View Single Post
Old 09-03-2003, 02:07 PM   #14
Kent Enfield
 
Kent Enfield's Avatar
Location: Oregon, USA
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 224
United_States
Offline
Quote:
Brion Toss wrote:
Saito's weapons style is Osensei's weapons style.
That's a pretty big assumption. Did other students of Ueshiba sensei who do different weapons systems or no weapons just decide, "Ah, screw it. I'm making up something different?"
Quote:
Brion Toss wrote:
So I am going to proceed on the assumption that there is value in Saito's/Osensei's work, and do my best to figure out why they do it that way.
I havn't said there isn't any value in aikido weapons work. What I have said is that the value lies more in improving the empty handed stuff, rather than in learning to use the weapons effectively in their own right.
Quote:
Brion Toss wrote:
Regarding passing up opportunities, that is precisely what we do when we deliver a non-bruising atemi (we call the bruising kind "hematemis"), in the interests of finding a technique instead. It really isn't so much that an opportunity has been passed up, as that the structure of the response is different.
I always was under the impression that "non-bruising atemi" was a concession for the durability of our training partners, just like not actually striking people in the head with our bokuto.

The discussion of whether atemi are techniques or not deserves its own thread, and I'm sure it's gotten it.
Quote:
Brion Toss wrote:
Likewise, giving the attacker something to attack, sometimes a lot to attack, is a very aiki thing; I like the idea of directing the attacker's force, without their necessarily being aware of it. And this seems to apply to many arts, with and without weapons. Leaving no opening can be a lovely thing, but it doesn't resolve anything.
I'm not sure what you mean by "giving the attacker something to attack." I think you mean providing an opening in order to draw out a specific attack with the intention of countering it. That's not unique to aikido by any stretch of the imagination. It's just another way of creating an opening to attack. However, at least the way I've been taught, you still want to be applying pressure to force the opponent to take the opening.
Quote:
Brion Toss wrote:
Next, having a weapon out does not necessarily mean that homicide must follow, and certainly not in Aikido.
No, there doesn't have to be a killing. A severe maiming will often suffice. Since I'm not very familiar with Saito sensei's weapons work, how do the kumitachi end? Do they end with the "loser" side just giving up, or do they end with the "winner" side striking a decisive blow? If it's the latter, which I suspect, what are you practicing, and what are you practicing for? Are you only training for friendly training matches? If you're not training to kill using the sword, are you actually training to use the sword?

This was my original question in different words.

Kentokuseisei
  Reply With Quote