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 > General

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 11-15-2011, 06:18 AM   #326
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,907
Spain
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Phi Truong wrote: View Post
it's the same book. i made a mistake. it wasn't Terry Dobson, but Ken Nissen (another great old timer i have heard of, but have not a chance to meet).
Thanks.

Quote:
it's in the pages where Saotome sensei talked about relationship between nuclear reaction and multiple attack.
Better don't go into Saotome's new ageish pseudoscience. Let's keep this thread on the IHTBF mojo.

Quote:
back then Ellis still had quite a bit of hair; same went for John Messores. They both had since cleaned up quite nicely.

 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:17 AM   #327
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Are you claiming that Dobson Sensei specifically disavowed the things in the book that I quoted?

Which parts of the book are you saying that he disavowed?

I don't see anything in the book that is inconsistent with anything he wrote at other times, anything he said on the videos of his teaching, anything he said in the interviews (some which were done with Jim
Lee late in his life and are not published) as well as those which are published, everything he told various senior instructors who trained with him back in the day, and what he did and said at the counseling sessions that he conducted.

If you are going to claim that your teacher disavowed the things he wrote and said in order to support your points, then I would request that you go into greater detail. I am continuing Dobson Sensei and Lee Sensei's work, though in new directions, and you are saying that I can't rely on the things they said? Isn't it possible that he stressed some parts of the art with you that don't contradict the other sides?

The language used in the momentum quote sounds like Dobson Sensei speaking. I think that part was Dobson Sensei.

At any rate, if he told you things that contradict everything that I can quote from him, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell us what those things were in greater detail.

Quote:
Ellis Amdur wrote: View Post
That book was one of Terry's greatest regrets. Insecure about his own writing (despite being brilliant, he was afflicted by terrible writer's block until near the end of his life), he associated himself with Miller, a hack writer who turned Terry's ideas into New Age pap. It's funny - just as with Ueshiba, one has to wend one's way through the rococo religious imagery, with this book, to glean even a little of what Terry really believed, you have to push your way through marzipan and New Age. And sadly, despite deciding consciously to sell out, in hopes of disseminating the moral ideals of aikido, as he saw them, to the wider populace, he ran smack into the 1980's (when the book was originally published), when the thrust was how to run your life like a hedge fund manager.

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-15-2011 at 10:21 AM.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:38 AM   #328
Fred Little
Dojo: NJIT Budokai
Location: State Line NJ/NY
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 610
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
Are you claiming that Dobson Sensei specifically disavowed the things in the book that I quoted?

Which parts of the book are you saying that he disavowed?

I don't see anything in the book that is inconsistent with anything he wrote at other times, anything he said on the videos of his teaching, anything he said in the interviews (some which were done with Jim
Lee late in his life and are not published) as well as those which are published, everything he told various senior instructors who trained with him back in the day, and what he did and said at the counseling sessions that he conducted.

If you are going to claim that your teacher disavowed the things he wrote and said in order to support your points, then I would request that you go into greater detail. I am continuing Dobson Sensei and Lee Sensei's work, though in new directions, and you are saying that I can't rely on the things they said? Isn't it possible that he stressed some parts of the art with you that don't contradict the other sides?

The language used in the momentum quote sounds like Dobson Sensei speaking. I think that part was Dobson Sensei.

At any rate, if he told you things that contradict everything that I can quote from him, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell us what those things were in greater detail.
Wow.

There's really nothing like someone quoting from a highly contingent process document read through the filter of tendentious sectarian third- and fourth- hand information and hagiography telling someone with first-hand experience that he doesn't know what he's talking about and then aggressively insisting on a chapter and verse defense of that experientially informed knowledge, which, on the basis of past evidence, would only be used as the basis for another ill-informed round of noisy posturing. Or if there is, I don't want to know.

And trust me, I'm not saying that on the basis of some crazy claim that I'm above a round of noisy posturing from time to time.

FL

 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:39 AM   #329
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

In Aikido in America (Stone and Meyer) Dobson Sensei says that he regretted the process of making the book, was very upset about the cover, and didn't like some of the things that were included. He was upset that his cover with the circle, square, and triangle was not used. He discusses these in the chapter on aiki that I quoted from. I see no evidence that he disavowed the discussion of the technical and aiki aspects of the book.

In fact, I can transcribe his seminar which I have on video to support the things I have attributed to him.

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
Are you claiming that Dobson Sensei specifically disavowed the things in the book that I quoted?

Which parts of the book are you saying that he disavowed?

I don't see anything in the book that is inconsistent with anything he wrote at other times, anything he said on the videos of his teaching, anything he said in the interviews (some which were done with Jim
Lee late in his life and are not published) as well as those which are published, everything he told various senior instructors who trained with him back in the day, and what he did and said at the counseling sessions that he conducted.

If you are going to claim that your teacher disavowed the things he wrote and said in order to support your points, then I would request that you go into greater detail. I am continuing Dobson Sensei and Lee Sensei's work, though in new directions, and you are saying that I can't rely on the things they said? Isn't it possible that he stressed some parts of the art with you that don't contradict the other sides?

The language used in the momentum quote sounds like Dobson Sensei speaking. I think that part was Dobson Sensei.

At any rate, if he told you things that contradict everything that I can quote from him, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell us what those things were in greater detail.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:42 AM   #330
gregstec
Dojo: Aiki Kurabu
Location: Elizabethtown, PA
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,110
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
Are you claiming that Dobson Sensei specifically disavowed the things in the book that I quoted?

Which parts of the book are you saying that he disavowed?

I don't see anything in the book that is inconsistent with anything he wrote at other times, anything he said on the videos of his teaching, anything he said in the interviews (some which were done with Jim
Lee late in his life and are not published) as well as those which are published, everything he told various senior instructors who trained with him back in the day, and what he did and said at the counseling sessions that he conducted.

If you are going to claim that your teacher disavowed the things he wrote and said in order to support your points, then I would request that you go into greater detail. I am continuing Dobson Sensei and Lee Sensei's work, though in new directions, and you are saying that I can't rely on the things they said? Isn't it possible that he stressed some parts of the art with you that don't contradict the other sides?

The language used in the momentum quote sounds like Dobson Sensei speaking. I think that part was Dobson Sensei.

At any rate, if he told you things that contradict everything that I can quote from him, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell us what those things were in greater detail.
You know Ken, I was seriously thinking about coming back to you about some points associated with your Saotome quotes and Dan's aiki model that may have made some sense to you. However, I realized that would be futile. You just will not listen to anything that does not match your perception exactly. This is very evident from you challenging Ellis on Terry D - what part of Ellis saying he was very intimate with Terry that you do not understand and cannot accept. Ellis commented on what Terry felt about that book after the fact - why can't you accept that maybe Terry felt some things in that book were wrong after it was written.

Every one views the world via their own filters and tries to make things match their beliefs as best they can - that does not mean other people have to agree with you 100%, and if they don't, that does not mean they are wrong. Two people can read the exact same thing and come away with two totally different perspectives on what the writer was trying to convey - both perceptions can be correct to the reader because every thing is relative - to ascertain that one is wrong and the other is correct, both perceptions need to be presented to the writer at the exact same time for clarification - have you done that with Saotome? Of course, you cannot do that with Dobson, but you just received the next best thing, the opinion of someone that knew Terry very very well.

Good luck in your journey - I am afraid it will be a lonely one.

Greg
 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:50 AM   #331
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Greg and Fred,

Ellis hasn't told us what Dobson Sensei allegedly rejected in the book (and in general) related to the importance of blending with momentum. If he has specific quote regarding that, then I may be persuaded. Despite your disparaging comments I am hardly someone who doesn't take evidence seriously. I am not someone who is unwilling to change views when warranted. But when weighing contradictory evidence one has a quandary. The written word can be understood. That's why people write. It's evidence. You favor the personal experience over other forms of evidence. How then could we ever resolve the differences between what Saito Sensei said and other direct students have said about he founder? Ellis is one person who knew Dobson Sensei well. I know a dozen people who also knew Dobson Sensei well, who had very in-depth conversations about some of these questions because they were working with him, and who tell me a different story. Dobson Sensei was known to bump an attacker off the line with his big belly, making an opening to the back where he could move. That is something far different from internal balance breaking. Of course, I've acknowledged that Dobson Sensie worked on internal unbalancing. But he also worked on other things. How should I weigh Ellis's views related to the totality of this evidence?

Quote:
Greg Steckel wrote: View Post
You know Ken, I was seriously thinking about coming back to you about some points associated with your Saotome quotes and Dan's aiki model that may have made some sense to you. However, I realized that would be futile. You just will not listen to anything that does not match your perception exactly. This is very evident from you challenging Ellis on Terry D - what part of Ellis saying he was very intimate with Terry that you do not understand and cannot accept. Ellis commented on what Terry felt about that book after the fact - why can't you accept that maybe Terry felt some things in that book were wrong after it was written.

Every one views the world via their own filters and tries to make things match their beliefs as best they can - that does not mean other people have to agree with you 100%, and if they don't, that does not mean they are wrong. Two people can read the exact same thing and come away with two totally different perspectives on what the writer was trying to convey - both perceptions can be correct to the reader because every thing is relative - to ascertain that one is wrong and the other is correct, both perceptions need to be presented to the writer at the exact same time for clarification - have you done that with Saotome? Of course, you cannot do that with Dobson, but you just received the next best thing, the opinion of someone that knew Terry very very well.

Good luck in your journey - I am afraid it will be a lonely one.

Greg

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-15-2011 at 10:57 AM.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:01 AM   #332
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

From the video, An Aikido Seminar with Terry Dobson:

"What causes him to fall is not my strength but his lack of balance."

As he demonstrates katatedori kokyu tandem ho from a fast attack and blends to throw: "I move with him, THAT SUDDEN AGREEMENT THROWS HIM ALL FORWARDS. Like anyone else... when you're too far forward you start going back [to try to regain your balance]. If you know that THEN YOU MOVE WITH HIM... You have to move with him... in terms of direction and center, agree with what he's doing. As he comes forward you'll feel him start to go back [shows blending with the back motion of Uke in an attempt to stand back up in order to break Uke's balance]."

Later he defines aiki: "There must be Aiki. There must be a time when his spirit and my spirit, when his intention and my intention, go the same way. If all we have is opposition we don't have Aiki. So to get Aiki you gotta get Aiki. And if you're not looking where your Uke is looking, you ain't doin' Aiki... can you do Aiki and move with him."


Try as I might, I can't see any ambiguity in what he is saying and showing on this video at that time. In that particular instance we was stressing blending as the means of throwing. There are lots of examples in the video like this. He shows no touch throws and describes them as non-resistance. There is also some internal stuff.

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-15-2011 at 11:13 AM.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:07 AM   #333
Thomas Campbell
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 407
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Marc Abrams wrote: View Post
3) [Ed: Link to personal information irrelevant to discussion removed.]
Awesome. The case does illustrate a certain tendency to and style of argumentation that seems relevant to this thread.

Last edited by akiy : 11-15-2011 at 11:25 AM. Reason: Removed link to personal information irrelevant to topic
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:16 AM   #334
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,907
Spain
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
How then could we ever resolve the differences between what Saito Sensei said and other direct students have said about he founder?
Interesting question. What have you read from Saito?

 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:21 AM   #335
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

You know what your problem is, Ken?

You just don't understand in yo ho.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:23 AM   #336
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,523
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Thomas Campbell wrote: View Post
Awesome. The case does illustrate a certain tendency to and style of argumentation that seems relevant to this thread.
Yup.

I remember when I was a minor I got a speeding ticket. I was righteously indignant for all sorts of reasons (he couldn't have gauged my speed that accurately, he didn't have time to do it, he was too far away, .... ). So my dad said "Okay, go argue it if you feel that way." So I go in to talk with the juvenile traffic judge. He listens to me for about 15 seconds then interrupts me. He said "Excuse me, son, but were you speeding?" I sat there for a moment and said "Well, yes, but " then he cut me off, told me my fine, and suggested I work a bit harder on staying under the speed limit. Next case!

 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:34 AM   #337
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Keith Larman wrote: View Post
Yup.

I remember when I was a minor I got a speeding ticket. I was righteously indignant for all sorts of reasons (he couldn't have gauged my speed that accurately, he didn't have time to do it, he was too far away, .... ). So my dad said "Okay, go argue it if you feel that way." So I go in to talk with the juvenile traffic judge. He listens to me for about 15 seconds then interrupts me. He said "Excuse me, son, but were you speeding?" I sat there for a moment and said "Well, yes, but " then he cut me off, told me my fine, and suggested I work a bit harder on staying under the speed limit. Next case!
We have a group of people who want to dominate conversations about Aikido on the international stage. When the evidence they present is questioned with logic and counter-evidence, they resort to repeated personal attacks, disparaging remarks, and now this. I have contacted Jun repeatedly about this. Because he hasn't responded, I will.

My case was take up by the Wisconsin Supreme Court... unheard of in recent decades for a case of this nature. The Supreme Court overruled the appeals court on the issue of the constitutional right to a jury trial. From now on, in that state, the right to a jury will always be constitutionally guaranteed and will never be less than 6 persons. We have seen the right to a jury trial eroded in this country in ways that were never intended. Do you know, for example, that the right has been taken away in many jurisdictions for non-criminal matters, reduced to a jury of only 6 in many and in our federal system, even in criminal matters? The very term jury since the dawn of law referred to 12 persons. This matters for obvious reasons. And yes, I admit there is a lot of Thomas Jefferson in me.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:34 AM   #338
Fred Little
Dojo: NJIT Budokai
Location: State Line NJ/NY
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 610
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
Greg and Fred,

Ellis hasn't told us what Dobson Sensei allegedly rejected in the book (and in general) related to the importance of blending with momentum. I
It is a fundamental category error to treat a work of pop psychology, intended as an advertisement for bookings on the self-help seminar circuit, as a technical manual.

It is, similarly, an utterly ungrounded supposition to assert that either Greg or I categorically "favor the personal experience over other forms of evidence."

I trained at Bond Street years after Terry and Ellis departed. For better or worse, I've got most of the canvas that was on the deck when Terry came back to teach one last set of classes at Bond Street after many years away, and those classes were the limit of my direct experience with the man.

That said, even as someone who trained at Bond Street years after Terry and Ellis departed, the all-too-frequent experience of encountering individuals with very partial views of what Terry was about putting that partial knowledge through additional filters to arrive at highly idiosyncratic readings of "what Terry really meant," has become so very, very familiar that it has to rise to a particular level to call for a response, however futile.

FL

 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:36 AM   #339
akiy
 
akiy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,835
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Folks,

One behavior that I keep noticing in threads like this is that the discussion starts to become very personal. By this, I don't mean that the points people are raising are not of personal importance for them, but, rather, that the posts become directed at the person behind the topic.

I'm fine with passion. I'm fine with disagreement. Being passionate and disagreeing, even vehemently, are welcome and even encouraged. Doing so in a manner that's directed towards disparaging a person's character, motivations, intent, and such are utterly unwelcome.

Direct your discussion towards discussing the post, not the person behind the posts. I have said this, time and time again, and I still stand by this simplest of rules that underlie civil discussions.

Choosing not to do so not only diminishes your argument but also lowers the level of discourse here on AikiWeb. So, please. PLEASE!

-- Jun

Please help support AikiWeb -- become an AikiWeb Contributing Member!
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:46 AM   #340
Gary David
 
Gary David's Avatar
Location: Long Beach, CA
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 329
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Jun Akiyama wrote: View Post
Direct your discussion towards discussing the post, not the person behind the posts. I have said this, time and time again, and I still stand by this simplest of rules that underlie civil discussions.

Choosing not to do so not only diminishes your argument but also lowers the level of discourse here on AikiWeb. So, please. PLEASE!

-- Jun
Jun
Dealing with this gentleman is like talking to a child who continually asks "Why"....... no answer, no matter how correct and no matter how who responses is still returns with the "Why" question. You might as well close this thread and give Ken the opportunity role out a new subject so we can go through this again........
Gary
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:53 AM   #341
HL1978
Dojo: Aunkai
Location: Fairfax, VA
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 415
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
We have a group of people who want to dominate conversations about Aikido on the international stage. When the evidence they present is questioned with logic and counter-evidence, they resort to repeated personal attacks, disparaging remarks, and now this. I have contacted Jun repeatedly about this. Because he hasn't responded, I will.
One might feel there is a religious zeal when people get exposed to IS skills, on the otherhand if people can start to replicate some of the feats attributed Ueshiba after a relatively short period of time providing a different perspective on the founders words, its hard to ignore.

For many, its like their eyes were opened to what the potential of martial arts could be. Its hard to go back after that....
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:54 AM   #342
akiy
 
akiy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,835
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Hi Gary,

In response, I'll just repeat myself one more time:

Direct your discussion towards discussing the post, not the person behind the posts.

-- Jun

Please help support AikiWeb -- become an AikiWeb Contributing Member!
 
Old 11-15-2011, 11:57 AM   #343
Gary David
 
Gary David's Avatar
Location: Long Beach, CA
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 329
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Jun Akiyama wrote: View Post
Hi Gary,

In response, I'll just repeat myself one more time:

Direct your discussion towards discussing the post, not the person behind the posts.

-- Jun
Jun
Read the posts......there is no discussion when one does not listen. As for me I'll drop off this one.....good luck with it.
Gary
 
Old 11-15-2011, 12:03 PM   #344
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,523
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
We have a group of people who want to dominate conversations about Aikido on the international stage. When the evidence they present is questioned with logic and counter-evidence, they resort to repeated personal attacks, disparaging remarks, and now this. I have contacted Jun repeatedly about this. Because he hasn't responded, I will.

My case was take up by the Wisconsin Supreme Court... unheard of in recent decades for a case of this nature. The Supreme Court overruled the appeals court on the issue of the constitutional right to a jury trial. From now on, in that state, the right to a jury will always be constitutionally guaranteed and will never be less than 6 persons. We have seen the right to a jury trial eroded in this country in ways that were never intended. Do you know, for example, that the right has been taken away in many jurisdictions for non-criminal matters, reduced to a jury of only 6 in many and in our federal system, even in criminal matters? The very term jury since the dawn of law referred to 12 persons. This matters for obvious reasons. And yes, I admit there is a lot of Thomas Jefferson in me.
Mr. McGrew -- reading the thread and the link I was just reminded of my own experience. I really have no comment on your particular traffic experience as I don't see it as relevant. Mine was more about how I was arguing all sorts of things but in the end what it was, was, what it was. I was speeding. He was right. My only point was that there can be a lot to argue about as to what/how/why/when but in the end things are what they are independently of our arguments. I can argue, I can not understand, but it will still be exactly what it is. My understanding or acceptance is not a requirement for it being the case. Your experience merely sparked a related memory of my own.

Aiki is a remarkably difficult concept to talk about on a forum like this. And it is very easy (dare I say impossible?) for people not to bring their own understandings to the forefront as a filter. FWIW I have met many people who had trained with Dobson off and on when he was in the US. I hear slightly different stories from each of them. But I had always heard that the book we've been discussing was a very odd detour given their understanding of the man. But that said... Je ne sais pas. It is not surprising that you don't believe what others are saying. You don't have to accept arguments from authority (like people who actually do it or people who actually knew Dobson closely).

In the end you're demanding to be convinced. And that's nigh impossible if someone won't accept anything other than what they already believe to be the case. That's why I suggested you simply talk to Saotome when he visits the US next month if you think there's an issue with a whole lot of senior people studying with Dan. If you feel so strongly that it is contradictory to his writings as you understand them you should probably go to the "source". It is his organization after all and I seriously doubt he appointed you as defender of his writings. He might want to know what's going on and would probably give you guidance for the future.

With respect to everything else, well, I was skeptical at first. But I saw glimmers of things in what they were doing in what I was beginning to wonder about in my own training. So I went. I have had to honor to train directly with a lot of really good people from inside aikido (including Saotome's group) as well as outside Aikido. And it has subtly changed my understanding of what Ueshiba Morihei was doing and saying. I certainly don't understand it all. I certainly don't have Chris Li's translation skills. I certainly don't have the direct experiences of someone like Ellis Amdur. But I made the effort to get on the mat with people I didn't necessarily understand or agree with. And I then let what I experienced directly guide my understanding. And I think I'm the better for it.

But honestly... I think this thread has run its course. You don't seem to be satisfied with anything other than what you already believe to be the case. So I suggest you go back to *your* final authority -- Saotome-sensei -- and ask him about all this when he comes next month. Then, if you are in fact correct I would think there will be a lot of censuring going on. I just hope if the answers aren't what you expect that you'll come back and share those as well.

 
Old 11-15-2011, 12:07 PM   #345
SteveTrinkle
Dojo: Aikido Kenkyukai International
Location: Ambler, Pennsylvania
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 232
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Again, better to actually try this stuff than to discuss it.

“Men argue, nature acts.” Voltaire

Last edited by SteveTrinkle : 11-15-2011 at 12:09 PM. Reason: *

 
Old 11-15-2011, 01:10 PM   #346
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Double post edit time ran out

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
Dan, I have been responding to a range of people who claim to understand your views and approach. And also responding to what you have written. If I remembered something one of your supporters said as if you had said it I am sorry. I would never deliberately attribute statements to someone that they do not hold. Having said that, you don't point of specifics. I quoted you at length and did not change the quotes in any manner. I do not believe that I have misquoted you or misrepresented what it is you do or believe, though it was not easy to sort out these things given the lack of clarity. I have become a student of every word you and your supporters have ever written on the subjects at hand.
Mr McGrew
First off I don't know where or how you feel familiar enough with me to call me Dan. Do you know me personally? Particularly while doing this hatchet job on me.

And for the last time, you sir are not correctly addressing my real views and thoughts on budo.
1. You started by misquoting me-and using your own interpretatons to arrive at views I do not hold.
2. Only to go on to actually quoting me.. . and still using your own interpretatons... to arrive at views I do not hold.
Two small samples:
Quote:
You can see from Dan's posts, which I will quote again below, that what we have here is Daito-ryu attempting to infiltrate post-war Aikido as revenge for what they took to be O Sensei's theft. The only question is whether we will help him/them to do so.
I do not believe Ueshiba "stole" anything. He studied very hard under Takeda, and earned what he got. He (like others under Takeda) continued to research and grow past what he had learned with Takeda and made some changes that I have not only outlined here on Aikiweb, one or two of them have been quoted in Ellis's book.
Quote:
For example, the internal approach being advocated by Dan and company requires a strict notion of posture. I'm not saying that they are stiff or rigid. But they oppose leaning. I've been corrected in recent years by teachers who I believe have been influenced by Dan. Here's the problem, I have multiple screen shots of O Sensei, Saotome Sensei, and other high level Aikido practitioners engaging in strategic leaning. Ikeda sensei teaches this as a way to avoid the face punch as part of his tenkan. Despite the claims of Dan and others I am simply not as clueless about what they are doing and what my teachers are teaching as they'd like the world to believe.
Your description of me supposedly teaching to stand absolutely vertical defies anything I have ever taught...anywhere. There is a very inportant teaching involving the spine but it has not one thing to do with verticality. For the most part that is important for certain reasons- which I would bet you cannot state- but at a later state it is not an operational requirement, again for reasons I would bet you cannot state either. You then go on to state that you know more about my teaching then you reveal. It's pure fabrication.

Excuse me, but you demonstrate over and over, that you don't know what you are talking about where I am concerned and this sort of blatent dishonesty or ignorance doesn't deserve any expansation in response. In fact I think it incredibly obvous you do not undestand anything at all that I teach.

I challenge that you are directly uninterested in what I do or teach and are engaging in a smear campaign based on dissinformation of your own making.

Just like you did with your discussion of Terry Dobson with Ellis; it appears you can be given better and more accurate information and you remain undeterred from your own conclusions based on poor information. Keith tried to explain that to you. Unfortunately, it appears that you are the one who is not interested in a a real exchange. I think you should rethink your approach. We all have had to do that many times with various issues. It's not a bad thing.
Dan

Last edited by DH : 11-15-2011 at 01:19 PM.
 
Old 11-15-2011, 01:39 PM   #347
gregstec
Dojo: Aiki Kurabu
Location: Elizabethtown, PA
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,110
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Ken McGrew wrote: View Post
Greg and Fred,

Ellis hasn't told us what Dobson Sensei allegedly rejected in the book (and in general) related to the importance of blending with momentum. If he has specific quote regarding that, then I may be persuaded. Despite your disparaging comments I am hardly someone who doesn't take evidence seriously. I am not someone who is unwilling to change views when warranted. But when weighing contradictory evidence one has a quandary. The written word can be understood. That's why people write. It's evidence. You favor the personal experience over other forms of evidence. How then could we ever resolve the differences between what Saito Sensei said and other direct students have said about he founder? Ellis is one person who knew Dobson Sensei well. I know a dozen people who also knew Dobson Sensei well, who had very in-depth conversations about some of these questions because they were working with him, and who tell me a different story. Dobson Sensei was known to bump an attacker off the line with his big belly, making an opening to the back where he could move. That is something far different from internal balance breaking. Of course, I've acknowledged that Dobson Sensie worked on internal unbalancing. But he also worked on other things. How should I weigh Ellis's views related to the totality of this evidence?
The written word is as timeless as the paper it is written on - however, it is only as accurate as the opinion and knowledge of the author at the time of composition, which can change before the ink dries. In other words, things change, new knowledge is learned and opinions and conclusion change as time goes by - I will give much more validity to those that have actual first hand expediences over any form of written knowledge in a heart beat. I have had first hand experiences with various historical events over the years due to my many years of military and other government service where I have NEVER once seen the actual written report of the event to accurately present all the facts as they truly occurred - some points are minimized while others are embellished, and some are even changed or left out in order to reflect a desired conclusion. So yeah, I take all written knowledge with a grain of salt until I can personally validate it with hands on experience AND corroboration.

You bring up blending a bit - so, let me just say that the quotes on blending you have presented from Saotome and Dobson can also very easily fit into Dan's model of aiki as well. keep in mind there is external blending and there is internal blending. You appear to advocate external blending into uke and then doing something to uke to unbalance him. In internal blending, the blending starts in nage by the balancing of yin-yang within, when uke attacks, uke's energy is blended internally with nage, and uke and nage become one under the control of nage - nage then unbalances uke by moving nage - nage maintains his balance but uke comes along for the ride and is unbalanced as the result - at this point, feel free to apply the technique of your choice - oh, by the way, all this happens in an instant at the point of contact with uke - no large timing movements from nage to position for leverage, etc.

Now of course, you do not have to agree with all of that, but that is OK - just try not to call it something else because you do not totally understand it. Also, don't bother responding to any of this looking for further discussion - I have exhausted what I feel is worth mentioning on the subject at this time.

Greg
 
Old 11-15-2011, 01:45 PM   #348
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Jun Akiyama wrote: View Post
Folks,

One behavior that I keep noticing in threads like this is that the discussion starts to become very personal. By this, I don't mean that the points people are raising are not of personal importance for them, but, rather, that the posts become directed at the person behind the topic.

I'm fine with passion. I'm fine with disagreement. Being passionate and disagreeing, even vehemently, are welcome and even encouraged. Doing so in a manner that's directed towards disparaging a person's character, motivations, intent, and such are utterly unwelcome.

Direct your discussion towards discussing the post, not the person behind the posts. I have said this, time and time again, and I still stand by this simplest of rules that underlie civil discussions.

Choosing not to do so not only diminishes your argument but also lowers the level of discourse here on AikiWeb. So, please. PLEASE!

-- Jun
This is hard to do, but over the years I have continued to realize the wisdom in it. God knows I have failed this simple guideline in the past.

Of late, I open Aikiweb to see these highly personal comments made about me, and I have to take a breath from either laughing out loud, or being ticked off at the audacity of some people. In the end though, this simple guide does help to keep the discussion at a higher level-even when I am the one getting personally attacked.

Dan
 
Old 11-15-2011, 01:57 PM   #349
vjw
Dojo: Rochester Phoenix
Location: Rochester, NY
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 83
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
This is hard to do, but over the years I have continued to realize the wisdom in it. God knows I have failed this simple guideline in the past.

Of late, I open Aikiweb to see these highly personal comments made about me, and I have to take a breath from either laughing out loud, or being ticked off at the audacity of some people. In the end though, this simple guide does help to keep the discussion at a higher level-even when I am the one getting personally attacked.

Dan
Dan, Thank you for putting up with all this BS. I don't say much and write even less, but I've worked hard on your stuff for the last two years. People are now commenting about the changes in my Aikido and other martial arts that I'm learning. My instructors are surprised at my rate of advancing. Yet I know I still only have a toe in the door. I'm enjoying my training like never before. I'm also able to "steal" much more from my instructors thanks to your instruction. Looking forward to seeing you again in January,

Vic
 
Old 11-15-2011, 02:03 PM   #350
Ken McGrew
Dojo: Aikido at UAB
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
United_States
Offline
Re: Ueshiba's Aiki

Mr. Haden and others,

I have used the name Dan because you have used the name Ken. You've said a number of things far less kind.

Why do you continue to engage with me, raising accusations that are hard to ignore, and then complain that I am not convinced or going away?

A number of people have claimed to be presenting what you are doing. You have even thanked them for doing so. When I posted what I took to be what you were doing, none of your supporters said that I was wrong. When I did so I used qualified language like "seems to be doing" and so forth. I don't claim to know exactly what you are doing. But you claim to know exactly what all Aikido direct students of O Sensei are doing wrong. If what you are doing is like Daito-ryu, if what you are doing is more like what Saito Sensei was doing, if what you are doing is somewhat like the video of the other instructor you commented on, if what you are doing is something like the sort of internal connection and unbalancing exercises that many people have worked on, then it is possible to have some idea of what you are doing. If we can't talk about it why post about it?

I have tried to piece together what you are doing from a variety of sources as no-one has been willing to come out and say directly what you are doing and why you are doing it. I was told to go read all those threads. I did. Then people still wouldn't answer the questions after all that work. I was accused of lying that I had not read them. When I explained that I can read quickly given my academic training I was accused of lying about my academic training. This frustrated me early in the discussion and I let that show. I should not have done so.

Since then, however, I have not done that. The attacks have been personal and not based on the evidence. I have tried not to respond in kind. I have sincerely tried to respond to what you and people who say they follow you are doing and why. You do make very bold claims that undercut modern Aikido training. What sort of reaction do you expect that to elicit? If you are right, then your arguments must be proven. It's very important. If you are wrong, then what you do may be valuable, but not for the reasons that are given.

I have repeated time and again that what you are doing may be very good and may be applicable to Aikido. I have questioned the claims you have made about having Aiki when so many other students of O Sensei allegedly don't have it. I have disagreed with statements that say that the things in Aikido that make it Aikido as I understand it, that they are mere trickery and not real Aiki. I am not at all invested in winning anything. I am invested in knowing what is true. Some truths are relative. Others are testable.

Here is the quotation of you that led me to say that you said O Sensei "stole" Aiki:

"What he does hands out Daito ryu scrolls with a changed name, and refused to pay the fees he promised...and walked away into a world pointing to his vision.."

I think given this quote what I said was reasonable. Maybe you forgot that you said that. You have obviously said that O Sensei had ability, as you define it.

You use the video of Dobson Sensei as an example of my unwillingness to see how I am wrong. In all sincerity I don't see how what Dobson Sensei said in the video of the seminar supports the yo ho arguments you and your supporters have made and how the contradict what I have taken them to mean. He seems very clear to me. If I am wrong, it seems that people could demonstrate how I am wrong, by showing how I took the video and words wrong, or brining in other conversations with him that would change what I took to be his meaning. It is very important that I understand where Dobson Sensei was coming from. I do not want to get it wrong as I will be writing based on some of his work.

Here's what I think I have learned based on what you are teaching:

Aiki is not about blending with energy. It is about connecting with an attacker in such a manner that immobilizes their attack. It is then possible to throw them or move them as you wish as they are in you.

This Aiki is not spiritually based. It is found in the retraining of muscles, tendons, and nervous system.

You develop this Aiki skill though exercises, largely solo exercises.

The training approach is a slow static type training, not rigid, but Uke does not move unless compelled to do so by Nage's Aiki.

Real Aiki has nothing to do with leading, blending, or even getting off the line. These are tricks that may work but not in a "real fight." In application it is necessary to connect with Aiki right away, bringing Uke into your control, so that the attack is instantly immobilized.

This secret to Aiki is found in Daito-ryu. It probably is or Chinese origin.


As I said, I've tried hard to understand. I'm just not convinced. I've given reasons why. The approach to engaging in debate that I've taken is academic. Maybe people just don't understand that. It seems to rub people the wrong way.

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Double post edit time ran out

Mr McGrew
First off I don't know where or how you feel familiar enough with me to call me Dan. Do you know me personally? Particularly while doing this hatchet job on me.

And for the last time, you sir are not correctly addressing my real views and thoughts on budo.
1. You started by misquoting me-and using your own interpretatons to arrive at views I do not hold.
2. Only to go on to actually quoting me.. . and still using your own interpretatons... to arrive at views I do not hold.
Two small samples:

I do not believe Ueshiba "stole" anything. He studied very hard under Takeda, and earned what he got. He (like others under Takeda) continued to research and grow past what he had learned with Takeda and made some changes that I have not only outlined here on Aikiweb, one or two of them have been quoted in Ellis's book.

Your description of me supposedly teaching to stand absolutely vertical defies anything I have ever taught...anywhere. There is a very inportant teaching involving the spine but it has not one thing to do with verticality. For the most part that is important for certain reasons- which I would bet you cannot state- but at a later state it is not an operational requirement, again for reasons I would bet you cannot state either. You then go on to state that you know more about my teaching then you reveal. It's pure fabrication.

Excuse me, but you demonstrate over and over, that you don't know what you are talking about where I am concerned and this sort of blatent dishonesty or ignorance doesn't deserve any expansation in response. In fact I think it incredibly obvous you do not undestand anything at all that I teach.

I challenge that you are directly uninterested in what I do or teach and are engaging in a smear campaign based on dissinformation of your own making.

Just like you did with your discussion of Terry Dobson with Ellis; it appears you can be given better and more accurate information and you remain undeterred from your own conclusions based on poor information. Keith tried to explain that to you. Unfortunately, it appears that you are the one who is not interested in a a real exchange. I think you should rethink your approach. We all have had to do that many times with various issues. It's not a bad thing.
Dan

Last edited by Ken McGrew : 11-15-2011 at 02:16 PM.
 

Please visit our sponsor:

Aikido DVDs and Video Downloads - by George Ledyard Sensei & other great teachers from AikidoDVDS.Com



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
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 18 Peter Goldsbury Columns 187 09-08-2011 02:41 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 17 Peter Goldsbury Columns 41 06-03-2010 09:46 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 14 Peter Goldsbury Columns 38 07-31-2009 11:19 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 10 Peter Goldsbury Columns 200 02-04-2009 06:45 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:29 PM.



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