And then he went to his own corporate Headquarters, walked in the door and shouted "This is not my AIkido!!" and preceded to lecture.
I find it interesting that this is the third or fourth time that this anecdotal statement has been mentioned. I also find it very interesting as to the standards of acceptance of the points in debate on either side. Where is the similar critique of language or circumstance or finessed translation on what O Sensei supposedly meant in the anecdotal event mentioned here? Why would one refuse to accept the plain import of things he is reasonably well-documented to have actually said, emphatically, in generally reliable and well-regarded regarded translation (and presumably to mean it when he said it.)
I find the contrast of approach interesting. My reliance on an authoritative, well-attributed interview in which O Sensei (with Kisshomaru Doshu also present and speaking) makes an emphatic point on "absolute non-resistance" several times, in several different ways, all to the same essential effect, is dismissed. I am told, among other things, that I do not understand the plain words, that it must be a bad translation, or alternatively, that what was said could not possibly be what was meant. http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=612
Why the uncritical willingnness to believe that THIS statement means just exactly what YOU want it to mean? Especially since the anecdotal account seen so far does not in the least bit elaborate on WHY the instance of practice he was observing was objectionable. Nor is there any indication that what ever he was observing was not subsequently corrected following from that comment. Nor any explanation of why whatever he (the Founder) did criticize would not have been immediately corrected.
One cannot support a persuasive position on a chain of inferences, leaving questions such as these unanswered with regard to a statement with such an ambiguous reference. Suggestive rhetorical questions are no substitute for some actual facts.