Bukiwaza by Lewis Bernaldo de Quiros

BUKIWAZA.

Levels of practice and their rationale.

Three fundamental levels of practice:
1. Basic (kihon), step by step. Balancing movement with stillness. Clarity
and precision of form , distance and timing (maai). Uncovering the
Principles behind the Techniques.
2. Semi-flowing. Integration and joining of the basic steps in a flexible
way. Engaging the Principles. Working with obstacles.
3. Flowing (ki no nagare). While retaining the Œheaviness¹ and clarity of
the previous levels. Expressing the Principles through the techniques.
Emphasis more on Œfeeling¹ than form.

Each of the above levels are in turn flexible in that they can be broken
down and put together in different ways according to individual and group
didactic requirements.

Level 1 remains the primary and most important level. It is at this level
that the lack of body-mind integration and habitual patterns of misuse and
tension can be engaged and brought into conscious awareness.

Aikido dynamics are based on natural movements and at the basic level the
work is twofold: learning the myriad forms and techniques of the Aikido
repertoire and unlearning patterns of dysfunctional misuse on both the
mental and physical levels which stand in the way of the free execution of
those forms. To the degree that we remain unaware of this second
Œunlearning¹ aspect of training will the techniques stubbornly resist our
efforts at improving their quality beyond a certain point (the Œplateau¹ or
the Œwall¹). They will simply and faithfully reflect the fact that Œwe do as
we are¹.

The more flowing levels should emerge from a maturing of the training at the
first level. So while we should not reach beyond our level prematurely
neither should we ignore the direction the practice takes and it¹s larger
perspective. Otherwise the danger is of becoming confined to the basic level
thinking that is all there is ( a common misapprehension among aikidoka¹s
superficially acquainted with Saito Sensei¹s Aikido) and what should serve
as a basis and solid foundation for further growth and expansion becomes a
restriction and confinement. At this point the basics no longer serve as a
platform for developing freedom of responsiveness but have become practices
which reinforce defensiveness and reactivity. This is a common problem and
represents an incomplete understanding of the progressional levels of the
practice and of the purpose of basic training itself.

Having said that, it should be made clear that basic or kihon training,
whether for beginners or senior practitioners, constitutes the main
practice. It is the foundation for all other training and the ground to
which we return to work on weaknesses when uncovered on other levels. But it
is the understanding or Œoperational framework¹ within which we practice
which will determine whether those basics serve us or not in developing the
ability to respond freely without becoming trapped by positions (both
physical and mental).

The common tendency to identify and invest our sense of self with Œwhat we
can do¹ seriously hampers our ability to grow beyond and challenge those
positions. The great Tai Chi master Cheng Man Ching put it succintly as
follows. One¹s attitude in approaching the Art should ideally be one of
Œinvesting in loss¹.

This understanding of levels (and how they can be used) is a key feature of
the Aikido that Saito Morihiro Sensei transmitted from O Sensei in his
teaching and runs as a common thread through the whole system, from bukiwaza
to bukidori to taijutsu. Please refer to Volume 5 of Saito Sensei¹s
Traditional Aikido series for more insight into this.

Bukiwaza and it¹s place in Aikido.

At the present time, the question of weapons and it¹s place in Aikido is
divided mainly among three groups: those who claim that weapons are not
important, those who have incorporated weapon systems from other traditional
weapon schools into Aikido and the weapon system handed down from O Sensei
to Saito Sensei (itself a system rooted in older traditional systems and
transformed by O Sensei in the light of his understanding of Budo). O
Sensei was apparently cautious in both teaching his weapon system and in
giving permission to instructors in teaching it themselves. Saito sensei
studied with him for over 24 years and to my knowledge was the only
recognized successor to this particular body of knowledge. Many of O
Sensei¹s other students were already well conversant (if not already
masters) with other weapon systems and later when becoming teachers in their
own right readily incorporated this background into their own understanding
and teaching of Aikido. From what I have seen, this has become the dominant
weapons influence in the Aikido world today: the result being in fact a
hybrid system consisting on the one hand of Aikido taijutsu and on the
other, Iaido, Kenjutsu and Jodo techniques incorporated and themselves
modified by the movements and principles of the empty handed side of the
art. The value of such an Œincorporation¹ is certainly debateable and can be
argued either way. It is however beyond argument that the original spirit
behind these arts is fundamentally different from Aikido. Iado is the Art of
Killing Œthrough unsheathing the sword¹ and Kenjutsu is the Art of Killing
Œwith the unsheathed sword¹. Aikido is fundamentally not about defeating or
killing the other but about reconciliation and neutralization of conflict.
OSensei also made this patently clear through the writings and poems he left
behind. It is this going beyond the dichotomies of either winning or losing,
killing or being killed which sets Aikido apart as a unique Martial Art and
makes it particularly relevant (to my mind) in today's world where when we
face conflict (of any kind) we must ask ourselves whether our usual
strategies and Œsolutions¹ are not themselves part of the problem. Violence
begets violence and what we resist tends to persist.

I make this distinction as to the Spirit of traditional weapon systems with
full respect for those Arts. I think that Iado is one of the most
aesthetically beautiful martial Arts I have ever seen. My question is as to
the compatibility of Spirit or Intention behind the these arts with the
spirit of Aiki.

The issue then is what the relationship is between empty handed techniques
and weapons and how the latter can enhance the former (and vice versa).
Sensei called this relationship and understanding Riai and emhasised that it
was fundamental in understanding his Aikido. Within the Aikido that Saito
Sensei taught, my understanding is that weapon training is at the root of
empty handed forms in the following principal aspects:

1. Basic footwork, hipwork and handwork. General body dynamics (tai
sabaki).
2. The dynamics of distance and timing (maai), the rythms of blending
(awase).
3. Zanshin. The broadening of attention and presence beyond the apparent
limits of the engagement with another (or others).

These three areas can be seen to relate to work (awase) with one¹s self (1),
with the other (2) and beyond to include the space or environment Œholding¹
the event (3). All three need to be in balance. Balance is a prerequisite
for being centered and functioning from center.

Some of the advantages of weapon training over taijutsu:

1. Body work as a solo practice (suburi and kata).
2. Self control. There is no armor in Aikido. In advanced blending
practices, attention, precision and control are therefore strongly
emphasised. The strict observance of ettiquette is both neccessary for
reasons of safety and for the training of attention (Sensei once commented
that Œa polite person is an attentive person¹). Being attentive to the
relational process as it unfolds (Presence), is a central (if not THE
central) aspect of Aikido practice.
3. Intensity (of intention) and extension (of feeling).

Takemusu Aiki Bukiwaza, basic overall structure.

Ken.

1. Suburi (7 basic suburi; happo giri)
2. Awase (migi/hidari: non-contact; go/shichi: contact).
3. Kata (5 kumitachi; ki musubi no tachi).

Jo.

1. Suburi (20 jo suburi, happo tsuki)
Kata (31 jo no kata; 13 jo no kata)
2. Awase (against tsuki; yokomen, etc)
3. Kumijo.
31 kumijo
10 kumijo.
13 no awase.

Ken & Jo.
7 ken tai jo.


(Note: For a clear, detailed and comprehensive account of Saito Sensei¹s
weapon curriculum please refer to Ethan Weisgard¹s two volume set,
Bukiwaza).

The weapon system basically can thus be understood on three levels. The
first level is the level of suburi and kata. At this level we work without a
partner on integrating and unifying our body dynamic and joining with the
weapon, making it an extension of our feeling. This is the
first level of Œblending¹ with the ground, with ourselves (on all levels)
and with the weapon.

The second level is beginning to work on blending with another through
simple Œone (or two) step meetings¹. This level is very flexible and
although there are a few sequences which have become almost as Œfixed¹ as
the kata, it is a wide area of practice open to experimentation and
improvisation. From what Saito Sensei told me, the majority of the blending
exercises O Sensei would engage in were on this level of Œsimple¹ awase.

Level three. Complex blending through the extended sequences of the
kumitachi and kumijo. This level builds naturally upon the previous two and
is far more demanding in terms of technical skill and mental/energetic
stamina. The different katas and their partner sequences explore specific
Œproblems¹ or challenges of maai, intention and blending. The variations are
further extensions of this level and again are flexible. Sensei repeatedly
stated that the variations of the kumitachi for instance were given as
examples and that trainees should explore the possibilities of the advanced
forms by devising their own. This is obviously an advanced level of
practice.

Overall what can be appreciated is a gradated system of training and
progressive development which beautifully complements and enhances the
taijutsu aspect of the art when used with understanding. It is a wonderful
balance of clarity, precision and flexibility.


Lewis Bernaldo de Quiros.
The Netherlands. Mid-winter of 2005.