Quote:
Christopher Li wrote:
Well...
Yes, really.
True, it's my assumpution, but the "everything was changed by Ueshiba after the war" argument is pretty thin these days, in the light of recent historical evidence. That's what I'm referring to.
Kisshomaru absolutely spun things - that's been clearly established in the historical record. Peter Goldsbury just posted an entire essay about some of the issues.
Again, I haven't put anybody down - their role after the war is clearly documented, check the evidence. If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it, but you're going to be arguing against a massive amount of published work by Stan Pranin and others.
I don't think there's anything wrong in recognizing their acts as they were - they were both giants in the spread of Aikido, why should the truth be seen as putting them down?
The same guy who said:
敵人の走り来りて"つときは一足よけてすぐに切るべし
"When the enemy comes running forward to strike you must take one step out of the way and cut them down."
Western thinking tends to have one exclude the other. Japanese thinking tends to be less absolute - more on a case by case basis. One of my first instructors got in a fight with some folks from another dojo - after a long lecture on love by Ueshiba the founder came up to him and said "well, how many did you get?". Another direct student (one of the closest) used to rumble regularly in town - with the founder's full knowledge. We don't even have to get started on Arikawa...
Ueshiba was an amazing man all on his own - no need to look at him through rose-colored glasses.
Best,
Chris
|
Ha, ha. I was looking up your quote, yours not mine. You mention therefore four different names not me . I mention but one, Ueshiba. in response I might add.
As I said, putting down people. The word 'spin' for example. The belief put out that mistranslations are rampant and because of some devious plot. More put down which to me is more misunderstanding on the part of those with hidden agendas themselves or just inherent suspicions overriding wisdom.
Dare I challenge such historians? Yes indeed I dare.
It's not the facts I challenge it's some conclusions and the use of some facts just to fit in with their current view. (usually done by others, not the historians) But having said that a historian should refrain from any conclusion really and remain neutral in my opinion. Of course he or she may then have an opinion but that opinion is of no more worth than anyone elses.
You use examples once again of your teacher after lecture on love and the founder having full knowledge of someone who got into rucks. Why?
Western thinking is another term you use. I suggest you investigate that further. Eastern thinking I would say in those areas concerned were very spiritual as is the history of Aikido in it's essence tracing back through the yamabushi, sohei etc. to chinese monks and that's not even mentioning the hidden role of Korea.
Until the spiritual history is done and understood then how can you understand budo is love?
Becoming enlightened in life and spiritual and religeous matters was not so unusual in the east and that is the crux of what the so called western mind has a hard time understanding.
By the way rose tinted glasses is yet another meaningless statement created by ego to keep people negative I would say. To see the good is a high ability in truth. But that of course takes love.
Regards.G.