Izumizu-ha

For someone who claims to have an "affinity for the Japanese language", you sure seem to miss the simplest of terms and the context they're used.

wara - rice straw
goza - a top layer of tatami matting
tatami "omote" - the outside rush mat layer

none of which are considered a target unless they're within the context of tameshigiri and only then when they've been constructed as such.

I'd like to make a clear distinction. Aikiken IS NOT a form of Japanese swordsmanship.

If you'd like to have a conversation about the nuances of a Japanese sword art, I'd be happy to do that.

 

Take it as read that we understand that, you don't need to be making that distinction.

 

Thanks for that distinction. I never said it was a form of swordsmanship, nor did I ever mention I practice kenjutsu/kendo/iaido.

I would also like to point out that given the limited weapons instruction found in relation to the three traditional weapons found in aikido (tanto, jo, bokken), that these systems are merely added to aikido as a very basic introduction to the world of weapons in the MA, and taken as a small portion of a much larger and comprehensive weapons system.

 

Again, you've lost me. The amount of bukiwaza within aikido, particularly Iwama Ryu is vast and is an integral part of their training regime.

You might be limited to the amount you physically know, but, as someone who's studied Iwama Ryu (as well as aikikai) their curriculum is very healthy with weapon's practice

 

Sure, but is it jojutsu? Is it kenjutsu? (Jo tori and Jo waza / bokken tori and bokken waza aside)

 

I think I've just made that distinction relating to Kenjutsu so why did you just ask that question ?

It's Aikiken and Aikijo, as codified by the founder's longest student Saito Sensei.

 

I just read that again.. you're kidding, right ?

Honestly, is that your assessment after nearly 20 years study of aikido?

Seriously?

 

Because aikiken has its foundations in Kashima Shinto Ryu, but it is not kashima shinto ryu.

And the forms/katas/kumi tachi for the jo are but a limited aspect of the arts of jojutsu.

 

Most of the emphasis is on tori and waza.

 

Where it comes from at this juncture of the discussion is pretty much irrelevant, we've already covered that.

Please tell me you really don't think that :

 

Is aikido daito ryu jujutsu?

 

Don't waste my time with this stupidity.

 

Nor is it jojutsu. It is a portion of that art. It is an introduction to that art. It is not the art.

Nice edit on the part in which you refered to me as idiot.

 

If the cap fits.

 

It's okay, I'm sure idiot was putting things mildly from your perspective.

In anycase: the aspects of the weapons work included in aikido are not jojutsu nor are they kenjutsu. They are segments of those arts taken and meshed into aikido and done so with aiki principles in mind.

 

How long did that pearl of wisdom take to muster?

 

You mean from this:

I would also like to point out that given the limited weapons instruction found in relation to the three traditional weapons found in aikido (tanto, jo, bokken), that these systems are merely added to aikido as a very basic introduction to the world of weapons in the MA, and taken as a small portion of a much larger and comprehensive weapons system.

To this:

In anycase: the aspects of the weapons work included in aikido are not jojutsu nor are they kenjutsu. They are segments of those arts taken and meshed into aikido and done so with aiki principles in mind.

Not long at all. Why?

 

With respect to the type of Aikido you practice. This has me leaning towards either Ki Aikido or one of the many independent schools that has decided weapons training is not required.

 

I'd appreciate an answer to this:

Thank you

.. you're kidding, right ?

Honestly, is that your assessment after nearly 20 years study of aikido?

Seriously?

 

Okay, your instructor told you that the exercise was specifically about being able to cut along a straight line, and was for accuracy in striking? It just seemed to me, from the way you described the drill, that the idea was far more about correct blade alignment, that's all. At least, that's the most obvious benefit that I can see from it.

And I understand that he/she didn't teach you the later forms (with the coin etc), what it seems to me is that the initial exericise was misunderstood, so your subsequent "extrapolations" just took you further from what was actually needed and beneficial. I'll see if I can explain a little more.

Accuracy is great. However, when dealing with a bladed weapon, such as a sword, accurately hitting a target with a badly or mis-aligned blade results in the cut not being effective (and, if we want to go through the concept of Yoroi Kumitachi, you just won't have a chance to do anything effective whatsoever). This is why we have been saying that the idea of focusing on accuracy in these types of drills isn't really the way it should be approached. Correct cutting mechanics are the better way to approach it.

Now, if you have those mechanics instilled properly, and your cutting skills are honed, then accuracy can be looked towards a great deal more. If not, then it's a cart before the horse kinda deal.

Hmm, I think we may have a different ideal about solo training there, honestly. But we'll come back to that.

In terms of feeling that your accuracy with a bokken has improved, can I ask exactly what is "accurate" to you? By that I am talking about the part of the sword used to strike, whether it is to a specific point, or along a line? How are your arms held as you strike? There is a reason for all this, by the way.

Er, you did read the thread you linked on Martial Talk, yeah? Here it is again (only 21 posts, a quick easy read....): http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18169

The guy offering the advice similar to yours was hardly extolled as the ideal source for credible training tips and ideas, so not sure why you linked it, other than to show that other people with little understanding came to the same idea that you did. Oh, and Dianne's posts were about Jodo, where the alignment of the front and back of the weapon doesn't enter into it the way it does with a sword (the aforementioned hasuji). Rather a different situation.

To me, running and swimming are more part of your solo conditioning routine, or exercise routine, not your solo training (martial) routine. Your solo (martial) routine should be done to instill the skills, movements, actions, responces, and so forth of your martial art. And, really, the further you move from the approach that you have been guided with by your instructor, the more chance you are simply getting it wrong.

Realistically, solo home training is both the best way to improve, but can by the same token open up a student to the biggest delays in improving. It just depends on how the training is approached. If it is approached seriously, with the ideal of perfecting that which is studied in class, then your home solo training is great, and will result in a much faster rate of improvement and accumulation of skill. However, if the approach is more along the lines of 'well, I want to keep it interesting, and come up with new ways of approaching things, with new ideas all the time', it becomes a fair bit of play, rather than training, and you very likely end up instilling skills and actions that are not only not part of the art you're meant to be studying, but in fact are counter-productive to your growth and development.

We didn't think you did. But what we saw was someone with very limited ideas of the use of a sword giving advice about how to train swordsmanship at home, so that was corrected. Then you started trying to argue against the correction, and, well, here we are!

Oh, but for clarification, are you refering to this video?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs-uRHtQaDQ"]YouTube - Sword Kata[/ame]

Uh, yeah. You may have liked it, but that only shows us that your knowledge of swordsmanship is desperately lacking. To be honest.

Yes, but the issue then goes back to what exactly are you considering "swinging a sword accurately"? To illustrate, one of the guys I work with in a Kenjutsu training group is, well, rather tall. In fact, he's nearly 7 feet tall. And when training in kata (paired), he tends to find himself rather cramped at the end of the actions. Now, he's striking to the right place, certainly, and he's using the right section of the blade, but it's not what I would call 'swinging a sword accurately'.

Yes, and offering ideas is great. But when those with far more experience in swordsmanship point out problems, perhaps not arguing with them would be an idea?

Ha, no. Don't know what you look like, for one.

Er, yeah. You're mistaken. But that's been covered already.

True... hence accuracy in terms of targeting being developed through paired practice in the main.

If you're finding an issue with your solo training becoming boring, I'd suggest there may be some issues with the way you're doing it in the first place. But, as I said, I feel we're both coming from different ideals and concepts of what solo training is for, and how it best achieves it's goals. "Taking some initiative" and developing new training drills can be done, but it needs to be for the benefit of the practice, not just because you get bored.

Discuss, yeah. Learn is another issue, though. And I might suggest that lines such as the last one there show the wrong approach. Not everyone has to agree with you, like your ideas (or mine, or anyone else's), and you certainly don't have to like anyone else's ideas, or agree with them, but when it comes to others not "understanding" what you're saying, then that should be an indication that you could put things a bit better, or clearer. Does make for much better discussion, I feel.