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 > Columns

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!

Comment
 
Column Tools
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4
by Peter Goldsbury
07-20-2007
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

The previous column ended with a brief discussion of the third proposition relating to transmission:
(c) Morihei Ueshiba appears to have made no attempt to check whether they had understood what they had learned from him.
As I stated earlier, I think the truth of this proposition is a consequence of the Teacher as Living Model and the Learner as Mirror paradigm. In Aikido Masters many of the uchi-deshi at the Kobukan stated that Morihei Ueshiba rarely showed the same waza twice and would not stop to give any technical explanations. The explanations given at the beginning of Budo Renshu are exclusively concerned with how to attack and how to move when so attacked. Of course, there are brief explanations of the drawings in the book, but these are of little value to those who do not already know how to practice the waza and Zenzaburo Akazawa suggested this in Aikido Masters. Akazawa actually stated that:
"The only trouble is that things rarely work out as neatly as in those drawings because your partner is a living person. There's always the danger of people coming to rely too much on this one book. Even though, those illustrations [NB. Not the explanations, which Akazawa never mentions] may well serve as guidelines or as a kind of yardstick. The sort of thing that helps you realize, 'Oh, sure, in that situation that would be a possibility.'" Aikido Masters, p.263.).
There is a passage in Aikido Shugyou, where Gozo Shioda discusses his grading test for 9th dan. Shioda visited Morihei Ueshiba in Iwama after the war ended. He gives the date as Showa 26, which would be 1951. The test involved attacking O Sensei, successively with a bokken and without any weapon, in any way possible. Shioda could not attack Ueshiba with the bokken because he could not find any openings in his stance. He noted that it was as if his hands and feet had been bound together. He almost landed an empty-handed attack, but O Sensei appears to have stopped him dead. Shioda was given his 9th dan and told to do more sword training. So it was indeed a test, and limited acknowledgement, of what Shioda himself had learned from Ueshiba, but it was all about suki, or openings, and did not involve any waza at all. (The discussion appears on pp.207-210 of 合気道修行.)

I think we need to unpack the above proposition a little further, because to understand it requires a distinct shift in our attitudes to teaching & learning. My third proposition was a direct follow-on from the second, discussed fully in the previous column:
(b) The latter all gained profound knowledge and skills during their time as deshi, but it is by no means clear that they gained all the knowledge or that all gained the same knowledge.
The important point here is: gaining all the knowledge or all gaining the same knowledge. Of course, there were the waza to be practiced every day, a sample of which is given in Budo Renshu and recorded in the Noma Dojo photograph archive. However, it no means clear that the Founder showed all of the uchi-deshi-or showed them all of-his own personal training exercises and rituals that he had learned from Sokaku Takeda and from Onisaburo Deguchi. So I understand the third proposition in the same 'individualistic' sense:
(c1) Morihei Ueshiba appears to have made no attempt to check individually whether each uchi-deshi had understood what each uchi-deshi had learned from him.
And not as (which is even less likely):
(c2) Morihei Ueshiba appears to have made no attempt to check whether as a group they had understood what they had (collectively) learned from him.
There is an important difference of emphasis here. Clearly, in Gozo Shioda's 9th dan test Morihei Ueshiba had an opportunity to see whether Shioda could find any openings or gaps in his defence and was satisfied. But there is no record of him giving such a test to anyone else-not to Morihiro Saito, for example, who was his principal deshi in Iwama at this time-and no indication that for Ueshiba it was a grading test as we understand the term. Later in his life O Sensei did not even bother with a test and was notoriously liberal in his verbal awards of 10th dan.

I think that to understand the proposition in the sense of (c2) is to jump too far into the future. I suggested that one cannot really think of the training in the early Kobukan as a seamless garment; even less is it a seamless garment that can be put on and worn by different people. The collective checking of what deshi had learned, by means of testing, had to wait until the Master-Student paradigm had changed and I think this did not really happen in the Aikikai until the Tokyo Hombu reopened after the war and began to flourish under the direction of Kisshomaru Ueshiba.

Apart from occasional comments during training, the only way Morihei Ueshiba appears to have checked the understanding of his uchi-deshi was by showing them the waza and making sporadic corrections during training, by seeing how they looked after him outside training, and, most importantly, choosing or not choosing particular deshi as uke / otomo (bag-carrier & general assistant) when he taught classes or went on trips. I think the question of being uke, and the knowledge gained from being uke, is of some importance here and will return to this point below.

I believe that much stems from the fact that they had been chosen as uchi-deshi I do not believe that he ever considered the need for actually checking their understanding and the reason is clear from the traditional Master-Deshi paradigm. I do not think it ever crossed Morihei Ueshiba's mind to actually verify for himself whether or not they had understood what he had been showing them. This was simply not a matter worthy of his concern: whether they had understood, or not, would be obvious from their training.

The qualification, 'or not', is also important here, since the possibility has to be considered seriously that none of his uchi-deshi fully understood what Morihei Ueshiba had spent his entire life developing-and was spending a major part of his life in showing them. There are several plausible reasons for this. One is that he was unique: a martial arts genius; and therefore in the nature of things this unique quality cannot be quantified or reproduced. Another reason is that he showed them only waza-the tips of the iceberg-and left them to penetrate for themselves the vast legacy of personal training lying beneath the surface. A third reason is that they never cracked the code to begin with: they never succeeded in understanding the explanations he gave because they did not have time or skill for such private training. A fourth reason is that he really did not care whether they understood or not, even though he could see it from their training: it was simply not his responsibility as a Living Mirror also to make sure that the reflections in the mirror were adequate. This was the responsibility of his deshi, who at least had been afforded the opportunity to look closely in the mirror.

I stated earlier that being uke and taking ukemi was one way in which Morihei Ueshiba might have checked how much his deshi had learned from him, but the Master as Mirror metaphor fails here in one important respect: Morihei Ueshiba rarely took ukemi from his own deshi and his example has been followed by nearly all the present-day Hombu shihan. So the deshi learned from Ueshiba not by throwing him, but by him throwing them and this is exactly what happened in the taijutsu part of Shioda's 9th dan examination. In a series of web logs published by Aikido Journal, Ellis Amdur has discussed the general question of how and why Sokaku Takeda and Morihei Ueshiba departed from the usual koryu model of teaching by having his deshi take ukemi. This is a personal impression of mine, but in the archive of interviews that Stanley Pranin has published, it seems to me that there are rather fewer references to the importance of ukemi for Sokaku Takeda than for Morihei Ueshiba. I myself have heard from Ueshiba's deshi that taking ukemi for O Sensei was of crucial importance. Skill in (1) reading his intentions as to what kind of attack he wanted and (2) understanding and exploiting the openings he gave became a yardstick for the deshi themselves (individually, once again) to measure their own proficiency.

I have no wish to repeat Ellis Amdur's arguments here, except to stress one aspect of ukemi. The term is usually translated as 'roll' or 'break-fall' and is what one does on being 'thrown' by the shite, (or nage or tori), depending on the waza. Such a translation is inadequate in many respects, for it narrows the focus of the term far too much and ignores the crucial roles played by both shite and uke in setting up a waza, which is actually a joint production, unique to each occasion. The word ukemi is composed of two Chinese characters: one, 受, having a vast range of meanings centered on obtaining, receiving, accepting; the other, 身, having two central meanings of body, and the self. I think that the relationship between shite and uke covers a very wide spectrum, ranging from the meeting of minds-and then bodies-in sumo-style wrestling, to the pre-arranged kata in kumi-tachi / kumi-jo.

If we break down the encounter between shite and uke in aikido to three artificial stages (attack, waza, zanshin), we can see some of the complexities involved. (1) Attacks can range from pre-established dance-like movements to real-life attacks, including feints and using weapons. Shite, also, is not prevented from initiating the attacks. During the attack, the attacker, also, need not lose his/her balance, so the defender can be made to work really hard to find any openings in the attack. (2) Assuming that the attack progresses beyond atemi and results in some kind of waza, the attacker can 'surrender' and accept the waza and roll / breakfall, or still maintain the attack and utilize the defender's power, movement, KI, whatever, to reverse the waza, or, yet again, simply absorb & neutralize the defender's power. Thus, (3) the ukemi need not actually result in a roll or break-fall. In fact, one of the principal aims of ukemi training with a partner is to avoid having to roll or break-fall.

In the interviews recorded in Aikido Masters, there is very little discussion of how Morihei Ueshiba taught by means of waza and ukemi. People like Shigemi Yonekawa, who was uke for the Noma Dojo photographs, were clearly expert at rolls and break-falls, but there is little indication of how they learned these skills from Morihei Ueshiba himself. Yonekawa talks of 'taking O Sensei's ukemi' and regards this as a very special experience. I myself have heard other shihans use this phrase, as if doing this was a measure of one's progress in understanding aikido. I have often taken ukemi from the late Seigo Yamaguchi Shihan and more occasionally from Hiroshi Tada Shihan. Both shihans are the same in that they both require a subtle matching of KI, but are quite different in how they expect this to be manifested. This is a very personal opinion, but I felt that Yamaguchi Sensei took you more for what you were and adapted his waza to exploit your abilities, whereas Tada expected you to enter a whirlwind or maelstrom, but also to manage yourself properly throughout this experience. Of course, being able to do this requires hard and constant personal training.

I would like to spend a little more time on the subject of the Master-as-Mirror, by considering two examples from my own experience. The first example is my teacher of Japanese; the second example is my teacher of aikido.

When I came to Hiroshima in 1980, I knew no Japanese at all apart from the few words and phrases I had learned as a result of aikido practice. My colleagues in the university were in two minds about my learning Japanese. On the one hand, a foreign teacher not knowing any Japanese at all would present a 'fresh face' to Japanese students and motivate them to work hard at making themselves understood, especially at examination time. (The foundation for this is a theory of language acquisition based on something like KI: you pour forth your 'pure' language KI and this motivates the students to extend their own KI and achieve linguistic matching, if not total harmony. This theory is quite pervasive and underpins the JET scheme in Japan.) On the other hand, in a local city like Hiroshima, total ignorance of Japanese would be a considerable handicap and no amount of English KI-pouring would achieve any matching or harmony in the supermarket.

So the professor who was responsible for appointing me suggested I learn some Japanese and offered to teach me Chinese kanji. However, he never actually gave me any formal lessons or set out to 'teach' me anything. What he actually intended was that I would read aloud the books he himself had written and then translate them. So, I would go to his house, read aloud a few pages of text in Japanese (which I had prepared beforehand) and give a verbal, and then a 'real', translation. After this we would have dinner. I still have these meetings nearly thirty years later and I think this is a fair example of a Master-deshi relationship as this is traditionally conceived. (A similar relationship is sketched by Natsume Soseki in Kokoro.) I was allowed to have a privileged access to the mind of a literary craftsman as this issued in works of literature and criticism. The task of translating was merely the vehicle, the kata, for many conversations about literature and the art of writing. While no formal teaching took place, there was certainly learning-much learning-going on.

My aikido teacher is somewhat different. At the age of 70 he still actively teaches aikido and has recently received his 8th dan. However, he has never had any deshi and does not regard any of his students as deshi. There is no heir apparent and when he finally gives up teaching aikido, there will be no one to step into his shoes. He has produced no videos or texts and his extensive knowledge of the art will die with him. I have had as long a relationship with this teacher as I have had with my kanji professor, but he, too, does not think of formally 'teaching' anything. He trains in a very small dojo that is quite hard to find and does not actively seek new students. In fact there is a regular turnover of students and there is currently no one in the dojo who was there when I myself started in 1980. Students who have been there as long as I have can be counted on one hand.

I think the possibility that an art will die out because its creator is mortal is hard for people to accept, especially those who embrace the art as a self-contained entity, worthy of serious personal study, and not as the personal expression of a particular individual who was simply a Model. I have in mind those who believe that Morihei Ueshiba bequeathed to the world the 'art of aikido' as a 'gift' and that therefore it somehow stands on its own, as well as belonging to everybody who practices it. This belief is unusually connected with the supposed spiritual and ethical aspects of aikido, as a cure for the world's ills.

I once asked Hiroshi Tada Shihan about the time when he would no longer be around to teach aikido; what arrangements had he had made to transmit aikido to his own deshi? I think that the readers of Aikiweb can readily understand the logic behind the question. The spread of aikido overseas after World War II has largely been due to the efforts of Japanese shihan like Nobuyoshi Tamura, Yoshimitsu Yamada, Mitsugi Saotome, and especially Koichi Tohei, who are all known as supremely accomplished technicians of waza, if not as somewhat idiosyncratic individuals. So the question was really a repetition of the questions underlying these columns. What had these shihans done to distil their knowledge, so that it could be transmitted intact to their students?

Tada Sensei's answer was striking, but not really surprising. He had done virtually nothing beyond being as perfect a model as possible. He had done his best to emulate his teacher(s) and show his students his personal training regime. It was up to these students to do the same. His own aikido would, of course, die when he did.
Attached Images
File Type: pdf pgoldsbury_2007_07.pdf (212.9 KB, 110 views)
Old 07-20-2007, 10:17 AM   #2
raul rodrigo
Location: Quezon City
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Philippines
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

SIR:

Would you care to speculate how other shihan of Tada's generation would have answered your question? Eg Yamaguchi, Arikawa, Tamura, etc. The late Yamaguchi in particular still has his followers teaching at Hombu Dojo (Endo, Yasuno, Kuribayashi) and also there is Takeda Yoshinobu. Would Yamaguchi have said that his aikido would die with him? Did he have a different model for transmission and emulation?

best

R
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 11:29 AM   #3
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Thanks Peter, another great column. Just a couple comments.

I'm glad you brought up Ellis' article on the nature/importance of ukemi, that was what I first thought of when you brought up Shioda Sensei's 9th dan exam. I have never heard that story before.

Along the lines of the meaning of "uke/ukemi", I find it kind of interesting that my first aikido school (Kurita Minouru's Seikikai) did not use the term "uke" to describe the attacker role in aikido practice (at least not here in the States). It was only after I had left that organization and started training elsewhere that I heard the terms "uke" and "nage." We had used "tori" and "aite" almost exclusively to describe these roles. Ukemi was what you did to stay safe as an attacker, but we didn't really associate that term with the attack itself or anything in the interaction before the physical act of falling safely. At the last aikido dojo I trained at, ukemi was a more all inclusive term, and often more attention was paid to how "uke" should follow nage's movements so that they could do the technique rather than how to actually protect the body during practice. I have no idea how common the "aite" term is for this role in Japan, I haven't heard it in any other aikido circles in my travels here in the US though. I find it kind of interesting given the time period that Kurita Sensei was an uchideshi (porter? ) for OSensei.

Along those lines... he commented on almost every trip to the US that I was able to attend about the importance of being the 'low man' on the uchideshi-pole because it meant he was 'stuck' carrying OSensei's bags, preparing his meals, massaging him after keiko, etc... I don't think he said it outright, but he certainly implied that those uchideshi who were so quick to get out of this kind of duty so that they could get back to their training were missing out on a great deal.

I don't think any of my comments are particularly useful or groundbreaking, just thought I'd throw them out there, since they were what I thought of as I went through your column.

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 11:31 AM   #4
MM
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,996
United_States
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Quote:
Peter Goldsbury wrote:
The qualification, 'or not', is also important here, since the possibility has to be considered seriously that none of his uchi-deshi fully understood what Morihei Ueshiba had spent his entire life developing-and was spending a major part of his life in showing them. There are several plausible reasons for this. One is that he was unique: a martial arts genius; and therefore in the nature of things this unique quality cannot be quantified or reproduced. Another reason is that he showed them only waza-the tips of the iceberg-and left them to penetrate for themselves the vast legacy of personal training lying beneath the surface. A third reason is that they never cracked the code to begin with: they never succeeded in understanding the explanations he gave because they did not have time or skill for such private training. A fourth reason is that he really did not care whether they understood or not, even though he could see it from their training: it was simply not his responsibility as a Living Mirror also to make sure that the reflections in the mirror were adequate. This was the responsibility of his deshi, who at least had been afforded the opportunity to look closely in the mirror.
Sensei,
Thank you for what you've written. It's like reading a good book. At the end of the chapter, you're left with wanting to read more.

I have just a thought about the portion above. In regards to your plausible reason #1, I find it very unlikely. My reason being that some of the students of Morihei Ueshiba also met and felt Sokaku Takeda. Rather than noting that Takeda's skills were completely different, they noted instead that his skills were far better. In other words, if you look at those student's views, they did not liken Takeda as someone completely different than Ueshiba, but instead as someone far better at the same skills. And looking at Takeda, we can see that he instilled these same skills to a few other students. In that regard, Ueshiba can not be seen as being unique.

Thank you,
Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 07:02 AM   #5
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Quote:
Raul Rodrigo wrote: View Post
SIR:

Would you care to speculate how other shihan of Tada's generation would have answered your question? Eg Yamaguchi, Arikawa, Tamura, etc. The late Yamaguchi in particular still has his followers teaching at Hombu Dojo (Endo, Yasuno, Kuribayashi) and also there is Takeda Yoshinobu. Would Yamaguchi have said that his aikido would die with him? Did he have a different model for transmission and emulation?

best

R
Hello Raul,

I do not think that Yamaguchi Sensei consciously designated anybody as his followers and I am certain that his aikido has already died (and Arikawa Sensei's), in the same sense that Tada Sensei's will die when he does. Hiroshi Isoyama in Iwama is another example.

Tamura Shihan is somewhat different. He went to live in France and has never returned to live in Japan. He leads a huge federation in France and has produced a large number of yudansha, as has Christian Tissier. But I do not think there is any one heir to 'Tamura Aikido'.

I will have more to say about this in future columns.

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 07:15 AM   #6
CitoMaramba
 
CitoMaramba's Avatar
Dojo: Dangayan Singkaw Aikido Shinzui Group Philippines
Location: Plymouth, UK
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 492
Philippines
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Dear Professor Goldsbury,

Would you say the Nishio Shoji Shihan's method has survived his passing? Or did it also die with him?

All the best,

Cito

Inocencio Maramba, MD, MSc
Dangayan Singkaw Aikido Shinzui
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 05:36 PM   #7
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Quote:
Cito Maramba wrote: View Post
Dear Professor Goldsbury,

Would you say the Nishio Shoji Shihan's method has survived his passing? Or did it also die with him?

All the best,

Cito
Hello Cito,

Well, given the way you put the question yes, I would say it has. It has survived in the same sense that students of Tada Sensei also spend time trying to practise aikido exactly in the way he himself did. One difference is that Nishio-shi appears to have devised a systematized methodology and he has left a book and a whole series of videotapes. Tada-shi, on the other hand, has left nothing except himself and the memories students like myself have of his aikido. He does, however, have a very interesting website in Japanese.

Best wishes,

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2007, 10:01 AM   #8
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Dear Peter,

Once again, fantastic article. Eagerly awaiting more...

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2007, 11:27 AM   #9
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,931
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Peter, thank you so much for this continuing series. The history and your analysis are fascinaitng.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2007, 08:16 AM   #10
Peter Goldsbury
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Peter Goldsbury's Avatar
Dojo: Hiroshima Kokusai Dojo
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,997
Japan
Offline
Re: Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 4

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
Sensei,
Thank you for what you've written. It's like reading a good book. At the end of the chapter, you're left with wanting to read more.

I have just a thought about the portion above. In regards to your plausible reason #1, I find it very unlikely. My reason being that some of the students of Morihei Ueshiba also met and felt Sokaku Takeda. Rather than noting that Takeda's skills were completely different, they noted instead that his skills were far better. In other words, if you look at those student's views, they did not liken Takeda as someone completely different than Ueshiba, but instead as someone far better at the same skills. And looking at Takeda, we can see that he instilled these same skills to a few other students. In that regard, Ueshiba can not be seen as being unique.

Thank you,
Mark
Hello Mark,

Well, I suppose it depends on the nature of genius and I think we are dealing with two here. I know of a proverb, to the effect that you cannot have two queens in the same beehive. With aiki (bu) do, perhaps we should slightly modify this to: you cannot have more than one queen in one beehive (to allow for many more than two).

I have not really spent much space discussing Morihei Ueshiba's relationship with Sokaku Takeda. The reason is that these columns discuss aikido and I so wanted to start with M Ueshiba, not with S Takeda.

I have read Stan Pranin's interviews with the DRAJJ students of Takeda, but there is really no objective discussion in these interviews of Ueshiba's skills in relation to Takeda's. In any case there is a Master-Deshi relationship here and it is very unlikely that Takeda's DRAJJ students would rate Ueshiba's skills higher than those of their own Master.

The same relationship can be seen in Aikido Modern Masters and this is what leads me to have some distrust in the interview as a means of obtaining objective information. I know that Stan's interviews are all we have about the early history of aikido, but this in itself does make them objectve (with all due respect to Stan's obvious skill as an interviewer).

Best wishes,

P A Goldsbury
_______________________
Hiroshima, Japan
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Budo Bear Patterns - Sewing pattern for Women's (and Men's) dogi.



Comment


Currently Active Users Viewing This Column: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Column Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new columns
You may not post comment
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
Column Column Starter Category Comments Last Post
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 3 Peter Goldsbury Columns 16 05-28-2007 06:24 AM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 2 Peter Goldsbury Columns 3 04-19-2007 04:53 AM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation Peter Goldsbury Columns 7 03-25-2007 02:33 PM
Article: Transmission in Aikido by George S. Ledyard AikiWeb System AikiWeb System 14 10-04-2004 11:05 AM
direct transmission? Paula Lydon Training 20 07-15-2002 07:15 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:31 PM.



Column powered by GARS 2.1.5 ©2005-2006

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