Purpose/origin of weapons training in Aikido

[AFF]

Dear all:

I have had this troubling question for a long time:

1. Do the weapons techniques we practice in Aikido existed before O'Sensei?

Here comes my problem:

1. If they existed before (that is from traditional martial arts), then should we follow all the rules from the traditional martial art? So should we practice with the idea of "killing" the partner and being as precise and efficient with the bokken or jo?

2. If they were developed by O'Sensei, then weapons practice would be only to demonstrate the bare handed techiques. So we do not need to much to worry about the partner but only to worry about our own movements and see how we can apply them without the bokken or jo?

Ideas?

Best.

Alina

[Julian Gerhart]

to the best of my knowledge every technique in Aikido predates O'sensei by a great number of years.

If you are doing Aikido though you should never have intent to kill someone. Thats what separates Aikido from those more traditional styles. When practicing in general and especialy when with weapons you should focus on disarming your partner and nuetralizing the threat without causeing harm. In the case of weapons practice specificaly you should also look at the relationship between those movements and their counterparts in open hand techniques. I have found that that helps me.

In short. do both, but nuetralize, don't kill.

[szczepan]

Originally posted by AFF
Dear all:

I have had this troubling question for a long time:

1. Do the weapons techniques we practice in Aikido existed before O'Sensei?
Alina
No - O sensei was a Creator, Founder, Source of Aikido. Before him was nothingness.

Founder used weapons practice to communicate with Kami.Nothing to do with bare handed techiques or killing somebody.

[Eric Joyce]

Originally posted by szczepan
No - O sensei was a Creator, Founder, Source of Aikido. Before him was nothingness.

Should we cannonize him too? A rather myopic view Szczepan.

[bruceb]

All right then .... should one pursue the knowledge that is contained within techniques to the point one learns to kill and maim opponents?

This is the two edged sword that O Sensei struggled with as the grips of WW 2 came to visit his homeland, and the practice of Ueshiba Ryu was changed to Aikido. It will also be the struggle of every practitioner to pursue, or not, the full potential of what is taught as Aikido to present day students to its full capacity as a warrior art or not. Each practitioner finds as much or as little of what they need and takes the level of practice to where it will satisfy their own curiosity of how far they could go with the knowledge they have been given.

Obviously, many techniques have been modified to make them more practical for safe practice while maintaining the martial integrity. In a way, the knowledge of killing will come out in time, but the practice of learning how not to kill or maim will be contained in the practice of Aikido.

Look at it this way ... just because a doctor knows what is poisonous or what will kill you doesn't mean that knowledge is used for that purpose. We have come to know doctors as healers, haven't we? Maybe that is what Morehei Ueshiba saw ... a means to turn practice into a way to reconcile the world rather than cause pain and misery?

Weapons practice should be no different. Although there is contained a variety of techniques in weapons practice that can be deadly, the individual can modify much of this practice to make it disabling, not deadly. This is the choice of the individual to find peace, make peace, and not get caught up in the pain and misery of always seeking to cause injury and death to other human beings. There is some thought that one actually becomes the embodiment of evil and thereby draws that evil unto themselves and others that surround them, but this is just an observation of the dark side of the human psyche. It may or may not be accurrate over the lifetime of an individual, but seems to be accurrate over generations, at least in my observations.

Before one wanders off to acquire the older forms, the weapons practice that was before OSensei, get some basic idea of what present practice is all about, then build upon that knowledge.

There are not many shortcuts, but the practice of weapons is a critical part of Aikido, even if Morehei Ueshiba, in his later years, did not want students to pursue that avenue of practice. When the student is able to transfer all aiki-ken and aiki-jo to empty hand, then one can understand why OSensei would say such a thing. I could be wrong about this, but I do believe he saw too many students going into the mentality of his students who went off to war, and longed for darker side of the human spirit when they picked up a weapon, even the wooden ones.

Don't make the mistake of getting into the state of mind that has you looking for all the means that would kill because it is a trap of the spirit that bypasses empathy for other human beings. Hence, although clarity exists with weapons practice, the alternative of aikido is the gentler kinder means to resolve a situation both for the opponent and the defender.

I am sure someone else with say it more eloquently, but that is about the long and short of it for what I understand Aikido to be.

[szczepan]

Originally posted by Eric Joyce
Should we cannonize him too? A rather myopic view Szczepan.

.........hmhmh......You said canonize.....that would be catholic - ryu. He was rather shinto- ryu. :D
I don't think I'm myopic ;) One must to know where is he coming from. Where or who is THE source of wisdom rotfl
Otherwise one gets lost forever in the forest of aiki :cool:

[ChrisHein]

Well I think Szczepan is just telling it the way it is! In his youth O-sensei was a crazy man, he learned all about killing people, and how to do all sorts of crule things, one of his primary teachers (Takeda) was by all modern standards was compleatly homicidal. It was only later in his life that he chilled out, and to what degree none of us really know. So of coarse the Aikido weapons have killing blows in mind, you wouldn't pick up a weapon if you didn 't mean to do serious damage. If you're not ment to use a stick as a stick, or a sword as a sword, then why would they even be included in the syllibus??? Swords do mortal damage, no matter how careful you are!

How likely are you to EVER be in a sword fight...........
This is what I think is ment by the "peaceful" practice of Aikido, It's not it's techniques, or it's meathodolgy of fighting that is "peaceful", It's that it's training meathods are useful for more then fighting. Like all relationships between two people.

Fighting is fighting, and if anyone is ever swinging a sword at your head, I would like to see how long you keep your idea of not killing them!

-Chris

[Eric Joyce]

Originally posted by ChrisHein
Well I think Szczepan is just telling it the way it is! In his youth O-sensei was a crazy man, he learned all about killing people, and how to do all sorts of crule things, one of his primary teachers (Takeda) was by all modern standards was compleatly homicidal. -Chris

That's the way it is huh? That before aikido, Ueshiba had no other experience that he brought to the table? There was nothingness? Please, give me a frigin break.

Was Ueshiba crazy? I never heard that before. Takeda was a bit paranoid, but consider the time frame he was born in. Are the cruel things you mention, would that be Daito Ryu? A little judgemental wouldn't you say?

[wimp_lo]

Eric took the bait.

[Aikisean]

Originally posted by AFF
Dear all:

I have had this troubling question for a long time:

1. Do the weapons techniques we practice in Aikido existed before O'Sensei?


Technically yes. There are disarms and empty hand techniques to defend against a swordsman. They are similar to what is taught in Daito Ryu and other Koryu.




Here comes my problem:

1. If they existed before (that is from traditional martial arts), then should we follow all the rules from the traditional martial art?


No Aikido is it's own art. There is nothing that says you should follow another schools ideology.




So should we practice with the idea of "killing" the partner and being as precise and efficient with the bokken or jo?



Be as precise and as proficient as your own instructor. Strike with intent in order for nage to train at the same time learn to attack honestly.




2. If they were developed by O'Sensei, then weapons practice would be only to demonstrate the bare handed techiques. So we do not need to much to worry about the partner but only to worry about our own movements and see how we can apply them without the bokken or jo?



His weapons style is based upon his experience and how he applied it to his philosophy: Aikido. His weapon style is unique in the sense that you always train Katsujinken, the sword that preserves life.

[ChrisHein]

Well if you wanna look into what Ueshiba did when he was a kid, thats fine with me, if you dont' thats fine too. All i'm saying is that fighing is fighting, and the study of relationship is the study of relationship. You shouldnt' hurt your practice partners, you should figure out how to work things out.

-Chris

[Julian Gerhart]

Originally posted by Eric Joyce
Was Ueshiba crazy? I never heard that before. Takeda was a bit paranoid, but consider the time frame he was born in. Are the cruel things you mention, would that be Daito Ryu? A little judgemental wouldn't you say?

I am flipping through my copy of Invincible Warrior by John Stevens and I have found that Osensei did do some strange things when he was a young man. For instance:

for a few years begining in 1906 Ueshiba would disapear for days at a time either by shutting himself in his room or wandering off into the mountains.
during this time he is said to have spent hours and hours madly swinging his sword

he had an extra marital affair with a younger woman during the 1920's

he opened a stationary store with money given to him by his relatives and then simply gave it away to his employees after a year and returned home

Through out the first half of Ueshiba's life he did all kinds of crazy things in order to make himself stronger.

Crazy? probably not. but he was definatly far from normal.

[Martyn van Halm]

Originally posted by bruceb
This is the two edged sword that O Sensei struggled with as the grips of WW 2 came to visit his homeland...
A katana has only one edge. Granted, it's sharp enough to use twice...

[chrismoses]

Originally posted by szczepan
No - O sensei was a Creator, Founder, Source of Aikido. Before him was nothingness.

Founder used weapons practice to communicate with Kami.Nothing to do with bare handed techiques or killing somebody.


(clearing, throat...) Hoooooeeeyyyy!
Nothingness my...___
Before O-Sensei there was Daito-Ryu, Shindo-Yoshin Ryu, Judo, Itto-ryu Kenjutsu, Shinkage Ryu Kenjutsu, Jukendo, and on, and on...

Anyone who has ever seen a Daito Ryu demo knows that O Sensei did not create his art in a vacuume. Same goes for his sword work. Besides, it's been pretty clearly documented that most of the Uchi-Deshi who went on to systematize an Aikido weapons system had their own unique influences besides O-Sensei. I really think that Pranin's "Aikido Masters" should be required reading. It could be argued (rather convincingly) that there is no weapon system in Aikido. The best evidence for this is the huge disparity between the major styles of Aiki-ken (Chiba, Saito, Saotome, Nishio...). They look nearly nothing like each other.

As for O-Sensei only using his weapons practice to communicate with Kami, I just don't see that. I KNOW he used his jukendo practice to do more than communicate with Kami. He was after all known for how fierce he was with one on the battlefield. I don't know if you were being coy szczepan, but if you really buy all of that, I feel kind of sorry for you.

With regards to the original post, this summer our dojo hosted Anno Motomichi Sensei. He lamented the fact that so few people ever push their training to the point of "shinken". He was using the term metophorically for training and attacking as if it were real. He said that O-Sensei used to insist that his uchi-deshi attack with the bokken as if to split him in half. He would get furious if they held back. As a beginner should you train that way? PLEASE NO! This level of training takes years to build up to, and great trust on the part of both partners. If we are too removed from the INTENT of our attack (no matter what speed) how can we truly polish each other? To some extent, I feel you must embody the intent to do harm. If that isn't there, then we're dancing, and that's what kenbu is for...

[INFINOO]

Chis: Excellent point about attacking with intent.

[szczepan]

Originally posted by chrismoses
(clearing, throat...) Hoooooeeeyyyy!
Nothingness my...___
Before O-Sensei there was Daito-Ryu, Shindo-Yoshin Ryu, Judo, Itto-ryu Kenjutsu, Shinkage Ryu Kenjutsu, Jukendo, and on, and on...

Anyone who has ever seen a Daito Ryu demo knows that O Sensei did not create his art in a vacuume. Same goes for his sword work.

Daito ryu has no it's own sword work - S.Takeda did probably mainly Itto-ryu. O sensei didn't learn Itto-ryu.
There is no prove that O sensei learned sword work from any school. As late as in the end of 1930-ties he observed some traning of Kashima - that's all. However - aikido sword techniques have nothing to do with kashima.

[chrismoses]

My point was that O-Sensei did not create his art in a vacuume. He had various experiences with weapons which contributed to how he moved with a sword. Further it has been documented that he WAS a student of Kashima Shinto-Ryu (see http://aikinews.com/articles/_article.asp?ArticleID=719 for details). O-Sensei also studied Yagyu Shingan Ryu which contains several forms of weapons in addition to their Taijutsu. Further I think that we do the arts a great disservice by limiting their scope based solely on their names. Takeda Sokaku knew the sword and it seems highly unlikely that while teaching O-Sensei budo, that he wouldn't have drawn from this knowlege and shared some of his skills. Remember that Daito Ryu's sylabus was not codified until after Takeda Sokaku's death. Finally, it is clear that O-Sensei was acquainted with many of the finer kenjutsu teachers of his era. He would quiz his own students who he sent to train with them. As you can tell, I feel it is a gross oversimplification to say that before Ueshiba Sensei, there was nothing.

But for clarity's sake, it's also important to keep in mind that most of the aiki-ken was formalized by O-Sensei's students, many of whom had their own unique weapons experience to draw from.

[szczepan]

Originally posted by chrismoses
My point was that O-Sensei did not create his art in a vacuume. He had various experiences with weapons which contributed to how he moved with a sword. Further it has been documented that he WAS a student of Kashima Shinto-Ryu
He was sitting and observing, never practiced physically himself - if you have such person in your dojo, will you say that he is your student of aikido? ;)
various experiences with weapons ? - very general statement. Would you mind write some concrete details?


Originally posted by chrismoses

Finally, it is clear that O-Sensei was acquainted with many of the finer kenjutsu teachers of his era. He would quiz his own students who he sent to train with them. As you can tell, I feel it is a gross oversimplification to say that before Ueshiba Sensei, there was nothing.

But for clarity's sake, it's also important to keep in mind that most of the aiki-ken was formalized by O-Sensei's students, many of whom had their own unique weapons experience to draw from.
I’m not talking here about aiki-jo and aiki-boken – rather conclusions from the films with Founder.

It is very well known that many of the finer kenjutsu teachers of his era criticised strongly his weapons work. It was propably a reason why K.Nakakura sensei(And may be Mochizuki sensei) resigned from successing him as heir of aikido.
From position of kenjutsu, if somebody have even some minimal experience, it is very obvious, that weapon's work of M.Ueshiba is completely useless for fight, or to defend one's life. One month's beginner kendoka will devastate any aiki-knight with all his artillery :rolleyes: No tactics, no strategy, no basic lines of cutting or attack. Footwork is good to proceed some rituals, but not for fight.....so....please : don't push me more :nono:

If you don't believe that O sensei weapons work was created to communicate with Kami - well, I'm here not in a position to convince you. But with time, may be you will understand it, if you start to practice koryu :nin:

[Hanna B]

If I understand correctly, to o-sensei the entire art of aikido was a way to communicate with kami.

Is it really true that he never actually practised the sword? What are your sources, Oh Unpronouncable One?

[chrismoses]

So, what evidence do you have that O-Sensei never practiced weapons? I have never even seen his most die-hard detractors make this assertion. Without something beyond your own statements, I can't even take this seriously. In "Aikido Masters" several of the prewar uchi-deshi describe demonstrating the weapon techniques they were being taught elsewhere to O-Sensei and then having him demonstrate the "aiki" versions of the same techniques. Sure sounds like more than sitting and watching to me.

As for my "various experiences with weapons" comment, he learned enough shuriken to teach it for some time at hombu, this was recently discussed by AJ. It was only discontinued when his son was hit with a shuriken and developed an infection. I believe it was Chiba S. who hit him. I'm also not in a position to describe what weapons work O-Sensei was taught AS A SOLDIER. Typically the army teaches you something about how to hurt the other guy. Do you know otherwise? I also hold that he would have learned some weapons work from Takeda S. From everything I have seen of older jujutsu styles, certain ammount of weapons work was simply a part of the system. An excellent example is Shindo Yoshin Ryu, or Yanagi Ryu for that matter.

If you're not talking about aiki-ken, why are you in this thread? The original poster was questioning wether the "weapons techniques we practice today exist before the founder?" (sic) So I would presume that they were talking about aiki-ken. In fact I can't imagine any other assumption. As for baseing your argument entirely on films of the founder, I have heard from very reliable sources (both print and personal conversations with several of O-Sensei's uchi-deshi) that footage of the founder was quite different than what he taught in classes. Every time there was a camera, O-Sensei was doing a demonstration. People tend to move differently when demonstrating than when they are in private.

As for studying koryu, I am a nidan in Shinto-Ryu, and I agree with you that what passes for weapons work in Aikido wouldn't get you very far with a kendoka or someone who has truly studied a sword art. I don't understand however how that plays into my understanding that aiki-ken was designed to talk to spirits. Contrary to your statements, in sword circles, O-Sensei's weapons work (in contrast to aiki-ken) is thought of rather highly. True he was unorthdox, but so was his taijutsu.

[szczepan]

Originally posted by Hanna B
If I understand correctly, to o-sensei the entire art of aikido was a way to communicate with kami.
More I practice aikido, more I tend to agree with this statement.

Originally posted by Hanna B

Is it really true that he never actually practised the sword? What are your sources, Oh Unpronouncable One?
His way of using sword is.....very strange, unorthdox as chrismoses said. Also normally if someone practice sword a lot, his aikido chage and has very characteristic flavor. It changes a basic mechanic of the body, footwork,....I can't describe it in detail.
Only thing from sword that I can see it is "irimi mind" of Founder his control of distance and timing.....In fact, when he got older, he used only those three things to execute any aikido technik...so I don't know.....There is also another possibility, that religous influence cleared sword influence....Or he wasn't very interesting in deep study of sword schools....Practicing sword alone, somewhere in the mountains, without supervision of any sword teacher can't be taken seriously...
If you add to this no-existence of any diploma or certification from pure sword schools, a conclusion is simple.


If you're not talking about aiki-ken, why are you in this thread? The original poster was questioning wether the "weapons techniques we practice today exist before the founder?" (sic)
I understood practice aiki ken and aiki jo as Saito sensei teaches it. :D These terms are not used by others students of Founder.


As for studying koryu, I am a nidan in Shinto-Ryu, and I agree with you that what passes for weapons work in Aikido wouldn't get you very far with a kendoka or someone who has truly studied a sword art. I don't understand however how that plays into my understanding that aiki-ken was designed to talk to spirits.
So what is the goal to study weapons if it is useless from practical, martial point of view? And can only deform correct martial spirit?

[chrismoses]

"Practicing sword alone, somewhere in the mountains, without supervision of any sword teacher can't be taken seriously...
If you add to this no-existence of any diploma or certification from pure sword schools, a conclusion is simple." -szczepan

I'd have to disagree that a conclusion is simple. Lack of written evidence does not in any way indicate lack of existence. As for practicing alone in the mountains, I think more koryu kenjutsu schools attribute their techniques to the founder flailing about in the mountains in forced solitude than any other explanation. So while I may not take it literally, I think it can be taken seriously.


"I understood practice aiki ken and aiki jo as Saito sensei teaches it. These terms are not used by others students of Founder." -szczepan

Again I'd have to disagree. Regardless of who initially started calling it "aiki-ken" in general I believe that the terms simply refers to the study of the sword within the framework of aikido. According to Aikido Journal, aiki-ken is "Sword used in aikido. Influenced by the sword of the KASHIMA SHINTO-RYU." Is what Saotome Sensei does not aiki-ken? What is it then? His tape is called "Sword of Aikido." Sounds like "aiki-ken" to me. Nishio Sensei uses the term aiki-toho to distinguish his work from other aiki-ken, but at its root, it is still sword within the context of aikido.

"So what is the goal to study weapons if it is useless from practical, martial point of view? And can only deform correct martial spirit?" -szczepan

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. I'll assume you're asking me what I feel the point of aiki-ken is if it's not very good sword work? Is that a decent paraphrase? If it is then I'd have to say there isn't much point. Personally I feel this is one of the big problems with aikido training today (right up there with most people not knowing how to actually attack or strike effectively). I've decided to get most of my weapon education outside of the context of aikido. As you said, people who have a good grasp of the sword have something different about their waza. I've gone to seminars where I trained with someone else for the first time in my life, and knew within seconds that they studied iai or kenjutsu. You can just tell.

One of the biggest differences as I see it between studying the sword (in say battojutsu, iaido or kenjutsu) and aiki-ken is that aiki-ken is bokken work. Many of the moves that are unique to aikido simply wouldn't work with a live blade. It seems to me that instead of treating the bokken as a safer and cheaper stand in for a live blade, the training has become the study of the bokken, not the sword at all. That's a shame, and I'm not sure what the best resolution is. I'm not in any way affiliated with Nishio Sensei, but I honestly feel that his weapon sylabus is by far the best thing going for teaching a real understanding of ken and jo and how they influence your open hand waza (within the mainlines of aikido). Short of finding a dojo affiliated with Nishio Sensei, I encourage aikidoka who really want to understand the sword to go outside of aikido and find a weapon art to study. Initially it's a real pain to try to keep the two arts separate, but once you get past the differences the core principles really begin to benefit one's open hand training. But I'm kind of prejudiced towards this kind of training because that's what worked for me. As with anything I say, your mileage may vary...

[Tim Mailloux]

Originally posted by chrismoses
Besides, it's been pretty clearly documented that most of the Uchi-Deshi who went on to systematize an Aikido weapons system had their own unique influences besides O-Sensei. I really think that Pranin's "Aikido Masters" should be required reading. It could be argued (rather convincingly) that there is no weapon system in Aikido. The best evidence for this is the huge disparity between the major styles of Aiki-ken (Chiba, Saito, Saotome, Nishio...). They look nearly nothing like each other.


Well I won't get into the differnece in different teachers weapons stystems. But I can say with certainty that Chiba sensei learned a majority of his weapons training directly from O-sensei. When Chiba sensei was a yong uchideshi he severly hurt his back while training, and was told he may never do aikido again. At that time he was a Hombu dojo uchideshi. O'sensei took Chiba sensei up to Iwama and taugh him weapons in depth for months while his back healed. Of course Chiba senei eventually added / modified to the weapons he was taught by O'sensei. But the basis for his weapons comes directly from O'sensei

[Paul Frank]

Good question. When I first started Aikido I was taught many techniques both training with weapons and training with no weapons. I have trained with many Sensei's and learned a lot but there was something missing that I was not even aware of. I practiced this way for many years. When I was introduced to the Ancient way to train with weapons I was very discouraged with my training with Aikido weapons and my own Aikido. I had to basically change all of the bad habits I had been taught in America. And I thought I had reall good Aikido techniques meaning my form was good and I was quick and I could make most techniques work (with enought force. Ha Ha). My purpose for training in Aikido was to master the skills which O'Sensei had developed. I learned modern Aikido was very limited for reaching my goal. I quickly learned it was impossible with out the proper training or background. O'Sensei mastered many universal principles and evolved over his lifetime within these principles. I think it is very difficult to master his skills without learning the principles from a great weapons teacher. Had I never trained in weapons I would lack the skills to begin to understand Aikido. I have been seriously training in weapons for the last 13 years and I am finally beginning to have a totally different reality for Aikido. If you are training in Aikido to master universal martial arts principle it is impossible to do this learning only Aikido Weapons. I hopes this saves you some time in your training. Good luck with your training.

[AFF]

Frank:

It is interesting what you wrote. About a year ago I started training SMR and since then I have realized that the perspective of the weapons training in Aikido (at least in my dojo) is totally different from the one in a traditional martial way.

Now, I always have this conflict in understanding what is the point of practicing weapons in Aikido. I argue all the time with my Aikido classmates about this, and sometimes I feel that perhaps I should stop training with weapons in Aikido?

Best.

Alina

[AFF]

Sorry. Paul (I realize that "Frank" was your last name only after I posted my reply).

Best.

Alina

[Paul Frank]

Dear Alina,

Ya that was a good point. No problem about the name. Having two first names sometimes gets confusing.
Be careful approaching Aikido people about their weapon work. I do not know why but most people are very threatned about considering there might be some benifit from learning something outside Aikido weapons. So you have to be really careful about the approach. I have found it is best if they come to you for advise. They should be able to see the difference in your technique and they will come and ask you why your movements are much different. Just remember not everyone is commited to the same budo you are.

I think if you train in weapons the lessons you learn should enhance your aikido movements and timing. I do not think training in Aikido weapons Aikikai style, for example, will lead to a greater understanding of Aikido principle. It is probably best to not train in Aiki weapons because you will have to do what I did and change many years of bad habits. Most people in Aikido learn to slash and cut the first day and that is it. But that basic movement does not teach the necessary ingredients for application to Aikido. That is why most people do not generate power from the ground and project it into their techniques. Most energy is developed from shoulder momentium. The other problem is most aikido the nage is not remotely connected to uke. The uke just follows along for the ride but there is not real connection.

I do not know but from my experience it took me years about 8 I think to have a good sword cut. I mean working every day With my japanese teacher telling me "Why you so stupid. It is so easy" Basically when I would get someting down he would change it and we would start all over again. This happened for years. One day I got really frustrated with never seeming to be able to please him. He looked me in discust and said "Do you want me to teach you American way or Japanese way" What he meant was do you want me to teach you in your reality and make you think you are learning or do you want to dig in and work through all your petty mental walls and really learn. My point is he taught me how to SEE. Fortunatually I was young enough to know he had something to teach me and it was the missing BASE that Aikido did not offer me for my first 10 years study. I learned the hard way. Most people in Aikido do not have the eye to understand what they do not know so it is best if you do not make people mad. I have done that too much myself. My intentions were good but my approach was bad. I really wanted to bring this to the Aikido world but it is very difficult. . Learn from my mistakes. Not everyone is commited to the same budo you are. I naturally assumed we all were interested in martial arts to uncover the universal truths that all masters are working from.
I noticed you are in St. Louis. I am not very advanced but I am going to be teaching a Weapons class in Kansas City October 11th and 12th. It is a blast because many teachers come from all over the area. Each teacher teaches one class. It is the midwest Friendship Seminar. We did this last year and it was great. They asked me to teach a weapons class and I taught from a totally different paradym then they had every seen. I was really suprised but they really liked it. I was so afraid they would not like it because it was so differrent from their experinces. Let me know if you are interested and I will send you the information. kerryfrank@interlinc.net

Train hard

[bruceb]

Originally posted by chrismoses
"Practicing sword alone, somewhere in the mountains, without supervision of any sword teacher can't be taken seriously...


"I understood practice aiki ken and aiki jo as Saito sensei teaches it. These terms are not used by others students of Founder." -szczepan

Again I'd have to disagree. Regardless of who initially started calling it "aiki-ken" in general I believe that the terms simply refers to the study of the sword within the framework of aikido. According to Aikido Journal, aiki-ken is "Sword used in aikido. Influenced by the sword of the KASHIMA SHINTO-RYU." Is what Saotome Sensei does not aiki-ken? What is it then? His tape is called "Sword of Aikido." Sounds like "aiki-ken" to me. Nishio Sensei uses the term aiki-toho to distinguish his work from other aiki-ken, but at its root, it is still sword within the context of aikido.

"So what is the goal to study weapons if it is useless from

One of the biggest differences as I see it between studying the sword (in say battojutsu, iaido or kenjutsu) and aiki-ken is that aiki-ken is bokken work. Many of the moves that are unique to aikido simply wouldn't work with a live blade. It seems to me that instead of treating the bokken as a safer and cheaper stand in for a live blade, the training has become the study of the bokken, not the sword at all. .

Interesting observation.

I would say if you are not paying attention so that your weapons work in tandem with your empty hand practice, then you are doing your practice incorrectly.

Just because we have taken the live blade out of the practice, it doesn't mean we should lose the relevence of the sword in Aikido practice. As a matter of fact, it is up to every practitioner to find the relevence of their practice whether it be within weapons, hand to hand, or learning to talk your way out of dangerous situation.

If the moves for your Aikido don't work for a live blade, then there is something wrong with your Aikido. All I can say is .... fix it.

[Vapour]

I posted a thread "What is Aiki?". I was going to post it here but I thought that the article deserve a separate thread. The article will provide interesting insight to this topic as well.