View Single Post
Old 08-19-2008, 11:01 PM   #60
salim
Location: Greensboro North Carolina
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 370
United_States
Offline
Re: The continued Evolution of Aikido

Quote:
Philip Burgess wrote: View Post
Now, now, if you disagree there is no reason to get hot under the collar. I think their criticism is directed at how Aikido was being taught and maintained, instead of at Aikido as an art. They all loved Aikido and cared for it. Stan Pranin wrote that he believed modern Aikido was the result not of O'Sensei but of his uchideshi. Shioda was what, pre-world war Aikido, and continued that tradition.

Mochizuki also pre-world war has a crazy number rank and six ranks above 5 dan. He is 10th dan in Aikido, IMAF. He started his own, style of Aikido-may not be considered Aikido. So what he did was to create his own art, having spot on Aikido techniques done in a modern Aikido way. And Kano sent him to O'Sensei. And Mochizuki sword take disarms and such apply Aikido techniques. I wonder why that is? Why would Mochizuki apply Aikido? Mochizuki was the guy who could compete in all the Olympic events of Japanese martial arts. What art did he concentrate in, Aikido.

These two styles of Aikido, like Tomiki and Mochizuki Aikido, are build around Aikido. Aikido is the main ingredient. Shioda didn't do what Mochizuki or Tomiki did create composite arts, he was committed to Aikido. All these men ended up with stressing Aikido. Aikido had to have something for Tomiki and Mochizuki to comprise other art with Aikido and not the other way around. And be dedicated to Aikido.

Look up why Shioda, Tomiki, and Mochizuki why all where interested in Aikido. Look up what they thought of Aikido the first time they seen O'Sensei. Tomiki, and Mochizuki have composite Aikidos.

You said, "What's complete for one is not for the other. We will all have satisfactions that are different." If your are reinventing the wheel, then it is true. We are not taking about personal philosophy or choice that is best to take individually. We are discussing the art of Aikido evolving, that has its own defined constitution. You may not understand or agree with that constitution, or the idea of a constitution (form), but never the less there is an identifiable constitution that defines Aikido. In Aikido, lays a universal law at higher levels of evolution within Aikido, it does become formless, defining also as complete. Even that is the same idea Bruce Lee used and felt strongly about. That formlessness existed even before Bruce Lee was speaking out about it. Here we are full circle, Aikido like a circle, it is complete. With or without bunnies.
No anger here. You said it exactly, yes I love Aikido too, but I agree with them in there ideas of what is lacking in modern Aikido. Hence the evolution will continue.

"Aikido Masters Volume 1, Shioda Sensei said today's Aikido was dimensionless, empty of content and nothing more than an imitation of the real thing."

"Really Something to think about" Someone of his stature saying that, wow!