Quote:
Ross Robertson wrote:
To be clear, are you stating that your aikido as you know and teach it is by design devoid of social or political relevance?
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
Are all elements of conflict-management and peacemaking absent, ...
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
... or for that matter, forbidden?
|
There are no restraints or proscriptions in the aikidō I know. Nothing is forbidden. The aspects you mentioned are just not topic of our practice. They just do not occur.
Quote:
|
I want to be sure I'm not misunderstanding you.
|
I think, you got me right.
Quote:
|
How would you describe the basis for the worth/merit of your art in itself?
|
To make a very, very long story very, very short:
To me aikidō in the first place is a certain way of body work that helps to connect my body and helps to connect me myself to my own body. Kneading and connecting the body, polishing the mind, developing the self, growing. It's a way of individualistic personal growth using a certain form of body work.
Because aikidō is a definite form of bodywork of a certain person, there is no way it can "get outside", no way to play a role on the pollitical or social stage. Connecting your toe to your thumb is very interesting, maybe helpfull for the person doing it. But it is in no way of political or social relevance.
The outcome of this bodywork is designed to be martially effective. It is designed to defend against bodily - not verbal! - attacks. To manage bodily - not intellectual - conflicts. There exist beautyfull methods of conflictmanagement and peace making. I very much recommend the Non-Violent-Communication of Marshall Rosenberg. Because aikidō is body work it is not needed as long as talking is possible.
Finally: What I know as aikidō, what I learn for nearly 19 years now, what I try to teach since six years now is a Japanese budō.
We have a lot of people here who know more than I do about both parts of this term: Japanese and budō. Much more than I do. But I think that it is obvious that a japanese budō is just different ... ?!
budō is just not designed to solve problems or fit into the schemes of the questions of our culture, isn't it?