Re: Saotome Sensei's Training History
I am merely trying to say that it would be nice if all the insults, stated directly or implied, would stop.
Unfortunately, I don't think they will stop as the claims that some people are invested in are themselves insulting. They depend, for example, on the idea that the direct students of O Sensei made things up (or some other related version of this) when they allegedly weren't actually instructed on what Aikido is supposed to be. I have suggested a way for new things to be added without the need for such implied or stated insults. But it will require compromise from those who are bringing what they take to be a new or rediscovered influence, both in terms of claims and arguments made, as well as in conforming to training norms in Aikido.
The extent to which the existence of the voices who advance these connected claims and beliefs about Aikido even matters is debatable. Maybe it won't matter in the end. Already on Aikiweb as an example it is pretty much impossible to have a discussion based on the mainstream notion of Aiki as non-resistance and harmony. So it already matters there. To the extent that people who are drawn to this other way of training, as described in the post I linked to above, try to infiltrate with an approach that differs from the usual Uke Nage training system, it may be a serious problem for the practice of Aikido. What is Aiki and how should we train in the dojo are central questions that must be asked and answered, if even implicitly, every time someone enters the mat. If we don't agree about these things, are we even training the same art? And if the training process for each approach is different, then we cannot train both approaches at the same time.
Last edited by Ken McGrew : 12-05-2011 at 04:55 PM.