Re: Counter techniques against Judo: the process of forming Aikido in 1930s
Some things I found interesting the pointed to as support for his ideas that these approaches iof Ueshiba as being something unique.
The experiences Ueshiba had in learning Judo were in his youth, and his teacher was himself a shodan. The 51 counters to Judo appear to be a descrition of any engagement imaginable and in my view are meaningless as definitions. The methods of counters he discusses in which he defines aiki as straining hands is erroneous and is of a very limited view. Aiki has nothing at all to do with straining against a hand grab. In fact in training to release from a grab it is the weaknesses inherent in both the grip (and in the structural alignment of the bodies frame that supports it) that teaches one to attack and release the grip specifically without strain. It is the furtherance of the sensitivity in meeting the grip and softening the approach that seizes and takes control of the body through the same channels trained and used in the releases. This is a deeper discussion than is served here, but the straining hands comment addresses the depth of the work.
Likewise where he outlines what he supposes is “Ueshiba's unique approach" to countering judo throws? To be in motion when grabbed? This is erroneous as well. Again due to ignorance -so many things are mistakenly accorded as something unique to Ueshiba’s development, when all too often we go back and find it is just yet another foundational approach in Daito ryu. This time as one of its methods in aiki for the hand, arm, or body to be in motion when meeting a grip. There are specific motions, defined approaches, and a more in depth internal way to be in motion within the body when meeting force. And his referring to Daito ryu aiki as a singular thing is troublesome as well.
In this sense I find the conclusions reached and the "reaching" for inclusions like Kito ryu-for substance in explaining the counter methods... are outlined and well defined in the only art Ueshiba ever spent any length of time in -over twenty years- that art being Daito ryu. There is no comparison of form and method or anything that I can see here to point to Kito ryu, or much of anything else but his excellent previous training. I see it as just another attempt to explain something followers didn’t really understand or have explanations for and have to assign artificial complexities to a really simple answer.
Last edited by DH : 10-02-2008 at 09:49 PM.