PDA

View Full Version : AikiDO or Aiki JUJUTSU?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Haole
11-26-2006, 12:47 AM
Aloha! First as this is my first post... hello forum :D

Coming from a Dan Zan Ryu Jujitsu background I am getting a little confused on what Aikido is compared to a harder style such as a "jujitsu/jujutsu" style.

When I started up in Aikido I started lurking this forum and checking out alot of Aikido videos on youtube and what not. One thing that has me a bit confused is where is the "DO"?

I've read a lot of posts about my style is more "real" then your style or how Akikdo want work in the "real word" or even worse, my aikido will kick your Aikido's butt :p

Also, it seems like most of the good aikido videos I've seen have more in common with Jujitsu then what I assumed Aikido to be.

Is there a fear in the Aikido community that it is getting to "soft" so it's going back to its Aikijujutsu's roots?

I stopped taking Dan Zan Ryu because I was more interested in a "way" then a series of techniques that will crush a guy.

Is Aikido being re-shaped or am I getting the wrong impression from the online Aikido community or do I not have a good understanding of what Aikido really is?

Mahalo

Mark

Erick Mead
11-26-2006, 03:43 PM
Aloha! Aloha. If you haven't visited Pearl City for practice, you should -- great folks. They were and I hear, still are, at the Hongwan-ji temple very near Pearl City Tavern. Assuming it still survives the neverending battle with the termite swarms.

... One thing that has me a bit confused is where is the "DO"?

Is there a fear in the Aikido community that it is getting to "soft" so it's going back to its Aikijujutsu's roots? ... I stopped taking Dan Zan Ryu because I was more interested in a "way" then a series of techniques that will crush a guy. ... Is Aikido being re-shaped or am I getting the wrong impression from the online Aikido community or do I not have a good understanding of what Aikido really is? The net is like a highly sensitive microphone -- picks up a lot of confusing detail and tends to create feedback alot. I wouldn't judge from that at all.

Aikido still has a series of techniques that will crush a guy, but we have a Way of using them to other purposes -- That is the Way -- the techniques are the paving stones, necessarily hard, needing much hammering down to set them firmly in the base and a fair bit of chipping the pointy bits off the top edges to smooth it down and fit the joints closely to those others adjoining it.

There's lots of other good aikido around some with different sets of chisels and hammers to do the polishing. That's the Way of it ...

If you go to Pearl City -- bring cold beer for afters and your in ... and tell them aloha, and mahalo nui loa for me!

NixNa
11-26-2006, 03:57 PM
Aloha mate! Welcome to the forum and enjoy your stay here. I think your right, but thats how people are lol :)

mathewjgano
11-26-2006, 04:22 PM
Coming from a Dan Zan Ryu Jujitsu background I am getting a little confused on what Aikido is compared to a harder style such as a "jujitsu/jujutsu" style.
I've been training for several years in Aikido and I still get a little confused. I think, aside from a simple name, it makes a subtle distinction from other arts, but I don't think it's holds anything exclusively, apart from its interesting history. I'd describe it as more or less the same as everything else but in different proportions.

When I started up in Aikido I started lurking this forum and checking out alot of Aikido videos on youtube and what not. One thing that has me a bit confused is where is the "DO"?
Maybe if you define to me "do" as compared to "jutsu" I can point something out, but I think the distinction between those terms doesn't necessarily reflect a distinction between the practice of individuals within a -do art and a -jutsu art.

I stopped taking Dan Zan Ryu because I was more interested in a "way" then a series of techniques that will crush a guy.
What few aikijujutsu demonstrations I've seen, they do look like Aikido to me. It looked so familiar, that watching a Daito Ryu demo for the first time made me feel compelled to bow-in and play, though I doubt that would have been greeted well. :D

Is Aikido being re-shaped or am I getting the wrong impression from the online Aikido community or do I not have a good understanding of what Aikido really is?
I've had Aikido on the brain for what is frighteningly close to 10 years now, and I can't say I understand what Aikido "really is," compared to other arts. Is it being reshaped? I think yes in that it is effected by those who practice it, but I think the universal principles involved in the concepts of efficiency (eg-creating the greatest net force by not conflicting with outside forces) and power/work will always be present.
The more I think about it, the more I think the names which we use to distinguish between various martial methods reflects its history more than anything else.
Take care!
Matt

Haole
11-26-2006, 04:39 PM
I guess to me a "do" style is more focused on the esoteric as opposed to the exoteric of a jujutsu/jujistu form.

When I use the term esoteric I don't mean it in the context of some hidden, mystical thing that only really old men and 6 month old babies understand =D

I mean it more in the context of harmonizing of the mind, body and spirit.

So is Aikido today an art of the self or is it being re-shaped with more martial and less art or, even worse, is it being tailored so that it looks good on video or at demonstrations?

Is it safe to assume that the answer is "it depends" :p

Mahalo

Mark

Chris Li
11-26-2006, 06:01 PM
Also, it seems like most of the good aikido videos I've seen have more in common with Jujitsu then what I assumed Aikido to be.

Basically speaking, Aikido is a form of jujutsu.

Is there a fear in the Aikido community that it is getting to "soft" so it's going back to its Aikijujutsu's roots?

Daito-ryu schools, like Aikido schools, vary greatly, from the very soft to the very hard. The mainline Kondo tradition in Daito-ryu isn't really that far, in "hardness", from mainline Aikikai.

Morihei Ueshiba wrote an entire book about what he thought that Aikido was, and why (and how) it ought to be practiced. He didn't talk about technique once, not even in passing.

For Erick - Don Moriyama's stiil doing fine out in Pearl City.

Best,

Chris

mathewjgano
11-26-2006, 06:13 PM
Is it safe to assume that the answer is "it depends" :p
:p dang it! That's what I was going to say! ...only I would have said it much less succinctly

Haole
11-26-2006, 06:31 PM
:p dang it! That's what I was going to say! ...only I would have said it much less succinctly


:D

Amir Krause
11-27-2006, 02:37 AM
Dear Mark

I do not think the "Do" and "Jutsu are that distinct, and I believe one should not be able to see any distinction by watching an individual practice. To my understanding, the term Aikido is a generic term for a sub-category of the Jujutsu arts, those which stress the Ai Ki principles. The same principles found in Aikido exists in other Jujutsu styles and I doubt any technique was invented specifically for Aikido.

The "Do" mostly refers to a content that exists outside of the mat, to the way a person unites mind and body and using the practice on the mat to teach his spirit to follow the same principles he practices with his body. Then again, I do believe this concept was invented in Japanese MA long before the "Do" arts, and the "Do" extension is in some way, a fashion.

Amir

Bronson
11-27-2006, 10:34 AM
Morihei Ueshiba wrote an entire book about what he thought that Aikido was, and why (and how) it ought to be practiced. He didn't talk about technique once, not even in passing.

Sooo, does this book exist in english?

Bronson

Chris Li
11-27-2006, 10:45 AM
Sooo, does this book exist in english?

Bronson

No, but the first couple of chapters of "Takemusu Aiki" are available in English on the Aikido Journal website. There's also a good collection of the founder's articles from the "Aikido Shinbun" published as "Aikido Shinzui", also in Japanese. Unfortunately, very little of what Morihei Ueshiba wrote ever got translated into English. Almost everything available is short quotes and scattered excerpts.

Best,

Chris

Bronson
11-27-2006, 10:48 AM
Thanks Chris

Bronson

Don_Modesto
11-27-2006, 05:53 PM
Coming from a Dan Zan Ryu Jujitsu background I am getting a little confused on what Aikido is compared to a harder style such as a "jujitsu/jujutsu" style.Welcome to the cacophony. There's lots of talk about this difference.

Friday's article is to the point:
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11338

Qatana
11-27-2006, 06:49 PM
Most of the senseis I am familiar with in the CAA and ASU most definitly teach aikido as Way. My dojo is vas concerned with energy awareness and practical philosophy as it is with technique. Maybe even moreso.

Don_Modesto
11-27-2006, 07:35 PM
What would it even mean to teach it as a way rather than a jutsu?

More talk/lectures on morality/spirit?

Watered down technique?

...

Haole
11-27-2006, 07:46 PM
What would it even mean to teach it as a way rather than a jutsu?

More talk/lectures on morality/spirit?

Watered down technique?

...

As a vehicle for self development as opposed to realistic battle training?

Hell, you could look at MMA as a "Do" art if you wanted too. Though I don't think they MMA practitioners would appreciate the analogy :D

Also, thanks for the link to the other post, I'll have to look into those publications.

Chris Li
11-27-2006, 09:03 PM
As a vehicle for self development as opposed to realistic battle training?

I would say that it is the element of "realistic battle training" (so far as that goes) that makes it a vehicle for self development at all. Remove that and you have something else - not necessarily bad, just not Budo.

Best,

Chris

Haole
11-27-2006, 09:44 PM
I would say that it is the element of "realistic battle training" (so far as that goes) that makes it a vehicle for self development at all. Remove that and you have something else - not necessarily bad, just not Budo.

Best,

Chris

I think I disagree on this a little. Budo arts are very much separated from their battlefield pasts. How much street relevance does Kyudo have today? I don't think you would see Kyudo artist bragging that they are as effective as a bow hunter against deer. Then again this is the internet so it is possible :D

Also, aren't, calligraphy, painting, tea ceremony and poetry historically part of Budo?

Also, if "realistic battle training" develops character then my infantry days must have made me one hell of a character (please dont miss read this, this is very much tongue in cheek) :p

Chris Li
11-27-2006, 10:40 PM
I think I disagree on this a little. Budo arts are very much separated from their battlefield pasts. How much street relevance does Kyudo have today? I don't think you would see Kyudo artist bragging that they are as effective as a bow hunter against deer. Then again this is the internet so it is possible :D

See http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/jjrs/pdf/586.pdf for a discussion of the exaggeration of the spirituality of Kyudo. Of course, some people do argue that Kyudo is no longer a budo - I would say that the martial elements are still clear (and have nothing to do with deer hunting), if heavily ritualized.


Also, aren't, calligraphy, painting, tea ceremony and poetry historically part of Budo?

Well, no, although those were all arts commonly studied in the warrior class.

Also, if "realistic battle training" develops character then my infantry days must have made me one hell of a character (please dont miss read this, this is very much tongue in cheek) :p

Writing spelling words 100 times may not develop your character either, but that doesn't mean that Japanese calligraphy is any less of a spiritual practice. Look at it this way - would calligraphy still be calligraphy if you took away the writing? It might still be great stuff, but it would certainly be something different.

Best,

Chris

Gernot Hassenpflug
11-27-2006, 11:46 PM
Calligraphy, flower arranging, tea ceremony, aikido, etc., are the same. The appreciation is absolute, not relative, in that once the invisible (coordination if you like, in any case, a very specific method of action, free but not free in the sense of anything goes) behind the visible has been perceived, then discussion of quality can take on an equal footing between members of any of these groups. I've heard this from Seiseki Abe sensei talking about aikido and calligraphy (he calls the invisible "ki" and "kokyu"), and read it in Testsuzan Kuroda's books (he refers to the invisible in sword school terms as "centerline", "floating body", and "vanishing movement" based on "realization coming from kata-based training"). The terminology no doubt differs but he brings in examples of people who've never done what he does who can point to the essential quality right away from their own, different, training background (be it ink painting, calligraphy, other martial arts, or other traditional arts using the same absolute paradigm).

Chris Li
11-28-2006, 12:01 AM
Calligraphy, flower arranging, tea ceremony, aikido, etc., are the same.

They're the same and not the same. They may produce many similar qualities, but many of the methods and results are quite different. Aikido may teach you to appreciate calligraphy, but it doesn't necessarily teach you how to draw a character well. Being a tea master doesn't automatically teach you how to execute sankyo well. Sure, there's crossover, expecially in the results, but that's not quite the same as being identical. Bicycling and jogging both increase your endurance and lower body strength, but that doesn't mean that they are the same thing - just related.

My argument was simply this - Aikido without the martial element is no longer budo, and Aikido that is not budo is no longer Aikido, but something else (Nihon Buyo maybe?). It may well be something great (or not) but it won't be the same.

Best,

Chris

Haole
11-28-2006, 12:58 AM
I think what Gernot and myself are alluding to is the, dare I say, "chi hugger" zen aspects of the Budo arts.

Yes, yes I know, Aikido doesn't really have a zen background but humor me ok :D

For me personally, what attracted me to Aikido definitely wasn't some illusion about it being effective in the "real world". Hell, golf could be shoe horned into an effective fighting style but I think you would probably be better served buying some pepper spray.

For me personally I'm more interested in an art that is going to allow me to practice for years and years without requiring knee surgery at 50 that is also focused on internal rather then external development.



Writing spelling words 100 times may not develop your character either, but that doesn't mean that Japanese calligraphy is any less of a spiritual practice. Look at it this way - would calligraphy still be calligraphy if you took away the writing? It might still be great stuff, but it would certainly be something different.


Nice analogy by the way. It makes a valid point.

Chris Li
11-28-2006, 01:33 AM
I think what Gernot and myself are alluding to is the, dare I say, "chi hugger" zen aspects of the Budo arts.

Yes, yes I know, Aikido doesn't really have a zen background but humor me ok :D

For me personally, what attracted me to Aikido definitely wasn't some illusion about it being effective in the "real world". Hell, golf could be shoe horned into an effective fighting style but I think you would probably be better served buying some pepper spray.

For me personally I'm more interested in an art that is going to allow me to practice for years and years without requiring knee surgery at 50 that is also focused on internal rather then external development.

Morihei Ueshiba was eminently practical and effective - he also wrote and said things that would make tree huggers look conservative. Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?

Ueshiba trained some of his hardest stylists (such as Morihiro Saito and Hiroshi Isoyama) when he was in his 80's and starting out each day with a couple of hours of prayer. Yoshino Sugino's training, for that matter, was extremely martial - and that went on until he was well over 100. Just because training is martial doesn't mean that it has to be destructive to the body.

I don't know about you, but I don't carry pepper spray with me, and I don't personally know anyone who does - but my sankyo never leaves my side :).

In any case, it's not really about the most effective, the most deadly fighter. I can enjoy basketball without being Michael Jordan, and I can benefit from martial training without being Sylvester Stallone. IMO, Morihei Ueshiba had a vision of Aikido as a form of misogi through budo shugyo, using the stress of training in budo to produce the intensity that encourages spiritual cultivation. Now, there are other ways to produce that intensity, ones that I'm sure are equally effective. But they are just that - other ways, other methods.

Best,

Chris

Haole
11-28-2006, 01:39 AM
Morihei Ueshiba was eminently practical and effective - he also wrote and said things that would make tree huggers look conservative. Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?

Ueshiba trained some of his hardest stylists (such as Morihiro Saito and Hiroshi Isoyama) when he was in his 80's and starting out each day with a couple of hours of prayer. Yoshino Sugino's training, for that matter, was extremely martial - and that went on until he was well over 100. Just because training is martial doesn't mean that it has to be destructive to the body.

I don't know about you, but I don't carry pepper spray with me, and I don't personally know anyone who does - but my sankyo never leaves my side :).

In any case, it's not really about the most effective, the most deadly fighter. I can enjoy basketball without being Michael Jordan, and I can benefit from martial training without being Sylvester Stallone. IMO, Morihei Ueshiba had a vision of Aikido as a form of misogi through budo shugyo, using the stress of training in budo to produce the intensity that encourages spiritual cultivation. Now, there are other ways to produce that intensity, ones that I'm sure are equally effective. But they are just that - other ways, other methods.

Best,

Chris

Meh, we are on the same wave length :)

Alec Corper
11-28-2006, 03:33 AM
IMO, Morihei Ueshiba had a vision of Aikido as a form of misogi through budo shugyo, using the stress of training in budo to produce the intensity that encourages spiritual cultivation. Now, there are other ways to produce that intensity, ones that I'm sure are equally effective. But they are just that - other ways, other methods.

I think this nicely sums up my thinking on this. If you remove the stressors, the path to harmony is entirely different. To achieve stillness in the midst of a maelstrom, excellent practice.

Gernot Hassenpflug
11-28-2006, 06:49 AM
They're the same and not the same. They may produce many similar qualities, but many of the methods and results are quite different. Aikido may teach you to appreciate calligraphy, but it doesn't necessarily teach you how to draw a character well. Being a tea master doesn't automatically teach you how to execute sankyo well. Sure, there's crossover, expecially in the results, but that's not quite the same as being identical. Bicycling and jogging both increase your endurance and lower body strength, but that doesn't mean that they are the same thing - just related.

Yes, good points all, I won't argue with that. My point and that of my sources is that the same body training is required to practice all of those I mentioned (bicycling and jogging don't count because noone of high level in those sports predicates their high level on the same things the traditional arts in Japan do), and to achieve the respective high levels in those arts. This underlying mechanism is visible to anyone who has it, even though they may not be able to do the specific techniques of the specific art without practice. The results are outer appearance, but the idea is to look behind that and discover what is invisible (according to Kuroda, in relation to body training by kata. First the eyes must be trained to see what is not visible, then the body can be trained to try and do the same.)

mathewjgano
11-28-2006, 01:16 PM
Morihei Ueshiba was eminently practical and effective - he also wrote and said things that would make tree huggers look conservative. Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?

Hear hear! :D

Don_Modesto
11-28-2006, 05:49 PM
I think I disagree on this a little. Budo arts are very much separated from their battlefield pasts.Karl Friday's argument is that Bujutsu, too, was "very much separated from [its] battlefield past."

Don_Modesto
11-28-2006, 05:57 PM
My argument was simply this - Aikido without the martial element is no longer budo, and Aikido that is not budo is no longer Aikido, but something else (Nihon Buyo maybe?). It may well be something great (or not) but it won't be the same.

A "shinto" scholar named Fabio Rambelli wrote an article called "Honji suijaku at work: religion, economics, and ideology in pre-modern Japan" that relates the induction into MICHI of disparate practicies, from poetry and dance to carpentry. At least in the case of the latter, carpentry as the profane avatar of the divine--much in the pattern of Osensei's aikido, as a representation of the universe--could not stray far from utility notwithstanding its spiritual aspects or the whole edifice would come crashing down, literally. I think there's no inherent contradiction between utility and spirituality. (In BUDDHAS AND KAMI IN JAPAN: Honji
suijaku as a combinatory paradigm, Edited by Mark
Teeuwen and Fabio Rambelli.)

This has been discussed in the context of Original Enlightenment, in particular, but Doogen's writings also address it, and probably lots others that I'm unfamiliar with. (An area for Fred Little to comment on, not myself.)