TAE Journal, Edition 11, Questions and Answers – with Lewis Bernaldo de Quiros

FROM EDITION 11 OF THE TRADITIONAL AIKIDO EUROPE JOURNAL – SPRING 2024

Lewis Bernaldo de Quirós Sensei trained full time under the late Morihiro Saito Sensei (9th Dan) from 1986 until 1993 in the Iwama Dojo in Japan. Prior to beginning his training in Aikido, he trained for 10 years in Judo and Karate. During his stay in Japan, he also practiced Kyudo, Zen and Japanese calligraphy.

Lewis received the rank of 5th Dan Aikikai from Morihiro Saito Sensei in 1999 and 6th Dan Aikikai from the third Doshu, Moriteru Ueshiba, in 2009. In 2024 he was awarded the rank of 7th Dan Aikikai.

Here we explore his views on a range of Aikido training topics such as the practice of henka and kaeshi waza, the role of high falls, kicks and other subjects.

Q: Should we introduce henka and kaeshi waza at an earlier stage in the syllabus? I.e., 1st kyu?  It appears that there is little study of this before nidan and sandan (within the TAE syllabus). Why is this?

A: Henka and kaeshi waza are advanced practice in that they require a well developed ability to blend with our partners. When we begin our practice ‘blending’ seems to be primarily about the point of contact (handwork) between partners, but the smoothness and timing of advanced blending depends on ordered bodywork and a refined sense of distance and timing (maai). This is a delicate process of re-education and training and is what is done through our system (that of TAE) up to sandan / yondan levels. In my experience, introducing these levels of technique too early are counterproductive as they are not so much about learning sets of techniques as developing the ‘following -joining -leading’ subtleties of the relational encounter where the transitions become seamless and hence undetected by our partners. That is the core of these levels. Without that quality, henka waza easily becomes forcing a change and kaeshi waza becomes resistance-counter.

Q: Why do we not practice kicks more, and techniques of defending these? What about headbutts, knees and elbow strikes? Obviously, these are not very 'aiki'. Are we ill-prepared if someone attacks with these in a violent encounter?

A: This is related to strikes in general as Aikidoka. In our system we begin with static grabs (kihon) moving onto dynamic grabs (ki no nagare) and from there onto strikes (shomen, yokomen, tsuki etc). But of course, kicks elbow strikes and even head-butts can be addressed. I think the problem is twofold. Aikidoka in general do not train striking ability sufficiently in my opinion. We need good attacks to train and perfect our techniques under real pressure and of course atemi are part of the techniques and are emphasised later at advanced levels. We should train strikes the same way we train suburi with weapons. The second issue is - at yudansha levels - is to give ourselves permission to explore beyond the basic training system we have inherited [ed. from Saito Sensei] and in which the atemi you mention are not emphasised. There is nothing to stop us exploring these areas.

Q: What do you think Saito Sensei would be focused on now if he were still alive, and didn't have to teach at many seminars? I.e., would he be writing books, structuring the tanken syllabus, something else?

A: My impression of Sensei is that he had a real passion for transmitting the Founders Aikido, so I think he would still be busy with that in one way or another- as he was in the many years I knew him. If he had lived longer, I think he would have continued teaching seminars but also would have perhaps focused more on his seniors. He once commented that Iwama was a 'University for instructors'. I told Sensei six months before I left that I would be returning to Europe. Once Sensei realised this, he regularly (weekly) would be giving me advice and pointers on how to teach. So, transmission of the system was very much uppermost in his mind, and I think that would have only increased had he lived longer.

Q: Should we train highfalls more? It has been suggested that the development of ukemi should be more central to grading, particularly in kyu grades i.e., Mae/ushiro ukemi progressed to asymmetrical rolls, to highfalls from various techniques?

A: I think the ability to take highfalls is important but not that important. Sensei once commented that if your partner was able to take a high fall he was able to counter your technique. In regular training in Iwama high falls were not so emphasised. For example, shiho nage was a direct tight spiral to the ground. No highfall. Uke takes a high fall from this technique if I allow it or change the angle on the elbow. The same goes for irimi nage. However, in demonstrations these days we see a predominance of high fall ukemi to the extent that we even called this 'embu ukemi' (demonstration ukemi) when in Iwama. Frankly most of it is unrealistic and for show which I am not in favour of. When I first saw a Daitu Ryu Jiujitsu demonstration in Japan I saw a type of ukemi that was very functional and simple. As Sensei also emphasised, the job of uke is to take care of himself with his ukemi and not facilitate the technique for Nage. The techniques were compressive and functional and ukes had to de-form and compress under the pressure and direction of the technique to maintain their physical integrity. This was very much the kind of ukemi we trained regularly and which I took from Sensei in regular classes. Having said that, certain techniques such as Koshi Nage and various Kokyu Nage demand the ability to take a high fall and distribute the force of the impact over a curved area through the body into the ground. So everything has its place.

Q: What is your favourite technique, and why?

A: I think all the techniques of Aikido are beautiful so no particular favourite. However, techniques explore different ranges of motion and different entry points to Uke’s attack so on some days I may walk into the Dojo feeling that I ‘need’ a particular technique to break up or unwind some tension or block in the body. Then on that day, that particular technique could be said to be my favourite.

Q: As teachers, when watching students, should we let people get things wrong for a while or step in quickly and address the issue?

A: It's about direction. If they are ‘getting it wrong’ but moving in the right direction. then I leave students alone. Getting it ‘wrong’ is feedback and making adjustments and improving is the learning process. In that sense there is not right and wrong but just learning and these judgemental terms are not so useful. However, if a student is ‘moving in the wrong direction’ or stuck in a cul de sac (for too long and does not seem to realise where he or she is) I will generally step in and correct or reorient them. One of the jobs of a teacher is to save the student time. Otherwise, I am conservative on intervention and generally demonstrate and allow the students to do their own work.

Q: How do we teach extension, grounding, kokyu to beginners?

A: I do it in two ways. First, I demonstrate and have students feel directly what is happening when I am grounded and extended or producing power through ‘kokyu’ - and when not. This gives them a feeling distinction to work with. The other is to draw their attention to these principles as being evident in other areas and activities of life: the rootedness of a great tree, the extension of a cat as it jumps onto a table top, the ‘weight underneath’ in a two year old baby sitting on the ground, the focus of a surgeon just before he makes the first incision with a scalpel, the ‘stillness in motion’ of the late and great Tetsuzan Kuroda in that endless moment before drawing the sword…The world is full of wonder when we have the eyes to see it.

Subscribe now to receive the latest edition of the TAE journal directly to your inbox by following the link here: https://mailchi.mp/5877c0cea3bd/traditionalaikidoeuropejournal