View Single Post
Old 10-18-2012, 11:08 AM   #126
Carl Thompson
Carl Thompson's Avatar
Location: Kasama
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 488
Re: VoE: AWASE - The Principle of AIKI

Mark Murray wrote: View Post
The view of awase with the train example still doesn't equal Ueshiba's aiki.
The very idea that it did is something you set up as a strawman argument.

You said awase was not what Osensei used against Tenryu and that it was actually Aiki. This is a strawman because Alexander sensei never said that Tenryu was overcome by awase. You made that up as an example of what he was saying.

The question of whether awase equals Aiki was mentioned by Chris Li and you quickly made that the new head for your strawman and now even Dan is adding stuffing to it:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
How did he stop Tenryu? By fitting in with him?
Then after repeating yourself a number of times (thanks for answering me by the way ) you said
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
Then that tells me that how he is defining awase is not the definition of Ueshiba's aiki. It tells me... etc... etc
AWASE does not equal AIKI. Stop making out that Alexander Sensei wrote that. He didn't. He actually called it a principle of AIKI in the title and content of the thread you quoted from.

Let's put down the strawman and do some research into what he actually meant by awase.
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
Or you can just keep posting that I don't know what I'm talking about without anything to support it.
Isn't that what you and Dan are doing with many people on this forum?
Christopher Li wrote: View Post
Some of us have been discussing this over the internet for 15 years and more. If nobody talked about their beliefs/knowledge it would have been a much shorter and less fruitful conversation.

I, for one, am more than happy that Dan spent years shoving this stuff in my face.
Sharing knowledge and beliefs is great, but the discussing part is important. It involves supporting assertions, not just shoving them in people's faces. I can imagine Dan has one of many valuable pre-aikido models at least, almost certainly more effective than the mass-produced model that got the brand-name, but so do a lot of people.
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
The classic model was aiki as a union of opposites-BEFORE- awase. It is in my tag line from Shirata -yet another giant.
1. Place the immovable body (there is that nagging Ueshiba example again eh?)
2. Into an an invincible position (awase)
This sounds like aikido to me but I think the use of the term awase is different (not wrong though -- it's a broad term).
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
The research has to take place on your part. Of course there is a vetting process that needs to be undertaken by those in doubt. I suggest it take place both academically and physically.
So you have a book called "Takemusu Aiki" you keep referring to in which Osensei defines his art, saying it was born in Iwama. He dictated the book while living in Iwama. David Alexander spent a considerable length of time in Iwama, beginning a few years after Osensei passed away and wrote an article mentioning a concept he learned from the old sempai who trained with Osensei there for ten or twenty years or more. I'm not saying time-served gave them the goods, they just had long windows of opportunity, which is still important. And you allow that information to get branded "modern aikido" without any evidence. Are you assuming a (possibly willful) zero-percent success rate from Osensei in passing on the proper training? You tell others that it is they who have to do research. Why not ask the remaining old sempai yourself, while they're still around?

Bear in mind, the conclusion could be that Aikido was not "born" but rather "stillborn" in Iwama: Perhaps Ueshiba changed the model for the worse? You could be the one to prove it. Maybe Ueshiba was just a Daito-Drone, capable of doing but not reproducing in his students. Maybe Dan is the Man who steps in and fixes things. We can only know by comparing notes honestly. Just lecturing and assuming no one else knows anything is not helpful.

  Reply With Quote