Re: "Hidden in Plain Sight" - Specific Internal Training
I was actually trying to suggest something more in the middle; of Tomiki supposedly knowing, or mostly knowing, or partially knowing, or being very good but not really knowing specific means to teach it. It's sort of in between you and Ellis's points. My contention is that there is a way to learn by intuition not real knowledge. I have seen it first hand and a way to learn with exact language of body parts and hands-on approach that is more defining.
1. Ellis was correct in that Tomiki supposedly "had it."
2. But we have little except some personal anecdotes to go by. So that is as "up in the air" as people wanting to leave Daito ryu as a maybe-or-maybe-not, as Ueshiba's source of power.
It's all "up for grabs."
3. The choice of symbol means little to me. I mentioned the fact that other Japanese teachers choose classical symbols for their arts. So what?
4. The definitive language of what was happening in the body would have been the smoking gun for me-not a symbol. And it failed.
If you read Shirata's descriptions of his breathing exercises they will prove to be as useless to an outsider as much everything else most Japanese teachers produce; a bunch of nonsense that could have otherwise been taught in detail and with actual and real body parts being discussed and far better descriptions rendered. Again it's all up in the air and loyal students will debate it so…..
5. Last, and more importantly the thrust of my previous post-was to ask to consider that there was and are men who "got it" -to one degree or another -who cannot teach that well. Some, I have met who had some ability- seem to have really learned it intuitively-mostly through kata. In other words, not everyone has a real depth and not everyone can even manage to teach what they DO know in a manner that surpasses guesswork and experimentation by them and their students and produces consistent results by way of internals in anyone.
Internal training in whole or in part
There is little in writing of specific training. There are those who teach specific training. It is worthwhile to look past many of these guys -to meet and feel "their guys" and who has it or not. My own views are that there are definitive ways to teach that bring about usable skills in people. I have been doing it for years. I have no patience with these guys who can't teach but call themselves teachers.
Case in point: I was listening to a certain guy go on and on about his teacher and his skills and power.
I asked him "How long have you been training with him?"
The answer was "Decades! I am one of his senior men."
I then asked
"What the hell happened to you?"
At a certain point it is the student's responsibility as well. But there is no way...NO WAY, these people should feel the way they do even after 5 years. Twenty- that's inexcusable for their teachers and them. Were this a professional performance review- many of these teachers would get justifiably thrown out for poor results. True master class guys who can actually fight, and who can and will actually teach are rare jewels. I said that ten years ago. Not much has changed, I'll have to see what the next ten years bring.
It is my hope that as a group, we are going to take care of ourselves and change all of this. In the end it will at least help open the eyes of those training, to be able to differentiate from external fighting ability with zero internal skills, to poor skills, to middling skills, and then they can help themselves find real experts. I am finding it interesting to read some of the aikido teachers who have recently stated they are "somewhere in the middle" with internal skills after meeting one or two guys. I find that fascinating on several levels. I would only continue to encourage people to go feel those who supposedly have it and see how they feel and what they are teaching and if their students have anything even worth discussing!
Last edited by DH : 09-08-2009 at 01:45 PM.