Re: Re: making the 1st move
 

If one of my loved ones were being attacked, I would not have a problem doing what is necessary to defend them. That said, if one wishes to use aikido techniques in such a situation, he would just need to utilize the energy and direction of the attack - it just might not be coming directly at him, but in another direction.

Regarding being able to draw out the attack, I don't view that as intiating the attack, but rather getting the attacker to attack in a specific way by way of body positioning and mental attitude. Our Dojo Cho has told us how skillful Kissaburo Osawa Sensei of Hombu Dojo was at this. When demonstrating techiniques, his uke wouldn't need to be told how to attack him, they would know what attacks to use just by the way Osawa Sensei was positioning himself. There essentially would only be one attack available to the uke. This practice is not isolated strictly to aikido either.

I believe that some of the koryu arts made this part of their curriculum. For instance, a bugeisha would sublety create the false appearance of an opening for his opponent to attack, thus causing his opponent to fatally expose an opening for the bugeisha to defeat his opponent.

I'm not sure about that, I think he was making a very obscure, perhaps impractical point. The interviewer several times said "Ah, just like in judo then?" and received a number of "Not really" type replies. (I'm paraphrasing.

The interview is on http://www.aikidofaq.com (the interview section is essential reading in my own self-aggrandising opinion..)
The translation apparently..

"The following interuiew, conducted by two unnamed newspapermen, appeared in the Japanese-language text Aikido by Kisshomaru Ueshiba, Tokyo, Kowado, 1957, pages 198-219. It was translated from the Japanese by Stanley Pranin and Katsuaki Terasawa."

What I left out from the reply was:
"....If I were to try to verbalize it I would say that you control your opponent without trying to control him. That is, the state of continuous victory. There isn't any question of winning over or losing to an opponent. In this sense, there is no opponent in Aikido. Even if you have an opponent, he becomes a part of you, a partner you control only."

Really I think the interview needs to be read, to see where they were in conversation. There's not many opportunities I've seen in training to say "there's no opponent" and have it be helpful... (Well, "Ignore me, just touch your nose with your hands" was a piece of advice that really improved my kokyo-ho.... and made my jaw drop.)
I think O Sensei was alluding to things beyond most of us in everyday practice, the kind of thing you experience when you take ukemi from a master. You're still going to have to go back and take forced, fumbling technique from the likes of me for the rest of your life...

andrew

Hi Andrew

The old line taken out of context trick or how can you attack something that is part of you?

Interesting stuff - what?

I've read that interview a number of times but its been awhile - thanks for reminding me. Still I never understood it as a ban on "sen no sen" or "sen sen no sen" related moves.

The problem with diffuse stuff like this, or the Bible, or .... is that you can often pick out exactly what you like and still miss the point entirely. I am positive I do the same on a regular.

Oh, big time. I agree. How are you going to start learning otherwise? (Which is what I meant when I referred to practicality.) Obviously he's not referring to what Aikido is to most of us, but what it is (has evolved into) from the perspective of a master. I think what was normal for him was what he referred to- the old cliche of doing your own aikido- and I think that this is what we're aspiring to. Perhaps, for example, aspiring to the level of aikido where it is "Absoloutely not a case" of sen no sen, sen sen no sen, or whatever- not a ban, just a better way beyond them?

I can't claim expertise AT ALL!!! I do know feel that this is analagous though to simpler things in Aikido- you can do Ikkyo in a correct fashion with little effort (which we aspire to) or badly and forcing it by muscle (which we often start to learn with.) I just got triggered by a keyword, and I think that whatever the mitigating circumstance of context you have to be very careful about a statement that seems perhaps to have been directly contradicted by a master. (Any master.)

I suppose, to be honest, there's a lot of pedantry involved here on my part, because the statement that started this little part of the debate was as good a way as any of expressing an opinion I don't disagree with at all.

andrew

Understood. The electronic forum provides a wonderful opprotunity to hash out ideas and impressions that would not normally be discussed in the dojo.

Someone once suggested that one should keep all our posts and see how our ideas evolve. Personally I could not stand the embarrasment.