AikiWeb Aikido Forums

AikiWeb Aikido Forums (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/index.php)
-   Spiritual (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   True Warfare (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20440)

Aikido Alive 10-21-2011 08:49 PM

True Warfare
 
Before invading another country we send our spies in. They infiltrate the nerve centers without being noticed. At the time of full scale attack they cut the supply lines and destroy the electrical power stations. Caught off-guard the enemy rush to their battle stations only to be picked off one after one. Without their essential power supply they loose all their counter force and are easily overrun. Without any delay we occupy the main crossroads and key locations, hold the high ground and send our spies even further ahead, to infiltrate the very heart of resistance. Without firing even one shot we flood the enemy land with our own forces, occupying it to squeeze out any remaining opposition. In one well planned and well executed strike we manage to neutralize and overtake our opponent without much loss on either side.

graham christian 10-21-2011 09:09 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Not very spiritual. Not very Aikido either.

Regards.G.

Chris Li 10-21-2011 11:30 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 294972)
Not very spiritual. Not very Aikido either.

Regards.G.

Quote:

“Sensei, does aikido also have kicking techniques?”

“You fool! What do you mean by such a question? We use kicking techniques or anything else. I even used artillery. Martial arts, guns and artillery are all aikido. What do you think aikido is? Do you think it involves only the twisting of hands? It is a means of war… an act of war! aikido is a fight with real swords. We use the word ‘aiki’ because through it we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately. Look at Sumo. After the command is given (“Miatte! Miatte!), they stand up and go at each other in a flash. That’s the same as aiki. When a person suddenly faces his enemy in an mental state free from all ideas and thoughts and is instantly able to deal with him, we call that aiki. In the old days it was called ‘aiki no jutsu’. Therefore, artillery or anything else becomes aiki.” “Is that so… I think I understand.” “If you still don’t understand, come to me again.” After that he was afraid of me and bowed to me from far off. When I went to Europe he asked me to take him as well.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=369

Best,

Chris

graham christian 10-22-2011 07:26 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Makes sense for 1933. As for Aikido or spiritual......nah.

Regards.G.

Aikido Alive 10-22-2011 07:28 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Before openly engaging in a sensitive and non-violent physical response to an aggressive attack we penetrate and pervade him with loving kindness long before him knowing about it. We enter his soul through a spiritual insight revealing his ego strongholds. With this preemptive attitude we disarm his ability to launch effectively and we neutralize his intention to attack and channel his aggression back onto himself. Overwhelming him with a feeling of peace we control the situation.

graham christian 10-22-2011 07:38 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Beautifully put.

Regards.G.

Chris Li 10-22-2011 11:08 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 294985)
Makes sense for 1933. As for Aikido or spiritual......nah.

Regards.G.

That would be difficult, since Tadashi Abe didn't even begin Aikido until 1942.

Ueshiba did think enough of Mochizuki that he wanted to adopt him into the family and make him his successor. In 1951 he taught Aikido in Europe with Ueshiba's blessing. His 10th dan was specifically approved by Kisshomaru Ueshiba in 1979.

Best,

Chris

graham christian 10-22-2011 01:09 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 294993)
That would be difficult, since Tadashi Abe didn't even begin Aikido until 1942.

Ueshiba did think enough of Mochizuki that he wanted to adopt him into the family and make him his successor. In 1951 he taught Aikido in Europe with Ueshiba's blessing. His 10th dan was specifically approved by Kisshomaru Ueshiba in 1979.

Best,

Chris

Still makes sense. He says that meeting was just after the war so must be around 1945.

What it's got to do with the o/p I don't know.

That particular time however was not Aikido, it was Aiki jujutsu. As to how spiritual that particular incident was I suppose depends on the charachters involved and the point being made.

Regards.G.

Carsten Mllering 10-22-2011 01:15 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295002)
... That particular time however was not Aikido, it was Aiki jujutsu. ...

Wasn't it called Aiki budo then?

But does it make any difference (or why does it make a difference) how Ueshiba's way was called then?

graham christian 10-22-2011 01:29 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Carsten Mllering wrote: (Post 295004)
Wasn't it called Aiki budo then?

But does it make any difference (or why does it make a difference) how Ueshiba's way was called then?

In the article he states Aiki jujutsu. The difference is Ueshiba changed 'everything' after the war and developed it into what was called Aikido, a name he was completely satisfied with.

It's important because no doubt many didn't like the changes and wanted to cling to the old ways and meanings of budo. Many even now.

Regards.G.

Gorgeous George 10-22-2011 02:30 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295002)
As to how spiritual that particular incident was I suppose depends on the charachters involved and the point being made.

Regards.G.

This is a brilliant statement.

Chris Li 10-22-2011 02:58 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295005)
In the article he states Aiki jujutsu. The difference is Ueshiba changed 'everything' after the war and developed it into what was called Aikido, a name he was completely satisfied with.

It's important because no doubt many didn't like the changes and wanted to cling to the old ways and meanings of budo. Many even now.

Regards.G.

It's not nearly as clear cut as that.

It was called "Aikido" from 1942.

Morihiro Saito stated quite repeatedly that what he was shown by Ueshiba in the 1960's was closest to what appears in the 1938 manual "Budo" - somewhat different than what Kisshomaru and Tohei were showing in Tokyo.

Anyway, he didn't actually chose the name - it was chosen by committee at the Dai Nihon Butokukai, although he did choose to stick with it later.

Kisshomaru always cited the key revelations behind Aikido as occurring in 1925.

The old ways of Budo? Here's a quick and famous quote - "Strategies for war become strategies for peace". Can you name the year? If you can, then what does that do to your pre-war/post-war dichotomy?

Best,

Chris

Gorgeous George 10-22-2011 03:22 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 295009)
It's not nearly as clear cut as that.

It was called "Aikido" from 1942.

Morihiro Saito stated quite repeatedly that what he was shown by Ueshiba in the 1960's was closest to what appears in the 1938 manual "Budo" - somewhat different than what Kisshomaru and Tohei were showing in Tokyo.

Anyway, he didn't actually chose the name - it was chosen by committee at the Dai Nihon Butokukai, although he did choose to stick with it later.

Kisshomaru always cited the key revelations behind Aikido as occurring in 1925.

The old ways of Budo? Here's a quick and famous quote - "Strategies for war become strategies for peace". Can you name the year? If you can, then what does that do to your pre-war/post-war dichotomy?

Best,

Chris

Thank you.
I was quite sure 'Aikido' was given that name in 1942 (something to do with excluding it from a pro-war category, alongside other martial arts?)

Chris Li 10-22-2011 04:05 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Jenkins wrote: (Post 295011)
Thank you.
I was quite sure 'Aikido' was given that name in 1942 (something to do with excluding it from a pro-war category, alongside other martial arts?)

It was part of the general organization of the martial arts by the Japanese government under the management of the Dai Nihon Butokukai.

Aikido was certainly not anti-war at that time or any other. Ueshiba taught the special forces personally. He also taught wartime Prime Minister Hideki Tojo through the group at Kenkoku University (in occupied Manchuria). Even after the war and through to today, the Aikikai maintains strong (if quiet) ties to the right wing.

Best,

Chris

graham christian 10-22-2011 04:22 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 295009)
It's not nearly as clear cut as that.

It was called "Aikido" from 1942.

Morihiro Saito stated quite repeatedly that what he was shown by Ueshiba in the 1960's was closest to what appears in the 1938 manual "Budo" - somewhat different than what Kisshomaru and Tohei were showing in Tokyo.

Anyway, he didn't actually chose the name - it was chosen by committee at the Dai Nihon Butokukai, although he did choose to stick with it later.

Kisshomaru always cited the key revelations behind Aikido as occurring in 1925.

The old ways of Budo? Here's a quick and famous quote - "Strategies for war become strategies for peace". Can you name the year? If you can, then what does that do to your pre-war/post-war dichotomy?

Best,

Chris

It's not as clearly cut as that to you but it is to me.

This isn't about who coined the word Aikido.

Saito? What does most closely resembles mean? From what perspective? In what context? What was the subject under discussion when he mentioned such and what point was he trying to make and to whom?

Kisshomaru? Cited when seen fit and yet put down when seen fit also.

Now your strategy and budo sayings? No I don't know. Obviously you feel they have some significant value. Feel free to enlighten me. Maybe that's what you are connecting to the o/p.

Regards.G.

Demetrio Cereijo 10-22-2011 04:46 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295015)
Saito? What does most closely resembles mean? From what perspective? In what context? What was the subject under discussion when he mentioned such and what point was he trying to make and to whom?

Considering the fact Bjorn, the OP, is a high level practitioner of the Iwama style aikido, he could explain it better to you.

Chris Li 10-22-2011 04:49 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295015)
It's not as clearly cut as that to you but it is to me.

This isn't about who coined the word Aikido.

Saito? What does most closely resembles mean? From what perspective? In what context? What was the subject under discussion when he mentioned such and what point was he trying to make and to whom?

Kisshomaru? Cited when seen fit and yet put down when seen fit also.

Now your strategy and budo sayings? No I don't know. Obviously you feel they have some significant value. Feel free to enlighten me. Maybe that's what you are connecting to the o/p.

Regards.G.

Well, you were the one who brought up the naming and called is significant, not me.

I cited Saito because he probably spent the most actual time one on one with Ueshiba after the war. He said it and Stan Pranin has shown it quite clearly - the post-war changes in Aikido came mostly from Kisshomaru and Tohei.

I didn't put Kisshomaru down at any point, I liked him quite a bit and enjoyed training with him.

The point of the quote is that it is from the 1400's - from the founder of the oldest traditional martial arts school in Japan. Ueshiba's ideas weren't new and unique, and the "old ways and meanings of budo" weren't necessarily blood guts and destruction. You've latched on to a modern representation that was pushed by many of the postwar teachers - Kisshomaru and Tohei among them, but that viewpoint is spun quite heavily, and is not supported by the historical record.

Best,

Chris

graham christian 10-22-2011 05:24 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 295017)
Well, you were the one who brought up the naming and called is significant, not me.

I cited Saito because he probably spent the most actual time one on one with Ueshiba after the war. He said it and Stan Pranin has shown it quite clearly - the post-war changes in Aikido came mostly from Kisshomaru and Tohei.

I didn't put Kisshomaru down at any point, I liked him quite a bit and enjoyed training with him.

The point of the quote is that it is from the 1400's - from the founder of the oldest traditional martial arts school in Japan. Ueshiba's ideas weren't new and unique, and the "old ways and meanings of budo" weren't necessarily blood guts and destruction. You've latched on to a modern representation that was pushed by many of the postwar teachers - Kisshomaru and Tohei among them, but that viewpoint is spun quite heavily, and is not supported by the historical record.

Best,

Chris

I brought up names? Really...

Oh I've latched onto have I ? Your assumption.

There you go again, using Kisshomaru as a name connected with heavily spun modern blah.

If you think you know what I've latched on to and why I view things as I do then it only means to me that you are arguing with yourself.

Do I care or know what Kisshomaru or Tohei said on the subject of budo? Do I mention them as sources to my view on budo? No. Do I need to put them down just to support an argument? No.

Budo is love. Now who said that?

Regards.G.

graham christian 10-22-2011 05:46 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: (Post 295016)
Considering the fact Bjorn, the OP, is a high level practitioner of the Iwama style aikido, he could explain it better to you.

Hi Demetrio.
I'd rather not ask. I don't use names to make others wrong I only use them sometimes as other sources who have said what I say now. A subtle difference. All this using what someone else said to put down what someone is saying I'll leave to those who think it means something.

I think some are more interested in argument than the thread and the funny thing is they don't know it.

I commented on the o/p.

I commented also on the next post by the o/p.

I see them as miles apart yet maybe the o/p sees them as connected and maybe Chris does too but hasn't got around to that point yet. Too busy trying to 'educate' me.

Now I could see some or even many translating the o/ps second post into war scenario and coming up with the first post. Not me though.

Anyway, I raise a glass to the mighty atom ha, ha. An incredible man.

Regards.G.

Demetrio Cereijo 10-22-2011 06:25 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295019)
Hi Demetrio.
I'd rather not ask. I don't use names to make others wrong I only use them sometimes as other sources who have said what I say now. A subtle difference. All this using what someone else said to put down what someone is saying I'll leave to those who think it means something.

Hi Graham,

You made some questions about Saito and his statements regarding what the founder taught to him. Bjorn is someone who could help you solve said questions. That's all.

Chris Li 10-22-2011 08:43 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295018)
I brought up names? Really...

Well...

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295018)
In the article he states Aiki jujutsu. The difference is Ueshiba changed 'everything' after the war and developed it into what was called Aikido, a name he was completely satisfied with.

Yes, really.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295018)
Oh I've latched onto have I ? Your assumption.

True, it's my assumpution, but the "everything was changed by Ueshiba after the war" argument is pretty thin these days, in the light of recent historical evidence. That's what I'm referring to.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295018)
There you go again, using Kisshomaru as a name connected with heavily spun modern blah.

Kisshomaru absolutely spun things - that's been clearly established in the historical record. Peter Goldsbury just posted an entire essay about some of the issues.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295018)

Do I care or know what Kisshomaru or Tohei said on the subject of budo? Do I mention them as sources to my view on budo? No. Do I need to put them down just to support an argument? No.

Again, I haven't put anybody down - their role after the war is clearly documented, check the evidence. If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it, but you're going to be arguing against a massive amount of published work by Stan Pranin and others.

I don't think there's anything wrong in recognizing their acts as they were - they were both giants in the spread of Aikido, why should the truth be seen as putting them down?

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295018)
Budo is love. Now who said that?

Regards.G.

The same guy who said:

敵人の走り来りて"つときは一足よけてすぐに切るべし

"When the enemy comes running forward to strike you must take one step out of the way and cut them down."

Western thinking tends to have one exclude the other. Japanese thinking tends to be less absolute - more on a case by case basis. One of my first instructors got in a fight with some folks from another dojo - after a long lecture on love by Ueshiba the founder came up to him and said "well, how many did you get?". Another direct student (one of the closest) used to rumble regularly in town - with the founder's full knowledge. We don't even have to get started on Arikawa...

Ueshiba was an amazing man all on his own - no need to look at him through rose-colored glasses.

Best,

Chris

Michael Varin 10-22-2011 11:16 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

"You fool! What do you mean by such a question? We use kicking techniques or anything else. I even used artillery. Martial arts, guns and artillery are all aikido. What do you think aikido is? Do you think it involves only the twisting of hands? It is a means of war… an act of war! aikido is a fight with real swords. We use the word ‘aiki' because through it we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately. Look at Sumo. After the command is given ("Miatte! Miatte!), they stand up and go at each other in a flash. That's the same as aiki. When a person suddenly faces his enemy in an mental state free from all ideas and thoughts and is instantly able to deal with him, we call that aiki. In the old days it was called ‘aiki no jutsu'. Therefore, artillery or anything else becomes aiki."
-- Minoru Mochizuki
Hello Chris,

Interesting that you chose to use this quote, as I have always found it particularly inconvenient for those proposing that aiki = IP. And it is a rather clear statement.

I find that it points to aiki as being a principle of relating or interacting, in which one perceives and then responds to the other's intent and then commitment to act, which by necessity precede the act itself. Doing so allows one to still follow the opponent, so as to be appropriate, and yet does not require waiting for the physical act before responding, so as to avoid being late. It further suggests a neutral state from which you can perceive what is actually happening, not your ideas about what is happening.

The "IP/IT/IS" paradigm as discussed here on AikiWeb would seem to have very little to do with the use of or defending against guns, and even less to do with artillery.

Of course, it is possible that Mochizuki (and/or the translator) was unable to understand do to a lack of background information. But then how would you reconcile that with:

Quote:

Christopher Li wrote:
Ueshiba did think enough of Mochizuki that he wanted to adopt him into the family and make him his successor. In 1951 he taught Aikido in Europe with Ueshiba's blessing. His 10th dan was specifically approved by Kisshomaru Ueshiba in 1979.


Chris Li 10-22-2011 11:45 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Michael Varin wrote: (Post 295029)
Hello Chris,

Interesting that you chose to use this quote, as I have always found it particularly inconvenient for those proposing that aiki = IP. And it is a rather clear statement.

I find that it points to aiki as being a principle of relating or interacting, in which one perceives and then responds to the other's intent and then commitment to act, which by necessity precede the act itself. Doing so allows one to still follow the opponent, so as to be appropriate, and yet does not require waiting for the physical act before responding, so as to avoid being late. It further suggests a neutral state from which you can perceive what is actually happening, not your ideas about what is happening.

The "IP/IT/IS" paradigm as discussed here on AikiWeb would seem to have very little to do with the use of or defending against guns, and even less to do with artillery.

Of course, it is possible that Mochizuki (and/or the translator) was unable to understand do to a lack of background information. But then how would you reconcile that with:

Personally, I don't see any particular conflict - it says that through Aiki the mental state of the enemy can be divined. Not that the interaction itself is Aiki. It seems exactly right - Aiki is a particular kind of personal training and conditioning that allows you to do "stuff". :)

Best,

Chris

Michael Varin 10-23-2011 12:10 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 295031)
Personally, I don't see any particular conflict - it says that through Aiki the mental state of the enemy can be divined. Not that the interaction itself is Aiki. It seems exactly right - Aiki is a particular kind of personal training and conditioning that allows you to do "stuff". :)

Well . . .

On that level, I suppose I don't either. :)

graham christian 10-23-2011 01:48 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: (Post 295021)
Hi Graham,

You made some questions about Saito and his statements regarding what the founder taught to him. Bjorn is someone who could help you solve said questions. That's all.

Hi Demetrio.
I bet he could no doubt. However I was just pointing out to Chris that without all the data to do with the time and place and context then just using a 'he said' to me means nothing.

I'm more interested in what a person believes and can do above their knowledge of history. What's your view now, that's how people generally communicate in life unless they are specifically talking history.

That's all. If someone wants to fill me in on some history then that's good too in it's own way.

Regards.G.

Carsten Mllering 10-23-2011 01:58 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295005)
The difference is Ueshiba changed 'everything' after the war
...

Thank you for answering my question.

I don't see this global cange when looking at what we can know about the history of aikido.
And I don't "experience" it when practicing with my teacher who has practiced with the late Sugino Yoshio (besides other teachers).
So I don't agree with your statement. Be it sitting over my books or be it practicing on the tatami.

I myself think that the assumption of a global change after WWII just makes it easier for us, to - seemingly! - understand what Ueshiba thaught and did.

Chris Li 10-23-2011 02:13 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295035)
Hi Demetrio.
I bet he could no doubt. However I was just pointing out to Chris that without all the data to do with the time and place and context then just using a 'he said' to me means nothing.

I'm more interested in what a person believes and can do above their knowledge of history. What's your view now, that's how people generally communicate in life unless they are specifically talking history.

That's all. If someone wants to fill me in on some history then that's good too in it's own way.

Regards.G.

Well, OK, Saito used to carry around a copy of the 1938 manual "Budo" when he was teaching to show people that the way he was teaching it was precisely the same as it was in the 1938 manual. He said that this was the way that he was taught by the founder in Iwama, and that the way that they were doing it in Tokyo was different. It's all on record in various places - an old story, and not under dispute by just about anybody I know of.

Take a look at http://blog.aikidojournal.com/2011/0...tanley-pranin/

And at http://www.aikidojournal.com/article?articleID=34 (from 1996!)

But I heard Saito make the statement from his own mouth more than once - and I wasn't even around him all that much.

That doesn't mean, by the way, that I'm saying that what Saito was doing was better (or worse) than what was happening in other places. Just that there's more to the story.

Best,

Chris

graham christian 10-23-2011 02:29 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 295024)
Well...

Yes, really.

True, it's my assumpution, but the "everything was changed by Ueshiba after the war" argument is pretty thin these days, in the light of recent historical evidence. That's what I'm referring to.

Kisshomaru absolutely spun things - that's been clearly established in the historical record. Peter Goldsbury just posted an entire essay about some of the issues.

Again, I haven't put anybody down - their role after the war is clearly documented, check the evidence. If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it, but you're going to be arguing against a massive amount of published work by Stan Pranin and others.

I don't think there's anything wrong in recognizing their acts as they were - they were both giants in the spread of Aikido, why should the truth be seen as putting them down?

The same guy who said:

敵人の走り来りて"つときは一足よけてすぐに切るべし

"When the enemy comes running forward to strike you must take one step out of the way and cut them down."

Western thinking tends to have one exclude the other. Japanese thinking tends to be less absolute - more on a case by case basis. One of my first instructors got in a fight with some folks from another dojo - after a long lecture on love by Ueshiba the founder came up to him and said "well, how many did you get?". Another direct student (one of the closest) used to rumble regularly in town - with the founder's full knowledge. We don't even have to get started on Arikawa...

Ueshiba was an amazing man all on his own - no need to look at him through rose-colored glasses.

Best,

Chris

Ha, ha. I was looking up your quote, yours not mine. You mention therefore four different names not me . I mention but one, Ueshiba. in response I might add.

As I said, putting down people. The word 'spin' for example. The belief put out that mistranslations are rampant and because of some devious plot. More put down which to me is more misunderstanding on the part of those with hidden agendas themselves or just inherent suspicions overriding wisdom.

Dare I challenge such historians? Yes indeed I dare.

It's not the facts I challenge it's some conclusions and the use of some facts just to fit in with their current view. (usually done by others, not the historians) But having said that a historian should refrain from any conclusion really and remain neutral in my opinion. Of course he or she may then have an opinion but that opinion is of no more worth than anyone elses.

You use examples once again of your teacher after lecture on love and the founder having full knowledge of someone who got into rucks. Why?

Western thinking is another term you use. I suggest you investigate that further. Eastern thinking I would say in those areas concerned were very spiritual as is the history of Aikido in it's essence tracing back through the yamabushi, sohei etc. to chinese monks and that's not even mentioning the hidden role of Korea.

Until the spiritual history is done and understood then how can you understand budo is love?

Becoming enlightened in life and spiritual and religeous matters was not so unusual in the east and that is the crux of what the so called western mind has a hard time understanding.

By the way rose tinted glasses is yet another meaningless statement created by ego to keep people negative I would say. To see the good is a high ability in truth. But that of course takes love.

Regards.G.

Chris Li 10-23-2011 02:33 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Carsten M�llering wrote: (Post 295036)
Thank you for answering my question.

I don't see this global cange when looking at what we can know about the history of aikido.
And I don't "experience" it when practicing with my teacher who has practiced with the late Sugino Yoshio (besides other teachers).
So I don't agree with your statement. Be it sitting over my books or be it practicing on the tatami.

I myself think that the assumption of a global change after WWII just makes it easier for us, to - seemingly! - understand what Ueshiba thaught and did.

Also, part of the very deliberate post-war effort to separate Aikido from it's militaristic roots (for obvious reasons).

It was also a great sales point to distinguish Aikido from the other arts in post-war Japan.

Even pre-war, Judo and Karate made similar efforts - but Ueshiba and the Aikikai seem to have been the most successful at branding.

I'm not being cynical, I think that he believed in what he was doing - but it wasn't (quite) unique.

Judo under Kano: JITA-KYOEI (Perfection of One's Self and Mutual Welfare and Benefit)

Karate under Funakoshi: Never forget that karate begins and ends with respect. There is no first attack in karate. Karate fosters righteousness.

Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu: Winning without fighting - "Strategies for war become strategies for peace", circa early 1400's.

And others...I think that the pre-war/post-war knife edge dichotomy is way too simplistic.

Best,

Chris

Chris Li 10-23-2011 02:35 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295038)
Ha, ha. I was looking up your quote, yours not mine. You mention therefore four different names not me . I mention but one, Ueshiba. in response I might add.

As I said, putting down people. The word 'spin' for example. The belief put out that mistranslations are rampant and because of some devious plot. More put down which to me is more misunderstanding on the part of those with hidden agendas themselves or just inherent suspicions overriding wisdom.

Dare I challenge such historians? Yes indeed I dare.

It's not the facts I challenge it's some conclusions and the use of some facts just to fit in with their current view. (usually done by others, not the historians) But having said that a historian should refrain from any conclusion really and remain neutral in my opinion. Of course he or she may then have an opinion but that opinion is of no more worth than anyone elses.

You use examples once again of your teacher after lecture on love and the founder having full knowledge of someone who got into rucks. Why?

Western thinking is another term you use. I suggest you investigate that further. Eastern thinking I would say in those areas concerned were very spiritual as is the history of Aikido in it's essence tracing back through the yamabushi, sohei etc. to chinese monks and that's not even mentioning the hidden role of Korea.

Until the spiritual history is done and understood then how can you understand budo is love?

Becoming enlightened in life and spiritual and religeous matters was not so unusual in the east and that is the crux of what the so called western mind has a hard time understanding.

By the way rose tinted glasses is yet another meaningless statement created by ego to keep people negative I would say. To see the good is a high ability in truth. But that of course takes love.

Regards.G.

:D OK, whatever you say...

Best,

Chris

graham christian 10-23-2011 02:40 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Carsten Mllering wrote: (Post 295036)
Thank you for answering my question.

I don't see this global cange when looking at what we can know about the history of aikido.
And I don't "experience" it when practicing with my teacher who has practiced with the late Sugino Yoshio (besides other teachers).
So I don't agree with your statement. Be it sitting over my books or be it practicing on the tatami.

I myself think that the assumption of a global change after WWII just makes it easier for us, to - seemingly! - understand what Ueshiba thaught and did.

Thank you too for responding in clear way.

Herein lies the core of the differences of opinion within Aikido. Herein in my opinion lies the reason that Aikido potentially is different to other martial arts. Herein lies the difference between Ueshibas personal ability and others.

Not trying to convince you but merely stating where I come from.

Regards.G.

mathewjgano 10-23-2011 03:06 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295038)
By the way rose tinted glasses is yet another meaningless statement created by ego to keep people negative I would say.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, too. Saying it's "meaningless" seems just as potentially ego-driven to me. It's a valid point to make that people often look to great men and affix more of a personal/subjective truth to the objective reality. From what I can see of the "harmony" (heiwa) interpretation of Aikido, it's a fair reminder to make from time to time. I'm an idealist at heart, so I often need such reminders. Of course we ought not easily forsake the ideals for the facility of pragmatism, but sometimes we must start at the bottom of the proverbial mountain, away from the bedrock of those lofty positions. I think O Sensei recognized this kind of baseline of reality and it was from this realization that his ideals of reconciling the world took their deepest meaning. Sometimes people have to kill...it's just less often than many might think, unfortunately.
...My tupence.
Take care,
Matt

mathewjgano 10-23-2011 03:22 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Torbjorn Saw wrote: (Post 294970)
Before invading another country we send our spies in. They infiltrate the nerve centers without being noticed. At the time of full scale attack they cut the supply lines and destroy the electrical power stations. Caught off-guard the enemy rush to their battle stations only to be picked off one after one. Without their essential power supply they loose all their counter force and are easily overrun. Without any delay we occupy the main crossroads and key locations, hold the high ground and send our spies even further ahead, to infiltrate the very heart of resistance. Without firing even one shot we flood the enemy land with our own forces, occupying it to squeeze out any remaining opposition. In one well planned and well executed strike we manage to neutralize and overtake our opponent without much loss on either side.

I'm guessing this isn't a prescription for war so much as a metaphor for how we might project our ki/intent into our would-be attackers, maximizing utility?

Gorgeous George 10-23-2011 08:04 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Christopher Li wrote: (Post 295040)
:D OK, whatever you say...

Best,

Chris

Chris: thank you for your impartial, reasoned, intelligent, and knowledgeable posts; many of those reading have surely been greatly informed by them.
I think, however, you are trying to reason with a bigot: a man whose interest is not in facts - only in the false reality he has constructed for himself.
For a man lacking ego, he comes across as very egotistical.

graham christian 10-23-2011 09:09 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Matthew Gano wrote: (Post 295042)
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, too. Saying it's "meaningless" seems just as potentially ego-driven to me. It's a valid point to make that people often look to great men and affix more of a personal/subjective truth to the objective reality. From what I can see of the "harmony" (heiwa) interpretation of Aikido, it's a fair reminder to make from time to time. I'm an idealist at heart, so I often need such reminders. Of course we ought not easily forsake the ideals for the facility of pragmatism, but sometimes we must start at the bottom of the proverbial mountain, away from the bedrock of those lofty positions. I think O Sensei recognized this kind of baseline of reality and it was from this realization that his ideals of reconciling the world took their deepest meaning. Sometimes people have to kill...it's just less often than many might think, unfortunately.
...My tupence.
Take care,
Matt

True definition of rose tinted glasses. Unfortunately used in the accusative for point scoring is merely a worthless statement. As I said seeing the good is an ability and real.

I know people who start at the bottom of the proverbial mountain yet recognise the the ideals as real and worth striving for.

Regards.G.

graham christian 10-23-2011 09:17 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Jenkins wrote: (Post 295056)
Chris: thank you for your impartial, reasoned, intelligent, and knowledgeable posts; many of those reading have surely been greatly informed by them.
I think, however, you are trying to reason with a bigot: a man whose interest is not in facts - only in the false reality he has constructed for himself.
For a man lacking ego, he comes across as very egotistical.

Obviously you don't agree with budo is love.

Regards.G.

Gorgeous George 10-23-2011 09:35 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295059)
Obviously you don't agree with budo is love.

Regards.G.

How is that obvious?

I don't agree with your refusal to allow facts to interfere with your conclusions.

Your very claim that 'Budo is love.' is open to all kinds of objections: 'What is love?'; 'How do you express love?'; etc.

graham christian 10-23-2011 09:57 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Jenkins wrote: (Post 295061)
How is that obvious?

I don't agree with your refusal to allow facts to interfere with your conclusions.

Your very claim that 'Budo is love.' is open to all kinds of objections: 'What is love?'; 'How do you express love?'; etc.

Why should I allow facts to interfere with my conclusions when I point out how incomplete they are?

You can disagree by all means as is your right but name calliing?

Budo is love. Yes, you merely point to what I've said all along. The problem isn't japanese translations but not knowing the meaning or having reality on the english words like love.

Without such reality people have to believe Ueshiba meant a, b, c, d. No, he meant budo is love. When you understand that clearly you can understand better Aikido. To me it's self evident.

I can demonstrate and teach such. No problem. If that's a problem to you or any others who don't have that particular reality then what can I say? It's an immovable truth for me. Quite demonstratable.

If you don't know or even believe in such then carry on and talk about what you do.

Regards.G.

Gorgeous George 10-23-2011 10:24 AM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Christian wrote: (Post 295063)
Why should I allow facts to interfere with my conclusions when I point out how incomplete they are?

You can disagree by all means as is your right but name calliing?

Budo is love. Yes, you merely point to what I've said all along. The problem isn't japanese translations but not knowing the meaning or having reality on the english words like love.

Without such reality people have to believe Ueshiba meant a, b, c, d. No, he meant budo is love. When you understand that clearly you can understand better Aikido. To me it's self evident.

I can demonstrate and teach such. No problem. If that's a problem to you or any others who don't have that particular reality then what can I say? It's an immovable truth for me. Quite demonstratable.

If you don't know or even believe in such then carry on and talk about what you do.

Regards.G.

Name-calling? To what are you referring?

The point these good people have been making to you, is that you don't know very much - at all - about Ueshiba, his thoughts on aikido, or those other figures - who were actually there.

So you prattle on about 'What aikido is.', and 'What Ueshiba meant.' - but as a rational observer, and as a historian, I see everything you say as entirely worthless; it wouldn't even be entertained as a source, if historians, in the future, looked at this thread.

Do you honestly think that if someone like Ueshiba, or Saito, or Shioda, saw your aikido, they'd be impressed?
Fair enough: you like one perspective on the 'spiritual' side of aikido - but to express it through aikido, you have to...be able to express it through aikido, something you seem unable to do.

You might think you understand aiki with your mind, but do you understand it with your body? - that's a big reason why I feel aggrieved at how you act: because there are people out there with vastly superior ability at aikido, who actually say they barely understand it - hell: i've got a book written by Gozo Shioda in the eighties, I believe, where he actually says that he is only just beginning to understand some of the things Ueshiba talked about in the thirties...but you have all the answers?!
Seishiro Endo - 8th dan, and someone whose ability I massively admire - says that he is still trying to become soft, to become good...but you have all the answers? You know everything?

I don't believe you can demonstrate aikido, no - for I am a student of this grandmaster:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNAWff9Daqg

He has massive ki balls.

graham christian 10-23-2011 12:25 PM

Re: True Warfare
 
Quote:

Graham Jenkins wrote: (Post 295066)
Name-calling? To what are you referring?

The point these good people have been making to you, is that you don't know very much - at all - about Ueshiba, his thoughts on aikido, or those other figures - who were actually there.

So you prattle on about 'What aikido is.', and 'What Ueshiba meant.' - but as a rational observer, and as a historian, I see everything you say as entirely worthless; it wouldn't even be entertained as a source, if historians, in the future, looked at this thread.

Do you honestly think that if someone like Ueshiba, or Saito, or Shioda, saw your aikido, they'd be impressed?
Fair enough: you like one perspective on the 'spiritual' side of aikido - but to express it through aikido, you have to...be able to express it through aikido, something you seem unable to do.

You might think you understand aiki with your mind, but do you understand it with your body? - that's a big reason why I feel aggrieved at how you act: because there are people out there with vastly superior ability at aikido, who actually say they barely understand it - hell: i've got a book written by Gozo Shioda in the eighties, I believe, where he actually says that he is only just beginning to understand some of the things Ueshiba talked about in the thirties...but you have all the answers?!
Seishiro Endo - 8th dan, and someone whose ability I massively admire - says that he is still trying to become soft, to become good...but you have all the answers? You know everything?

I don't believe you can demonstrate aikido, no - for I am a student of this grandmaster:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNAWff9Daqg

He has massive ki balls.

Ha, ha. He has something, maybe you think that's Ki.

If that's the point these good people are making then they are sadly mistaken. I think I read once that Ueshiba told some omoto students in answer to their questioning him about what that Aikido that he does was about. He said he thought they knew more Aikido than his students.

I never mentioned aiki so don't even go there.

I met Shioda and wasn't impressed. I met Kanetsuka and was impressed. We all have ones we like more than others. Nothing new there.

Yeah, your view on my Aikido may be shared by many but those with that view cannot do what I do. That may sound arrogant to you but it isn't is just as it is. Why should that annoy you?

You don't believe it. That about sums it up.

Senshiro Endo says such things then I'm sure I could help him out there, now how's that for 'arrogance' or is it confidence.

I am not a label, I am me and I can do what I say I can. Until you understand that then you can only place me in categories to fit your own mind.

Labels and titles don't mean to me what they do to you.

Regards.G.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:14 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.