What Saito is saying is that Ueshiba did not use "hanmi" in Budo as a term for what is now called the "hanmi" stance; he used "roppo ni hiraku".
Interesting to read he NEVER used the term Hanmi
and instead opted for six directions
He knew what he was talking about.
Were his works to have been discussed with a better educated group of people, they would have preserved what he actually said. It is worth considering that even those who read it in it's orignal form didn't know and didn't much care either as stated by interviews with some deshi.
At least there could have been a chance that the non Japanese might have done some research and got a better education were they to have has access to the original meaning, even if only spawned by curiosity.
Another reference to six directions form Ueshiba
Interesting that the only other ten dan he awarded was to a no dancer because he "got it."
I've read sections of a translated training scroll for a now defunt no dance school from the 1780's, in which it is stated to move while mainting six directions
and it stated why. That it allows you to remain stable and maintain perfect balance in order to float acorss the floor.
I think it is interesting that the person who translated that was more than likely ignorant of the subject yet purposefully left the words intact. Those ignorant of the topic can argue it is a coincidence, those familair will say, " Of course it is in keeping with a known principle"
Thankfully it was not translated by a budo guy!
you could replace all instances of "roppo ni hiraku" with "hanmi ni naru" and contextually it would still work.
Really? According to who? Words are words and are all equal? I guess all phrasing is interchangeable when you don't know the value of what they actually mean.
Hanmi as a subsitute not only does not work, it will not "do" for the practioner any thing near what the founder was both doing himself and trying to express to an ignorant audience. That he used six direction training as part of an overal model to attain power and balance is what someone who is trying to understand his power would be after.
Again it has a pedagogy in the martial arts. All that people are doing is demonstrating their ignorance of the subject and going a long way to demonstrate it in their budo as well.
And yet, and yet... John Stevens sometimes gets a bit of grief here about his translations, including from myself. ...
...he was a student of Shirata Rinjiro, a pre-war student of Ueshiba. It seems to me that he would be eminently qualified to translate such a text as Budo.
No, not even close, in fact these authors with a passing knowledge of the subject often do as much damage as good; substituting their own knowledge in one area to mask a profound ignorance in an other. I've read any number of books on forging katana that have " facts" that are flat out wrong. And in their bibliographies, we find other books with unchallenged, mistakes as well.
Shirata had a series of power building exercises more akin to what Ueshiba was actually doing and fitting in with Daito ryu and Chinese arts. I have trained with one of Shirata's deshi who did not have a good handle on what they were for. Mr. Stevens is yet another example of that.
Few have managed to replicate the founders power and skill, and the translators ignorance of a training process has helped to obliterate even the few written clues he left.