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!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-05-2011, 03:30 AM   #1
Ellis Amdur
Location: Seattle
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 814
Offline
Terry Dobson's Training History

History's a funny thing. On the one hand, some are claiming that the post-war Aikikai misrepresented Ueshiba Morihei's role and that post-war aikido was largely the creation of a group of senior shihan under the clear leadership of Ueshiba Kisshomaru. In a sense, there is an allegation here of a level of dishonesty. Yet at the same time, when it comes to post-war resident students of the Aikikai, they are no-longer "uchi-deshi." Why? Because that same individual, who some choose to not "trust" in some respects trust him now. Ueshiba Kisshomaru is quoted, on one occasion, of said they weren't "uchi-deshi," so that makes it so, and therefore, their careers are open to being debunked as trivial compared to a "real" uchi-deshi.

There is no doubt that the pre-war Kobukan was a far different place than the post-war Aikikai. But there is no doubt whatsoever - truly - that the live-in students of the Aikikai were uchi-deshi. For goodness sakes, all the word means is "inside student." They were so referred to by others. And they were not all "apprentice teachers." The proof is Terry Dobson (who Osensei ORDERED be admitted to the Aikikai as an uchi-deshi over the objections of the cabal who allegedly controlled the old man - really, think of this. Terry was, at that time, a psychologically disturbed guy, almost out of control emotionally, and a foreigner to boot, and Ueshiba simply said "I want him in here." And so he was - in - "uchi"

Truly, with the exception of Tohei Koichi, who offered him the continental United States (as his cat's paw - something Terry wisely turned down), no one was preparing Terry Dobson to be an Aikikai teacher. Yet, he was regarded very differently than other foreigners. Here's some examples"
1. He, alone, I believe, among non-Japanese, was called to Ueshiba's death-bed. Osensei's last words to him, which Terry believed contained his mandate to transmit aikido in the way that he did, were "onegai shimasu."
2. When Doshu came to America in an attempt to heal a rift between the California group (which Terry was advising, in what was regarded by some as an adversarial role), Doshu entered the dojo and all the "uchi-deshi" ran up and knelt, bowing. Terry, because he was on the "opposing side," felt it was improper to join the group. This was regarded by some as a mortal insult. That the other non-Japanese teachers were not in the group was irrelevant. Terry was different to ALL the Japanese. One could hate him, regard him as an inconvenience, whatever, but he was part of a select group. They couldn't escape that.
3. The uchi-deshi travelled with O-sensei. Interestingly, even when he was in Iwama, he'd get lonely and call up Tokyo and asked for one of the deshi to come up and keep him company (I can't remember which shihan reminesced on this one). I think this is significant - if Saito wasn't around, Osensei was apparently largely alone, as the other Iwama students were locals, and they had homes to go back to and families to care for. Iwama was not a commune!
4. When I lived at the Kuwamori dojo (and was referred to as "our uchi-deshi," Terry came to Japan. The dojo head, Kuwamori Yasunori, had never heard of him. Yet when he heard that he was an uchi-deshi, he a sixth dan, asked Terry - then demanded that Terry - a 4th dan (politics) - teach the class. And when the class heard he had been an uchi-deshi, no one batted an eye.

The uchi-deshi trained together, ate together, and just like the pre-war students, were drafted to carry Osensei's bags. Terry and Chiba Kazuo are two I recall right off the bat who described their duties to wake in the middle of the night whenever the old man stirred. This was part of training, and was exactly, by the way, what Ueshiba did with Takeda Sokaku. The men who lived IN the dojo actually regard the soto-deshi, like Yamada Yoshimitsu, as - not being less, per se - but having missed out on a vital, essential experience.

To be clear, I think that Ueshiba Kisshomaru WAS highlighting a real difference in organizational attitude and role towards the uchi-deshi compared to prewar, but this quibbling in various threads that the Tokyo uchi-deshi were "not really" so is truly splitting hairs. (By the way, Kobayashi sensei referred to HIS live-in students as uchi-deshi, as I recall).

Now, the reason I really posted this. Relevant to this debate is how much time some of the post-war disciples spent with Ueshiba. I've seen something similar in discussions about how many training hours Ueshiba had with Takeda Sokaku! In both cases, this is to either discount the student or discount the teacher! For me, the most interesting riddle is Feng Zhi Qiang, a titan of Chen t'ai chi (sort of the Saito sensei of the art). In his own story, he says he studied six years with Chen Fake. But detractors say he only studied two (and me - I think - how could he get so incredibly good and powerful with just two years training - maybe he expanded the years to be modest!!!!)

The point I'm really making is that there is a qualitative question here that is more important than the quantitative. When I started aikido, I started asking Terry about other teachers, whom he'd met during travels with Osensei to Osaka - Tanaka Bansen, Kobayashi Hirokazu, ABe Seiseki,and Hikitsuchi Michio in Shingu, to name just four. Terry said, "I didn't notice them. All I saw was Osensei." He literally couldn't recall them - these 8th dan giants. To be sure, he had stories about Saito-sensei, Yamaguchi-sensei, Osawa sensei and Tohei sensei, and all the uchi-deshi, but they were, to him, big brothers, or if "larger," uncles. Were I to have asked Terry how many days Ueshiba was out of Tokyo, I don't think he could have answered. All his stories were about classes with Osensei, or taking ukemi for him, or traveling with him, doing farming chores at Iwama, etc. Does the reader get what I'm saying? Terry (and by implication others like him) may have taken classes from the senior shihan, but they were stand-ins - not replacements, but place-holders. They were still studying with Osensei. He was, to them, of such pervasive influence, that the days he was gone, were not days they "didn't study with him." They were studying with him - with him not there. In other words, when Arikawa sensei had Terry do a shihonage in practice, in his mind it was Osensei's shihonage he was doing. (Some of the deshii were surely different - but I think Chiba, Dobson and Saotome, to name three, were subjectively Osensei's students - don't know enough about the others to speculate).

There is less "lying" going on that some might assume. Subjective truth is where one places one's mind. I have dreamt about one of my teachers at least three times a week for the last 23 years since I've left Japan. I get lessons from him, arguments, criticism and approval. Sometimes I practice with him, and sometimes I'm in combat with him. I've actually seen him one time in that time period. As far as I'm concerned, I have 36 years of direct instruction from him.Everything I've learned since is filtered through that lens, of how he'd react, if what I'm doing is stronger that what he taught, or a fundamental deviation, which would be a betrayal

This last account may read strange to some of you. But that's because you are not uchi-deshi.

Ellis Amdur

Last edited by Ellis Amdur : 12-05-2011 at 03:35 AM.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 04:20 AM   #2
SeiserL
 
SeiserL's Avatar
Dojo: Roswell Budokan, Kyushinkan Dojo, Aikido World Alliance
Location: Roswell, GA USA
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,710
United_States
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

IMHO, the context makes a difference in the meaning of a communication.

I worry less about other's training history and more about my own training present and future.

Thanks for the insightful thoughts.

Lynn Seiser PhD
Yondan Aikido & FMA/JKD
We do not rise to the level of our expectations, but fall to the level of our training. Train well. KWATZ!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 08:42 AM   #3
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 943
United_States
Online
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Thanks for posting this, Ellis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 08:49 AM   #4
raul rodrigo
Location: Quezon City
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Philippines
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Thanks, Ellis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 09:02 AM   #5
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Very well written, as usual.

Quote:
Ellis Amdur wrote: View Post
There is less "lying" going on that some might assume. Subjective truth is where one places one's mind.
It doesn't matter what you believe just so long as you're sincere, isn't it?

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 09:43 AM   #6
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,933
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
Very well written, as usual.

It doesn't matter what you believe just so long as you're sincere, isn't it?
I think there is another issue at play besides purely memory and how it changes over the years with the way we codify our memories as stories. There is also the framing of the narrative.

If you ask me about my leaving the first dojo I trained at, or why I decided to return to nursing after taking a hiatus, how I came to my political beliefs, or any number of things about my life, it is easy for me to frame my reply in very different terms. Not a single one will have a falsehood, each will essentially be the truth about it. Yet by focusing on a different aspect of the contributing factors, I can relate a cogent narrative that iis completely different from the one I relate tomorrow. So different people who chat with me or interview me may end up walking away with a very different understanding of my history.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 09:49 AM   #7
Ellis Amdur
Location: Seattle
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 814
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Demetrio - I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not. Let me address both options.

1. From one perspective, in many ways, a classic Japanese one, that is true. The quality of one's actions are determined by their heartfelt nature - or not. One of the most dismissive comments the teacher I referred to above could make about someone was, "he has no ideology." Another way of putting that is, "he has nothing he considers worth dying for." That's classic bushi ethics, and whether aikido is or is not, technically, a bushi-derived/associated martial training, that ethos is certainly held by some people - particularly Japanese - who practiced aikido post-war - and perhaps to this day.

That said, I was not talking about a "belief." I was talking about an experience. Terry was Ueshiba Morihei's student - unambiguously. Not just because he wished it so - that was the nature of his relationship - and, I think, many, if not all of the uchi-deshi. (I'm not speaking for them - I'm observing, as best as I can). Not all - to be sure - because a number of them split with Tohei when he left. They considered themselves primarily Tohei's deshi, and from what I've read, that was true for some who stayed, who were torn - because as far as their experience went, they viewed themselves as primarily Tohei's student, but 'structurally,' they felt required to stay within the Ueshiba family's aegis
I won't go into what was a long story, but Kuroiwa Yoshio, at one point in the 1950's, decided to leave the Aikikai and make common cause with the Yoshinkan, because of a dispute he was having with Tohei Koichi. Osawa sensei and Doshu (Kisshomaru) took him out for coffee and Kuroiwa remembers Osawa remonstrating with him, saying, "Since when did this become Tohei's aikido. Aikido is Osensei's" - that's why he stayed.
2. If you ARE being sarcastic, then you've missed the point of what I wrote entirely.

Ellis Amdur

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 09:54 AM   #8
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,779
United_States
Online
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Ellis Amdur wrote: View Post
There is less "lying" going on that some might assume. Subjective truth is where one places one's mind. I have dreamt about one of my teachers at least three times a week for the last 23 years since I've left Japan. I get lessons from him, arguments, criticism and approval. Sometimes I practice with him, and sometimes I'm in combat with him. I've actually seen him one time in that time period. As far as I'm concerned, I have 36 years of direct instruction from him.Everything I've learned since is filtered through that lens, of how he'd react, if what I'm doing is stronger that what he taught, or a fundamental deviation, which would be a betrayal

This last account may read strange to some of you. But that's because you are not uchi-deshi.

Ellis Amdur
it's an asian attitude, methink. there is a saying in asia that translated to something along the line: teacher for a day, father for life. i believed that the word shifu meant in chinese.

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 10:16 AM   #9
Chuck Clark
 
Chuck Clark's Avatar
Dojo: Jiyushinkan
Location: Monroe, Washington
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,134
United_States
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Ellis, well put, and one of those that comes "right from the gut" rather than "a writer's head"... Your memories of your teacher and the "current visits" are powerful. Unless someone has had a relationship that close with a teacher these fresh lessons don't seem possible to others. I still get those lessons from two of my teachers. One of them is still alive and I often call him and relate the lesson and he says, "Well, obviously you're still listening to what I have to offer." Or something to that effect... On at least two occasions he's said, "Oh good, you've pulled your head outta your ass!" I miss both of them every day. He has said that he now views me as a colleague... and I still view him as my sensei.

And... additionally, thinking about how long I was with either of these two is almost impossible to think or count in days, weeks, or months. Another thought, I learned more from Miyake Tsunako Sensei in a double handful of encounters that might seem like a trivial amount to some, but was huge for me. She is not one of the two mentioned above.

Thanks for your input.

Chuck

Last edited by Chuck Clark : 12-05-2011 at 10:21 AM.

Chuck Clark
Jiyushinkai Aikibudo
www.jiyushinkai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 10:23 AM   #10
George S. Ledyard
 
George S. Ledyard's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Eastside
Location: Bellevue, WA
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,633
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Ellis Amdur wrote: View Post
History's a funny thing. On the one hand, some are claiming that the post-war Aikikai misrepresented Ueshiba Morihei's role and that post-war aikido was largely the creation of a group of senior shihan under the clear leadership of Ueshiba Kisshomaru. In a sense, there is an allegation here of a level of dishonesty. Yet at the same time, when it comes to post-war resident students of the Aikikai, they are no-longer "uchi-deshi." Why? Because that same individual, who some choose to not "trust" in some respects trust him now. Ueshiba Kisshomaru is quoted, on one occasion, of said they weren't "uchi-deshi," so that makes it so, and therefore, their careers are open to being debunked as trivial compared to a "real" uchi-deshi.

There is no doubt that the pre-war Kobukan was a far different place than the post-war Aikikai. But there is no doubt whatsoever - truly - that the live-in students of the Aikikai were uchi-deshi. For goodness sakes, all the word means is "inside student." They were so referred to by others. And they were not all "apprentice teachers." The proof is Terry Dobson (who Osensei ORDERED be admitted to the Aikikai as an uchi-deshi over the objections of the cabal who allegedly controlled the old man - really, think of this. Terry was, at that time, a psychologically disturbed guy, almost out of control emotionally, and a foreigner to boot, and Ueshiba simply said "I want him in here." And so he was - in - "uchi"

Truly, with the exception of Tohei Koichi, who offered him the continental United States (as his cat's paw - something Terry wisely turned down), no one was preparing Terry Dobson to be an Aikikai teacher. Yet, he was regarded very differently than other foreigners. Here's some examples"
1. He, alone, I believe, among non-Japanese, was called to Ueshiba's death-bed. Osensei's last words to him, which Terry believed contained his mandate to transmit aikido in the way that he did, were "onegai shimasu."
2. When Doshu came to America in an attempt to heal a rift between the California group (which Terry was advising, in what was regarded by some as an adversarial role), Doshu entered the dojo and all the "uchi-deshi" ran up and knelt, bowing. Terry, because he was on the "opposing side," felt it was improper to join the group. This was regarded by some as a mortal insult. That the other non-Japanese teachers were not in the group was irrelevant. Terry was different to ALL the Japanese. One could hate him, regard him as an inconvenience, whatever, but he was part of a select group. They couldn't escape that.
3. The uchi-deshi travelled with O-sensei. Interestingly, even when he was in Iwama, he'd get lonely and call up Tokyo and asked for one of the deshi to come up and keep him company (I can't remember which shihan reminesced on this one). I think this is significant - if Saito wasn't around, Osensei was apparently largely alone, as the other Iwama students were locals, and they had homes to go back to and families to care for. Iwama was not a commune!
4. When I lived at the Kuwamori dojo (and was referred to as "our uchi-deshi," Terry came to Japan. The dojo head, Kuwamori Yasunori, had never heard of him. Yet when he heard that he was an uchi-deshi, he a sixth dan, asked Terry - then demanded that Terry - a 4th dan (politics) - teach the class. And when the class heard he had been an uchi-deshi, no one batted an eye.

The uchi-deshi trained together, ate together, and just like the pre-war students, were drafted to carry Osensei's bags. Terry and Chiba Kazuo are two I recall right off the bat who described their duties to wake in the middle of the night whenever the old man stirred. This was part of training, and was exactly, by the way, what Ueshiba did with Takeda Sokaku. The men who lived IN the dojo actually regard the soto-deshi, like Yamada Yoshimitsu, as - not being less, per se - but having missed out on a vital, essential experience.

To be clear, I think that Ueshiba Kisshomaru WAS highlighting a real difference in organizational attitude and role towards the uchi-deshi compared to prewar, but this quibbling in various threads that the Tokyo uchi-deshi were "not really" so is truly splitting hairs. (By the way, Kobayashi sensei referred to HIS live-in students as uchi-deshi, as I recall).

Now, the reason I really posted this. Relevant to this debate is how much time some of the post-war disciples spent with Ueshiba. I've seen something similar in discussions about how many training hours Ueshiba had with Takeda Sokaku! In both cases, this is to either discount the student or discount the teacher! For me, the most interesting riddle is Feng Zhi Qiang, a titan of Chen t'ai chi (sort of the Saito sensei of the art). In his own story, he says he studied six years with Chen Fake. But detractors say he only studied two (and me - I think - how could he get so incredibly good and powerful with just two years training - maybe he expanded the years to be modest!!!!)

The point I'm really making is that there is a qualitative question here that is more important than the quantitative. When I started aikido, I started asking Terry about other teachers, whom he'd met during travels with Osensei to Osaka - Tanaka Bansen, Kobayashi Hirokazu, ABe Seiseki,and Hikitsuchi Michio in Shingu, to name just four. Terry said, "I didn't notice them. All I saw was Osensei." He literally couldn't recall them - these 8th dan giants. To be sure, he had stories about Saito-sensei, Yamaguchi-sensei, Osawa sensei and Tohei sensei, and all the uchi-deshi, but they were, to him, big brothers, or if "larger," uncles. Were I to have asked Terry how many days Ueshiba was out of Tokyo, I don't think he could have answered. All his stories were about classes with Osensei, or taking ukemi for him, or traveling with him, doing farming chores at Iwama, etc. Does the reader get what I'm saying? Terry (and by implication others like him) may have taken classes from the senior shihan, but they were stand-ins - not replacements, but place-holders. They were still studying with Osensei. He was, to them, of such pervasive influence, that the days he was gone, were not days they "didn't study with him." They were studying with him - with him not there. In other words, when Arikawa sensei had Terry do a shihonage in practice, in his mind it was Osensei's shihonage he was doing. (Some of the deshii were surely different - but I think Chiba, Dobson and Saotome, to name three, were subjectively Osensei's students - don't know enough about the others to speculate).

There is less "lying" going on that some might assume. Subjective truth is where one places one's mind. I have dreamt about one of my teachers at least three times a week for the last 23 years since I've left Japan. I get lessons from him, arguments, criticism and approval. Sometimes I practice with him, and sometimes I'm in combat with him. I've actually seen him one time in that time period. As far as I'm concerned, I have 36 years of direct instruction from him.Everything I've learned since is filtered through that lens, of how he'd react, if what I'm doing is stronger that what he taught, or a fundamental deviation, which would be a betrayal

This last account may read strange to some of you. But that's because you are not uchi-deshi.

Ellis Amdur
That's the best description I have ever seen of how I perceive Saotome Sensei's (and the other uchi deshi I have talked to) relationship to the Founder to have been. In many ways it describes my own relationship with my teacher. I may have been in his dojo from 1976 to 1981 but everything I have done in my training since that time was simply to try to expand my understanding of what I understand Saotome Sensei to be doing.

It is interesting... When I first moved to Seattle in '81 for career reasons, I was so worried that I had left DC and Sensei too early. I felt that the students who had stayed behind had an "advantage" over me and I would "fall behind". So, I trained with anyone I thought could offer me something, Ellis, Bruce Bookman, Mary Heiny, etc

Later on, when I would return to DC for seminars or camps, I started to realize that in many ways, leaving DC was the best thing that could have happened to me. It forced me to really go after my own training. For many who were in the dojo on a daily basis, practice remained an imitation of someone else's Aikido. They'd go to class every night, and Sensei would do these amazing things, and they would do their level best to duplicate that. Then they'd go home and say "Great class tonight!". They didn't necessarily dream about it all night or torture themselves over "not getting it" the night before... Sensei would be there again the next night.

For me, anything I got from Sensei after I left was a special "gift". For instance he created his kumitachi after I left the dojo. So, I never learned them when I was at the dojo but afterwards when I returned for training. I then had to return to Seattle, take them apart, put them back together, practice them, analyze them, and then repeat the process. No one was there to do his for me. When I returned to DC again, I was surprised to find only a very few of the most motivated had been doing anything similar. Most simply came to class, did whatever Sensei showed that night, and went home again.

My point on this is that I can just see how some Aikido researcher in the future would say that George Ledyard was really only with Saotome for five years... and compare me to some guy who had been at the DC dojo continuously until Sensei left for Florida later on. Numerically it might make sense but it simply wouldn't in any way reflect the reality. I remember Sensei saying on many occasions "I am not your entertainment". Now I understand what he meant. For many folks, nightly training with Saotome Sensei was "entertainment", an interesting thing to do, good exercise, etc But they never took it past the "imitation" of Sensei's Aikido to making it truly their own. And that was what Sensei was really waiting for. On the other hand, because I was far away... I valued every instant I had with Sensei after I left. Once videos were available, I had every one, I worked off them, I worked off my notes, I was far "hungrier" in some sense than many of the folks that were there with their dose of Sensei every day. I think many did not appreciate what they really had until Sensei moved to Florida and the no longer had him there.

I think that one of the things that gets forgotten or was never really discussed in the first place, was the extent to which the various uchi deshi did their own work, trying to master what they had been taught. Saotome Sensei would talk about constantly having questions for O-Sensei, which the old man found amusing from the young kid on some level but never refused to answer. But his answer would be to grab a bokken, do something once, say, "there you go" and walk off. Then Sensei would take that one thing and tear it apart. I have friends who were at Hombu back in the day who remember seeing Sensei coming out of a private practice room with blood streaming off his head from working on sword takeaways. In other words, a moment with O-Sensei could occasion many hours of practice. How could one possibly quantify that?

One of the things that has seemed to frame these discussions over the past couple of years is the issue of internal power training in the pre-war as opposed to the past war Aikido. Often the implication was that O-Sensei's Aikido could be defined as his mastery of internal power. While I do not dispute that these skills were central to his somewhat legendary reputation, these skills were in no way the sum of his Aikido. What the Founder taught was vastly greater than what can be defined as internal power skills. There is much of what he taught after the war that represented an evolution in his thinking about things. This is evident in the fact that most of the pre-war deshi went off and did their own thing after the war. The Aikido (or Aikibudo) that they had been taught was morphing and they didn't wish to go along. What they wanted was O-Sensei at 50 not O-Sensei at 70 something.

I think it is a huge mistake to make the IP issue the defining criterion for judging the art and its practitioners. I am the first one to say, by all means we should get as much experience as we can in the area. But it isn't the benchmark that defines the art. It is a piece, albeit an important one, of a much larger whole. The post war deshi received a "direct transmission" of principle, technique, philosophical / spiritual framework, etc every instant they were with the Founder. The most mundane task was turned into a lesson for the deshi by the Founder. These "lessons" were often an instant of teaching with a lifelong impact and they were highly individual, taking place in some random moment between the Founder and a student. Many of our discussions fail to incorporate any understanding of this.

Ellis's exposition here is a wonderful, and surprisingly sympathetic expression of this I think.. thanks so much to Ellis for this.

Last edited by George S. Ledyard : 12-05-2011 at 10:26 AM.

George S. Ledyard
Aikido Eastside
Bellevue, WA
Aikido Eastside
AikidoDvds.Com
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 10:23 AM   #11
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
If you ask me about my leaving the first dojo I trained at, or why I decided to return to nursing after taking a hiatus, how I came to my political beliefs, or any number of things about my life, it is easy for me to frame my reply in very different terms. Not a single one will have a falsehood, each will essentially be the truth about it. Yet by focusing on a different aspect of the contributing factors, I can relate a cogent narrative that iis completely different from the one I relate tomorrow. So different people who chat with me or interview me may end up walking away with a very different understanding of my history.
So Janet, if you were to tell me you decided to return to nursery after having been kidnapped by a team of circus ponies who put you in a flying saucer and took you on tour around the Tannhauser Gates I don't have to doubt about the veracity of your story.

If truth is subjective falsehood can not exist.

Ellis,

I wasn't being sarcastic.

However, I'd like to point that following your "Subjective truth is where one places one's mind", Dobson can be regarded both as Ueshiba uchi deshi and not as one at the same time, depending on the various "subjective truths" around. Both positions (Kisshomaru saying there was not uchi deshi and Dobson Saying he was one) are true.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 10:26 AM   #12
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 954
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

If your parents stopped influencing your life when you stopped living at home, please raise your hand.

Given the towering personality that Ueshiba Sensei clearly was, the idea that his closest students were only influenced by him while in his physical presence is ludicrous.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 10:42 AM   #13
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 954
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
However, I'd like to point that following your "Subjective truth is where one places one's mind", Dobson can be regarded both as Ueshiba uchi deshi and not as one at the same time, depending on the various "subjective truths" around. Both positions (Kisshomaru saying there was not uchi deshi and Dobson Saying he was one) are true.
Sure. See also Ledyard Sensei's post about Saotome Sensei introducing him as an uchi deshi, despite having said that the uchi deshi system is impossible in America.

One of the first lessons one learns as a writer is the extent to which viewpoint defines a story -- whether fiction or non-fiction. That's just as true in the real world as on the page. Even the "objective" truth that journalists and historians seek is going to be defined by the sources they are (or are not) able to consult.

When one considers a figure like Ueshiba Sensei, one also must consider the difference between history and myth. Though myth may not reflect objective reality, it still describes a different kind of truth.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 11:49 AM   #14
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,933
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
So Janet, if you were to tell me you decided to return to nursery after having been kidnapped by a team of circus ponies who put you in a flying saucer and took you on tour around the Tannhauser Gates I don't have to doubt about the veracity of your story.

If truth is subjective falsehood can not exist..
Of course not.That wasn't my point.
Truth is objective in terms of an action that happened, the dates things happened, etc. I left the dojo on such and such a date. I returned to nursing on such and such a date. In terms of the reasons action occured however, even the first person narrator chooses to frame a certain context by highlighting some things and omitting others or varying the relationship between things - these are not lies or falsehoods - to large degree nonconsciously, in forming memories over time, each of us does this and ends up "codifying" a specific story of our life. But depending on audience, the story may change in terms of what is highlighted or left out. And all the stories are still true.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 12:57 PM   #15
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,549
United_States
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
If truth is subjective falsehood can not exist.
True or truth can be subjective depending on what is being considered. It is true that I remember doing something 10 years ago. That statement can very well be true even if I do not remember it "correctly". Or if I remember it differently. Remember that most of the interesting things we talk about are not exactly amenable to precise and absolute quantification or description. As such they all suffer from perspective issues and the "weighting" the observer places on various aspects.

How often have we all taken classes where we walk away with some lesson that we thought was profound and critical only to talk with others in the class and find they came away with something completely different? Is it the case that only one person can be right? Sometimes. Is it the case that maybe they can all be right? Sometimes. Where does truth lie here?

Truth, for most people, aren't just absolutes. And are often open to debate and perspective. I think Ellis' posts points to that very strongly. Some want absolute. Some treat all things as absolute. Some will do that to a level where they lose all nuance, subtlety and shading. Which IMHO gets them vastly further away from a higher level of truth.

I would rephrase your quote to "If *ALL* truth is subjective *absolute* falsehood cannot exist." Okay, but the really interesting stuff are usually the things that aren't absolutes or easily quantifiable or precisely described. Some things we take to be true are very colored by subjectivity. Most non-trivial things require a perspective, an observation, a re-coding in to linguistic representation, or something that introduces some degree of subjective/cultural/whatever bias. That's why we have conversations, debates, and discussion. To flesh out the more subtle stuff. To decide how much weight to put on the "truth" of various things.

But my recounting of memories of my training are truthful to the best of my memory. But they are also absolutely subjective, even if I wrote them down. Because they are my impressions. My experiences. My "understanding" of those experiences.

Philosophers have been arguing about truth forever. Scientists generally avoid the topic altogether as it is a minefield since each person tends to apply their own standard of what might make something the "truth".

Back to your regularly scheduled discussion...

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:01 PM   #16
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,779
United_States
Online
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Keith Larman wrote: View Post
Truth, for most people, aren't just absolutes. And are often open to debate and perspective. I think Ellis' posts points to that very strongly. Some want absolute. Some treat all things as absolute. Some will do that to a level where they lose all nuance, subtlety and shading. Which IMHO gets them vastly further away from a higher level of truth.
"only the Sith deals in absolute"

*sorry couldn't help meself. please resume the resumed schedule of regular discussion*

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:03 PM   #17
sorokod
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 595
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Sure. See also Ledyard Sensei's post about Saotome Sensei introducing him as an uchi deshi, despite having said that the uchi deshi system is impossible in America.

One of the first lessons one learns as a writer is the extent to which viewpoint defines a story -- whether fiction or non-fiction. That's just as true in the real world as on the page. Even the "objective" truth that journalists and historians seek is going to be defined by the sources they are (or are not) able to consult.

When one considers a figure like Ueshiba Sensei, one also must consider the difference between history and myth. Though myth may not reflect objective reality, it still describes a different kind of truth.

Katherine
I do not think that a reasonable person will consider http://asu.org/Saotome.html to be a work of fiction. On the contrary, I imagine that a prospective student will consider this information accurate and use it as a basis to a decision to join the ASU.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:12 PM   #18
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 954
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
David Soroko wrote: View Post
I do not think that a reasonable person will consider http://asu.org/Saotome.html to be a work of fiction. On the contrary, I imagine that a prospective student will consider this information accurate and use it as a basis to a decision to join the ASU.
Non-fiction is just as viewpoint dependent. That's why they say history is written by the winners. That's why eyewitnesses to the same event will differ on important details. That's why a politician's speech will be seen completely differently by his supporters and his opponents.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:25 PM   #19
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,933
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Non-fiction is just as viewpoint dependent. That's why they say history is written by the winners. That's why eyewitnesses to the same event will differ on important details. That's why a politician's speech will be seen completely differently by his supporters and his opponents.

Katherine
Exactly.
I once had a young adult during the fairly early days of our war on Iraq tell me that the newspaper is unbiased.
After I stopped laughing, I said, ok: let's select a photo of an olive skinned person with dark hair in green fatigues carrying a gun. Let's further posit that it was taken in Iraq. Among the captions the editor might select to describe the photo are...Terrorist - Armed insurgent- Patriot- Freedom fighter - Rebel- Militia member - Not to mention father of four, pissed off unemployed oil rig worker, doctor trying to get to his hospital....

Objective truth is, this man was there at this time and (if witnessed) had just done this thing. All else is the framing of narrative.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:25 PM   #20
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,910
Spain
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Keith,

I don't disagree with your points, but my problem is not specifically about Dobson (or any individual history) but about a perceived attitude of every claim, every remembrance, every statement is true and valid because there is not objective reality and nuances, subtleties and details are not needed.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:34 PM   #21
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,549
United_States
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
Keith,

I don't disagree with your points, but my problem is not specifically about Dobson (or any individual history) but about a perceived attitude of every claim, every remembrance, every statement is true and valid because there is not objective reality and nuances, subtleties and details are not needed.
Of course that's not true as well. The problem is that it can be very difficult at times to evaluate many claims after the fact because of the mixing of a variety of issues, not the least of which is the faulty nature of memory, confirmation bias, and any number of other things.

We can't sit back and say "nothing is resolvable" because of these issues. However, we also can't become like some of the rabid "I drank the koolaid" folk that simply can't see past their own (often very limited) range of experience and knowledge. Forgive the phrasing, but the "truth" is somewhere in between. And it is often fuzzy, open to discussion, and usually the most interesting truths are also most vexing and difficult to pin down.

Sure, some thing are just flat out false. Some are "conveniently remembered in a self-aggrandizing way". Some are seen through thick goggles. And a few, hopefully, are seen clearly. Standing on any extreme side, however, is usually off the mark...

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 01:50 PM   #22
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,549
United_States
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

I'll also add... Sometimes the most insidious and misleading histories are not due to the words of the people involved. But how subsequent students choose to interpret those words.

WRT to Saotome's brief history on their website. I have no argument with anything there. But I've also been to a seminar and paired up with some fella (apparently mid-yudansha ranked in that org) who spent a lot of time telling me how "we" were able to do this real stuff unlike those people who came from Ki Society lineages. And how Saotome had special access for over a decade which meant he got oh-so-much more than anyone else. I just smiled a lot, kept training, and never mentioned that I had only crashed a couple ASU seminars over the years but was actually myself in a Tohei lineage. Of course many in the Tohei lineage claim some degree of direct authenticity due to Tohei being the chief instructor under O-sensei for all those years. You see it's not the underlying history, it is the interpretation of it and the use of those interpretations as justifications for further judgments and evaluations.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 02:26 PM   #23
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,108
United_States
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Nothing much to add, but wanted to say thank you for a great thread! It's somewhat cathartic after some of the other recent discussions.
Take care,
Matthew

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 02:50 PM   #24
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 954
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Demetrio Cereijo wrote: View Post
Keith,

I don't disagree with your points, but my problem is not specifically about Dobson (or any individual history) but about a perceived attitude of every claim, every remembrance, every statement is true and valid because there is not objective reality and nuances, subtleties and details are not needed.
I can't speak for anyone else, but my point is just the opposite: that nuances, subtleties, and details are critical because the objectively reportable facts don't tell you much. But also that those nuances and subtleties will be filtered by the person telling the story.

At a much smaller scale, consider any aikido technique. There's what nage is actually doing, as it might be measured by an objective device like a camera or a motion capture system. There's what nage thinks he's doing. There's what uke feels. And there's what a human third-party observer sees (or thinks he sees).

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 02:57 PM   #25
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 954
Offline
Re: Terry Dobson's Training History

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
Exactly.
I once had a young adult during the fairly early days of our war on Iraq tell me that the newspaper is unbiased.
After I stopped laughing, I said, ok: let's select a photo of an olive skinned person with dark hair in green fatigues carrying a gun. Let's further posit that it was taken in Iraq. Among the captions the editor might select to describe the photo are...Terrorist - Armed insurgent- Patriot- Freedom fighter - Rebel- Militia member - Not to mention father of four, pissed off unemployed oil rig worker, doctor trying to get to his hospital....

Objective truth is, this man was there at this time and (if witnessed) had just done this thing. All else is the framing of narrative.
As is the decision to publish that particular photo in the first place, as opposed to a different photo of the same person sitting and drinking coffee, or a similar photo of an olive-skinned American soldier, or a photo of an olive-skinned female in civilian clothing.

And these are decisions by journalists, who (mostly) have training in objective reporting and (mostly) consciously try to be aware of and compensate for their own biases and those of their sources. Read the diaries of ordinary people involved in news-making events and you'll get yet a different view.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

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



Reply


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
The Limiting Factor in a Student's Training George S. Ledyard External Aikido Blog Posts 13 03-09-2012 09:15 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 10 Peter Goldsbury Columns 200 02-04-2009 06:45 AM
Analytic Anger and Frustration in Training Erick Mead Training 13 06-14-2007 04:17 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 3 Peter Goldsbury Columns 16 05-28-2007 06:24 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:47 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