I saw a good interview... interesting points.
and other interesting stuffs. Is it relevant?
From< over @How Do Armbar
. (<-nice site btw)
Josh, that is interesting and I would never say that anything Kuroiwa Sensei wrote was not relevant. There are some very good points there, but I think his view of kata is very different from Mochizuki Sensei's traditional view.
In mainstream aikido, there is no kata as it is formally recognized in traditional jujutsu and sword. But I believe that each technique of mainstream aikido is considered to be a kata. As Kuroiwa Sensei said, "...we are not falling because we are being thrown but rather we are practicing a kata designed for us to be thrown." In other words, mainstream aikido technique practice is kata practice and the two sides are performing interlocking roles that leave one standing and the other on the ground. So the whole practice is kata.
However, in the old aikido, that was not how it went. You would learn through form, but the training required actually applying a workable technique to a vigorous attack, as in all jujutsu.
In Mochizuki Sensei's yoseikan aikido, the techniques are kihon and their variations. These are not considered "kata" in the formal sense. They are kihon waza. The real kata are another thing altogether, as illustrated by the two clips I posted before. There is another very important kata that I couldn't find on the web. It's Jutsuri no Kata, or "The Kata of the Princples of Technique," which is concerned with the dynamics of how techniques are developed.
So Kuroiwa Sensei is, of course, correct in the context in which he speaks, but in the real traditional martial arts context, those comments are less comprehensive.
Best to you.