The continued Evolution of Aikido

Gene,

I approach Aikido as budo. As budo it also is misogi. I also study Yoga. I don't confuse the two. If attacked, I don't think I'll drop into downward dog.

There are parts of what Chiba says that do agree with your position; do you acknowledge that he seems to disagree with parts of what you have been saying?

David Henderson wrote: 1. Your description -- Ueshiba was, even as an elderly man, first and foremost a competitive person, as opposed to someone who had mastered that aspect of themselves and was trying to impart a different message, one suggested by several other posters. That description. 2. Your data. You say, for example, this thread is the first place you've ever run into the idea of Aikido as misogi practice, even though it is one of O'sensei's more famous notions. 3. Your conclusion. Straw men burn easy, don't they. So what?

So nothing better to contribute than to attempt to attack me personally?
1.) I didn't tell Osensei, in his 80's, to say that he'd never been beaten(in competition)and was able to carry 1200lbs and had a rippled body, rather than that he'd competed as a young man , but now he's moved on to more spiritual self realization. Why didn't he say that? Hmmm. maybe 'cause that's not what he felt was important. One thing, we'll never know for sure, but IN MY Opinion, that is significant.

2.) What difference does it make where I first heard of Misogi, it's still a Shinto practice of ritual cleansing, usually before speaking to the spirits of the dead. My point is that it had no bearing on anything we're talking about here and I don't beleive that's what Aikido is, either.

3.) That's not my conclusion and you may not project it to me.

So, instead of engaging in personal attack, why don't we just agree to dis-agree.

Clarence Couch wrote: So nothing better to contribute than to attempt to attack me personally? 1.) I didn't tell Osensei, in his 80's, to say that he'd never been beaten(in competition)and was able to carry 1200lbs and had a rippled body, rather than that he'd competed as a young man , but now he's moved on to more spiritual self realization. Why didn't he say that? Hmmm. maybe 'cause that's not what he felt was important. One thing, we'll never know for sure, but IN MY Opinion, that is significant. 2.) What difference does it make where I first heard of Misogi, it's still a Shinto practice of ritual cleansing, usually before speaking to the spirits of the dead. My point is that it had no bearing on anything we're talking about here and I don't beleive that's what Aikido is, either. 3.) That's not my conclusion and you may not project it to me. So, instead of engaging in personal attack, why don't we just agree to dis-agree.

OK, Gene, let's do this in order.

First, I mean to challenge your opinion because I don't think its sound. I don't mean to insult you. If you felt insulted, rather than challenged, I apologize that I hurt your feelings.

Second, thin data, to me, is your clinging to a single radio interview and your idiosyncratic interpretation of what it says about the complex and interesting person who was being interviewed. I wouldn't base those kinds of conclusions on that interview, because they are at odds with a great deal else that Ueshiba said and wrote in his later years.

Third, it matters where you heard of misogi because it says something about your depth of knowledge on this particular subject.

Fourth, by "your conclusion," I meant your mischaracterization of what I said -- i.e., the straw man position -- well isn't that O'Sensei's voice? You repeat this argument here.

Fifth, if I were to attack you personally, I would be talking about you as a person, not the views you are expressing.

Clarence Couch wrote: I'm just observing the Osensei was a very competitive individual and engaged in competition all his life, so much so that even in his 80's he boasted of never been beaten (so I guess he never mastered himself), which to me means Aikido was meant to be a competitive MA. Also, the plain truth is, in a confrontation with skilled opponent, if you don't take them out, they're gonna kill you., so all that chess business flies right out the window.

Really, you need to put his point in his own context, and unless you think he was also being competitive about athe All-Japan Octogenarian Androgeny Beauty Pageant in boasting of his soft, shapely body like a woman under his clothes, but perhaps I may have gotten it wrong. Anyone can see what he meant if they watch the video, so let's leave that.

In point of fact in true budo, whether I live or die makes not one whit of difference to my victory if my objective is the protection of someone else from that attack -- so long as I accomplish that goal. Victory is not "winning" in that narrow sense and is not even synonymous with personal survival in armed conflict where true budo exists -- and this is true of the deep martial traditions -- East and West. Even apart from the many tales of stalwart samurai, the film Braveheart illustrates the greatness of ignominious death to work a final victory, and, perhaps, there is another even more significant one that might be mentioned ...

Clarence Couch wrote: Very simple- adapting to improve to survive.

Well I guess I do understand what you mean by evolution then. I don't think shodo-o-seisu would be an adaptation because I think it's already present in Aikido today. Clearly there is variation (those proverbial branches and leaves, Chiba spoke of), but Aikido as I understand it is deals with this concept plenty.

David Henderson wrote: First, I mean to challenge your opinion because I don't think its sound. I don't mean to insult you. If you felt insulted, rather than challenged, I apologize that I hurt your feelings.

Apology accepted. You didn't hurt my feelings (I'm a big boy), it's more a reflection on you. I'd be disappointed to think that's how you are.

David Henderson wrote: Second, thin data, to me, is your clinging to a single radio interview and your idiosyncratic interpretation of what it says about the complex and interesting person who was being interviewed. I wouldn't base those kinds of conclusions on that interview, because they are at odds with a great deal else that Ueshiba said and wrote in his later years.

Well, it's just not that radio interview (like I said), there's the rice cake deal and several of his uchidesi's said he was always like that. Nishio Shihan said he changed a technique after a Judoka threw him (in a competition). You won't accept the empirical evidence that Osensei was competitive and advocated competition to ensure Aikdo techniques were martially effective and that competiton has a place in Aikido and'd be an evolvement, but I do and you won't change my mind.

David Henderson wrote: Third, it matters where you heard of misogi because it says something about your depth of knowledge on this particular subject.

Dave, this is one of those things that's subjective and not rocket science. I understand it, I just disagree with it.

David Henderson wrote: Fourth, by "your conclusion," I meant your mischaracterization of what I said -- i.e., the straw man position -- well isn't that O'Sensei's voice? You repeat this argument here.

Well, to me a "straw man" position is, in the gun world, a person buys a gun for someone else , who couldn't get it on their own. That is a legal term - a "Straw man " purchase, so obviously you're using the term differently.

David Henderson wrote: Fifth, if I were to attack you personally, I would be talking about you as a person, not the views you are expressing.

So are you taking back your apology? My views and expressions ARE me,especially in this medium.

Listen, we're going nowhere with this, so why don't we cease and desist and agree to disagree and drop it?

Erick Mead wrote: Really, you need to put his point in his own context, and unless you think he was also being competitive about athe All-Japan Octogenarian Androgeny Beauty Pageant in boasting of his soft, shapely body like a woman under his clothes, but perhaps I may have gotten it wrong. Anyone can see what he meant if they watch the video, so let's leave that.

OK,so if we can't reason, we just brush it off with a blanket statement and sweep it under the rug? Uhhh, nope.

I believe I am putting the interview in it's proper perspective. I don't know about anyone else, but here is a man in his 80's , one of the most respected men in his Country, after spending his life talking to folks about everything and definitely with the mind to get his point across, with yet another opportunity to spread his message about Shinto, Omoto, Aikido, Oneness, Misogi, masakatsu agatsu or anything else, but he chose one thing and clearly emphasized that he remained unbeaten in all his years (in a clearly competitive and egotistical manner{ so maybe he wasn't omnipotent in intergalactic oneness afterall}, if I might add)

Erick Mead wrote: In point of fact in true budo, whether I live or die makes not one whit of difference to my victory if my objective is the protection of someone else from that attack -- so long as I accomplish that goal. Victory is not "winning" in that narrow sense and is not even synonymous with personal survival in armed conflict where true budo exists ......

You can't deny the simple fact that if your MA isn't martially effective, all that "true Budo" stuff don't mean squat if you're dead. Btw, if you get killed trying to protect someone else, while sounding quite noble, they'll most likely get killed too( not to mention, what if you find yourself in a situation where you're not protecting someone else). Everybody's just as dead and the bad guy wins. Ever hear the old saying,"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"

Gene,

If you identify with your opinions, does it threaten your identity to change your opinions?

By the way, I did not apologize for challenging your thinking, so I could hardly take back such an apology.

Still, you haven't bothered to answer a question I asked -- do you acknowledge that the Chiba quote conflicts with some of your views, but are relevant to this discussion? Just curious.

Matthew Gano wrote: Well I guess I do understand what you mean by evolution then. I don't think shodo-o-seisu would be an adaptation because I think it's already present in Aikido today. Clearly there is variation (those proverbial branches and leaves, Chiba spoke of), but Aikido as I understand it is deals with this concept plenty.

Shodo-o-seisu? Like this: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/1...do-o-seisu.htm

Well, in the context of evolvement, he says Aikido is a defensive MA. Imo, that conflicts with Budo (the way of war is to defeat your enemy). The best defense is a good offense. Making Aikido a offense oriented MA would be evolutionary. Instead of recieving and re-directing the first move, intercepting the first move with and attack, or even making the first move(like a pre-emptive strike), would be an evolvement. However, my main point is getting folks to THINK about Aikido, the MA in a evolutionary context. I really believe it's our duty. At this point just moving Aikido in the direction of making it martially effective again would be evolutionary. I undersatnd that there is (and should be) variations of Aikido.That is Aikido evolving and it may also mean campaigning to increase the popularity of Aikido, having thriving dojos that aren't in the backrooms of karate schools and rec centers. Some have said that that's OK, but I just don't believe that that was Osensei's intention for Aikido.

David Henderson wrote: Gene,If you identify with your opinions, does it threaten your identity to change your opinions? By the way, I did not apologize for challenging your thinking, so I could hardly take back such an apology.Still, you haven't bothered to answer a question I asked -- do you acknowledge that the Chiba quote conflicts with some of your views, but are relevant to this discussion? Just curious.

So you just won't cease and desist *sigh* ok....

I don't just identify with my opinions, my opinions identify me. You won't get anywhere trying to psychoanalyze me, I'm quite comfortable with myself. I won't change my opinions because I believe in them with all my heart.
Now, I do disagree with Chiba's quote for several reasons: one is that that's his opinion and is based on his experience. My experience is different. Another is that that's his opinion,which he has a right to and I have a right to mine. Another is just because he said it doesn't make it true. His perception of Budo is not the omnipotent concept of budo, which is quite simply "the way of war". he certainly didn't have the monopoly on "the way of war". He didn't invent it or have a copyright on it. He even says, "In his way of thinking" blah, blah blah, his Japanese language doesn't have a word for "new budo". Not my problem, that means nothing to me. American English has a word for that- "New Budo". My problem with "his way of thinking" is that he's trying to project Budo into sports. Who does that? Who says we have to do that? War is war and sports is sports. Budo is the "way of war" , you mean the Japanese can't come up with a word or phrase to mean "the way of sports"? Again, not my problem. American has such words. Nobody I know is trying to make a sports oriented Aikido a "new Budo". I've not even said anything about a"sports Aikido" or a "new Budo" , I've just said that competiton in Aikido is a good thing to make sure that the techniques are martially effective, in order for Aikido actually be a MA., in my opinion.
Now, if you make a disparaging statement and it has the word"you" at the front of it, that is a personal attack. My challenge to you is to rephrase your offensive statements without using the word "you". if you can't( or won't), I win.

Mr. Couch,

I've just now arrived at this discussion, but it seems you have a marked nack for missing the point entirely -- a nack I'm beginning to think you nurture intentionally.

What Chiba-sensei was saying is that there is room for branches to sprout out from Aikido, more "flowery" expressions of it, but only so long as we continue to remember that they are branches, offshoots, not the root/base thing itself... and that it is crucial that there still be people following the original trunk of the tree. If the trunk should disappear, the branches would fall to the ground, being attached to nothing anymore.

Think of it as a rare and desirable animal. Many want to breed to it, for the gifts it bestows, and that' s all good, but there still must be some who will breed that animal pure, so that hybrids can be made from it. If not, if one tries to keep on hybridizing off of the hybrids rather than returning to the source, what is left will quickly become weak, impotent, and have no obvious or pointed connection to that which caused it to be so great in the first place.

This isn't a matter of Old or New Budo. It is Budo. Offshoots will occur, and are fine now, but don't mistake those branches for the tree itself.

Peace & Creation for us all,

JT

John Taylor Yezeguielian wrote: If the trunk should disappear, the branches would fall to the ground, being attached to nothing anymore.

And if all the branches disappear the trunk will wither and die from lack of nourishment.

[metaphor] Aikido, like the tree, is an integrated organism wherein all the parts contribute to the well-being of the whole. [/metaphor]

Ron

Clarence Couch wrote: Shodo-o-seisu? Like this: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/1...do-o-seisu.htm Well...he says Aikido is a defensive MA. Imo, that conflicts with Budo (the way of war is to defeat your enemy). The best defense is a good offense.

I know this is a popular sentiment. I've grown up my whole short life with folks who share this exact opinion and exercised it regularly, but I think sometimes the best offense is a good defense. And in my opinion, the way of war depends on what one seeks to gain. If they want more war, that's what their way of war is: to propogate war. If they want to defeat their enemy, that's their way of war. My way of war is about finding peace and that doesn't necessarily mean defeating my attacker by "conventional" means (e.g. my fisticuffs of steel ), though it certainly might include them.

At this point just moving Aikido in the direction of making it martially effective again would be evolutionary.

See, but I do think it's martially effective. I'm not saying there aren't new ways of looking at it, but I'm a small guy and Aikido has made it easier for me to handle my big friends, most of whom grew up scrapping...something I would imagine might fit with your litmus test. I'm not saying I'm a good fighter, I'm saying that for as little as I've trained, and as sparsely as I've trained (all in Aikido), I am moderately effective at "besting" by buddies. Hardly the be-all end-all of tests ("street fighters" can suck at fighting too), but the best I have at my disposal and better than your average person, who has very little need of fighting skills...statistically speaking; as I recall.

but I just don't believe that that was Osensei's intention for Aikido.

O Sensei's intention for Aikido, from what I can tell, was for something akin to personal perfection and purity. Without getting into what that could exactly mean, I think it should suffice to say that O Sensei had very lofty goals and one componant of that set of goals was the profound physical potency that comes from training in aiki.

Well, I put the last lengthy posts of Mr. Couch in my ATETD* and surprisingly the result was:

Clarence Couch wrote:

So Gene, make us (and yourself) a favor.
Empty your cup and relax a bit. You're only starting to scratch the surface of what is Aikido. Stop acting like a know-it-all-noob and listen to people with more experience and knowledge about the issue at hand than you have.

Please. Thanks. Merry Cristmas.

*American To English Translation Device.

I'm with Demetrio.

Clarence, it seems to me at least that you are terrifically incurious whenever you run into contrary information. When you were told you were taking a Chiba quote out of context, you didn't say, "Really, how?" Instead, you bring up Moriteru as a potential embodiment of what you are looking for, but when told that in fact Moriteru is even more conservative, you drop the whole thing altogether and say that you aren't really interested, because nothing will change your mind. When someone brought up the idea of aikido as misogi, which is in fact central to Osensei's own conception of his aikido, you didn't reply, "I am interested, tell me more." You cherry pick bits of things that conform to what you want to see/believe, and then when people try to get you to see the larger picture, you just reiterate your original formulation as if that alone is refutation enough. You assume that your military experience gives you a privileged point of view about the reality of combat, only to find out that there are in fact ex military and current military men on Aikiweb. This isn't a formula for a fruitful exchange. You are right in saying that we seem to be going around and around, but I think you should take a breath and take some responsibility for this state of affairs.

Clarence Couch wrote: Shodo-o-seisu? Like this: http://www.expertvillage.com/video/1...do-o-seisu.htm

Please excuse me, I only could see but not heare the explanations.
Do you realy think this to be something new or different from Aikido?

Instead of recieving and re-directing the first move, intercepting the first move with and attack, or even making the first move(like a pre-emptive strike), would be an evolvement.

This was one of the first things I learnt: Aikido isn't to react, but to act. This is pointed out often in our practice:
Nage creates the situation. Not uke.

Recieving and re-directing just makes it easier for beginners to learn the basic movements.

just moving Aikido in the direction of making it martially effective again would be evolutionary.

Well our practice emphasizes the martial aspect of Aikido.

... having thriving dojos that aren't in the backrooms of karate schools and rec centers.

Oh, the situation here in Europe is different: In France, where one of our shihan comes from, Aikido ist taught in schools and every Aikido teacher - not only in school but also in a dojo has to be state approved.

Here in Germany we have got another system, but Aikido also is very popular here.

All together it seems things are different here.

Carsten

Ron Ragusa wrote: And if all the branches disappear the trunk will wither and die from lack of nourishment. [metaphor] Aikido, like the tree, is an integrated organism wherein all the parts contribute to the well-being of the whole. [/metaphor] Ron

I suggest not-so metaphor -- but the image of the principle of ki in operation which is to say, in-yo ho. The principle of jouri 条理 expounded by Miura Baien as the process of ki in development follows the image of the branching division typical of the tree. 条 is a combination of radicals for 'winter' and 'tree' where branching is naturally revealed. There is unceasing and recurrent division, both revealed and hidden developments that are of the same type (branches and roots), and necessarily develop in tandem, and progressive differentiation, but unceasing unity -- all in one coherent whole.

For those who routinely play with jiyu-waza this kind of constantly branching and flow should feel very familiar.

Fractal development, on many levels.

Ron Ragusa wrote: Martial effectiveness is not a characteristic of any martial art. It's a measure of the capability of the practitioner of a given art. When you divorce the art from those that employ it you render the question of martial effectiveness meaningless. Ron

Hey!!! I think I said that too!!! Sort of...

You know this conversation about the evolution of Aikido pops up a few times a year usually at dinner...Fowler Sensei and we Senior Students just smile and listen and I answer the queries much the same way I did here....

Then during the next class I may playfully toss the "seeker" across the mat a few times and say the same thing to them that was said to me...

Theres no better time to evolve like the present! One technique at a time LOL....

In essence There are some on this board who may have been chosen by a higher spirit/power to take Aikido "to the next level".... The rest of us will just have to be content with "evolving ourselves"..

William Hazen

Erick Mead wrote: I suggest not-so metaphor -- but the image of the principle of ki in operation which is to say, in-yo ho.

"in-yo ho"? sounded like a hip-hop rap group! are you saying that aikido evolves into hip-hop rap? wonder if we can get "aikido with the stars" program.

my group name will be "ai-ki do"

David Henderson wrote: Fractal development, on many levels.

Seems to me THAT'S how aikido WILL evolve?...........

Tony

John Taylor Yezeguielian wrote: Mr. Couch, I've just now arrived at this discussion, but it seems you have a marked nack for missing the point entirely -- a nack I'm beginning to think you nurture intentionally. What Chiba-sensei was saying is that there is room for branches to sprout out from Aikido, more "flowery" expressions of it, but only so long as we continue to remember that they are branches, offshoots, not the root/base thing itself... and that it is crucial that there still be people following the original trunk of the tree. If the trunk should disappear, the branches would fall to the ground, being attached to nothing anymore. Think of it as a rare and desirable animal. Many want to breed to it, for the gifts it bestows, and that' s all good, but there still must be some who will breed that animal pure, so that hybrids can be made from it. If not, if one tries to keep on hybridizing off of the hybrids rather than returning to the source, what is left will quickly become weak, impotent, and have no obvious or pointed connection to that which caused it to be so great in the first place. This isn't a matter of Old or New Budo. It is Budo. Offshoots will occur, and are fine now, but don't mistake those branches for the tree itself. Peace & Creation for us all, JT

Mr Taylor, I understand well what all Mr Chiba said ( and here I am dealing with your mis-preception of me) You assume, because I didn't mention the limbs and leaves vs the trunk and roots portion of his words, that I missed that point. Well I didn't, but the fact is that Mr Henderson was talking about a different point( old Budo vs new Budo), so that's what we talked about.
Now, if you'd like to discuss that portion, I'd be happy to, as I agree that this isn't even an issue of old Budo or new Budo, but trying to convince Mr Henderson of that may be futile.
AFA that tree analogy, the problem I have with this analogy is that it opens up room for folks' ago to get in the way of seeing the overall picture. For instance, how many folks, after reading that analogy, secretly yearns or even feel like or think of themselves as being the trunk or the roots? How many feel like it's more noble or important to be the trunk or the roots? Go ahead, don't be shy, raise your hands. Even you yourself , Mr Taylor said that without the trunk or roots , the limbs would simply fall to the ground. No offense, but that's a pretty arrogant idea.

The only purpose of that tree is to grow limbs and branches, so it can grow leaves to it can grow and thrive for ONE PURPOSE and ONE PURPOSE ONLY--to grow a flower and then a fruit and then a seed, to make another tree. That's it, that's it's only purpose. So to me, the seed is the most important part of that tree,'cause after that seed drops, the roots, trunk, limbs, branches, leaves and all can die happy, 'cause it's fulfilled it's God given natural inctinctual purpose- to produce another tree. Also, in context of this topic, when the tree evolves, it in the seeding process, another reason to be the seed. Consider me the seed.

Then again, maybe that analogy is not a good analogy at all, showing the flaw in another man's perception/opinion

Raul Rodrigo wrote: I'm with Demetrio.

Hmm, Im sorry that y'all feel that way. Maybe if you two could get together and contribute something beneficial, we can move on. Otherwise I'd suggest skipping this thread. I;m jsut discussing ideas and conceptswith folks. Not really trying to come across as anything other than a person with ideas and opinions.

Ok, so here we go- you post to me and I post to you. That's how it goes with this medium.

Raul Rodrigo wrote: Clarence, it seems to me at least that you are terrifically incurious whenever you run into contrary information. When you were told you were taking a Chiba quote out of context, you didn't say, "Really, how?" Instead, you bring up Moriteru as a potential embodiment of what you are looking for, but when told that in fact Moriteru is even more conservative, you drop the whole thing altogether and say that you aren't really interested, because nothing will change your mind.

Wow, I'm not sure that the chronological sequence is correct , much less the facts. Sorry I don't respond the way you think I should. Didn't know that was expected of me. Talking baout taking things out of context and spinning facts.

Raul Rodrigo wrote: When someone brought up the idea of aikido as misogi, which is in fact central to Osensei's own conception of his aikido, you didn't reply, "I am interested, tell me more." You cherry pick bits of things that conform to what you want to see/believe, and then when people try to get you to see the larger picture, you just reiterate your original formulation as if that alone is refutation enough.

Fact is , I'm not interested in learning more about Misogi at this time (I'm a Christian, Misogi is Shinto), that's why I didn't ask. I understand the concept of spiritual cleansing and how Aikido is geared to help with that, but I also know that is an individual journey that each of us are on, so YMMV.

Ruaul Rodrigo wrote: You assume that your military experience gives you a privileged point of view about the reality of combat, only to find out that there are in fact ex military and current military men on Aikiweb..

And the point is? Ok, so there's other ex and current military. Then why aren't they talking about the reality of a vicious fight? I'm not assuming anything. I'm seeing alot of folks missing key points about Budo and fighting, key points that could mean the difference of life or death, that refutes some of this "feel good, no problems, new age Budo" that seems to be "flowing". I'm simply offering my insights and I'm not insisting on anyone taking it or not.

Again, if you have that much of a problem with me, just ignore me, it's OK.