Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
Hope you're doing well.
|
Hello Mark,
Yes all's well around these parts. Thanks for asking. Still struggling though.
Quote:
|
So, if someone is working on regular aikido training, that aikido training is going to oppose Internal Training at various times, sometimes as much as 100%.
|
I hear what you're saying having experienced that myself to some extent. I'm not sure though if it's not more due to me being inexperienced and not being able to train directly with a qualified teacher on a weekly basis. As Mike mentions above, it may simply be the result of not knowing the full range of these skills. I'm trying to remain very mindful of that but it's a hard thing to accomplish on ones own.
Quote:
|
The question then becomes, what would you rather do?
|
Well that's a very good question isn't it? I'm not fully convinced if it's the methodology itself between which to choose or my comprehension and mastery of the methodologies (if solely based on what feels more rewarding I would choose IT). I'm aware of that of which I have little mastery, but unaware of what I'm unaware of.
Quote:
|
It is worth noting that Ueshiba didn't have a technique based training methodology. It is worth noting that most of the schools of Ueshiba's students have a technique based training methodology, but have yet to produce anyone as skilled as them or Ueshiba. It is worth noting that Takeda didn't have a technique based training methodology, but had some methodology to create Ueshiba, Sagawa, Kodo, etc.
|
Then again, look at Toby Threadgill (whom I'm NOT comparing to Ueshiba lest I'm mistaken). He's noted for his IS also while primarily teaching from a kata based approach. I guess a lot of the pitfalls of this approach is covered in Takamura Sensei's excellent article on Shu-ha-ri.
So here at least is one example of a training methodology where the outcome of IS does not require solely focusing on IT.
Best,
Ernesto Lemke