For Ted Ehara - Boundary of your aikido?

Cheap shot coming!!! Be warned!

Erick Mead wrote: Can anybody spell p-a-s-s-i-v-e a-g-r-e-s-s-i-v-e?

Well we know you can't - Where I come from we spell aggressive with two "g"s.

George S. Ledyard wrote: I still don't get the point... why the "just"? as if his contribution to creating something new was somehow smaller than it was...

Because I practice aikido, it's creation and development is important to me. If I didn't practice aikido, the development of the art would be just a curious scholarly incident. This art becomes just a transformation of Omote concepts into a budo.

What the founder was doing applies to a much wider setting than Japanese martial arts. He probably didn't realize this. Certainly most people don't today. People are caught up in the mysticism and superstitions of aikido's creation. They can't see a larger picture.

Dan Botari wrote: Cheap shot coming!!! Be warned! Well we know you can't - Where I come from we spell aggressive with two "g"s.

oops, mea culpa too...

R

Ron Tisdale wrote: Erick Mead wrote: They wish to be pushed -- but do not wish to be pushed. False. They wish to have a partner push on them...and they maintain their internal structure.

They cannot maintain that structure without 1) movement or 2) resistance.

To will the act is to will the effect. If the effect is resistance, then it is not Aikido.

O Sensei wrote: We adhere to the principle of absolute nonresistance, that is to say, we do not oppose the attacker.

For reference: http://www.aikidofaq.com/interviews.html

What nuance on "absolute" am I missing here ?

Ron Tisdale wrote: So the push has no outward affect.

Are we throwing Newton's Third Law out the window ?

If the input force is unbalanced by reaction, however derived (active or inertial) then it induces motion. If it does not induce motion, it is a balanced force equation -- there is a reaction, and it is necessarily equal and opposes the input force, i.e.-- it is resistance.

And therefore outside the boundaries of Aikido.

Ron Tisdale wrote: [spelling of agGressive] oops, mea culpa too...

Declaration of Independence -- the gold standard, has two (2) interlineated spelling corrections -- in the original.

Erick,

The force is redirected through the system of 'sticks and strings' that is our bodies. The movement you seek may be unmeasurably small flexions of tendons, and compression of bones.

It does not 'feel' the same as resistance, because of the network. It's a subjective thing - best I can do bro.

Isn't the engineering definition of 'rigid' - ten units of force in and ten units out = rigid. God help me here, but maybe there are losses to friction also.

dave

Erick Mead wrote: If the input force is unbalanced by reaction, however derived (active or inertial) then it induces motion. If it does not induce motion, it is a balanced force equation -- there is a reaction, and it is necessarily equal and opposes the input force, i.e.-- it is resistance. And therefore outside the boundaries of Aikido.

Who are you to define the boundaries of Aikido, Erick? According to your self-styled rules, the demonstrations by Ueshiba, where someone pushed on him and he did not move, are "outside the boundaries of Aikido". I think you need to recognize that as brilliant as you undoubtedly are, your abilities to define for everyone what Aikido is are probably limited when your theories miss the point.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

And therefore outside the boundaries of Aikido.

In your opinion...not mine...

Best,
Ron

David Knowlton wrote: The force is redirected through the system of 'sticks and strings' that is our bodies.

Fair enough, where to? Ground reaction is still reaction -- being a buttress instead of a piston.

David Knowlton wrote: The movement you seek may be unmeasurably small flexions of tendons, and compression of bones.

Yikes. I don't go for bone compression. Is this not, again, language of simple inertial reaction? Or elastic deformation -- i.e spring-force resistance ?

David Knowlton wrote: It does not 'feel' the same as resistance, because of the network. It's a subjective thing - best I can do bro.

The first thing I learned about 3-D mechanics is that it is a counterintuive, and frequently nonlinear environment. Try force paths in spaceframe analysis for statics. Or masonry vaults. God loves vaults. He had medieval stonemasons curse generations of engineers by building lots and lots of them. For dynamics -- I can put you in an airplane and make you "feel" perfectly "right-side-up" but that does not make it so.

David Knowlton wrote: God help me here, but maybe there are losses to friction also.

God won't help you there -- friction is wholly the work of the Devil -- ruined a bunch of perfectly good perpetual motion machines ...

Erick,

Spend the $30.00 on a 'tensegritoy'. Build one of the models. My favorite is the icosahedron (twenty sides) with six sticks all parallel. It looks, and kicks, like a soccer ball when done.

Point is - the 'compression' i'm speaking of is because the tendons/fascia, I'll use 'strings' pull in a balanced way Down the length of the bone. You can snap a pencil easily - can you crush it by pushing directly along it's line (compression)? Probably not.

dave

Ron Tisdale wrote: Erick Mead wrote: And therefore outside the boundaries of Aikido. In your opinion...not mine...

Mike Sigman wrote: Who are you to define the boundaries of Aikido, Erick?

Not my opinion nor my authority. OSensei's. I quoted him directly. He was pretty clear on that point; "absolute," in fact.

Aikido = NOT-resistance :: resistance = NOT-Aikido.

A = NOT B ; B = NOT-A.

Among the more basic logical propositions.

The only question is whether what you all are doing is resistance or motion, or a combination thereof. You all seem to claim it is neither one nor both. And that is just not possible.

Mike Sigman wrote: According to your self-styled rules,

"Self-styled." Quoting O Sensei. An intersting usage that I was not previously aware of ...

Mike Sigman wrote: ... the demonstrations by Ueshiba, where someone pushed on him and he did not move, are "outside the boundaries of Aikido". I think you need to recognize that as brilliant as you undoubtedly are, your abilities to define for everyone what Aikido is are probably limited when your theories miss the point.

Fortunately for me, since I am not, a brilliant effort is not required. I simply reconcile the statements you make with the conflicting statements he made -- by concluding that you are wrong when it comes to Aikido. How can I conclude otherwise? You all do bear the burden of overcoming O Sensei's direct statements that facially conflict with your premises -- if you hope to persuade anybody.

I have seen many clips of what you speak: the "chest push;" the "thigh push;" the "seated push."

"Il muove." So far.

Point me to one where he doesn't move; you keep saying that there are. Show me. I am open minded.

You also have not attempted to rebut a earlier point I made in another thread that even if he can be shown "not moving" (assuming such a clip exists) in responcse to force, how do you show that this is not merely a demonstration to show the pointlessness of "strength" contests versus aikido. He was by all accounts plenty strong. This is especially suspect since all these examples seem to be limited to demos as opposed to principles he gave in his explicit aikido instruction and were recorded by his primary deshi.

That he did not teach these means of resistance is also evidence that they were not aikido. Not useless, but not aikido.

Erick my friend, you are resisting opening up to a new way of understanding.

Perhaps rather than the word 'resistance' we could substitute 'struggle'.

My friend asked how I loaded uchi mata so easily - he knew my back was injured and painful. I told him - one leg stands relaxed, and you simply join uke by hugging with one arm, and you both fall over - except that as you fall forward, uke falls UP - up your back. There - I've used magical language, but it's really just leverage as far as the pivot goes. The leg bearing the weight is not being used muscularly - the bones and fascia form nice little triangles with minimal effort on my part.

Imagine a creature that can intuitively find strength in static - linear compression, triangles etc. - but be able to reprogram itself at will. God - I want to be one of those!



dave

David Knowlton wrote: Spend the $30.00 on a 'tensegritoy'. Build one of the models.

Yes. Build a tower out of them, which I have seen done. They are very survivable in severe wind conditions because they are very elastic and THEY MOVE at the slightest input.

http://ropesandpoles.blogspot.com/20...ity-tower.html

Along these lines, I designed and built a pentagonal plan, chain-suspended, center-pivot treehouse for my kids seven years ago, It is tied to the tree with radial eyebolts and a suspending circumferential roof truss space-frame that carries the floor loads on beams hung on chains. It has withstood direct hits from Hurricanes Ivan and Dennis --- all because it MOVES and does not resist at all.

David Knowlton wrote: Erick my friend, you are resisting opening up to a new way of understanding. Perhaps rather than the word 'resistance' we could substitute 'struggle'.

That's all fine and good, and had I the opportunity I would gladly play -- but what has that to do with Aikido?

Disregard what the Old Man said, but how is that then Aikido?

I edited my post. read above.

dave

David Knowlton wrote: My friend asked how I loaded uchi mata so easily .... The leg bearing the weight is not being used muscularly - the bones and fascia form nice little triangles with minimal effort on my part. .... strength in static - linear compression, triangles etc.

As a model, the adaptive truss you describe is not terribly apt anatomically. An adaptive-jointed chain is a better one. See this structural image: for something that does make sense -- anatomically and mechanically.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1860...23#reader-link

To illustrate the significance of this model, let me follow up on your earlier bicycle stability question:

Fold a chain in two and hang both ends from one support. Then let one end drop from the support.

How would it fall in relation to a simultaneously dropped ball?
Less acceleration? Same acceleration? More acceleration?

With the ball terminal velocity is reached when drag equals gravity.

Does the falling chain tip have the the same limitation? What limitation does it have? Greater or lesser, and by what magnitude ?

What the falling chain achieves in pure tension -- the linked chain of body and limbs can adaptively achieve by proper kokyu in pure compression.

As per the illustration cited above. You cannot do that with a truss.

Boundless Aiki-do does not rest on truss diagrams and empty extrapolations.
The path to power is in-yo ho. Resolving in-yo.... in you. Aiki blossoms from there.
The results of your training and hard work lies in your understanding.
And your level of understanding is alive.... in your hands.

The path has to be shown. And it does not take twenty years, or even ten.
Sadly, many are going full speed...in the wrong direction... on a well traveled highway. Hoping to find it under those either incapable or unwilling to teach it.
At least they have a lot of company.
And it applies to all the arts.

Good teachers are jewels.
Dan

Dan Harden wrote: Boundless Aiki-do ... The path to power is in-yo ho. Resolving in-yo.... in you.

If I sought power, I would look for things far more cruel, selfish and immediate. Bullets are the old standby; bombs work; poisons too. Understanding in the pursuit of power is self-limiting -- it only understands greater power. The counsels of power are therefore rarely the counsels of wisdom. There are things much greater than power, and which can overcome the greatest of powers. I practice that heiho.

Ted Ehara wrote: What the founder was doing applies to a much wider setting than Japanese martial arts. He probably didn't realize this. Certainly most people don't today. People are caught up in the mysticism and superstitions of aikido's creation. They can't see a larger picture.

Ted, you keep saying things that, at least to me are self evident. O-Sensei certainly did understand that what he was doing applied well beyond Japanese martial arts. He quite clearly stated that Aikido had the power to transform the world.

I also disagree that most people don't see it that way. You can find folks out there running every which way and that with the concepts they've taken from Aikido. I don't see many people at all who are caught up in the "mysticism and superstitions" of Aikido's creation... in fact it's the opposite. People have almost no understanding of O-Sensei's spiritual ideas. What passes in general for Aikido spirituality is a sort of ethical system based on the idea of "do no harm". It's simplistic. Just look at the bulk of the posts on the various Aikido forums. The number of people who have even an academic understanding of what O-Sensei about his spirituality is quite small. The number who have actually experienced training of the type he underwent is even smaller. I don't see where you can maintain that some significant number is caught up in the mysticism and I actually have no idea what you might be considering superstition...

I think that there are many people who see the "big picture" just fine. It's the little picture they don't get. The current discussion and the related threads are all about the fact that there are technical issues which Aikido practitioners need to deal with if they aspire to technique that is comparable to teachers like O-Sensei or Takeda Sensei. I see lots of ideas about how one applies Aikido principles in the world. I don't see a lot of real understanding about how Aikido principles apply martially.

It's amazing to me how various folks want to remove O-Sensei from Aikido or selectively focus on what he said in order to maintain some position. The man was the Founder of that art. The art was his unique creation. Of course it was based on elements that had gone before. Everything is based on what has gone before. But O-Sensei's structuring of the techniques, his development of the manner in which we practice, and his spiritual expression of how the physical art connected with the spiritual art was unique. It did not exist before him. Many would maintain that it may not have existed after him.

It is not an overattachment to O-Sensei's spiritual beliefs that is the problem for Aikido... It's that most people don't ever get their Aikido technique up to the level at which they can actually connect their physical technique to the spiritual concepts O-Sensei talked about. A working knowledge of O-Sensei's spiritual ideas is important for giving direction to ones practice. Without that, it commonly happens that simplistic spiritual concepts arise out of incomplete understanding of physical technique.

Everybody likes to call these folks "aiki fruities" or "aiki bunnies" or some such. The folks that refer to them as such generally pride themselves on not having much involvment in the spiritual side of the art, as if that would make their Aikido more martial. Well, they are no closer to the Aikido of O-Sensei than the "fruities"... I know that there are many folks out there who don't really care if they are doing anything like what O-Sensei had in mind. He is just some figure from ancient history as far as they are concerned. But for many of us, the connection to O-Sensei's art is important. If Aikido was limited to what goes by that name in a lot of cases, I would never have stayed in the art for thirty years. I might not even have started.

George S. Ledyard wrote: ...<snip>...I think that there are many people who see the "big picture" just fine. It's the little picture they don't get. The current discussion and the related threads are all about the fact that there are technical issues which Aikido practitioners need to deal with if they aspire to technique that is comparable to teachers like O-Sensei or Takeda Sensei. I see lots of ideas about how one applies Aikido principles in the world. I don't see a lot of real understanding about how Aikido principles apply martially.

A case of putting the ox-cart infront of the oxens. Totally agree.

GeorgeL wrote: It is not an overattachment to O-Sensei's spiritual beliefs that is the problem for Aikido... It's that most people don't ever get their Aikido technique up to the level at which they can actually connect their physical technique to the spiritual concepts O-Sensei talked about. A working knowledge of O-Sensei's spiritual ideas is important for giving direction to ones practice. Without that, it commonly happens that simplistic spiritual concepts arise out of incomplete understanding of physical technique.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner here. I like this paragraph, George.

As for me...
After years of doing the art AIKIDO... I am no closer to finding out whether I can apply it in a stressful environment yet (e.g. shiai or competition or "on the street") This unknown is really bugging me and in my current aikido training, there is no way I can find out.

That is why I am exploring Judo (and competition) to know more about myself, my limits and boundaries.

My sensei started his martial journey in alive type martial art (Boxing, Judo) and his aikido teacher (namely Gozo Shioda) before him also did Kendo and Judo prior to aikido. And they are both martially competent, IMO. I am only following their foot step. I may return to aikido later, but first I must find out more about myself.

Boon.

A nice explanation!



THE NOBLE STRUGGLE OF THE WARRIOR

By Taisen Deshimaru


Budo is the way of the warrior; it embraces all the Japanese martial arts. It explores through direct experience and in depth the relationship between ethics, religion, and philosophy. Its association with sports is a very recent development; the ancient writings are essentially concerned with a particular form of cultivation of the mind and a reflection upon the nature of the self: who am I? what is I?

In Japanese, do means the way. How do you walk on this way? How can you find it? It is not just learning a technique, still less is it a sporting match. Budo includes such arts as kendo, judo, aikido, and kyudo or archery; yet the ideogram bu also means to cease the struggle. In Budo the point is not only to compete, but to find peace and mastery of the self.

Do, the way, is the method, the teaching that enables you to understand perfectly the nature of your own mind and self. It is the way of the Buddha, butsudo, that leads you to discover your own original nature, to awaken from the numbness of the sleeping ego (the little self, the limited "me") and accede to higher, fuller personhood. In Asia this way has become the supreme morality and essence of all religions and philosophies. The yin and yang of the I Ching, the "existence is nothing" of Lao Tsu, have their roots in it.

What does this mean? That you can forget your personal body and mind; attain absolute spirit, nonego. Harmonize, unite sky and earth. The inner mind lets thoughts and emotions pass by; it is completely free from its environment, egoism drops away. This is the wellspring of the philosophies and religions of Asia. Mind and body, outside and inside, substance and phenomena: these pairs are neither dualistic nor opposed, but form one unseparated whole. Change, any change, influences all actions, all relationships among all existences; the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of one person influences every other person; our movements and those of others are interdependent. "Your happiness must be my happiness and if you weep I weep with you. When you are sad I must become sad and when you are happy I must be so too." Everything in the universe is connected, everything is osmosis. You cannot separate any part from the whole: interdependence rules the cosmic order.

Throughout five thousand years of the history of the East, the sages and philosophers have fixed their attention on this spirit, this way, and transmitted it.

The Shin Jin Mei is a very ancient book, originally Chinese, and at one point it says, shi dobu nan: the way, the highest way, is not difficult, but you must not make choices. You must entertain neither affection nor distaste. The San Do Kai (or "interpenetration of essence and phenomena") says, similarly, "If you cherish one single illusion, separation comes, as between mountain and river."

One of the things Zen means is the effort of practicing meditation, zazen. It is the effort to reach the realm of thought without discrimination, consciousness beyond all categories, embracing and transcending every conceivable expression in language. This dimension can be attained through the practice of zazen and of bushido.

George S. Ledyard wrote: Ted, you keep saying things that, at least to me are self evident. O-Sensei certainly did understand that what he was doing applied well beyond Japanese martial arts. He quite clearly stated that Aikido had the power to transform the world. I also disagree that most people don't see it that way. You can find folks out there running every which way and that with the concepts they've taken from Aikido. I don't see many people at all who are caught up in the "mysticism and superstitions" of Aikido's creation... in fact it's the opposite. People have almost no understanding of O-Sensei's spiritual ideas. What passes in general for Aikido spirituality is a sort of ethical system based on the idea of "do no harm". It's simplistic. Just look at the bulk of the posts on the various Aikido forums. The number of people who have even an academic understanding of what O-Sensei about his spirituality is quite small. The number who have actually experienced training of the type he underwent is even smaller. I don't see where you can maintain that some significant number is caught up in the mysticism and I actually have no idea what you might be considering superstition... I think that there are many people who see the "big picture" just fine. It's the little picture they don't get. The current discussion and the related threads are all about the fact that there are technical issues which Aikido practitioners need to deal with if they aspire to technique that is comparable to teachers like O-Sensei or Takeda Sensei. I see lots of ideas about how one applies Aikido principles in the world. I don't see a lot of real understanding about how Aikido principles apply martially. It's amazing to me how various folks want to remove O-Sensei from Aikido or selectively focus on what he said in order to maintain some position. The man was the Founder of that art. The art was his unique creation. Of course it was based on elements that had gone before. Everything is based on what has gone before. But O-Sensei's structuring of the techniques, his development of the manner in which we practice, and his spiritual expression of how the physical art connected with the spiritual art was unique. It did not exist before him. Many would maintain that it may not have existed after him. It is not an overattachment to O-Sensei's spiritual beliefs that is the problem for Aikido... It's that most people don't ever get their Aikido technique up to the level at which they can actually connect their physical technique to the spiritual concepts O-Sensei talked about. A working knowledge of O-Sensei's spiritual ideas is important for giving direction to ones practice. Without that, it commonly happens that simplistic spiritual concepts arise out of incomplete understanding of physical technique. Everybody likes to call these folks "aiki fruities" or "aiki bunnies" or some such. The folks that refer to them as such generally pride themselves on not having much involvment in the spiritual side of the art, as if that would make their Aikido more martial. Well, they are no closer to the Aikido of O-Sensei than the "fruities"... I know that there are many folks out there who don't really care if they are doing anything like what O-Sensei had in mind. He is just some figure from ancient history as far as they are concerned. But for many of us, the connection to O-Sensei's art is important. If Aikido was limited to what goes by that name in a lot of cases, I would never have stayed in the art for thirty years. I might not even have started.

The problem I see with the spiritual side of everything is that it is open to interpretation. Technique is hard to get confused about, you can climb out on the mat and see if it works. However, with philosophy and religion, you can change and warp words to mean anything you want to mean.

Look at the church. 99% of all Christians I know pick parts of the bible that support their positions, and ignore the parts that do not. I think the same is true of aikido. They pick the part that supports their position, and ignore the things that make them uncomfortable. The problem is there is no way to really know what someone means when they same something spiritual or philosophical.

If I said "I am like the willow, dancing in the wind as the universe flows around me.", you would be hard pressed to really know what i'm talking about. Of course I'm talking about the correct mindset to have while playing nintendo wii. For combat I would say, "The sapling grows forth with infinite girth, allowing the truth of flora to be grown in its shade." Ok, even I do not know what I mean by that.

I find O Sensei's writings (The small amount I've been exposed too) to be just as cryptic and sometimes even express opposite viewpoints to his previous work. Look at how people argue about the attemi quote if you want a better handle on what I'm describing.

Erick,

The beauty of the tensegrity icosahedron is that when you push two of the sticks together - the other two sets of sticks move together also. The sticks and strings - in balanced tension and compression - beautifully demonstrate unity in multiplicity. If you push on one part of the structure it reacts as a whole - no single part moves in isolation. This is the underlying principle of the 'my body is all one thing' that folks are proposing.

Sensei Ledyard,

I respect you very much sir. However, I will express some disagreement: I have heard God's voice myself, and had my own spiritual experiences. Dropping the argument that I may be insane for same - I have no interest in OSensei's spiritual discoveries. I try to walk the path he put me on - but I have zero attachment to what he discovered. I must find my own way. I am paying attention to the method he gave me, and letting the results care for themselves. How else can I find the truth?

david

Don Magee wrote: However, with philosophy and religion, you can change and warp words to mean anything you want to mean.

Actually, no you can't, not unless one is intentionally sloppy about defining one's terms, or departs from traditional meanings without saying so. Which is admittedly a problem with many modern philosophers and religious, but not with philosophy or religion themselves.

Don Magee wrote: Look at the church. 99% of all Christians I know pick parts of the bible that support their positions, and ignore the parts that do not.

Only those that do not have an authoritative understanding of the tradition that both created that text and that continues serves as its interpretive foundation. Orthodoxy and Catholicism (together, 1.3 billion people or so, ~20% of the population of the planet) do not have that particular problem.

Don Magee wrote: I think the same is true of aikido. They pick the part that supports their position, and ignore the things that make them uncomfortable. The problem is there is no way to really know what someone means when they same something spiritual or philosophical.

Yes, there is. And the solution is the same. There is a stream of tradition that lies behind everything that O Sensei taught. That tradition informs the meaning of all the terms he used. You can find ways to interpret them in modern terms and find direct connection to modern observations by understanding those traditions faithfully from their sources. It just takes time and honest attention to the subject matter.

Don Magee wrote: If I said "I am like the willow, dancing in the wind as the universe flows around me." you would be hard pressed to really know what i'm talking about.

Let me preface with a bit of Western tradition:

Ecclesiastes:1:6,9. wrote: "The wind blows to the south, and goes round to the north; round and round goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. ... What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.

Actually, your quote is a paraphrase of Lieh-tzu from the Classic of Perfect Emptiness, in which he describes the experience of enlightenment.

A similar paraphrase of Lieh-Tzu was recently used by Wash Hoburn, the pilot in Joss Whedon's film "Serenity."

"I am a leaf on the wind. Watch me soar." He repeats it (far more ironically) when he comes to ground.

The translation of the original is

Lieh-tzu wrote: My mind was frozen, my body in dissolution, my flesh and bones all melted together. I was wholly unconscious of what my body was resting on, or what was under my feet. I was borne this way and that on the wind, like dry chaff or leaves falling from a tree. In fact, I knew not whether the wind was riding on me or I on the wind.

There is plenty to comprehend from these, together or in isolation.

Don Magee wrote: I find O Sensei's writings (The small amount I've been exposed too) to be just as cryptic and sometimes even express opposite viewpoints to his previous work.

Try spending some more time with the source material and you will see that, in fact, he meant and said a great deal of useful and specific stuff for the practice of aikido and its ultimate purpose. The paradoxes, too, have their purposes. It's just not a dance instruction manual with numbered footsteps.

David Knowlton wrote: The beauty of the tensegrity icosahedron is that when you push two of the sticks together - the other two sets of sticks move together also. The sticks and strings - in balanced tension and compression - beautifully demonstrate unity in multiplicity. If you push on one part of the structure it reacts as a whole - no single part moves in isolation. This is the underlying principle of the 'my body is all one thing' that folks are proposing.

Not when they go on about pushing -- not moving -- and trying to connect that mode of grounding or inertial resistance to aikido. I get internal adaptive motion (which is why I gave you an alternaive physical model of the action), but non-resistive internal adaptations are not invisible. That is why I can identify visible movement in all the O Sensei videos so far offered on him allegedly being "unmoved." The tendency, especially for beginners, is to interpret what they are talking about internally as requiring "resistance." If they are actually grounding dynamic forces -- it is resistance. This is a commonplace problem in kokyu tanden ho exercises that must be overcome.

So -- how about the chain tip, slower, same or faster accleration?