"Non-Aikido Martial Traditions" Forum

David Skaggs wrote: Not true. He did not go outside of Aikido to bring the skills back into Aikido...

What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't...

There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training.

My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side.

Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc.

Anyway, shades of grey here.

Keith Larman wrote: What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't... There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training. My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side. Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc. Anyway, shades of grey here.

Thumbs = up

Keith Larman wrote: What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't... There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training. My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side. Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc. Anyway, shades of grey here.

Excellent.

dps

David Skaggs wrote: (one half) percent of one million = five thousand dps

I am sure that the collective experience of those that have felt Dan's aiki and have not felt that elsewhere exceeds your five thousand - if there are others out thee at that same level, why aren't people swarming to them to get the stuff ?

Greg

David Skaggs wrote: Putting things in context. dos

Actually, I find your posts on this subject somewhat twisted in logic and coming across as putting things out of context.

Keith Larman wrote: What drives me nuts in these discussions is so often people get in to "binary" discussions. Yes he did, no he didn't... There is *no* doubt that Tohei trained with Nakamura who himself was considered the "father" of yoga in Japan. There is no doubt Tohei was profoundly affected by this training. My understanding of the issue is that his training with Nakamura helped Tohei better understand what he was experiencing with Ueshiba. And that allowed Tohei to develop his systematic approach to teaching which in turn became "mainstream" aikido since Tohei was soon Chief Instructor. So there was an influence. I wouldn't say he had nothing then went outside to bring ki back. Nor would I say he already had it all and he just did some yoga on the side. Now the question that remains is whether what he was doing/teaching/formulating was the absolute end all of aikido or the *only* way to go about transmitting the skillset. I think few would claim such a thing. I train in a lineage that goes directly to Tohei-sensei. I like/enjoy/train/teach much of the same stuff. However, time spent with others has greatly informed my understanding of what we learned from Tohei, from our founder, Kobayashi-sensei, and then from his senior students now carrying on what he taught. I have spent time with Mike, Dan, Toby, even Aaron Clark via an Aikiweb seminar. I learned much in all of them, adding things to my "to do" list each time. Stuff I try to do daily in addition to what I already do. And yet when I train and teach I don't think I'm doing anything outside the realm of Aikido. I just find there are new ways to improve, new insights, clarifications, etc. Anyway, shades of grey here.

Good points. Tohei did not bring ki to Aikido - he brought his own take on it and his own methodology of teaching it, which a lot came from outside the Aikido community. Prior to Tohei's split, ki was talked about openly by all in Aikido - just look at Kisshomaru's books published prior to the Tohei split. However, after the split, ki was not talked about openly because the lack of attention to ki in honbu was the public reason for the split - no one was talking about the political and personality issues that were the true reasons for the split.

No one is saying ki and aiki were never in Aikido - Ueshiba had it, but unfortunately, not much of it got passed down.

Greg

Everybody should just ignore David Skaggs to keep the discussion going.

Everybody should just ignore David Skaggs to keep the discussion going.

Very good point!

Keiths idea of shades of grey is more akin to how I think of these things. I like to think of it as this type of work "informs people about their aikido."
I agree that you couldn't likely find anyone who would claim their way is the only way. I do think there are ways that are more directly related and usable than others to Aikido. Hell, I have been writing about how the softness of DR is more akin to taiji than Aikido™ since aikido mailing list days, Aikido-ka always seemed either too stiff, or they noodled. Once you understand what is really supposed to be going on though you find there is an underlying logic; IP/aiki, that is inescapable. The comedy being it has indeed escaped most MA people. Back then, I had no idea that noodling, and the external evasion of force syndrome, was so prevelent in taiji as well.

And to address Aiki directly: Ueshiba obviously considered "the way of aiki" as fluid and changing, and never as a brand name or fixed practice, hence my calling it Aikido™. Since he, like Takeda, never repeated techniques and did solo training, I would even wonder if they were much interested at all in what became of the "brand" as demonstrated through waza.
As my signature line suggests from one of Ueshiba's peers:
"Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing." Sagawa

We have to understand that many cannot see beyond the brand, as even that body of work is daunting enough when looking at it from the bottom up. There is no way they are going to see the universality of aiki much less understand how the "way of aiki" is a superior and more encompassing pursuit than a collection of movement drills, waza, connection exercises, what have you. So there will not be a freedom from form at that stage of progress, and possibly even a level of resistance to that way of thinking.
hence my opting to teach the more informed group among them, the teachers. I love Gleasons Comment: 'This is like graduate school for teachers. You really can't expect everyone to understand."

This is yet another reason for NAMT as a forum. People who cannot see the universality of IP/aiki cannot help but to see it as a separate entity an assignment of sorts only related to individual arts that is only partially related. It's the old "This comes from that, that comes from the other and this is mine." mentality. I've met any number of men who actually pride themselves on their understanding of things that way. Like tools in a box they pick and choose the use, and don't see the toolbox that houses everything.
Cheers
Dan

Lorel Latorilla wrote: Everybody should just ignore David Skaggs to keep the discussion going.

Good advice.

I do.

dps