Re: The Nage/Uke Dynamic - Guidelines
Again thanks for replying.
Can only say I disagree with your take on the equality of ideas or the inequality of ideas and what contributes to that or not - but we knew that from the earlier posts we both made.
Just have to point out that I was not referring to what you said, hence, "using your post as a springboard..."
Legalistic was put in quotation marks - it was used to represent the common descriptives such as tediousness, repetition, redundancy, wordiness, specialized terminology, convolution, abstraction, complexity, etc., things many cited negatively in the stating of their stylistic preferences, etc. With that said, these texts I mentioned follow suit with all of these descriptives, and yet it would be wrong to say that these texts stifle training. In the same way then it is wrong to assume from the get go that said guidelines would stifle training and therefore should be dismiss - not even read.
If one is not reading them, then just say that, "I didn't read them because they weren't my kind of read." End of story - a good ending if you ask me. As fine as any other. But to go on to say more about what training is and is not or can be or cannot be in a way that is totally outside of experience and historical understanding is a bit too much - in my opinion. (Please understand that I am using your post to address the other posts that also made stylistic preferences a main point of consideration.)
Not sure why it is relevant to determine whether or not the Kojiki and the Heart Sutra were written specifically for Budo when my point was that texts in and of themselves do not stifle training - that history shows that they actually inspire it. The Kojiki and the Heart Sutra can be shown historically to have played these roles in Japanese martial arts though they were not written specifically for an audience of martial artists.
I understand your stylistic preferences. They are not mine. Mine are not yours. I can appreciate yours. I can appreciate mine. But there simply is no grounding, but the one found in Muscular Christianity, for the position that said guidelines would in some way innately interfere with, inhibit, stifle, prevent, curb, etc., training. The writing of guidelines is not a call for an end to training or an to the embodiment of the art, no more than a work like the Book of Five Rings, etc., is.