senshincenter

Mr. Hooker wrote:

"For instance Ikkyo, Uke knows where Nage wants him to go he can feel Nage's lead. So by cooperation they together find an Aikido resolution to the interaction and restore balance to their worlds. This is Uke Waza not just the ability to take a fall and survive. One is the leader and one is the follower and Nage is not always the leader. Sometimes Nage allows Uke to lead to the resolution and follows while in control of the interaction."

I find your position on uke waza very sound. I also agree with your statement that most aikidoka do not penetrate enough of the art to move beyond what Nage has to teach in order to see what Uke is offering. However, as I understood the original thread, it is partially the position contained in your last quote (pasted above) that led to why the original post was made in the first place. The poster was interested in what effect, if any, the repetition of such avenues (i.e. uke leading toward the completion of a throw or a pin, etc.) toward an "Aikido resolution" would have upon him within combative situations. Hence, I am not so sure that labeling things, or suggesting that we can label them, "Aikido resolutions" is the solution or explanation the original poster was interested in receiving. In other words, if such end-results are going to be held up as ideals we should aspire to or at least aspire toward investigating, I'm sure the poster would ask from within a combative environment, "Who wants them?!"

I undoubtedly believe you meant to suggest something else, as things pertain to the original post, but, for me at least, it is not clear how we are to reconcile your position that uke should and/or can lead in training and the original poster's concern over what affect such training has upon ones body/mind while within combative situations. If you could find the time, I would greatly appreciate if you could draw a clearer conclusion concerning this specific matter of the original post.

Humble thanks,
david