Peter A Goldsbury (Peter Goldsbury) wrote:
If you check the larger dictionaries, such as the big "Nihon Kokugo Daijiten", you will find that the ideas of DOU, as a way to be followed (in the world of learning and the arts) and of JUTSU, as a skill to be acquired (in the world of learning and the arts) both have a very long history (i.e., going back to the 10th/11th century). The difference is merely one of emphasis.
Thus, I have a suspicion that the decision to call the martial art we practice/martial way we follow "aikido" was a Japanese-style committee decision, of a type with which I have become very familiar.
I'm not sure I understand you here, Peter. Do you mean that "DO" was "invoked" for political reasons with a different, legitimating usage in the case of the GENDAI BUDO circa 1920-30's in the way that "Shinto" was with, say, the Great Promulgation in the 19th century?
More specifically, do you agree with Bodiford's history of Budo which I cited above? If so, do you believe that the name change from aikijujutsu to aikido was part of or separate from this state-initiated process? Hirai was rather cagey on this point in his AJ interview.
Thanks for your thoughts.