Iwama Ryu

[gmarquay]

I hope that I am not being disrespectful of Saito Sensei, but I was wondering what will become of Iwama Ryu Aikido? Will training still be as it was before (Following Saito Sensei's cirriculum)? Will the Aiki weapons still be taught, and will there still be mokuroku liscensing?

Again, this is not to be disrepsectful, and I hope I haven't broken any protocol. Thank you.

Glenn Marquay

[Rob Alvelais]

Pardon my naivete, but what is it about Mr. Saito's aikido that distinguishes it as a different ryu-ha from that practiced by other prominent aikido instructors (like Saotome, Chiba, Nishio, etc.)?

Rob

[Jeff Hamacher]

Glenn,

i suspect that Morihiro-sensei's son (sorry, his name escapes me) is already set to assume his father's role, but you'd have to approach an Iwama-connected person to get the real story. if such a succession takes place, the curriculum is almost certain to remain unchanged, particularly the style of weapons training that's followed at Iwama. i wasn't aware that Saito-sensei granted "mokuroku licenses" (which are distinct from the dan grades recognized by Aikikai?).

Rob,

the more you read about aikido, the more you discover just how variegated it is. i know relatively little about the various formal schools and their subsequent branches, but of the examples you mention Nishio-sensei is an interesting case. as far as i understand it, Nishio-sensei is connected to Aikikai (the organization headed currently by the grandson of Morihei-kaiso), but his school of aikido follows a somewhat different style of training, including its own iai curriculum. i have the impression that almost every top aikido instructor takes aikido and puts their own spin on it.

what sets Iwama apart is the importance of the place itself in aikido's history and the special relationship shared by Morihei-kaiso and Saito-sensei. following the war, there was a period of time when Saito-sensei was the only student that Morihei-kaiso had, and when Saito-sensei became the custodian of the Aiki Shrine at Iwama he took it upon himself to steadfastly preserve and teach the aikido that had been taught to him. the Aiki Shrine is still related to Aikikai, but has a rather special status.

simply put, aikido's various lines of teacher-student relationships and styles (which might be called "ryu", for lack of a better term) aren't that much different than the situation you'd find in other arts. some teachers and the aikido that they teach may be seen as more valuable than others, and in some cases i reckon that's true.

[Greg Jennings]

My understanding is that things will pretty much go on unchanged. Saito Shihan's son, Hitohiro has been set to take things over.

Best Regards,

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by Greg Jennings
My understanding is that things will pretty much go on unchanged. Saito Shihan's son, Hitohiro has been set to take things over.

Best Regards,

That's my understanding as well. For those who haven't seen him Hitohiro is like a little (well, not so little, I suppose) clone of his father (except that he keeps his arms straighter in tenkan), so the tradition should be well represented.

Of course, it remains to be seen whether or not technical similarity will be enough to hold the Iwama groups together and on the same track. There are some pretty big shoes to fill, and a lot of the Iwama structure is centered around the former Saito himself.

My personal feeling is that Hitohiro will continue to dissassociate himself (and by association Iwama) from the Aikikai (gradually), but what will actually happen is really anybody's guess.

Best,

Chris

[Eric Ling]

What is the precise nature of the relationship between Iwama and the Aikikai at present?

Eric

[Rob Alvelais]

So, what you're saying is that the use of the term "Style" in Aikido, is more to distinguish an individual's personal flair, and uniqueness in their practice, as with Tetsuhiko Asai and Hirokazu Kanazawa (both practitioners of Shotokan Karate-do) or Ryusho Sakagami and either of the Mabuni Brothers (students of Shito Ryu karate-do founder, Kenwa Mabuni). While the parings mentioned above practice the same ryu, their personal expression of their karate, in this case, is unique to them (but not so unique as to make their expression a distinct ryu). So, by your terminology, there would be a different ryu for every accomplished practitioner Aikido, and not a new style of martial art that utilizes the principle of aiki in their application of joint manipulations, throws, pins, etc. That about right?


Rob


Originally posted by Jeff Hamacher
Rob,

the more you read about aikido, the more you discover just how variegated it is. i know relatively little about the various formal schools and their subsequent branches, but of the examples you mention Nishio-sensei is an interesting case. as far as i understand it, Nishio-sensei is connected to Aikikai (the organization headed currently by the grandson of Morihei-kaiso), but his school of aikido follows a somewhat different style of training, including its own iai curriculum. i have the impression that almost every top aikido instructor takes aikido and puts their own spin on it.

what sets Iwama apart is the importance of the place itself in aikido's history and the special relationship shared by Morihei-kaiso and Saito-sensei. following the war, there was a period of time when Saito-sensei was the only student that Morihei-kaiso had, and when Saito-sensei became the custodian of the Aiki Shrine at Iwama he took it upon himself to steadfastly preserve and teach the aikido that had been taught to him. the Aiki Shrine is still related to Aikikai, but has a rather special status.

simply put, aikido's various lines of teacher-student relationships and styles (which might be called "ryu", for lack of a better term) aren't that much different than the situation you'd find in other arts. some teachers and the aikido that they teach may be seen as more valuable than others, and in some cases i reckon that's true.

[Jeff Hamacher]

actually, Rob, i think that the karate examples you provide make the aikido world sound very similar. in aikido, you'll find distinctions between both formal schools (examples include but aren't limited to Aikikai, Yoshinkan, and Shodokan) and various "styles" within each of those schools, depending upon the teacher. each school has its own basic operating procedures and parameters upon which the individual teacher will build their personal approach to the art. as for what terminology one uses to talk about the differences, i really don't know. the term ryuha might be used to denote the formal schools, whereas the term ryugi might be used to denote the smaller stylistic divisions. despite the distinctions, the basic principles of aikido guide all exponents, but the resulting manifestations of those principles (postures, training methods, even specific techniques) can vary widely. does this answer your question, or am i still failing to write clearly?:D

[PRehse]

A conversation that had a impact on my view of things was at the German Sausage Restaurant in Osaka a few years ago. Tetsuro Nariyama, Shihan of Shodokan Honbu, basically said there is no style of Aikido beyond the individual. He's said it a number of times since but that time it got me thinking - always dangerous.

It's all Aikido - although not necessarily good Aikido.

The end result is we are to make Aikido our own.

So when does this individual style become a ryuha? I would guess that at some point, the head, his students and others within the original organization consider it to be. I do think Saito could easily have gone the way of Shioda, Tomiki, Tohei and Mochizuki but he chose not to. Perhaps it had to do with Ueshiba K. and him finding a balance - same with Nishio. In any case, every time a change like this occurs, in nearly every Japanese organization, there will be a period of uncertainty and flux. I wish the Iwama organizaion well and sympathies for the passing of one of the greats.

[Jappzz]

Hi!

I'm pretty surprised that no one has brought up one of the real "trademarks" of Iwama-ryu in this thread: weapons. This is really something that distinguishes us in Iwama from other branches Aikido and makes it stand apart from the rest.

I don't think anybody would argue with me if i said that one of the largest feats made by the late Saito Morihiro was to create a methodical system of Aikido-TEACHING.

He made concepts taught by O-sensei available to the commmon Aikidoka. Defining the system he created as a "ryu" makes sense in the sense that he systemized and preserved O-sensei's teachings in a unique way that teaches weapons as a integral part of traditional taijutsu in a faithful manner.

Now that Saito shihan so sadly has passed on, the organization and educational system he created stands as his legacy. A grand legacy of a great man...


Jesper Arenskogh

[Jeff Hamacher]

Originally posted by Jappzz
I'm pretty surprised that no one has brought up one of the real "trademarks" of Iwama-ryu in this thread: weapons. This is really something that distinguishes us in Iwama from other branches Aikido and makes it stand apart from the rest.
Nishio-sensei's approach to weapons is reputedly just as sophisticated as any "style" of aikido. i think that weapons training in aikido is not exclusive to Iwama, although it may exert a strong influence on aikido weapons training elsewhere.

I don't think anybody would argue with me if i said that one of the largest feats made by the late Saito Morihiro was to create a methodical system of Aikido-TEACHING.
i would argue with you!:D Shioda-sensei's teaching methods which have come to form the basis of training in Yoshinkan aikido are also reputedly very logical and efficient. again, i don't think that teaching methods in Iwama aikido necessarily have an advantage over those of other styles.

He made concepts taught by O-sensei available to the commmon Aikidoka. Defining the system he created as a "ryu" makes sense in the sense that he systemized and preserved O-sensei's teachings in a unique way that teaches weapons as a integral part of traditional taijutsu in a faithful manner.
at the cost of sounding repetitive, Iwama aikido is distinct from other schools or styles of aikido, but not necessarily superior nor clearly closer to the aikido taught by Morihei-kaiso. the value of Iwama aikido cannot be underestimated, but i think you overstate its place in the aikido universe.

respectfully,

[Greg Jennings]

Hi Jeff,

I share your discomfort with the "sets us apart" phrase (I train at an Iwama dojo, btw).

I'm somewhat familiar with the weapons programs of other "flavors" of aikido and find them just as interesting as the Iwama program.

But, to be fair, in carefully reading the rest of Jesper's post, I didn't get that he put Saito Sensei's systemization efforts above anyone else's; just that Saito Sensei had made a great contribution.

Best Regards,

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by Greg Jennings
Hi Jeff,

I share your discomfort with the "sets us apart" phrase (I train at an Iwama dojo, btw).


I just wish that people like H. Saito would stop saying (a direct quote) - "This is the way that they do it in Tokyo, and it's wrong". That kind of thing tends to flow downhill and get magnified along the way.

Best,

Chris

[P Goldsbury]

As someone who has been practising aikido here in Japan since 1980 and who is pretty familiar with the various strands that make up the Aikikai (incuding Iwama), I think that the idea of Iwama as a 'ryu' is more prevalent outside Japan, especially Europe, than here.

I agree that Saito Morihiro's great contribution to aikido is the fact that he distilled wha he had learned from the Founder into a more learnable system, including training with weapons. But more than this. I think Saito Sensei's claim to greatness is that he did this at a crucial time in the Founder's own development.

The more I read about Morihei Ueshiba, the more I read what others have said about him (e.g., an interesting recent interview with K Chiba at Aikido Online.com), the more I think he was obsessed with his own development as a martial artist and did not conceive of aikido as a 'popular' martial art, or as a system which is teachable or learnable. As a Japanese man living in the Taisho/early Showa era, I do not believe he thought in these terms.

What he did was develop his aikido over a continuous period from 1920 onwards and in so doing attract some remarkable individuals who became his deshi. I talked to one of them last weekend. Hiroshi Tada, 9th dan, joined the Tokyo Dojo in 1950. Along with Koichi Tohei, Tada was a student of Tempu Nakamura's Shin-shin Toitsu system of breathing and incorporated this into his own aikido training. He divided his time between Tokyo and Iwama until 1955, which was when Morihei Ueshiba gradually moved the base of his activities from there to Tokyo. But the point which Tada Sensei stressed repeatedly is that the Founder's 'method' of teaching was different from anything that he as a deshi adopted (and Tada is pretty 'traditional' as a teacher). In other words, the Founder did not give recognisable 'lessons', so much as expose his chosen deshis to the ongoing research of a martial arts genius. Thus, Tada, like Tohei and Nishio, and also Hikitsuchi in Shinju, took what they learned from this exposure and created their own 'systems', which also included weapons in all four cases.

I am sure that many members of this forum would agree that two of the best ways of learning from a koryu or budo master are to be his partner or to watch the master in action. Ueshiba himself did this with Sokaku Takeda and other masters and Ueshiba's deshi did this with him. Of course, you need to have reached a certain level of proficiency, and also perhaps to have have a certain natural genius, so that you kow what to look for, or it will not be a productive learning experience. Now Saito Sensei starting training in Iwama in 1946 and was the Founder's partner, not just for the evening classes when these started, but for the 'research' training, when there were only the two of them. And this was the time when the Founder was studying 'riai', or the relationship between weapons and taijutsu. Some budo teachers relate their waza to the seasons of the year--a kind of liturgical cycle--and there are reasons for thinking that the Founder also did this. Noe exposure of this kind was pretty intense and Saito Sensei was able to make the most of it.

Now, at some point after the war, O Sensei finally agreed to the general proposal to make aikido a 'mass' martial art, dedicated to peace. Much of the credit for persuading him goes to Kisshomaru Ueshiba, but I do not think even Kisshomaru had much idea of the implications of this enormous change. If you have a 'mass' martial art, practised in many countries abbd cultures, you cannot use teaching methods appropriate for a traditional ryuha with only a dozen members, practised in rural Japan.

Saito Sensei was in the right place at the right time and he had the courage to systematise what he had learned from the Founder over at least a decade. And he did this while trying to intrude himself as little as possible. Of course, the Founder often said that only he himself could do his aikido; others had to create their own. So, the system that Saito Sensei created was unmistakably Saito Sensei's. But to say this is not to undermine or belittle his obvious very close links with the Founder. Some of the Noma Dojo photographs make this very clear.

I think this is also why Iwama is not a 'ryu' in any real sense. It is not that the 'focus' of aikido switched from Tokyo to Iwama and back again; right from when he started in 1920, the Founder had the idea of a country dojo, dedicated to budo and the soil. As H. Harootunian has shown, the idea resonates very strongly in 'traditional' Japanese culture, as expressed by Motoori Norinaga, Hirata Atsutane and the kokugaku scholars. But the Tokyo Hombu stopped functioning only in the heat of WWII and that it survived was was the result of a solemn injunction given to Kisshomaru by the Founder. So Aikido has had two centres and both are part of the 'iemoto' structure headed by the present Doshu. Iwama has never been set up as a separate ryuha and it is not considered in this way in Japan, especially in the area north of Tokyo, where Iwama is located.

Finally, we must all view with regret the passing of one of aikido's greatest apostles and extend deepest sumpathy to Saito Sensei's wife, to Hitohiro Sama and his family.

Best regards,

P A Goldsbury,
_______________
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[P Goldsbury]

After sending the above post, I attempted to edit it and correct spelling mistakes & make some sentences go more smoothly. I discovered that the administrator allows only 15 minutes to edit posts. Thus I was not able to make the corrections I thought (and still think) desirable.

I apologise for the spellig mistakes and feel such a rule penalises those of us who send lengthier posts and who like to spend some time thinking about what we have written, even after we have written it.

Yours sincerely,

P A Goldsbury,
________________
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[PRehse]

Hi Peter;

It's clled prview. ;)


I often - take a short walk and re-read what I have written - especially for longer posts. Great post by the way.

[P Goldsbury]

Yes, I am aware of the preview facility and occasionally use it if I think to do so. But other forums to which I subscribe do not have a 15-minute time limit for editing, as far as I know. The existence of this limit makes E-budo.com less user-friendly, in my opinion.

_______________
P A Goldsbury,
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[PRehse]

Hi Peter - I agree 15 minutes is a bit short, I think aikiweb has a longer time and of course there is the extremely necessary protection of limiting the number of posts within a certain period. I understand the need - but like you would rather clarify an existing post than make a new one. Course that taken to extremes (after an explosion of counter posts) could cause more trouble than worth.

Don't see myself getting up Tokyo way - do you travel to Kansai at any time?




Originally posted by P Goldsbury
Yes, I am aware of the preview facility and occasionally use it if I think to do so. But other forums to which I subscribe do not have a 15-minute time limit for editing, as far as I know. The existence of this limit makes E-budo.com less user-friendly, in my opinion.

_______________
P A Goldsbury,
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[P Goldsbury]

Originally posted by PRehse


Don't see myself getting up Tokyo way - do you travel to Kansai at any time?





Well, I am going up to Tokyo to witness the Aikikai's annual jamboree at the Nippon Budokan, but the only way I can get there and get back in time for classes is to take the overnight sleeper from Hiroshima and return on the last Nozomi, which leaves Tokyo around 8. I think the sleeper creeps through Himeji at about 11 pm. I do have ex-students in Kobe and Takarazuka and I would like to examine the famous castle you have. I have been once but did not have time for anything mnore than a quick walkaround.

The other thing is that three of us have recently opened the Hiroshima Kokusai Aikido Dojo and this is taking up a fair amount of time. I suppose it is something of a repeat of what Steven Seagal once did: a dojo where all the instructors are gaijin, but all the pupils (at present) are Japanese. Even after just a few weeks it is raising some eyebrows and perhaps it will not be long before the black sound trucks pay us a visit.

But I hope we will be able to meet sooner or later.

________________
P A Goldsbury,
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[hix]

I just want to say that I train in a dojo in Ibaraki. The only time I have ever heard the term Iwama Ryu used has been outside Japan, or by non-Japanese. Maybe one unique aspect of Iwama Aikido is that Saito Sensei didn't break with honbu, unlike many others of his time. This is why you will find Iwama groups present at the Tokyo Enbu.

Also, I have never been told by my teachers that Honbu Aikido was wrong. The only difference noted to me by our Dojo Cho was that he considers Iwama based Aikido to be "basic Aikido".

As far as weapons are concerned, I believe Honbu has much more weapons practice than my dojo.

From my point of view, I feel that the Aikido practiced by Iwama based group looks different than what I see in other groups. To me, it's just more direct. There is not a lot of leading the uke. That doesn't mean leading is wrong. There are many ways to use Ki.

But most importantly, the Aikido world suffered a great lose when Saito Sensei passed away. And this is still a time of mourning for all of us.

Thanks for listening:smilejapa

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by hix
I just want to say that I train in a dojo in Ibaraki. The only time I have ever heard the term Iwama Ryu used has been outside Japan, or by non-Japanese.

Morihiro Saito used the term himself quite often (in Japanese, of course).



Also, I have never been told by my teachers that Honbu Aikido was wrong.


Not so, unfortunately, with either M. or H. Saito. They may not have meant it to be a categorical condemnation (I have no idea), but that kind of comment tends to get magnified as it rolls downhill.




As far as weapons are concerned, I believe Honbu has much more weapons practice than my dojo.

Basically speaking, there's no weapons work at hombu at all. None. Except for some few and far between exceptions, if you train there and you want to do weapons then you either work on it yourself before or after class or else you go somewhere else for your weapons training.

I even know of high ranking instructors (who no longer teach there) who were directly told not to teach weapons at hombu (and this was in their private classes, not the general practice).

I think that there are a number of reasons for this approach, one being that there is no standard weapons curriculum in Aikido that is broadly agreed upon. Doing weapons at hombu would mean choosing one or creating one, and that would probably end up causing trouble with other groups (who already have their own curriculums in place) somewhere down the line. Plus you'd have to convince all of the instructors to teach something that didn't conflict with each other classes too badly, which would be a task in itself - especially since many of the instructors at hombu have no formal weapons training. Mostly, it's probably that there are just too many people on the mat in an average class to have room for that kind of training.

Best,

Chris

[P Goldsbury]

I think that one reason why weapons are not taught at the Hombu Dojo is that such training is not thought of as basic. (Of course, I am aware that it IS considered basic in some other dojos.) Another reason is that there is no unanimity about O Sensei's views about 'riai', the relationship between weapons and taijutsu.

I strongly suggested in an earlier post that O Sensei's aikido training, which also included weapons training, was very personal. Like his kotodama exercises, he did this training at an extension of, but something all of a piece with, his own spiritual pursuits. The issue really is to what extent you can systematise this personal type of training.

In this respect, it is instructive to read the late Doshu's preface to the first volume of Morihiro Saito's "Traditional Aikido". Doshu makes some comments on the concept of 'riai', but this preface, and the other contributions of Messrs Nishio, Shiota and Asakura, were not translated into English.

On a recent visit to Tokyo I had a private meeting with the present Doshu. I asked to look at the originals of "Budo Renshu" and "Budo", which are kept at the Hombu. Doshu gave me them to look at, but gently reminded me that the pictures and explanations were of O Sensei's training at a certain period of his life (the 1930s): it did not remain fixed in this way. As Doshu he had to present something like the Highest Common Factor, a distillation of the essentials. Thus weapons feature only as an extension of empty-handed techniques and as tachi-dori, tanto-dori and jo-dori, such as featured in the demonstrations given by Hiroshi Tada and Doshu at the 40th All-Japan Demonstration.

It is an interesting question to what extent the iemoto system actually succeeds in systematising what is at base anarchic. For it is a common observation that Kisshomaru systematised his father's aikido for mass production, so to speak. However, the same can be said of Saito Sensei's weapons training and taijutsu. Both are attempts to (1) preserve an inheritance which they received from the Founder individually, and (2) to pass on this inheritance in its original form to the world at large. One can argue that one can do either (1) or (2), but not both, since the inheritance is no longer in its original form.

The Master - Disciple relationship is a powerful way of transmitting practical knowledge, but its success depends on the right interaction between two individuals. But as I understand it, through the learning process the disciple constantly attempts to reproduce what he has learned but creates something original in the process. As he progresses, the part which is original assumes greater prominence. Thus, as I intimated before, you have a number of re-creations of Ueshiba's aikido, including weapons training, all of which can be said to be authentic. The dilemma is that this process of learning will change with the passing of those who learned from O Sensei personally, for it will become second and third hand. For some this matters a great deal.

Best regards

_______________
P A Goldsbury,
Graduate School of Social Sciuences,
Hiroshima University

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by P Goldsbury
As Doshu he had to present something like the Highest Common Factor, a distillation of the essentials.

A friend of mine often says "the hub of a wheel has to be empty". It's always seemed to me that both this doshu and the last make (made) conscious efforts to present a simple basic form. Personally, I agree with this approach because it then allows other people to branch out into their particular areas of interest without being forced to conform to an elaborate and detailed curriculum (which many probably wouldn't stick to anyway). Thus you have the Aikikai, where you can do almost anything under the communal tent as long as you don't go too far afield (and I think that you'd really have to go pretty far to go "too far"). Realistically, this is probably the only type of organization that can even hope to survive intact given the numbers and international spread of Aikido.

BTW, sorry that I missed you at the circus, Peter. I did notice you smirking at Watanabe's demonstration, though :) .


Best,

Chris

[Hanna B]

Originally posted by P Goldsbury
I think that one reason why weapons are not taught at the Hombu Dojo is that such training is not thought of as basic. (Of course, I am aware that it IS considered basic in some other dojos.) Another reason is that there is no unanimity about O Sensei's views about 'riai', the relationship between weapons and taijutsu.

Is there any possibility that the "no weapons" rule at Hombu also is a consequense of the views on budo at the time after second world war? I have heard a statement that after the war, Japan wanted to get rid of some of its old ideals. New and modern budo, such as Jigaro Kanos judo, modern kendo and the okinawan karate fitted well in the new Japan, but the old koryu were considered obsolete.

The idea occurrs to me that maybe weapons shouldn't be taught in Tokyo because withou weapons, aikido fitted better in the picture of modern budo? I'm just speculating... It would be interesting to hear a comment from somebody with knowledge.

Regards,
Hanna Björk

[P Goldsbury]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chris Li
[B]

A friend of mine often says "the hub of a wheel has to be empty". It's always seemed to me that both this doshu and the last make (made) conscious efforts to present a simple basic form. Personally, I agree with this approach because it then allows other people to branch out into their particular areas of interest without being forced to conform to an elaborate and detailed curriculum (which many probably wouldn't stick to anyway). Thus you have the Aikikai, where you can do almost anything under the communal tent as long as you don't go too far afield (and I think that you'd really have to go pretty far to go "too far"). Realistically, this is probably the only type of organization that can even hope to survive intact given the numbers and international spread of Aikido.

BTW, sorry that I missed you at the circus, Peter. I did notice you smirking at Watanabe's demonstration, though :).

P Goldsbury's response:

Yes. I have to agree with the first paragraph. As for Watanabe Sensei's demonstration, you might have noticed who I was sitting next to. I actually laughed out loud at some parts of the demonstration, but Arikawa Sensei sat through it in stony silence -- and did not applaud. As you can imagine, I had the benefit of many trenchant comments from this source during the afternoon.

With regard to Hanna's suggestion, I think that Saito Sensei also saw aikido as a peaceful, international activity, and Saito Sensei was actually a postwar student. But he regarded weapons training as esential to aikido, even considered as a postwar, 'peace-oriented' martial art. I think his emphasis on weapons reflects his own training with O Sensei.

Best,

_______________
P A Goldsbury,
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[Hanna B]

Originally posted by P Goldsbury
[With regard to Hanna's suggestion, I think that Saito Sensei also saw aikido as a peaceful, international activity, and Saito Sensei was actually a postwar student. But he regarded weapons training as esential to aikido, even considered as a postwar, 'peace-oriented' martial art. I think his emphasis on weapons reflects his own training with O Sensei.

I must have explained myself badly. I was not thinking of the intentions of people developing different training methods. I was rather thinking about what you choose display on stage - in Tokyo, as compared with countryside Iwama with fewer eyes watching - for authorities to make judgements on. But if it rings no bells that traditional Japanese weapons practise at the time would be considered not politically correct, then I suppose I am out of line.

Until proven wrong, I'd like to see Hombu and Iwama as complements rather than adversaries - which is how I like to look at different stylse in general. If proven wrong, I do not promise to listen. ;)

Regards,
Hanna Björk

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by P Goldsbury
Yes. I have to agree with the first paragraph. As for Watanabe Sensei's demonstration, you might have noticed who I was sitting next to. I actually laughed out loud at some parts of the demonstration, but Arikawa Sensei sat through it in stony silence -- and did not applaud. As you can imagine, I had the benefit of many trenchant comments from this source during the afternoon.

Not quite his style, I imagine :) . On the other hand, when I was going to hombu regularly I always enjoyed both their classes, although I don't think that I'd want to spend too much time with Watanabe.

I noticed that Okumura sensei was taking notes on a lot of the demonstrations - those I would love to see.

Best,

Chris

[Jack B]

Originally posted by Chris Li


I just wish that people like H. Saito would stop saying (a direct quote) - "This is the way that they do it in Tokyo, and it's wrong". That kind of thing tends to flow downhill and get magnified along the way.

Best,

Chris

In other budo I have heard sensei use this type of language in private instruction or conversation, but never in public or with the intention of being repeated. Without context, I wonder if this could be hon'ne vs tatemai.

Also it sounds like there is no one "way they do it" in Tokyo or most anywhere else. Big umbrella.

The unspoken context is "it's wrong here." Instructors sometimes make brash statements like "that is not Aikido" to make a point, but would never think of saying the same in public. However, I agree with your point. The older sensei just say "they do it differently - I don't understand why - but we do it like this."

Jack Bieler
Denton, Texas

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by Jack B


In other budo I have heard sensei use this type of language in private instruction or conversation, but never in public or with the intention of being repeated. Without context, I wonder if this could be hon'ne vs tatemai.

The kind of remark that I'm talking about has occurred in public. In private, of course, that thing is even more common, but I'm of the opinion that senior folks need to be careful about the things they say (even in private) - the "sensei says" syndrome being an all too common problem.

Best,

Chris

[Jeff Hamacher]

Peter & Chris,

is the Watanabe-sensei to whom you refer upthread the master of "no-touch" aiki-nage? would i have seen him demonstrate at the 2000 Zenkoku Aikido Taikai? sorry that i couldn't find a more subtle way to voice the question, but i'm just dying to know.:)

[hix]

Not so,....

No offense intended, but how could you know what I have and have not heard?
Perhaps Saito Sensei spoke like this, but I have never studied under him. Like I said, I study in Ibaraki, but not in Iwama. My teacher shows respect to all groups of Aikido. He is a first generation Shihan from Iwama. I only say this because we were talking about high ranking teachers. Sensei and I were talking last night about Ki Aikido and he said nothing negative. He didn't even laugh at Watanabe Sensei's Enbu. I sure did.

Also, I speculated that Honbu practiced more weapons than my dojo. I said this because we never train in weapons.Alo, I have never been to Honbu.
Most people feel that Iwama groups focus on weapons training, but from my experience, that's not entirely true. In Iwama Dojo? perhaps.

We all agree that Aikido is ours, personally. It is important though to have someone who can give you a solid foundation from which to grow. I chose a teacher according to this principle. Actually, I don't think too much about what goes on in other dojo. I consider myself very fortunate to have the chance to study where I am.

Be well,

[PRehse]

Hi Jonathan;

Did you ever get out to Tsukuba Daigaku.

So who is Watanabe sensei ?

[P Goldsbury]

Some comments in view of the last few posts.

1. To Hanna,

I doubt very much that there is any documentary evidence to support the view that weapons training was banned at the Tokyo Hombu because it was not 'politically correct', in the sense that the occupation authorities would not have allowed aikido training to restart if weapons had been taught. The only person I have ever talked to on this subject is Okumura Shigenobu Shihan and he agreed that the kamidana and other trappings of State Shinto were removed to stress the 'peacefulness' of aikido and the 'break' from the less desirable aspects of prewar aikido training. I cannot see that training with weapons would be any less 'peaceful' than traditional jujutsu. As you stated kendo was accepted, so weapons in themselves would seem to have no bad image. But others, more knowledgable than I about the Hombu in the late 1950s, can perhaps add more information.

2. To Jeff,

Yes, Watanabe Shihan is the one who stops attacks and throws ukes by, for example, eye-contact alone. But he has never done this in his regular classes I have attended at the Hombu.

3. Some top ramking shihans do bad mouth other top-ranking shihans and sometimes do this in relatively public places, when people who might be scandalised are within earshot. I have heard such bad-mouthing more often than I care to recall (and this includes criticism of Tokyo by Iwama and vice versa). Equally, some top-ranking shihans are models of discretion and have never in my experience criticised other teachers or students. It is difficult to generalise.

4. Finally, I agree that Iwama and Hombu can be seen as complementary and this is how I have regarded my own training. In my opinion the person most repsonsible for progress in aikido training is the individual aikido (-ka, -ist etc), not the teacher. But the teacher has to be the principal guide, at least initially (during the SHU stage of SHU - HA - RI). In some sense, this responsibility is greater than ever, since there are now very few teachers around who spent long periods training with the Founder himself.

_______________
P A Goldsbury,
Graduate School of Social Sciences,
Hiroshima University

[hix]

Hi Peter:smilejapa

I still haven't made it to the University. I upped my training at my teacher's other dojo. I will go someday though.

Watanabe Sensei is the master of "no touch" Aikido. At the Tokyo Enbu, he's really popular. It's really funny to watch. His uke are really good. He can just look at them and they go flying. I don't know if Watanabe Sensei's dojo Aikido is practicle, but I hope so. I would love to hear about it from someone who has trained with him.

I didn't realize you were in Japan. What region are you in?

[Chris Li]

Originally posted by Jeff Hamacher
Peter & Chris,

is the Watanabe-sensei to whom you refer upthread the master of "no-touch" aiki-nage? would i have seen him demonstrate at the 2000 Zenkoku Aikido Taikai? sorry that i couldn't find a more subtle way to voice the question, but i'm just dying to know.:)

That's the one.

FWIW, I've found that he is quite capable of throwing you even if you do "touch" him, but a lot of people don't like his style. If you look at it as a kind of modelling, then what he does can show the angles and connections very clearly. I always got a lot from his classes, although I'm fairly sure I wouldn't want to train that way all of the time. OTOH, the classes were never boring :) !

Best,

Chris

[Batemanb]

I haven`t trained with him, but I remember the first time that I saw him on video about 5 years back. Not knowing who he was, I asked my Sensei about him. Sensei laughed and said Watanabe, he then told me about the first time that he uke`d for Watanabe Sensei, not sure how long ago this was and apologies to anyone whos read this before. He was asked to do shomen uchi attack, stepped up and and smacked Watanabe Sensei square in the middle of the forehead (I know it was hard because he poleaxed me with it once when I didn`t get out of the way in time:rolleyes:). Watanabe Sensei stood and took it, apparently took about 20 minutes before Watanabe Sensei was able to do his thing.

Now I have only seen him on tape and at the Tokyo embutaikai the last two years. I know he has his sceptics, and a lot of people think he is fake, or disagree with it, but, if he is prepared to step up in front of x thousand people and do it, he must have some belief in it. Having watched the tapes a number of times now, I always find myself watching the uke`s more than Watanbe Sensei, from the way that some of them move, I don`t believe that they are all faking. What I mean by that, is that in some cases (not all), uke`s movement is such that I think it would have been difficult to just turn or roll into, the movement is so sudden that it does appear that something hit or moved uke.

OK, I`ve opened the can :D

Incidentally, it was a pleasure to meet you Peter, I will definately try to come down to Hiroshima one day.

[PRehse]

Originally posted by hix
I didn't realize you were in Japan. What region are you in?
Aioi, near Himeji.

[Batemanb]

Originally posted by PRehse

Aioi, near Himeji.

Hey Peter,

You look like you are as busy as me:D