Aikido - Breaking the barrier

Josh Phillipson wrote: unilaterally = one side mutual = both Unilaterally creating a mutual agreement one side creates an agreement both buy into.

Nope. At the point that the one side has created it, it isn't an agreement. It's a proposal, perhaps, but it it only becomes an agreement when another party agrees to it (hence the word "agreement").

Josh Phillipson wrote: unilaterally = one side mutual = both Unilaterally creating a mutual agreement one side creates an agreement both buy into. whether or not you want to is a different question. i guess the question is whether an agreement can be 'forced'. i've felt forced to agree in the past. in fact i feel forced to agree now. i guess we can both agree that i was wrong. wordplay is not a specialty of mine. it was just a thought. no worries.

lol this conversation between you two is awesome.
I hope you can reach a mutual agreement soon.

Gosh I can hear my Sensei now, "Stop being the dictionary police and train!" lol

Unilateralism is any doctrine or agenda that supports one-sided action. Such action may be in disregard for other parties, or as an expression of a commitment toward a direction which other parties may find agreeable.

This is what we do in Aikido - we decide for ourselves that we really don't want to get beat up - we ourselves decide the best course of action, and then impose that decision on the opponent. Somewhere between "he grabbed me" and "HIYAAAAA" is the blending, or 'mutual' part.

Ueshiba also said:

At certain times, the entire universe becomes our foe!

At such times, unity of body and mind are essential.

Is that unilateral or multilateral?

Aikido should be dynamic, too,

It's like that line from the Queen song 'One vision':

'No hate, no fight, just excitation'!!

Perhaps that's why it's waned a bit in recent years.

If you look at photos of a young Ueshiba, he looked quite aggressive, quite riled, in fact. He learned to get out his aggression first, then temper it? That's why I don't know whether to do Aikido first, then a bit of striking art,or the other way round, though it might take me till I'm 80 to work it out, then it will be too late!

Is Aikido for the whole world? Is that what Ueshiba wanted?

Carl Rylander wrote: If you look at photos of a young Ueshiba, he looked quite aggressive, quite riled, in fact. He learned to get out his aggression first, then temper it? That's why I don't know whether to do Aikido first, then a bit of striking art,or the other way round, though it might take me till I'm 80 to work it out, then it will be too late!

The purpose and function of martial arts training, of any style, is not to "get your aggressions out". Acting out aggression increases it, it doesn't diminish it.

Even boxing is known as the noble gentleman's art of self defence.

I do know that!

Carl Rylander wrote: Is Aikido for the whole world? Is that what Ueshiba wanted?

How do you mean the first question? As, "should everyone learn it?" Or as, "can it be a good practice for anyone?" Or something else?
Of course I don't know, but my guess is that Ueshiba wanted the world to be as positively realized as it possibly can be (whatever that might mean) and that his Aikido reflected principles of nature which could lead to that. However, being principles of Great Nature, one doesn't necessarily have to even know about Aikido to practice them.
Should the whole world study Buddhism? Or Kung Fu? I would say only those for whom these things resonate.