PDA

View Full Version : Ueshiba-ha Aikibudo vs. Takeda-ha Aikibudo



Nathan Scott
14th November 2000, 02:08
[Post deleted by user]

Ron Tisdale
15th November 2000, 14:49
What, no takers? I am trying to wait for the opinions of someone else first....ya'll have to the end of the day......

Ron :)

Dennis Hooker
15th November 2000, 15:39
Who was Ueshiba S. ?
Dennis Hooker
http://www.shindai.com

George Kohler
15th November 2000, 17:59
Originally posted by Dennis Hooker
Who was Ueshiba S. ?
Dennis Hooker


Ueshiba Morihei Sensei, founder of Aikido

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 18:02
[Post deleted by user]

RDeppe
15th November 2000, 18:18
Nathan, Dennis Hooker (like everyone else) knows who Morihei Ueshiba is and what he did. I think Dennis was poking fun at your inconsistant naming convention: Ueshiba S vs Tokimune T. Soke.

I have to say, it's the first time I've seen Morihei Ueshiba refered to as Ueshiba S.

It's a good question BTW-- unfortunately I don't do aikijujits/aikibudo nor have the historical background to address the answer.

Best regards,
Robert

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 18:26
[Post deleted by user]

George Kohler
15th November 2000, 18:26
Originally posted by RDeppe
Nathan, Dennis Hooker (like everyone else) knows who Morihei Ueshiba is and what he did. I think Dennis was poking fun at your inconsistant naming convention: Ueshiba S vs Tokimune T. Soke.


Opps, I didn't notice that Dennis studies Aiki related arts.

Ron Tisdale
15th November 2000, 18:56
uhhhh, yep, he (Hooker S.) was being a tad humorous, I think. I myself dislike refering to M. Ueshiba S. as "O'Sensei". Especially when trying to objectively write about historical occurances or technical details. The honorific carries with it a certain implication to others of "hero worship" which I would rather avoid. I suspect that some others feel the same way.

Nathan-san, shorthand away as far as I'm concerned. But I'd really like to see some opinions on the actual question.

:)

One comment; Kondo S. this weekend seemed to be saying that the techniques in the ikkajo series may or may not have aiki applied in them. They may be performed as jujutsu, or as aikijujutsu. From one of the demonstrations he did at the end of the seminar, I think that the effectiveness displayed by Ueshiba S. and Shioda S. was not possible with straight jujutsu techniques. I think the aiki is what makes even many of the ikkajo techniques as devestating as they felt to me. Just my opinion. This is not to say that the aiki of the two arts is the same. Just that some level of aiki seems to be present in both (at least at the higher levels of performance[ick, bad choice of word?]).

Ron (now *that* should get things going) Tisdale

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 19:19
[Post deleted by user]

Ron Tisdale
15th November 2000, 19:27
Gotcha! Ok, if both had it, were did Shioda S. learn it?

Ron Tisdale

:)

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 19:43
[Post deleted by user]

Ron Tisdale
15th November 2000, 19:57
Man, am I glad you have a good sense of humor...:)

What it may come down to is "stealing the technique". Some can do that, most need real personal guidance I think.

Someone ( :) ) recently told me "I don't mind if you steal my technique". He was even down right insistant that we do so....yelled at us for making him fly 14 hours to teach us just to have us keep doing what we already know.....:)

Certainly suggests that he was doing something different...

Ron Tisdale

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 20:27
[Post deleted by user]

Mark Jakabcsin
15th November 2000, 20:53
"Hey, I never said that Shioda S. had DR aiki!! "

I don't necessarily agree with exclusive view of DR aiki that some have professed. I also note that this view is very different than the teacher's view of the individual that continues to push this view without backing it up. Regardless of that, it should be noted that Shioda S. took private lessons from Horikawa S. so he was most likely (read definitely) exposed to DR aiki at it's highest levels.

mark

Ron Tisdale
15th November 2000, 21:17
Hi Mark,

Can you give more specifics on this? The teacher, the statement which contradicts the exclusiveness of Daito ryu aiki? Inquiring minds want to know. Also, can you point to a good source on information about the connection between Shioda S. and Horikawa S.?

Ron Tisdale

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 21:25
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 22:13
[Post deleted by user]

Earl Hartman
15th November 2000, 22:43
Originally posted by Nathan Scott

"Aiki is to pull when pushed, and to push when you are pulled. It is the spirit of slowness and speed, of harmonizing your movement with your opponent's ki.


I know that I'll catch hell for this, and I never said I knew anything about DRAJJ, but the above quote by Tokimune S., taken by itself, makes DRAJJ sound a heck of a lot like Tai Chi Chuan to an outsider who knows nothing about it. If this is the principle of DRAJJ, even if it is only the omote, then it is hardly unique AS A GENERAL PRINCIPLE. Tai Chi Chuan is based on it, from everything I've been led to believe (and from what very little I have practiced).

However, the devil is in the details. DRAJJ is a kind of jujutsu, that is, it is primarily grappling. Tai Chi deals primarily with strikes. In any case, it is in the details of specific techniques in different arts where differentiation comes.

Just a thought. No flames, please. I am NOT saying that DRAJJ and TCC are the same thing, only that if the above quote bears any relation to what the aiki of DRAJJ actually is, then it is not a unique principle, even if DRAJJ has a unique interpretation and application of it.

Earl

Nathan Scott
15th November 2000, 22:53
[Post deleted by user]

MarkF
16th November 2000, 09:20
[quote][b]"Aiki is to pull when pushed, and to push when you are pulled. It is the spirit of slowness and speed, of harmonizing your movement with your opponent's ki. It's opposite, Kiai, is to push the limit, while Aiki never resists."

[quote][b]

Earl has the right idea, as this describes most koryu as well. The push-pull method has also been described as tai jutsu of judo, or tai sabaki in action. Isn't this a good description of "minimum effort, maximum benefit?"

Funny, but this was one point I absolutely understood well from those interviews. Since my exposure to aiki is limited, would this interpretation then be wrong?

Mark

Nathan Scott
16th November 2000, 17:24
[Post deleted by user]

Mark Jakabcsin
16th November 2000, 22:54
Ron,

My comments come from personal experience with Okamoto Sensei during his numerous trips to NC. On several occasions during his visits he demonstrated and discussed how the principles of aiki are actually in other arts like judo and aikido. However, very few people understand these principles to there fullest and us them in a very raw and unrefined method which limits their effectiveness. He demonstrated to us that the specific shape (?) of his infinite cirlces can be found in numerous judo techniques. I believe he shows the relationship in principle to help us better understand the principles and see the infinite methods they can be employed in. Having attended his seminars at dojos outside of NC I also note that he does not always show this to everyone.

The information about Shioda S. training with Horikawa S. was from a verbal discussion with Inoue Sensei with several members of our dojo during a social visit to the Yoshinkan in Japan in 1999. He stated that Shioda S. would make everyone wait outside the dojo for hours while he and Horikawa S. trained in private.

Nathan,

You are welcome to give the 'benefit of the doubt for the point of discussion' to anyone you want, however, I also note that in this case your own criteria of 'train for quite some time' and 'only senior DR aikijujutsu members know' is not met. As far as saying that '..we don't have much choice..'I would disagree and feel that critical thinking and not accepting answers that are always 'secret' would be more prudent.

With regards to Takeda Tokimune Sensei's definition of aiki being the 'classical' or 'omote' definition with a more secretive definition used in private I can not refute that line of thinking but find it unlikely. I have found with aiki that the best way to hide it is out in the open and in plain sight. The definition that you quoted could be read throughout a person's lifetime and they could find new meaning in it at each stage of their training. Does the definition really spell it out clearly or could you literally write a book about the definition and subject? The theory of relativity is defined as e=mc2 but does that help you understand it if you don't know a hell of alot more than that? In essence, Tokimune Sensei's definition has a tremendous amount of information and possibilities encompassed within it and as one trains they will relate to more and more of the nuances of the the definition and the art.

mark

Nathan Scott
16th November 2000, 23:24
[Post deleted by user]

Earl Hartman
17th November 2000, 00:11
I think part of the confusion here stems from the fact that some people seem to equate a principle with a technique. They are not the same thing. If it is a proper technique it is only an expression, in concrete terms, of the principle which underlies it, not something separate from it.

In a martial situation (OK, a fight) there is always, theoretically at any rate, a proper response to any action by the enemy. If aiki means "blending", or "harmonizing", or whatever, then any technique that makes use of this principle can be defined as aiki.

For instance, there is in kendo a technique called "nuki-do", in which, as the enemy attacks with an overhead strike, you slip under it and cut him in the side as he goes past. This is blending in the sense that you are making use of the movement of the enemy and not resisting him; that is, it is the perfect response to the given situation. It is thus in harmony with the flow of the fight, that is, it is aiki. As a technique, it makes perfect use of the concept of aiki as it has been expressed in the context of this discussion: he pushes, you pull. It is even nore aiki-like, according to Ueshiba S.'s definition of "aiki is making the enemy do what you want" if you have deceived the enemy into going for what he only perceives as an opening, when in reality it amounts to a sucker punch: you offer him the bait, he takes it, you let him have it with a pre-prepared resposne after he falls into your trap. This is strategy, and it is ever changing: this technique will not work unless you have "ai'd his ki", so to speak. Thus, this will always change as the fight progresses; it will also change depending on your enemy, and the weapons employed, etc.

This is the expression of the constant interplay of "In-Yo" (Yin-Yang) as it manifests itself in physical phenomena (you can cue the spooky Zen space shakuhachi music now, Cady).

To extrapolate, if I may, in grappling, such as AJJ, using this natural phneomena to your advantage will mean that you must be intimately familiar with physiology and bio-mechanics, as Cady and others have said over and over again; that is, you must know how the person, and his body will act in any given situation. Any technique that makes use of these natural principles will be aiki; anything else won't. In any given art, the techniques will vary; some arts may have a deeper understanding of this than others and express this in different techniques.

Anyway, am I the only one who's getting a little sense of "deja vu all over again" on this?

Joseph Svinth
17th November 2000, 07:35
Perhaps this is changing the subject, but way back in the beginning didn't Nathan ask about what Ueshiba's aikibudo was like? Well, there are some minor descriptions of it in the US in 1935; the demonstrator was Isamu Takeshita. For some introduction, see my article at http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_svinth7_1199.htm . Anyway, following Admiral Takeshita's career closely might provide some insight. I believe Stan Pranin has already done some of that.

[Edited by Joseph Svinth on 11-17-2000 at 01:38 AM]

MarkF
17th November 2000, 12:20
Nathan,
Here is an example I think you will be familiar with:


If you learn real swordsmanship, you will understand why it is useless to go against a sword barehanded. Since students always learn one side of a martial art, they often don't understand the fake or simpleness in their techniques.

International Shinkendo Federation,
__________________
Obata Toshishiro




I look at it this way: if Obata Soke insisted that we have a sword technique that is unbeatable and cannot be defended against and I blabbed about it enough people would eventually want to know what it was. I could then rightfully say that it is an inner principle (or secret if you like) and not available anyone other than a few higher ranking members of Shinkendo

So here is an example, I think, of what you say, agreed, it was only an example, but when I questioned him on the possiblities of defending the sword empty-handed, it was dismissed as out of existence, so here is the "impossible" scenario.

So I think it is just a bit out of hand to state simply that one must be of a certain order of the art to understand and disseminate fact/opinion concerning that art. Some people, with the character and mindset to understand it, describe it, but ultimately fail to understand it, could be this fictional menkyo kaiden or judan, etc. Fact is simple. Some get it and some don't. Experience is not necessarily the arbiter of understanding, and if we are to use the example of E=mc, then Einstein's own opinion of what he understands must also stand beside it: "I am no better than anyone else. I am just intensly curious."

So how, then, does one burst out of a group and be the teacher of such a thing, while the rest, with the same experience, grade, understanding of aiki no jutsu, or anything else remotely related, not get it, but within this sphere, the same grade and experience as the teacher?

After all, some do get it immediately. I can't believe that anyone could say it is impossible, or that only one or two out of thousands taught, learn it, and these one or two, are chosen to be taught it, as well.

Earl,
I feel it, too, although not everyone has stuck with his/her side in round two.;)

Mark

Mark Jakabcsin
17th November 2000, 13:31
"(unless they are direct, verifiable quotes to someone who is Menkyo Kaiden or equiv level)."

Well Nathan I have shared what Okamoto Sensei has taught us, as far as verifiable, I could have some of the other folks that were there put in their two cents as well but then that probably wouldn't meet your criteria of verifiable. But then nothing the other individual states has been verifiable either, geez everything is secret with him, lol. Sure is easy to make claims of knowledge when you don't have to back them up because everything is secret.

If I shared the over 100 hours of video I have of Okamoto Sensei you probably still wouldn't be happy since he shared his thoughts over the course of time with several small demonstrations, many of which are not on video. Since he shared his thoughts only as we were ready/able to understand them it is unlikely that someone watching them out of the context of the actually training would understand the significance of what he was doing. Plus alot of what he trains isn't verbal but physical so if you can't 'feel' what he is saying you sure can't hear it. Lastly, I can think of two seperate occassions that he covered some of this material when the video wasn't on, once during a break at a seminar the other late at night after a seminar a few us found ourselves back at the dojo and we had an amazing 1 1/2 hours. Alot of this was about breathing but he did show a little how it related to other aspects. I just don't have the personal need for your acceptance or acknowledgement so you are welcome to any view you wish.

mark

[Edited by Mark Jakabcsin on 11-17-2000 at 08:01 AM]

Ron Tisdale
17th November 2000, 14:28
Mark J.

Thank you for that fantastic piece of information. I really appreciate your sharing that experience with Inoue S. I don't have a problem believing he would tell visitors this; I've met the man, and he is very open and willing to share. I've found a couple of informal sources now for the relationship between Horikawa S. and Shioda S. .... I either must have heard and forgotten, or didn't know. I think your statement sheds a lot of light on Shioda S.'s technique and mastery.

On switching sides: I'm not sure I have. I do know that what I recently experienced was a different level of what I had previously been exposed to. I'm not sure that it is a different thing altogether. The fact is, 4 years of yoshinkan training is not enough to know the breadth and depth of yoshinkan...eight hours of Daito ryu is not even a good taste. Just enough to wet the appetite.

Kondo S. struck me in much the same light as you described Okomoto S. and Inoue S. ... willing to share and have his secrets stolen. I guess that's a strong arguement against "you can't know till you've studied twenty years". These gentlemen certainly seem to hide their jewels in plain view.

As to rehashing this subject: Some of us have been lucky enough to aquire some new experiences. I guess that keeps the subject fresh for me.

Ron Tisdale

Mark Jakabcsin
17th November 2000, 15:25
Ron wrote: "As to rehashing this subject: Some of us have been lucky enough to aquire some new experiences. I guess that keeps the subject fresh for me. "

Ron, I agree with you there. While this is a difficult subect and it is certain that we will never actually resolve anything on this board I still find the discussion interesting, informative and helpful in my own quest to learn. Hearing others insight and experiences sometimes opens new areas of thought for me to explore. I realize not everyone shares this view and finds the whole attempt at a meaningful discussion of aiki as useless, so be it. Thanks to everyone that does get involved. Take care.

mark

Dennis Hooker
17th November 2000, 17:21
Well yes I was trying to be a tad bit witty there. However as far as I knew he could have been referring to someone named Ueshiba S. with S. being the given name, that would be the proper syntax. Also as far as I’m concerned all the gentlemen mentioned in the original post should be referred to with their full name and title. I believe they earned that respect. I also think that these gentlemen did not title themselves but had those honorific titles bestowed upon them by others who deemed it worthy. Now I have been in budo for over 40 years and damn sure “Don’t” know it all so there could have been someone named Ueshiba S. with the S. standing for a given name. That is not unusual in Japan with folks changing names and adopting sons into the family of the bride and such as that. Names and titles are a bit confusing in Japan and I would sure defer to Mr. Skoss and company with regard to that.

Now here is my take on the teacher some folks call O-Sensei and what he did and his background. Each of these gentlemen did remarkable things in their own rights. Why try to fuse their life’s work into a common denominator. I don’t think one exist at all and looking for one only puts us further behind in our effort to move ahead.

I'll say this and get back to where I belong as the heat gets turned up toward us interlopers.

MOSAIC CALLED AIKIDO
Whether or not I know the complete history of Ueshiba Morihei, Sensei’s training is not important to me. I am concerned with the final outcome of his life's work, and how that outcome can make my life and the lives of those around me better. Some of you have, for some time now, been concerned with the roots of Aikido. You look to this art, or that art, as the foundation of Aikido. Understanding some of the principles that were used in the development of Aikido may be a good thing. It is not a good thing if in doing so you are redefining Aikido in the terms of the arts you are examining.

Morihei Ueshiba was a master craftsman who blended a mosaic of martial art and philosophical doctrine into a intricate and beautiful painting. The master himself, as well as his emissaries offered this work to western culture, and it was graciously accepted. Many of the elements that made up this masterpiece had been available to western culture prior to the arrival of Aikido from Japan, but none had gained a substantial foothold in the west.

At a time when western (particularly American) culture was not looking to Japan for anything other than transistor radios and trinkets a movement was about to be born. Exceptional men armed with Ueshiba Sensei’s art, and their own incredible ability, ventured into what could be perceived as hostile territory. Nowadays, it is easy to forget what the attitude was like toward the Japanese people in those early years after the war.

However, the art and philosophy of the founder and his students would transcend cultural boundaries. If what we read about these early emissaries is true, not only would they match their skills against masterful martial artists and prevail, but would win their hearts and loyalty in the process.

As a people we found in this mosaic called Aikido something that was captivating to us. I think, in part, we recognized in this art of Aikido the American pioneer spirit. The art was a blend of all that was available to the founder at the time. When he added to this his compassion for humanity and all surrounding it, we can, in retrospect, see that the whole of Aikido is much grater that it's parts. We must preserve the whole of Aikido for ourselves and future generations. At a time when the fabric of western morality is being ripped to shreds Aikido is a bastion of hope for our future. Aikido alone cannot restore the social and moral values of the nation but it can be a corner stone in rebuilding it. We must not let the small minds of greedy people rip the fabric of Aikido apart.

As children, my generation, and generations before us were taught moral and social values and the rewards of discipline at home, at school and in the church. This is no longer available to many of our young people. Many of the institutions that help form us are still around, but many young people have little interest in them. Many of them view morality as weakness and discipline as something to be avoided. The church is no longer as strong in the community as it once was, and even if they had the capability public schools are prevented from teaching morality. Social values are an issue that neither schools or many churches want to touch. Many young people today are growing up without a sense of moral or social values. In Florida we see it every day. Children who kill, rape and steal and show no remorse beyond than of being caught. In the past we could write these off to the occasional sociopath. Now it is becoming the norm rather than the exception.

In talking to many Aikido teachers, I find a growing desire for children's classes. At first, this desire comes more from the parents than the children. They find the traditional dojo is a place where their children can learn life skills that go beyond physical self-defense. The children find that correct discipline can be a good thing, and many hunger for it. The Aikido dojo is, to a certain degree, replacing more conventional forums for teaching correct social principles.

We must not forget that O-Sensei's desire was for Aikido to bring about peace through love. When I hear Doshu speak of praying for world peace I believe him, when I hear Saotome Sensei speak of peace through strength I believe him. It seems that this is a part of the mosaic some people are beginning to forget. Others are attempting to cover it over with efforts to redefine Aikido as just another martial art. It is this principle of peace, not war, that endeared Aikido to our society in the first place. We must not forget that the AiKi of Aikido has a different meaning than the AiKi of Aikijujitsu. Let us not lose that distinction. If we chose to accept the meaning of Aikido as defined by Morihei Ueshiba, and expressed by his many exemplary students, then we should not feel a need to justify our art by looking to the past for it's meaning.

Aikido is quickly approaching the main stream of our society. I believe it is because of O-Sensei's total art. Not just a piece pigeonholed as martial, philosophical or spiritual. Some of us may be better at expressing ourselves at one part of this discipline than another. However, together we make up the mosaic of Aikido. We need not and should not be replicas of one another. Let others spend their time looking to the past to find meaning for what they do in the resent. As for me I follow O-Sensei's dream as expressed by my teacher and rationalized by myself and look to the future.


There are those that say O-Sensei's teachings were beyond understanding. That he spoke in terms they could not comprehend. They believed his teachings to be a jumble of diagrams and concepts bearing little relationship to the physical art of Aikido, and they could not grasp the significance of it in their learning process. The diagrams he drew and the concepts he talked about are ancient universal symbols and theories expressed within his framework of understanding. I am a Master Mason, and many of the principles I learned on my journey to becoming a Freemason closely parallel the teaching of O-Sensei. I find no contradiction between the two. In fact I find that one set of principles support the other in my learning process.

There is an old saying; "you can't see the forest for the trees". This is beginning to happen to the mosaic of Aikido. Some people are so concerned with the individual parts of the art they can no longer see the beauty of the whole.

One person will say look at that brush stroke, that is a stroke from our school. There are more of these strokes than others, so this artwork is a watered down version of our school. Others say no, look at this brush stroke. It is from our school. There are not as many of these strokes, but it makes the painting complete, therefore this artwork is of our school. Yet others say no look at the paint, this is
what makes the artwork complete. Without the paint there would be no artwork.

Others would say that it is the pigment that gives the paint it's color that really matters. Others say no, look at the canvas that supports the artwork. Without it, the brush and paint would not matter. So it is the canvas that makes the artwork complete. This is commensurate with the makers of the brush, the paint, and the plaster taking the credit for painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

There are people that say if you really want to know what Aikido is all about come study with the martial arts that were it's source. Although very viable arts in their own right, they contribute but a portion of their color and texture to the mosaic of Aikido. The art of Aikido is greater than it's parts! The source and root of Aikido springs for the soul of it's founder.


]Originally posted by Nathan Scott
Hey, I never said that Shioda S. had DR aiki!! (did I?) :)

It is possible though. His technique was alot closer to Ueshiba S. than alot of the later students. It's also possible that Ueshiba S. did teach DR Aiki to some degree when he was still teaching DR and perhaps up to the Aikibudo days. If that was the case, it would explain the similarity.

But I can't say. I was never thrown by either of them!!

There's no doubt that the earlier Aikibudo and Aikido more closely resembled Daito ryu than the post-war versions.

Regards,



[/QUOTE]

Ron Tisdale
17th November 2000, 18:25
Hooker Sensei,

Thank you for your excellant post, and sharing your perspective with us. I must admit, I do feel in some sense chastised by your remarks. In the excitement of seeing new things, it is indeed easy to lose sight of the total picture of what it is we claim to study. While I myself do believe in looking back to arm myself for looking forward, there is much value in simply accepting things as they are, living in the present, and getting on with each moment as it comes.

I'll try to remember what you said here as I train. Maybe something that I've looked for else where is right in front of me. Something greater than the sum of its parts.

Thank you again,

Ron Tisdale

Mark Jakabcsin
23rd November 2000, 14:00
Nathan,
I don’t mean to beat a dead horse but it has been suggested to me that I share a specific or two on how other arts use many of the same principles of aiki (this is in regards to our posts earlier in this thread). As has been mentioned by a particular party in the past, Roppokai uses a very specific shape to the circles used in it’s aiki techniques. Some here have felt that this shape is very secret and unique to Daito-ryu while I have taken the opposite view. During Okamoto Sensei’s numerous visits he showed us how several arts have the same shape embedded at the root of their techniques, however, very few people have realized this root exists or importance of it.

The specific shape that Okamoto Sensei’s Roppokai uses looks very much like a question mark (?). In the US, Okamoto Sensei calls this a no-shi. In order to help us learn the shape he showed us that if we took the Japanese characters ‘no’ and ‘shi’ and put them together we would get the correct shape. It is interesting to note that when we went to Japan, Okamoto Sensei instructed us not to talk about the no-shi in front of his Japanese students. Anyway, this shape is then used at different angles to accomplish numerous different results. There are specific reasons the shape is important and so exact but that goes beyond the scope of this discussion. At any Okamoto Sensei seminar in the US you will quickly learn that ‘no-shi’ is taught to everyone, even visitors at open seminars and is hardly a secret. While Okamoto Sensei does not keep it a secret, he doesn’t like it say….if someone were to make a newsletter and call it ‘No-Shi’. Of course, you could imagine that he would feel a person doing this would be unjustly attempting to claim his training/visualization idea and would dealt accordingly. So someone dumb enough to do such an act might feel that is safer to claim that no-shi is a secret. 

As noted previously, one of Okamoto Sensei’s three basic principles to aiki is circular motion, and the no-shi shape plays a large role in that basic principle. This particular shape can be found throughout other arts such as judo and aikido. Okamoto Sensei demonstrated this fact at various times using different judo or aikido techniques. One of the easiest to discuss would be osoto-gari. Okamoto Sensei showed us that the overall technique (as seen from tori’s body) takes on the shape of a giant no-shi. Tori’s body comes back slightly to disturb uke’s balance at the same time that his outside foot steps forward, then as uke adjust backwards for the disturbance in his balance, tori’s body comes through and swings like a pendulum sweeping uke’s leg and supported on his outside leg. If seen from the side, tori’s overall body shape resembles a big question mark, kinda tilted a little. I don’t want to get to detailed in this description and hope you can visualize from my half-assed description.

Okamoto Sensei, then showed us that hand motion used in osoto-gari also makes the same shape although much smaller. He said few people realized the power in these shapes or how to use them but that they were still present in arts like judo. For the best part of the demonstration Okamoto Sensei then did osoto-gari without using his leg to sweep or clip uke’s leg and without making the large no-shi body shape where tori bends at the waist. He showed that by having very good touch/feel, the correct shape, timing and understanding of uke’s conditioned response one can throw osoto-gari with minimal motion and remain in a preferred upright position and have a much stronger throw. He also used this demonstration to further show us that all leverage comes from the feet (the only part that touches the ground while standing) and how to use his concept of infinite circles. Both of these items are also part of circular motion and also found in numerous other arts. Okamoto Sensei did similar demonstrations with other judo techniques such as deashi-barai and okuri-ashi-barai and he has the most-wicked counter to ippon seoinage I have ever felt or seen.

While I could never duplicate the training in words I hope this helps you understand the similarities that do exist and that the 'secret differences' might not be what one person makes them out to be, nor is that person for that matter. There are many similarities between arts at their roots, how each tree grows and uses those roots may take on a different look, but roots is roots.

mark


[Edited by Mark Jakabcsin on 11-23-2000 at 08:30 AM]

Nathan Scott
27th November 2000, 19:11
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
27th November 2000, 20:46
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
27th November 2000, 21:03
[Post deleted by user]

Paul Madory
28th November 2000, 00:44
Just wanted to address the original subject a second here.

There is not only Ueshiba-ha and Takeda-ha aikibudo. There is also Aiki Inyo Ho traceable back to the shugenja mountain warrior ascetics. This is perhaps a geneological connection to ninjutsu.

In ninjutsu body movement, there is the saying, "Shizen gyoun ryusui". Translated (too) literally it means perhaps, "Natural moving clouds, flowing water". Transliterated, however (more meaningfully finding an equivalent idiomatic expression in the target language) it might be the equivalent aiki principle: "moving in harmony with force".

Nathan Scott
28th November 2000, 01:32
[Post deleted by user]

Nathan Scott
28th November 2000, 02:12
[Post deleted by user]

Paul Madory
28th November 2000, 21:15
No offense taken or intended, thanks.

I didn't say anything about Daito Ryu at all. Does Daito Ryu use that label in its curriculum as well - "Aiki Inyo Ho"? I am talking about Kaze Arashi Ryu Aiki Inyo Ho.

And I agree that there is little in common with Bujinkan. I was just making an observation about that little bit that they do have in common.