I was re-reading an old thread called "Aikido does not work at all in a real fight" in the general secion...which is where J. DeLucia (i.e. Aikidog), as mentioned in the recent "What the Hell?" thread, is also being discussed.
In this section I found this exchange with the Aikidog himself:
Perhaps the issue is that fighting does not work in Aikido.
lyle bogin,truer words were never spoken.of course it is necessarily true that aikido must be competent for defense ,and by it's thearetic basis it is the perfect martial art simply because if you only move evasively the enemy will not be able to attack ,as has been my experience when i first began to apply these principles in a professional fighting ring ,i noticed that the opponent would withdraw and only comense when i would engage offensively ,which is the antithesis of the art.once you violate the principle you lose the phenomena,but then i evolved into ''suigetsu''and ''awase ho'' made sense .infact'' awase ho'' is gate way to ''take- musu ''.
So my question is:
Could anyone please explain, comment or expound on this (and it's validity):
" once you violate the principle you lose the phenomena,but then i evolved into ''suigetsu''and ''awase ho'' made sense .infact'' awase ho'' is gate way to ''take- musu ''. "
I have been studying the idea takemusu aiki, but do not understand suigetsu or awase ho (i.e. and what they really mean, and how to work with them.)
p.s. I'm not intending to infer that I *have* figured out takemusu aiki.