Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Training

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-15-2009, 04:05 PM   #26
Charles Hill
Dojo: Numazu Aikikai/Aikikai Honbu Dojo
Location: Three Lakes WI/ Mishima Japan
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 837
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote: View Post
Hi Charles,
It is a nice theory, but today everybody agree that O sensei didn't teach, and even wasn't interested at all if anybody can learn something from him. It works against the idea that he wanted to pass some knowledge to his students.

The fact that somebody wants to FEEL a technique from him and adjusts his own ukemi for that goal, doesn't prove at all that that requirement comes from O sensei himself.You are trying to inverse a logic here, sorry.
Hi Szczepan,

Thanks for the feedback. I think I have failed in explaining what I believe is supposed to be happening in the transmission of an art from a Japanese teacher to a Japanese student.

Let me try this. For anyone interested in how this transmission is supposed to go, I highly recommend reading up on the psychology of "tatemae/honne" and "omote/ura". Then read all of Dr. Goldsbury's essays with these ideas in mind, especially the seemingly innocuous ones that don't even address Aikido directly (I personally enjoyed the stories of Hiroshima City Police committee and the car/bicycle accident.)

Then when you hear from a deshi of the founder "O'Sensei was beyond technique." "I didn't understand a word he said." "O'Sensei mainly taught about spiritual matters." "O'Sensei didn't teach." you then might be able to catch the wink.
 
Old 05-15-2009, 04:16 PM   #27
Charles Hill
Dojo: Numazu Aikikai/Aikikai Honbu Dojo
Location: Three Lakes WI/ Mishima Japan
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 837
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Too much verbiage from me, I know, but let me add two more things.

When examining O'Sensei's "transmission" I find keeping in mind two things very helpful.

1. Fujita Shihan has said that after the war, Morihei Ueshiba didn't have uchideshi.

2. Before the war, Morihei Ueshiba's deshi were all young, unmarried and from wealthy families. If they had been born in England, they would have matriculated at Oxford and would have spent their time worrying about getting "rusticated" for one offense or another.
 
Old 05-15-2009, 07:01 PM   #28
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Szczepan,

In your first post in this thread (with the quote), you misinterpreted what I stated, as others have pointed out, and you still persist in the misinterpretation. So, from my standpoint, the discussion cannot really begin.

Best wishes, as usual.

PAG

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
 
Old 05-15-2009, 09:39 PM   #29
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Then when you hear from a deshi of the founder "O'Sensei was beyond technique." "I didn't understand a word he said." "O'Sensei mainly taught about spiritual matters." "O'Sensei didn't teach." you then might be able to catch the wink.
Charles
Most of us here really don't need a lesson on "tatemae/hone," nor the appellation that we just don't "get it." Yes we do; in context, with the appropriate nuance, and for many of us here with personal experience in both gendai and Koryu arts. Understanding it and dealing with it- does not mean we have to a) take pride in understanding it b) accept it as a good thing with our approval c) try to sell it as anything more than what it is.I'm NOT saying your are either.

Yes...many of us also caught the wink…at so many of the obfuscations about what they told us through the Eighties and nineties, till Stanley put them on the spot with contrary evidence.
About the deshi's actual training time with Ueshiba-which also proved highly suspect.
About their ever really being taught in detail or obversly the fact that they when they said they didn't get it their techniques proved their words to be true.
The "wink" during all the obfuscations and what some consider outright lies about Daito ryu -that came by way of the Hombu. Including a Shihan telling me it no longer existed.
I gave up investing in what they "say" interesting or not, and instead look for corroboration at every turn. It's why I appreciated Stanley's method of research.

All you are really forwarding is that we shouldn't be sure anyone knows anything about anyone or anything, accept of course --any- individual and --their- teacher; they'e different.

So you fellows can debate
Whether or not they really attacked
Whether or not they really even spent much training with him at all
Whether or not who was really being the actual Uke
Whether or not Ueshiba actually taught at the hombu during the tenure of many of the later deshi
Whether or not he trained in Daito ryu a little bit, a lotta bit or even ever met "Some guy" called Takeda at all.
Quote:
I think I have failed in explaining what I believe is supposed to be happening in the transmission of an art from a Japanese teacher to a Japanese student.
There is no such thing as a fixed Japanese transmission model, not even in a single art. Not all kata methods are the same, nor are the omote / ura models all the same and for certain not the way aiki arts are taught compared to koryu.

But that said you can go back to the debate
Whether or not Ukemi is anything more than a pre-conditioned response- and the possibility that without it much of which is -Aikido as technique- will simply not work
Whether designing an "ukemi model by indoctrination" by forcing newbies to watch and learn how they were expected to receive, has any real merit in a martial art, or it just makes the model work in isolation.

And whether or not all of those explanations and detailed treatises on "the wisdom of fitting-in to a defense offered" from a teacher has ever really been "wise" at all; on any day, by any standard.

It's all good, it's all fascinating. As far as I am concerned --they- did a fairly good job of teaching both outsiders and insiders to never believe what they say at face value. Further, that by implication we would be fools for doing so. Oddly enough, the realization of having to "steal it" seems to fit the profile of being lied to about it in the first place. Makes Tatemae / hone …fit Omote and Ura quite well.
Me, I just like being honest and see people teaching and telling people where its going…with details. And oddly enough I was taught that and have seen that by teachers in the Japanese arts-both in Aikido and Koryu who hated the Japanese model…
or maybe they were just "winking" when they said that.
Cheers
Dan

Last edited by DH : 05-15-2009 at 09:53 PM.
 
Old 05-15-2009, 10:11 PM   #30
Ellis Amdur
Location: Seattle
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 809
Offline
Terry Dobson and Correct Ukemi

I'm going to do my best to quote the story as Terry told it:
Quote:
For a couple years, I was everywhere Tohei was. And he just loved to take me around with him. He had this schtick. He'd be in front of all these Japanese, they'd all been through the war, and he'd start in, "With the power of aikido, even a giant gaijin is helpless. Look at this man. He's a monster, isn't he. And now, I . . ." and then he'd throw me around and all would be well in the land of Wa. So one time, we were doing this demo in front these little old ladies, it was, I don't know, the "Little Old Ladies Knitting Society," or something, Tohei would demonstrate everywhere, and he started in, "Look at this gaijin, this huge gaijin. Go ahead, hit me with all your might, gaijin-san, it will have no effect against the power of aikido!" And I was thinking, "I love you, Tohei sensei, so I got to give you might best," and I came steaming in like an eighteen wheeler highballin' down Route 5 with a load of angle iron in the back of the truck and a load of meth between my eyes <OK, Terry didn't exactly say that part, but it demanded to be writtent and I hit him right between the eyes with a shomen uchi. And Tohei sensei stiffened like a poleaxed steer and fell flat out on his back. Unconscious. And there was dead silence. And I was standing there wringing my hands thinking, 'Oh s**t, I just killed my sensei.' and after the longest time, his eyes opened, he gets right to his feet and he yells at me, "You idiot, you did it wrong! Hit me again."

 
Old 05-16-2009, 12:34 AM   #31
dps
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,119
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

'Oh s**t, I just killed my sensei.

That is so funny.

David
 
Old 05-16-2009, 12:55 AM   #32
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
Ah, well, then, let me play Devil's Advocate.

What if there really wasn't a reversal at all?

http://www.koryu.com/library/tnishioka1.html
Hello Mark,

I think your Devil's advocacy needs to be somewhat stronger.

The point I am making is much simpler than the point you are answering by citing Nishioka on rei (with which I agree).

Takeda taught Daito-ryu kata (or waza, if you like) and charged so much per waza. I do not think he was the kind of teacher who would expose himself to danger by reversing roles and taking ukemi from his own students. Ueshiba, also, did not do this, but for different reasons. Of course, Ueshiba also expected his students to become better, but he expected them to show this in the skill with which they attacked--and also the skill with which they dealt with the reversal of roles--to put it in your terms.

Best wishes,

PAG

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
 
Old 05-16-2009, 02:18 AM   #33
Charles Hill
Dojo: Numazu Aikikai/Aikikai Honbu Dojo
Location: Three Lakes WI/ Mishima Japan
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 837
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Most of us here really don't need a lesson on "tatemae/hone," nor the appellation that we just don't "get it."
Hi Dan,

Please note that my post started with "Hi Szczepan". Please note that the "lesson" (in quotes to emphasize that this is your word) includes the appellation "for anyone interested" and "supposed." Then please indicate how I communicated that "you (plural)" don't get it. (Also not sure what "it" means.)

Then perhaps I can understand your post enough to respond with something interesting. Otherwise your post comes off as strawmannish.

Charles
 
Old 05-16-2009, 06:15 AM   #34
MM
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,996
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Peter A Goldsbury wrote: View Post
Hello Mark,

I think your Devil's advocacy needs to be somewhat stronger.
LOL! I was never very good at being Devil's Advocate.

Quote:
Peter A Goldsbury wrote: View Post
The point I am making is much simpler than the point you are answering by citing Nishioka on rei (with which I agree).

Takeda taught Daito-ryu kata (or waza, if you like) and charged so much per waza. I do not think he was the kind of teacher who would expose himself to danger by reversing roles and taking ukemi from his own students. Ueshiba, also, did not do this, but for different reasons. Of course, Ueshiba also expected his students to become better, but he expected them to show this in the skill with which they attacked--and also the skill with which they dealt with the reversal of roles--to put it in your terms.

Best wishes,

PAG
On Takeda ... Do you think it mattered to him which role he actually assumed? IF the aiki skills are true body skills that are built within, then, would it matter if one was uke or tori? Even being tori, Takeda had the skills to make the technique go whichever way he wanted -- for most people. So, I find that it wouldn't have been much of a danger for Takeda to take ukemi from his students. If anything, I think that were the roles reversed, Takeda's students might find themselves in a worse position - having to deal with an attack from a "monster" of a budo man and not being able to handle it.

It's been my experience that people that have very good internal skills are going to do a specific technique no matter what I want to do. Or, no matter who is uke or tori at the beginning. From that, I can't see Takeda really worrying about "danger" when training students.

As a teaching model compared to koryu methods ... I find myself contemplating the issue.
 
Old 05-16-2009, 06:35 AM   #35
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Charles Hill wrote: View Post
Hi Dan,

Please note that my post started with "Hi Szczepan". Please note that the "lesson" (in quotes to emphasize that this is your word) includes the appellation "for anyone interested" and "supposed." Then please indicate how I communicated that "you (plural)" don't get it. (Also not sure what "it" means.)

Then perhaps I can understand your post enough to respond with something interesting. Otherwise your post comes off as strawmannish.

Charles
Hi Charles
I hope I didn't come across as adversarial in any way. That was not my intent.
From "Hi Szczepan" you made a segue in the next paragraph to "anyone interested" which led to telling us how transmission is supposed to go, which then led to the implication that we are not capable of understanding what his deshi meant with certain comments.
If I was too strong please understand I wasn't trying to hang you with your comments, just responding that we hear far too much about the vagaries and grayness of Japanese comments in person and in print as to negate almost the entirety of the experience. I don't think that always holds up to scrutiny. The comments you quoted do not stand in isolation. They stand in context with thousands of pages of interviews and then they themselves in person being asked. Not to mention his later deshi being felt up-close in person.
There are enough comments, personal stories, testimonies what have you, to put the proverbial flesh on the bone in regards to Ueshiba and his training, this to include much video witness as well.
My comments were directed to the point-or should I say hypothesis- that so much is supposedly vague.
If it were indeed as vague as some would have us believe it would leave us with nothing to talk about as we could challenge everything said by everyone, and I would even challenge the witness of video footage that the vast majority of Aikidoka do not understand just what Ueshiba is doing in that footage. And if I were so inclined I could do so without being vague in any way.
Also the comment about "Japanese transmission" was a stretch. I think you over reached in trying to combine all of the transmission models into a single experience. That became particularly strident as a comment in a debate which unclouded Ueshiba and Takeda's model juxtaposed to the more traditional model of teacher as Uke.
I will have to review when I have more time-I am about to train all day, but I struggle to see a straw man anywhere on the horizon.

Cheers
Dan
 
Old 05-16-2009, 06:53 AM   #36
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
On Takeda ... Do you think it mattered to him which role he actually assumed?
PAG. Absolutely. He was seriously paranoid. I do not think he was either a 'typical' son, or a 'typical' father--even given the harsh standards of samurai parenting at the time. If he were alive nowadays, especially in countries like the UK, with supposedly advanced social services, he would undoubtedly have been 'at risk' as a child and probably 'taken into care'. As a father, he would probably have been arrested for willful neglect, or for actually maltreating his son.

At least, this is my reading of the available evidence. I think that you are assuming he was a 'normal' person, ruled by the same kind of rational thinking that you yourself employ.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
IF the aiki skills are true body skills that are built within, then, would it matter if one was uke or tori? ... From that, I can't see Takeda really worrying about "danger" when training students.
PAG. But he always worried about danger. He was armed all the time. When out visiting, he had people taste his food before he would touch it. When dealing with people like Takeda, or even M Ueshiba, we need to take a serious mental leap.

For example, are you sure that Takeda or Ueshiba thought about 'aiki skills as true body skills built from within' in quite the same way as you are doing? If I were to play Devils Advocate, I think I would argue that neither Takeda nor Ueshiba had any need to teach kata or waza on your scenario. They could simply teach exercises for building aiki skills, much like Minoru Akuzawa does now.

Best wishes, as always.

PAG

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
 
Old 05-16-2009, 07:10 AM   #37
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Peter A Goldsbury wrote: View Post
PAG. Absolutely. He was seriously paranoid. I do not think he was either a 'typical' son, or a 'typical' father--even given the harsh standards of samurai parenting at the time. If he were alive nowadays, especially in countries like the UK, with supposedly advanced social services, he would undoubtedly have been 'at risk' as a child and probably 'taken into care'. As a father, he would probably have been arrested for willful neglect, or for actually maltreating his son.

At least, this is my reading of the available evidence. I think that you are assuming he was a 'normal' person, ruled by the same kind of rational thinking that you yourself employ.

PAG. But he always worried about danger. He was armed all the time. When out visiting, he had people taste his food before he would touch it. When dealing with people like Takeda, or even M Ueshiba, we need to take a serious mental leap.

For example, are you sure that Takeda or Ueshiba thought about 'aiki skills as true body skills built from within' in quite the same way as you are doing? If I were to play Devils Advocate, I think I would argue that neither Takeda nor Ueshiba had any need to teach kata or waza on your scenario. They could simply teach exercises for building aiki skills, much like Minoru Akuzawa does now.

Best wishes, as always.

PAG
I think examining the psychology of these men is interesting but not salient to their skills. Also, since we are discussing vagaries and gray areas, Ueshiba did solo training so did Sagawa. and Sagawa stated flatly that Takeda TOLD him not to talk about, nor to reveal the essence of the art but to a few students. Which he went on to clarify that he did not do till later in his career. Then noted that his students improved. Worthy of note is that Takeda had close students and students of very high stations in Japanese society. All of which seems to negate the idea that a)he was as paranoid as we were led to believe b) he did in fact reveal and attempt to make equals in teaching Sagawa, Horikawa, Ueshiba, and Hisa "the goods."
Be that as it may, I will agree with Mark to the extent that just last week I played with high ranked teachers in Aikido in a manner they hadn't seen me do yet. You can ask them if it mattered which role I took at all.

Waza
An interesting diversion is to discuss why aiki waza is so bizzare, so singular, justaposed to koryu jujutsu. Why it wasn't repeated, why his students tried to record it. I think there is a reason. And it is also the reason most of it doesn't work in the hands of the vast majority who try them.

Solo training
The fact that Ark and I both teach people solo exercises that condition the body that leads to aiki, and do so openly is not germane, other than to point out that they still exist and we...are capable of doing so.
Cheers
Dan
 
Old 05-16-2009, 07:53 AM   #38
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

OK. Why did both Takeda and Ueshiba always use kata / waza as a teaching tool, if they did not really need to?

PAG

Last edited by Peter Goldsbury : 05-16-2009 at 07:56 AM.

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
 
Old 05-16-2009, 09:49 AM   #39
Ellis Amdur
Location: Seattle
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 809
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

BTW - I have heard of at least two accounts of Takeda having his technique stopped, albeit when elderly. Sorry, I cannot remember where I read these, but I recall Sagawa claiming he had to take over with someone whom Takeda couldn't throw and there is an account in one of Tohei's writing (I think that Chris Li mentioned this) where Yukawa Tsutomu stated or is described as stopping Takeda cold. And Inoue Noriaki seems to claim that he begrudgingly when through the motions of "falling" for Takeda in public demos, something he did just to keep the "wa" going. Just for the record, so to speak.

As for the initial question, there is a real difference between "could" take ukemi and "would" take ukemi.
Let's take Ueshiba first. He did waza to show his "principals." As I write <ahem> elsewhere (almost finished with the cover and we have a printer - so stop asking . .. ), Ueshiba was initially furious with Ohba because he had to resort to "old school" DR to handle him - and was molified when the charismatic, dignified, atttractive and altogether wonderful female head of Jikishin Kage-ryu naginata praised his embu. Ohba had his altogether over-enthusiastic butt saved by another kind of aiki altogether. Man, you can just see a middle -aged Ueshiba puffing up and preening while Ohba is quietly sitting there, thinking, "Lady, you just saved my life. Keep talking, keep talking, tell the man how big and strong and powerful you think he is!"
Whether Ueshiba could throw everyone, under any conditions, I'll leave to that wonderful non-existent tome, "The Lives of the Sword Saints," but he absolutely could not throw anyone so they would look like Tamura or Tada flying away in graceful curves.
Per Dobson, when Ueshiba was very old he would "work out" with Terry, throwing him around and then "take ukemi" for him, creaking down to the floor. It was a joke for the onlookers as well, on a par with his claims that the big awkward gaijin had grabbed his beard during each and every demo.
I also wonder with his grandiosity if he "forgot" that everyone didn't fall in graceful arcs at a gesture, and was shocked when an "unskilled" uke didn't follow the track of his desires.
There is no account of Takeda "taking ukemi" for a student. Dan and Mark, I agree, in my <ahem> book, about ukemi from the perspective you are talking about, and that's a worthwhile topic. But as the question of the thread was about ukemi manifested as part of the aikido/Daito-ryu kata, where ukemi is the "taking-falls-for" the other, the psychology is relevant, in that Takeda never allowed himself to be thrown - and in koryu jujutsu, the teacher will do that. And Takeda never allowed himself to be locked up - and in the kata, the jujutsu teacher will allowed himself to be put in a position where he is helpless. Takeda would never allow himself to be vulnerable - not only in fact - but in others' eyes.
Where this is relevant is that it affected the whole course of the development of the aiki arts - how they are taught, etc. If Takeda had the character of Dan Harden, for example, who openly shows how to do this and that, and tinkers together in a laboratory of mutual aiki-discovery in which he is happy when one of his students gets "it" and immediately tries to load him up with more info, then Daito-ryu as well as aikido would have developed in very different ways. They - it, actually, would have been small groups. Few people really want "aiki." Note the small number of people actually training in Aunkai in Japan, and the number of people who, from what I heard, did NOT come back for a 2nd/3rd grueling round of shikko and mabu during Ark's recent trip to the US.

Both UEshiba and Takeda presented themselves as supermen, through aiki, and in the eyes of onlookers, this would have been diminished if they "took falls." Why teach that way at all? Ueshiba used people the way physicists used chalk and board to describe the universe with equations. And kept himself at the head of his class, starting his own "program" so he didn't have to deal with faculty with more tenure.
Takeda demonstrated to his demons and angels that he was unconquerable yet another day. And as the real danger came from other people, it is very hard to conceive of Takeda Sokaku allowing - if that is what it took - anyone to thread his arms through the backs of his knees and cramp him up in a demeaning posture of a punk <using that word in it's old-school prison sense, something quite relevant to the psychology of the paranoid person>.

Best
Ellis

Last edited by Ellis Amdur : 05-16-2009 at 09:53 AM.

 
Old 05-16-2009, 04:28 PM   #40
Charles Hill
Dojo: Numazu Aikikai/Aikikai Honbu Dojo
Location: Three Lakes WI/ Mishima Japan
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 837
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
From "Hi Szczepan" you made a segue in the next paragraph to "anyone interested" which led to telling us how transmission is supposed to go, which then led to the implication that we are not capable of understanding what his deshi meant with certain comments.
I got it! You misunderstood my post because I was not clear on what I mean by "supposed." I don't mean "supposed to" as in this is reality and some people get it or not. I mean "supposed" as in if you asked the people who believe they got some transmission from O'Sensei and they were to tell you their true thinking, this is the answer I believe they will give you.

It seems to me that you believe that wrapped in this Takeda-Ueshiba-down to whomever thing is an "Emperor's new clothes" kind of thing, right? And truth be told, I basically believe that you are right.

In keeping with this metaphor, you are the boy pointing at the emperor saying ,"But look, he's naked! It's obvious." You say that the psychology of those involved is not salient to their skills, but I think it would be helpful for you to realize it is salient to you being able to convince others that it is not salient to the skills.

Charles
 
Old 05-17-2009, 01:23 AM   #41
Misogi-no-Gyo
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 498
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote:
I understand that they wanted to learn something from him and it was the only way to learn by feeling, as O sensei didn't explain techniques from technical point of view.
Greetings and apologies for my extended absence from the boards. My own experience tells me that this is not entirely correct. Abe Sensei mentioned quite often how O-Sensei would specifically provide him with instructions in this subject or that. It brings up the point of what "student" means and just who one's "teacher" actually is. Reflecting on thirty years of training I can say that I am a student of the martial arts without reservation. I might even be so presumptuous as to say I am a student of this teacher or that teacher... Of course, putting aside for the moment how diligent and loyal I might actually be, it is the individual Teacher's decision whom they actually view as their own student, and to whom they view themselves as their Teacher.

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote:
However I don't believe it was intention of O sensei to teach his students all these subtilities after IIWW.At that point of time he wasn't interested in physical aspect of practice anymore.
Again, I must disagree based upon what I have been told. Abe Sensei, being a personal student of the Founder after 1952, mentioned very specific instances of where O-Sensei was very interested in the physicality of movement, the methodology of progress (Misogi-no-Gyo & Kotodama-no-Gyo) and the specific mechanisms of spiritual growth and both Aikido's dependency on
and its integration within both the visualizations and conception of waza through Chinkon Kishin-no-Gyo, specifically.

My own sense tells me that while many students claim O-Sensei as their teacher, he in fact made no such declarations, public, silent or otherwise about 99 % of those same individuals as it related to his intention to transmission directly his art. I asked Abe Sensei about this specific thing and he did give me a list of very specific individuals who, in his mind at least were recipients of said transmission to some extent or another. I have my own opinions about the details of this based upon what I was told, but since it flies in the face of what a popular and supposed "historical expert" who refuses to debate his ill-founded conclusions and those who often quote him (in this very thread, in fact) as some sort of prophet and his works as some sort of prophet of biblical texts, I will keep them to myself for the time being. Too bad for those who find it much easier to accept the printed words of someone else rather than do their own research and challenge even the currently-held opinions and theories.

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote:
I think you are trying here to develop kata-like practice (aka 'ideal form' of both waza and ukemi). This is a very clear contradiction to the idea of controlling an attacker from the moment when idea of attack is raised in his head.You still make clear difference between nage and uke. This makes impossible the spontanous execution of the techniques even after 50 years of intensive practice. If you don't go through this rather primary dualism, you will never be able to FEEL the unity of the World and communicate with Kami.
Hmmmm... two points come to mind

First - on the level of "doing" aikido, while already a misunderstanding of the art form, but certainly the highest level most will ever reach, if you are trying to control an attacker from the moment the "idea" of attack comes into their head, as opposed to being at a place where you can keep the person from even having that idea, than dualism in terms of having to deal with conflict is all you will ever know.

Second - None of this has anything to do with feeling unity as there is no feeling when there is unity. When there is unity (everything all at once) there is no you, no kami nor any communication possible between two seemingly disparate things that cannot coexist when existence itself does not come into being in such a state of no state.

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote:
It was a very simple filter to reject casual students, and keep only serious ones. You are still not able to provide a single prove that O sensei taught ukemi('correct' or even ANY ukemi) to his students.
I don't believe S. Takeda taught ukemi to his students neither LOL
This may be only peripheral to the discussion, or perhaps there is no discussion here at all, but there are actual films of O-Sensei taking ukemi. One can only guess as to what his purpose was in taking ukemi in the first place. One might surmise that he was demonstrating something to either the nage (at the time) anyone present watching, along with anyone who via the films would be looking to dissect ad nauseum... O-Sensei was intimately aware of both microphones and cameras, the latter to which he most assuredly played knowing very well what would be left as a model for perpetuity.

In any case, coming from a dojo where ukemi was not only stressed as a methodology of both growth and progress, the learning of proper ukemi has a realistic function relating to limiting the level of injury one might sustain at any given time on the mat.... This may not have been something stressed via his Daito-Ryu experiences. However, as he changed his art form to reflect a broader scope of goals, perhaps even limiting the injury of one's training partner, as new and radical of an idea this may have seemed at the time (please read any amount of sarcasm here as makes you feel comfortable, or not, as you need) may have held some level of importance in his Dojo. I would be curious to know what the old-time, senior deshi of Iwama and Shingu might have to say about such a notion as this...

Okay, back to my corner now.

Best to all who seek the way...

.

Last edited by Misogi-no-Gyo : 05-17-2009 at 01:31 AM.

I no longer participate in or read the discussion forums here on AikiWeb due to the unfair and uneven treatment of people by the owner/administrator.
 
Old 05-17-2009, 08:17 AM   #42
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Shaun Ravens wrote: View Post
....>snip<... but since it flies in the face of what a popular and supposed "historical expert" who refuses to debate his ill-founded conclusions and those who often quote him (in this very thread, in fact) as some sort of prophet and his works as some sort of prophet of biblical texts, I will keep them to myself for the time being. Too bad for those who find it much easier to accept the printed words of someone else rather than do their own research and challenge even the currently-held opinions and theories..
Hello Shaun
I have not read anything, anywhere, that sets Stanley up as a prophet. I take it you were just trying to accent the strength of your argument.
Actually I can remember balanced views of his research and also critiques of his interview and follow up-or more pointedly the lack thereof. The one thing He was credited for was that fact that he sought corroborating evidence and testimony. He checked out Student A's story with Student B and C. And that process proved enlightening when it stood against certain stories.
Another benefit to Stanley's process is that it blew up a lot of the anecdotal stories offered by single students who trained with one or two teachers-like you're own.;
Quote:
...Again, I must disagree based upon what I have been told. Abe Sensei, being a personal student of the Founder after 1952....
.....I asked Abe Sensei about this specific thing
.....I have my own opinions about the details of this based upon what I was told...he did give me a list of very specific individuals who, in his mind at least were recipients of said transmission to some extent or another.
While we all appreciate everyone's loyalty to their teacher ,at a point it is foolish to let the experience of a single man training in 1952 define the art or the method spanning decades. It is equally false to let the experiences of a single man -say in 1938- be the defining voice as well.

Now let's add to that-that until Stanley showed up- everyone had buried their DR scrolls and were singing the Japanese "Go along- get along" song which had previously brought us a completely false idea of the origins of the art. Add to that the wonderful stories of O'sensei dodging bullets. Add to that the phases he himself went through. Add to that your VERY correct idea about just who was a real student and who was just passing through. Correct though it may be, do you really want to assign Abe, a single teacher, as the arbitor of who was who in 52'? I sure as hell don't.
Have you considered how many Sensei told how many of their students all the stories of their opinions and experiences with Ueshiba. Please tell me you are not this innocent! I have seen and heard of accounts of the feverishly devoted student, fiercely defending their own teachers version of Ueshiba's history -in the face of- the written evidence presented by Stanley.

Anecdotes are fun, and there are poignant stories worth preserving, but only a very foolish man would make a prophet of his own teacher and training experience without wondering how it pans out within a training / /teaching model lasting over forty years and several phases of a teachers growth.
I think most would agree that it was BECAUSE of Stan's research that we were privileged to see Ueshiba in a fuller light, spanning his career, if not most of his life. Something which we would have never seen. Was it ever meant to be a complete story? Stanley never said so. But as a record it helps to shape and /or place the anecdotes, fond memories, outright fabrications, romantic notions, assorted cold hard facts, and singular experiences in certain eras or phases of their training with Ueshiba in perspective.

I think Stan deserves some credit for that. And also the criticism he has gotten for not following up on some question or other after he received some bombshell answer in an interview. I remember (as so many others do) reading along with interest about some staggering piece of news from the interviewee, and then.... reading Stanley asking about how long a trip it was to go train. I wanted to reach across the pages and strangle him. You know..like you find in all good writing.

FWIW, I have included a copy of my post below which stands in stark contrast to your notion of me painting Stanley as a prophet. It is a balanced view of the issues I just discussed above. Of the ides of single teachers of certain eras talking B.S. or being a stellar voice and us not having the means to counter or verify it. Or we can add your model in of students of single teachers talking about their (research) with their limited exposure to just certain teachers.
In closing have you ever once considered that teachers tell different stories to different people for different reasons, and how smart it is -were you interested in the teacher-to hear contrary views that a single student is unable to obtain?
Stories from your teacher are interesting, but as I said in the quote below, I gave up investing in what they "say" interesting or not, and instead look for corroboration at every turn.
Cheers
Dan

Quote:
Yes...many of us also caught the wink…at so many of the obfuscations about what they told us through the Eighties and nineties, till Stanley put them on the spot with contrary evidence.
About the deshi's actual training time with Ueshiba-which also proved highly suspect.
About them ever really being taught in detail or obversly- the fact that they when they said they didn't get it their techniques proved their words to be true.
The "wink" during all the obfuscations and what some consider outright lies about Daito ryu -that came by way of the Hombu. Including a Shihan telling me it no longer existed.
I gave up investing in what they "say" interesting or not, and instead look for corroboration at every turn. It's why I appreciated Stanley's method of research.

Last edited by DH : 05-17-2009 at 08:31 AM.
 
Old 05-17-2009, 12:46 PM   #43
TomW
Dojo: Kodokan
Location: Portland, OR
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 51
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Hello Shaun
I have not read anything, anywhere, that sets Stanley up as a prophet. I take it you were just trying to accent the strength of your argument.
<snip>
Cheers
Dan
Dan-

I got the impression Mr. Ravens was talking about Stevens. Mark Murray posted a link to The Way of Harmony at the bottom of his post #15.

I'm sure few in this thread would dispute, with any tenacity, Mr. Ravens' assessment of Stevens' writing, though no less embellishing than Stevens' himself. For the record, I believe Mark was referencing Shirata Sensei, not Stevens.

Tom Wharton

Kodokan Aikido - Puttin' the Harm in Harmony,
 
Old 05-17-2009, 03:03 PM   #44
Charles Hill
Dojo: Numazu Aikikai/Aikikai Honbu Dojo
Location: Three Lakes WI/ Mishima Japan
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 837
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

I thought Shaun was refering to Stanley Pranin too.

John Stevens didn't even come to mind because; one, he has made no public claims about who did and didn't get "transmission " and two, I know of no "refusal to debate."

Who are you talking about Shaun?
 
Old 05-17-2009, 06:58 PM   #45
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

No big deal either way. If Shaun meant Stevens most would probably agree with him-but certainly not all. If he meant Stanley, most would probably disagree with him, but not all.
In my small way I tried to present one view of the issues of anecdotal V corroborated "versions" of history.
In either case, maybe we can all benefit from the exchange.
Cheers
Dan
 
Old 05-17-2009, 09:14 PM   #46
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,091
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Shaun Ravens wrote: View Post
...there is no feeling when there is unity. When there is unity (everything all at once) there is no you, no kami nor any communication possible between two seemingly disparate things that cannot coexist when existence itself does not come into being in such a state of no state.
Hi Shaun, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Are you saying there is no feeling/sensing the other because in a complete unity there is no other? ...that, insofaras X is in union with Y "they" are no longer X and Y, but rather some new singularity, Z?
Would you mind also elaborating on what you mean by "no feeling"?
Take care,
Matt

Gambarimashyo!
 
Old 05-17-2009, 09:31 PM   #47
MM
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,996
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Peter A Goldsbury wrote: View Post
OK. Why did both Takeda and Ueshiba always use kata / waza as a teaching tool, if they did not really need to?

PAG
Hi Peter.

If I was a very cynical person, I'd probably answer that they used kata/waza/techniques as a diversion to cover for the secret "aiki" stuff. Or Takeda did it just to make money.

But, I'm not that cynical. I'll address my reply to all rather than single you out. I'm not sure I can handle a debate at your level.

I think that the jujutsu level stuff that both Takeda and Ueshiba taught could be used as competent self defense techniques. As many on these forums have posted throughout the years, it isn't "aikido" that failed, but the person.

However, as many have experienced, "aikido" doesn't work against someone who is skilled in aiki (the internal body skills). Plus, there are many articles about competent jujutsu/judo people being handled like children by Takeda and Ueshiba. It was either Tohei or Tomiki who trained by kicking beams in a house then going back to Judo and faring very well. Didn't help when meeting Ueshiba. Another article about Tomiki being manhandled and thrown all over the place.

Maybe Takeda and Ueshiba taught the techniques because it gave them something worthwhile to give to their students without divulging the secrets of the art.

And then Ueshiba went a different route from Takeda's Daito ryu. He became the avatar of the kami, the bridge between heaven and earth, etc. But, the simple fact was that being the avatar or the bridge without other people is useless. I think Ueshiba needed people to fulfill his mission, or whatever you want to call it. The problem is that untrained people could get hurt. So, maybe he trained them to the point where he could use them safely and allow him to be that avatar or bridge.

Back to the question, we find that old school jujutsu people couldn't compare to Takeda. Judo people couldn't compare to Ueshiba. How many techniques or kata did all these people know? How many techniques or kata did the kendo people know when they came to learn from Ueshiba?

Doesn't it make you wonder why all these people from all the various backgrounds full of kata and techniques couldn't compare to Takeda or Ueshiba?

Or why each school of Daito ryu has different techniques? Why each school of aikido has different techniques?

If the core skills, if the secrets of the art, if what made Takeda and Ueshiba stand out were in the techniques/kata/waza, then why could most who knew all these myriads of techniques not compare to them?

As a parallel, why is it that Mifune looks and moves differently than all other judo people when they all knew the same kata/techniques?

Could there be a possibility that there really is something "hidden" in a Japanese martial art? That what was shown and taught to most was not the "full" art? And could it be possible that there is a specific internal body skill, aiki, that wasn't taught to many? If there is that possibility, then isn't it also likely that all the techniques taught to the masses did not have that secret?

It is an interesting question that you asked. While I can only point to articles and interviews as research material, they are, after all, secondhand information. Why did Takeda and Ueshiba teach techniques?
 
Old 05-18-2009, 04:51 AM   #48
philippe willaume
 
philippe willaume's Avatar
Location: windsor
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 317
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
Hi Peter.

IfCould there be a possibility that there really is something "hidden" in a Japanese martial art? That what was shown and taught to most was not the "full" art? And could it be possible that there is a specific internal body skill, aiki, that wasn't taught to many? If there is that possibility, then isn't it also likely that all the techniques taught to the masses did not have that secret?

It is an interesting question that you asked. While I can only point to articles and interviews as research material, they are, after all, secondhand information. Why did Takeda and Ueshiba teach techniques?
Because techniques are only the expression of your strategy and your tactics
What makes you a good horseman is not the number of way to use the reins, it is your ability to recognise situations and use the appropriate reins effect.

I am not sure there is secrets as in the medieval “vergorgen ringen” that you are not supposed to show in public.
Techniques are only defined by their range of applicability and I think the “what to use when so that you still have options” is what is not shown in most JMA.

If you take medieval fencing, wrestling, they do present techniques as well but they tell you as well which one you should use as an opening gambit inLike the breaking of the guards, or a Zornhau, streichen, or deflections from the krump if he attacks you in the zu fechten
Or the 3 wrestling from which “many wrestling, murder strike and bone breaker comes from”
And if you can not get the 1st wrestling, you can usually get the 2nd and if you can not get either you will have the 3rd.

As well they do make a difference between the getting in to proper range to fence (or fencing over extended); ie zu fechten
and the fencing from proper range; ie fechten
It is the same for wrestling, you have "zu lauffen ringen", the running wrestling when people rush you or at leastr a step to get you.
"ringen"wrestling from clinching, jabbing range and "auf ston" when a clinch is mutually neutralizing.

Last but not least, they do explain quite clearly the notion of relative timing with the notion of vor (before) nach (after) and indess (in the instant) at the movement.
All that represent a state more that representation of time.
To be in the “before” you strike needs to hit him before his counter can reach you and to stop it he must parry. I.e. he can void/dodge, you do not have the Vor.

So in the manual you do have the fundamentals strategy/tactics, how put that in action according to the initial situation/ context and techniques which can be chained together so that you stay true to the fundamental principles.

I think in most JMA that part is left to the individual or more realistically orally transmitted.

Last edited by philippe willaume : 05-18-2009 at 04:56 AM.

One Ringeck to bring them all and in darkness bind them,
In the Land of Windsor where phlip phlop live.
 
Old 05-18-2009, 09:45 AM   #49
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Hello Mark,

My question was basically a response to Dan's post #37. (Dan is preaching to the converted here, by the way.)

The fact remains, however, that despite the accomplishments of both men in Aiki skills, what they showed, even to their closest students, was waza--in Takeda's case, hundreds. Budo Renshu (compiled in 1933), by comparison, contains about 160, with an introduction dealing with possible attacks and how to deal with them. So it seems to me that Ueshiba, at least, combined aiki skills with waza and used waza also when dealing with people like Tomiki and Shioda.

Best,

PAG

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
 
Old 05-18-2009, 10:04 AM   #50
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: O sensei and 'correct ukemi'

Hello Peter
Yes I understand that I am preaching to the converted, but that doesn't really help. I am trying to further the discussion and hoping someone would at least consider addressingt my points in post #37 and others here; namely why the aiki waza are so bizzare (juxtaposed to koryu jujustu) in their approach, and application, and why they are so?
Then we can perhaps move on to the need or use for them in the first place, and also why the "expression" of perhaps a singular core skill -looked so different- due to their respective personalities.
It might help to tie up some excellent points you, Ellis, Mark and I are rasing collectively.
Cheers
Dan

Last edited by DH : 05-18-2009 at 10:12 AM.
 

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Yoshinkai - Beyond the "Hard Style" Label Susan Dalton Columns 8 11-16-2011 06:53 AM
Steven Seagal Interview ad_adrian General 45 01-15-2010 03:34 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 12 Peter Goldsbury Columns 32 05-16-2009 06:05 PM
Another harassment question Tom28 Anonymous 119 12-01-2008 09:24 AM
Seminar with Students of Chiba Sensei Ron Tisdale Seminars 0 01-21-2004 09:47 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:39 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate