war students in Tokyo and found his own way with taijitsu and weapons.

No comment ... :)

Alex

[Alex Megann]

A further thought (since I can no longer edit my last post):

Others have noted Daito Ryu influence on Yamaguchi's aikido. In fact, I just remembered an article (http://www.guillaumeerard.com/aikido/interviews/interview-with-olivier-gaurin-a-journey-on-the-way-of-disgrace) by Olivier Gaurin where he said "I would even go on to say that one who is not familiar with Daito-ryu cannot understand Yamaguchi Sensei's Aikido." This explains why, to my repeated surprise, I have found so much in common between Yamaguchi and Shioda, even though their styles look superficially very different.

Anyway, I am now drifting well off topic, so I will cease and desist...

Alex

[NagaBaba]

Hi David,

For many years, my teacher assiduously studied Saito Sensei's books and taught Aiki-ken and jo. In the late 1970s he took a left turn and started practising and teaching the kesagiri style of cutting from the Kashima-shinryu, which he himself learned from Minoru Sekiya. I believe that this was much more helpful for him in understanding the aikido of his teacher (Gozo Shioda) and of Seigo Yamaguchi: it certainly made is body much softer and improved his kuzushi skills. This way of cutting is not obviously "stopped", as I understand the Iwama shomen and yokomen cuts are, even though I have vivid memories of him making strong and clean shomen cuts that made the wooden tsuba on his heavy Kashima bokken rattle.

My understanding is that cutting, as a kind of metaphor for hand/arm movement in taijutsu, is through the partner, rather than into or onto them. I currently teach both shomenuchi and kesagiri (a diagonal cut through uke's torso from shoulder to hip) with bokken, but the kesagiri movement, which ends with the sword tip at ground level, feels much more relevant to the way my aikido is going. In particular, it emphasises the spiral use of the body I am learning from my internal power teacher. And, as I said earlier, ukemi feels very different in the two cases.

I'm not sure how well that answers your question.

Alex

I think the correct use of sword/bokken has nothing to do with stopping tip at plexus level or at ground level. You can cut or hit still preserving both forms. The real difference is what happens in the moment of the contact of the target. If there is a slicing motion, you are cutting, if not, you are hitting.

From strictly martial point of view, waving bokken/sword in large round movements creates too much openings in my position, so I don’t feel very safe. In the other hand it is true Iwama start/stop method creates a very rigid body. If you study koryu sword schools, you may learn correct use of sword and flexible body. But I don’t believe in direct translation from sword to empty hand aikido techniques. You need to keep them separated, the influence is done by induction not by conscious cerebral work.

Only after, one may use bokken work as an illustration some aikido principles, because bokken became his body extension. That what O sensei did I believe, but it was misunderstood by many people. They took it literally as a method to learn sword skills

[Cliff Judge]

I am not sure if this source is reliable, but after searching the web (bokken, shinken,musashi wooden) I found:

https://books.google.nl/books?id=1N9UhkonzK4C&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=bokken+shinken+musashi+wooden&source=bl&ots=UNYrQKTwF_&sig=XnfgWo3QTTJkWsqpMlppCWWwxug&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBGoVChMIlP677dCKyQIVhusUCh0NVwSA#v=onepage&q=bokken%20shinken%20musashi%20wooden&f=false

this preview chapter informs us that indeed some fighters preferred bokken over shinken....
but I do not know the period this refers too....some truth might be in there though...

FWIW, Dr. Karl Friday (of the REAL Kashima Shinryu, by the way) wrote this piece a couple years ago, and it has a couple of different things that are relevant to this thread:

Bokuto Jutsu: Straight, Curved, Fat, Thin, Why? (http://ejmas.com/tin/tinart_friday_0302.htm)

One particular item is the speculation about "bokutojutsu" - the idea that warriors might devise techniques for duels with wooden weapons, or simply adapt to the use of a wooden weapon. One thing I can add is that I asked my own sword teacher, Dr. Hall, if he ever came across a ryuha that had such material in its curriculum and he told me he had never seen such a thing.

Dr. Friday's essay also has some thoughts on how the shape of the training weapon interfaces with the attitude of the ryu.

[JW]

So if I understand right:
The founder of aikido, working through a faithful collaborator, left us with a pretty extensive bokken practice, which was clearly meant to represent work with bladed weapons. Furthermore, in taijutsu, the "cutting" terminology has been emphasized in that very same lineage, as opposed to pushing, pulling, or smacking. Also, the founder talked about swords all the time (especially the tsurugi, which is certainly a bladed weapon).

It sounds to me like in aikido, we are supposed to learn and practice a slicing action, to cut "through" rather than "at;" this way of using the intent and the body is supposed to be involved in taijutsu as well as weapon work. I realize the bokken can be used as a club but I am wary of focusing on that if it is not the real purpose of the practice.

I claim to practice aikido so I do in fact care what the founder of aikido meant for us to practice, that's why I think about this kind of thing.

[sorokod]

So if I understand right:
...Furthermore, in taijutsu, the "cutting" terminology has been emphasized in that very same lineage, as opposed to pushing, pulling, or smacking.

Well its all shomenuchi / yokomenuchi, my Japanese is non existent - does "uchi" means "cut"?


Also, the founder talked about swords all the time (especially the tsurugi, which is certainly a bladed weapon).


Tsurugi! Have a look at this video of Maeda Hiramasa (formerly ?) of Omoto kyo practising with his tsurigi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1vUMdSrBIc

[JW]

Well its all shomenuchi / yokomenuchi, my Japanese is non existent - does "uchi" means "cut"?
Well as I understand, that word is nonspecific enough to include cuts and strikes, whereas 切 kiru (as in "happogiri") is only for cuts. BTW that's another good piece of Iwama bokken-as-bladed-weapon evidence-- the happogiri exercise being called that rather than "happo-uchi" or something.

Anyway I wasn't talking about the attacks in aikido. In my experience, there were many times that we were instructed to "cut here" or "cut the arm down," etc. These are moments in throws, typically when you are using tegatana. The idea at these times was always that we must not think that we are pushing down or yanking the arm, etc, but rather, cutting through, while uke is attached.


Tsurugi! Have a look at this video of Maeda Hiramasa (formerly ?) of Omoto kyo practising with his tsurigi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1vUMdSrBIc

Wow thanks, I hadn't heard of waraku before! What is the history of this? Fairly modern I guess since that guy is the founder?

[sorokod]

Well as I understand, that word is nonspecific enough to include cuts and strikes, whereas 切 kiru (as in "happogiri") is only for cuts. BTW that's another good piece of Iwama bokken-as-bladed-weapon evidence-- the happogiri exercise being called that rather than "happo-uchi" or something.

Anyway I wasn't talking about the attacks in aikido. ...


Shomenuchi and Yokomenuchi are the descriptive names for the relevant ken suburi


Wow thanks, I hadn't heard of waraku before! What is the history of this? Fairly modern I guess since that guy is the founder?

New thread here: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24592

[JW]

Shomenuchi and Yokomenuchi are the descriptive names for the relevant ken suburi

True, but not sure what you mean to get at regarding that. I thought the word "uchi" includes both hits and cuts so it doesn't tell us anything specific. Anyway I was more trying to get at what Alex was talking about: the idea of "cut" rather than hit, pull, or push has been emphasized in the instruction I have received for taijutsu, so that's why I thought the bokken practice was probably a way to learn to cut rather than hit.
Anyway I'm just clarifying, not trying to get into an argument-- you already said my reasoning seems sound regarding the bokken practice seeming to be a cutting-based practice at least in its inception and early days.