I've been blown away with Nishio Sensei's DVDs! One of the many interesting things he said was: "Without understanding the Sword, you can never really understand Aikido!" I love practicing Aiki-Ken! What are your thoughts on Nishio Sensei's statement?

:D

SA
posted by:
Mike
Washington, D.C.
  • ->
    ->
    offline 65
    Hello !SA!,
    I'd say about 25% of my aikido training has been in weapons, and I've been very lucky to train with good weapons practicioners. The great thing is that one can reflect on taijutsu while doing weapons and vice versa. The lesson I have learned the most from bokken is a fantastic sense of hips, or rather maybe it might be more accurate to say a sense of center and control in the area of my pelvis. Subtle ways to firmly drop and be very solid, good ways to turn and lead without losing center. That's what I get out of it at least.
    • we might do well to consider why a person says these things before running to agree or disagree.

      when Nishio Sensei, or other senior instructors who trained with O'sensei say something such as "Without understanding the Sword, you can never really understand Aikido!" we might also consider their cultural constitution and influences. the katana is as "japanese" as baseball and apple pie is american. perhpas moreso: we have had baseball for a scant 150 years at most, and apple pie for 250 maybe; japan has had the sword among its three cultural icons (sword, mirror, gem) for 750+ years. He also had a background in iaido, as well as jodo and yari- staff and spear.

      In my life I find themes- that permaculture, for instance, is to landscape ecology what aikido is to spiritual practice, and even at the core of their teachings; that Non violent communication (NVC) is to conflict resolution and consensus what aikido is to movement and physical efforts. some may or may not agree with these observations, and others may not understand them.

      Certainly he has seen structures and metaphysics which we arent aware of; his life and culture are not ours, and his practice was deep. perhaps what is most important is to respect that a person has made these practices over a long and positive life. from this perspective we can ask "what experience does exploring his admonision give me", and find out in each of our own lifes and practice if this works.

      that aikido cannot be understood without swordwork was his experience; while It is also mine, it is not the experience of others whom I respect and love. and I will probably never be as close to necessary use of live blade as he was, neither in a cultural context or conflict situation. He was japanese during the war and the occuupation, old enough to have seen that war close up. he was old enough to have enlisted as japanese soldier. as a vet, I understand something of how these expereinces shape a person, even if I dont know his shape. but because he was a prewar japanese citizen, and furthermore budoka, the sword cannot be separated from him. it exists in his core, even after the blade, the hands, and the body are gone. Ito, muto yuishin. one sword, no sword: only mind.

      On a side note, at recent seminars Koretoshi Maruyama Sensei was teaching 500 year old sword kata, tachi dori and lots of shinkage ryu work. we did swords & jyo on the beach in wailua (kauai, hawaii) every morning at sunrise for 2 hours a day over four days. O, gods it was a blast!
      • Hello Satyr,

        I must confess to having no experiential knowledge of Aikido; I wasn't even a beginner long enough to be considered a beginner. (There was a schedule conflict -- while living in Japan for 4 years, my presence was required at sea more than ashore.) I have, however, been an admirer of O-Sensei Ueshiba for most of my life.

        I simply wanted to say that I, for one, quite agree with your overall point that before we rush to agree or disagree, it is most edifying for us to seek a place of understanding, and an awareness of our differences.

        We know different things, because we have different teachers (life being our principal teacher, and each life being infinitely unique despite infinite similarities). And after all, we are smarter collectively than individually.

        V/R,
        Wayne_san
    • Hi Paula. I was considering your remark, "The lesson I have learned the most from bokken is a fantastic sense of hips, or rather maybe it might be more accurate to say a sense of center and control in the area of my pelvis. Subtle ways to firmly drop and be very solid, good ways to turn and lead without losing center. "

      I believe Tai-Chi can also be an excellent path to increase that awareness and control. The style I practice maintains that all movement should flow from there (the dan tien).

      R/
      Wayne
  • I LOOOVE Nishio Sensei's techniques. He taught at our dojo a few years back (like 7 or so), and I was very much taken with his technique. What struck me most was how much of a composed gentelman he is. In many ways his crispness is the opposite of my Sensei, Hiroshi Kato. Kato Sensei is not sloppy, but he does push the envelop of his own comfort in technique, which is not somehing most high ranking Sensei will do. Nishio Sensei's lines were some of the best I have ever seen, and his techniques were incredibly direct.

    As to what he said about the sword - You have to take what each teacher says in the context of their class. Each one has a unique take, and I find the most benefit can be gained by listening intently to what they say, and what they do, and taking it as the truth as they see it. Personally, I agree with the idea that weapons training is essential to understanding Aikido. But, remeber that Nishio's other great love is Iaido.

    To anyone who says that weapons are not needed to understand Aikido (which took heavy inspiration from spear work, according to O'Sensei) I would say that I will believe the practioner who claims that they have fully mastered Aikido without weapons practice if the following are true-

    1 - They have mastered Aikido

    2 - They have never picked up a boken, tanto, or jo

    3 - They have never seen weapons demonstrated

    Only then could they say that they have mastered the principles of Aikido without any weapons training at all.

    My opinion is that the weapons, and the open hand techniques, and meditation on what is learned in class, and crazy experimentation with dojo-mates after class, and solo practice are all needed to grasp the principles of Aikido. At least that is what 10 years tells me makes sense. I'll let you know if I am right after I have realy grasped any of the principles.

    - Peace
    • I repeat. the ONLY person who can have claimed to heve "mastered" aikido was O'Sensei. Anybody else tells me that they have Mastered aikido, I will avoid their dojo like the plague.
      • Qatana, I'm curious why only O'Sensei can master Aikido and no one else?

        :D

        SA
        • valid question. I dont know that we are all using the same definition of "master" here.

          from my perspective, a master is one who, after having found a way, practices it in all things daily. I refer to Maruyama Sensei as an aikido master: he has 50 years training, and trained with O'sensei, earning the rank of 8th dan in 1967. for me mastery is inseperable integration (always from my perspective, which can be limited) of the basis that Aikido is Love, a path to universal peace. When I see a person demonstrate this in ways that I find deeply moving and filled with gravitas, joy and humility, I am able to call them a master. I can count about five that Ive met, all over 65 years of age...Technical ability as O'sensei said, is not the important thing. It is the spirit that becomes a master. IN fact, I dont beleive O'sensei mastered aikido- he is said to have always admited he was still learning. but It may be that he mastered himself, and that when we see someone who has done this, they embody the principal that Aikdio is Love- whether severe or softly charming, the thing we master and become is ourselves. "true victory is self victory" could just as well be "true mastery is self mastery"
          • Hmmm ...

            In the book "Looking at a Far Mountain" < www.amazon.com/Looking-Fa...183-4856032 > the intro discusses the three stages of learning that the Japanese consider implicit in, and essential for, the study and mastery of any art (from flower arranging to the sword). I do not have the text in front of me (it's still waiting to be unpacked), but please permit me to share from memory the lesson I took from that, and forgive my paraphrase.

            The first of the three stages in the study of an art is obeisance to what is taught (deference to the amonishments of one's sensei, and homage to the traditions and ancestoral lineage they represent). The Japanese word for the second stage literally means detruction. But, it is destruction in the same context as one destroy food by chewing it. In the final stage of learning, the practice of the art becomes second nature to us, and flows in our thoughts and actions spontaneously. Like breathing, it requires no thought.

            That appears to echo your reflection that a master practices their way in all things, daily.

            The last stage sounds like a fair description of mastery to me. I know of no master, of anything, who considers their learning at an end. But I've met a couple who have acquired sufficient insight and experience to become their own teacher.

            In Japan, a Sensei does not use that title in reference to themselves. It is only used by their students. Not sure whether the implications of that fact will mean much to those who haven't lived there. But I thought that was also worth sharing, for whatever value other readers may find.

            V/R,
            W.
      • Agreed.

        Interesting historical note-

        Gozo Shioda was the only Sensei that O'Sensei ever officialy told to go found his own school.

        Additionally, if you believe the sources, O'Sensei told Sensei Shioda, 'I cannot make your open hand skills any better. From now on you should devote yourself to the practice of the sword.'
        • john stevens talks of O'sensei bullet dodging, and that he was asked to demonstrate this. Demonstration for teh court is a high honor in old japan, but despite the arranged event, he declined upon meeting the rifleman, saying that the spiritual strength of the rifleman was such that he would not succeed, and rather than embarras the courts, hurt or kill himself, and defile the rifleman, he must decline the demonstration. I mention this as an aside, an examination of mastery and victory. sometimes to win means to loose.
          • Two shihan I know of don't teach weapons at all: Yamada Sensei and Nadeau Sensei. Whether or not learning weapons was integral to their own development, clearly they believe they can transmit the art w/o weapons instruction.
            I happen to love weapons.
            I have often picked up the bokken to either understand or to explain an emptyhand technique.
            But they are, to me, a tool.
            • Janet, you are (too date) my favorite poster on the Aikido tribe.

              However - I have learned weapons in seminars from both Yamada and Nadeau Sensei.

              How it breaks down for me is this - O'Sensei taught and demonstrated Aikido with weapons. If they are good enough for him they are good enough for me. ;-)

              And, I agree with you 100%. They are just a tool.
              • Same here. Interesting to note though, that stories have it that he did not want or necessarily allow anyone else, or virtually anyone else, to teach weapons at Hombu dojo.
                • aw shucks, tbone :-)
                  a question: were they teaching weapons-taking as part of empty hands training or paired weapons practice?
                  The former is indeed part of both their repertoires. I'd be curious to know if the latter, when/where. Not challenging you (especially after such flattery !)--just genuinely curious.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Hmm, I have had Nadeau Sensei come at me with a tanto at a seminar...however my Sensei and my senior sempai have both been training with Nadeau Sensei since the 60s and my senior sempai at least agrees that Nadeau does not "teach weapons".
                    I Wish we had a weapons program at my dojo...
                    • Satome Sensei starts us right off the bat with weapons. In my first month we practiced Jo, Tanto and Bokken!

                      :D

                      SA
                      • First dojo I trained at was in Chiba Sensei's lineage (usaf-wr)which also teaches weapons kata and practice from day 1; I haven't trained in that affiliation in many many yrs but still have a soft spot for his weapons work and still practice his 8 part bokken kata on my own.
                        The other person whose weapons work I really like is Hiroshi Kato Sensei. If I ever got Thursdays free I'd go to Suginami for weapons class-but I cannot travel there/back on lunch time, and Thurs evening is dedicated to Spanish classes at least through next May!
                      • The Aikibujutsu Tanren Kenkyukai (the organization I study under) teaches Bo, Jo, and Tanto. The same principles of Aikido are built into the weapons techniques. We also study Shinkendo. Everything shares a common base, and things you learn in one area cross over to others. Some weapons tend to amplify any problems I may have, like Jo for instance. I can really feel wether I'm using my center line power when I'm using the Jo. When I'm not, it's embarrasingly obvious. Shinkendo has been especially helpful in developing my Aikido, but I wouldn't say it's a requirement. (But I don't fully understand Aikido so don't take my word for it.)

                        Also, I don't think you can learn to defend against a weapon if you don't know how to use it . That means offense. As uke it is your responsibility to make good attacks. If you only make weak or unrealistic attacks, nage will be fooled into thinking his technique is good, which will be disastrous in combat. If you really like your partner, you'll make sure their technique is solid. But that's not to say that there isn't a time for soft attacks so that learning can take place. So if you're learning knife take-away techniques, make sure you know how to attack with the thing.

                        Recently I have been lucky enough to train with a new student at our dojo who studied Filipino knife arts. They don't teach large lunging attacks. I'm pretty sure he could turn me into hamburger before I could get my hands on him.

                        A funny thing, after many years studying the sword arts and building Shinkendo, Obata Toshishiro no longer teaches sword-take-away techniques.

              <