PDA

View Full Version : Martial artist / Aikidoka


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


Ghost Fox
02-07-2002, 08:53 AM
Do you think it is possible to be an aikidoka without being a martial artist, and is it possible to be a great aikidoka without being a martial artist?

What's the difference between an aikidoka and a martial artist and where is there overlap and divergence?

Just wondering.

:triangle: :circle: :square:

Chuck.Gordon
02-07-2002, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by Ghost Fox

Do you think it is possible to be an aikidoka without being a martial artist,

No. Though some far-fringe aiki-fruity aikidoka might LIKE to shed the martial aspects ...

However, if you shed the martial, you are no longer doing budo and aikido without budo is simply a form of dance. IMNSHO, of course.

and is it possible to be a great aikidoka without being a martial artist?

See above. And why the heck anyone would WANT to take the martial aspects out, I'll never understand ...

What's the difference between an aikidoka and a martial artist

Umm. None?

and where is there overlap and divergence?

Aikido is budo. Budo is martial. A practitioner of aikido practices budo, like it or not.

Odd question. Curious ... why do you ask? What do you think about it?

Chuck

Tim Griffiths
02-07-2002, 09:31 AM
No, no, and "necessary but not sufficent and vice versa".

Aikido is a martial art. This is not a grey area. Someone who does aikido is doing a martial art. Someone who practices a martial art is a martial artist, good or bad.
To say something else you have to twist one of the definitions so far as to make it unrecognisable, or useless.

Even Koichi Tohei made a distinction between teaching 'ki movement' and teaching aikido (although initally more distinction than he would have liked :D ).

You can do a physical activity that follows aiki principles, and that could technically be called aiki-do, but its not what is generally understood by the term, and it isn't aikido. You can practice what you like. Hell, if you lived next door to me I'd give you a lift to the club to do it. But if it isn't aikido, it isn't aikido.

Now, with a degree of sophistry, I could say that as there should be no conflict in aikido, and as 'martial' (of, pertaining to, or suited for, war) refers directly to conflict, then aikido is not technically a martial art, and so an aikidoist is not really a martial artist. I could say that, but I won't, because a) its silly and b) I would be wrong. I'm sure it doesn't mean someone else will, though.

Why do you ask?

Tim

jimvance
02-07-2002, 09:34 AM
Do you think it is possible to be a duck without being a bird, and is it possible to be a great quacker without being a bird?

What's the difference between a duck and a bird and where is there overlap and divergence?

Just wondering.

Mad Lib Editing by Jim Vance

Creature_of_the_id
02-07-2002, 10:33 AM
depends on how you limit your view of what aikido is and what martial arts are.
I have personaly experienced aikido more outside of the dojo in a non combatant way than I have inside the dojo.
inside the dojo I learn techniques, that is the martial arts side of it.
when I forget techniques then I am able to experience aikido. this can be applied in a martial form. The martial form is probably the most obvious demonstration of its principles as it shows in a physical, visible way what aikido is. but aikido is not limited to the dojo, aikido is not limited. the principles of non resistance do not have to only be applied to martial situations and physical violence, they can also be applied in any given situation.
they lead towards an experience that cannot be defined here on these forums.

I dont necissarily go to the dojo to learn aikido, I go to the dojo to learn technique and then through that apply aikido physically.

so yes, aikido is a martial art, but it is so much more than that. I can take the martial aspect out of aikido and still experience the principles involved, I can also ignore the principles and focus on the technique in aikido.

I think the answer to your question lies in whether or not you define aikido to be a set of principles or a set of techniques.

everyone will have their own interpretation, which is just as valid as my own. but this is what I have found from my own limited experiences.

thanks
Kev

Edward
02-07-2002, 11:50 AM
Well, if you go back to the founder's words, he said clearly that Aikido is the true Budo.
Obviously we are doing one of the most refined, sophisticated and modern martial arts. The true Budo is the one which preserves life not takes it away. It is by being able to cause damage but choosing not to that you can be a real Martial Artist.


Of course, Aikido is also the Martial Art which is most Law-friendly. By not causing damage, you stay away from jail ;)

Cheers,
Edward

PeterR
02-07-2002, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Edward
Well, if you go back to the founder's words, he said clearly that Aikido is the true Budo..No disrespect intended but I always found the true Budo statement to be a bit of salesmanship.

Obviously we are doing one of the most refined, sophisticated and modern martial arts.Well I happen to agree that Aikido is wonderfully refined and sophisticated although I might quibble about modern. I definately have a problem with obviously if by that you mean because of the above quote.

The idea of trancending destruction runs throughout much of Japanese budo.

Chuck.Gordon
02-07-2002, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by Edward

Well, if you go back to the founder's words, he said clearly that Aikido is the true Budo.

Wellll, OK, he said that. He also said a lot of other things that we probably oughtn't take exactly literally.

Aikido is _a_ budo. It was for Ueshiba _his_ true budo. It is not for all beings _the_ true budo. The challenge we have as students of budo is to find, each of us, our OWN true budo.

Obviously we are doing one of the most refined, sophisticated and modern martial arts.

Hoo boy. Have you ever seen really, really good judo? Takenouchi Ryu jujutsu? Kashima Shinryu? There are many budo out there that easily rival (and some, I might venture surpass) aikido in terms of refinement, sophistication, etc etc.

Aikido is a great budo, don't mistake me, but it is not the ultimate budo. It might be for _you_ and that's fine. However, to make such a statement: 'we are doing one of the most refined, sophisticated and modern martial arts' ... sheesh. Dunno, that's not even close to the mark, I fear.

The true Budo is the one which preserves life not takes it away. It is by being able to cause damage but choosing not to that you can be a real Martial Artist.

Sentiments found in MANY of the koryu and older gendai budo. There is nothing to be found in aikido that was not already found in the koryu and gendai budo from which it was synthesized.

Katsujinken/satsujinken had been around a long time before Ueshiba took his first judo lesson way back when.

Over the years, Ueshiba developed a fine budo, one well-suited for self-examination, self-improvement and (as a bonus) for self defense (on many levels). He took elements of many disparate things and molded them into a cohesive whole that suited his particular (and often damned quirky) personality and then offered that to the world.

He was no Messiah and his art is not Gospel. He was a funny, spiritual, grumpy, feisty, weird old man in his later years. He spent hours talking about bringing the kami into his body in order to do his aikido.

He went on lengthy diatribes about how his art took budo to a new level (well, hell, so did a lot of other old guys who were putting similar arts together).

Kano wasn't as spiritual. He was a highly-educated, internationall respected educator. His judo shows that influence. Kendo and seitei iaido are budo built by committee and that shows. Aikido was built by a man who was quite a brawler in his own right, not particularly well-educated, deeply influenced by a couple of very, very weird characters, who had visions, talked to the kami, and lived a very strange life.

To say aikido is the most sophisticated budo? No. Not even close. It is complex and deep, but there are other budo more complex, other budo offering philosophies that are just as sophisticated and valid.

Of course, Aikido is also the Martial Art which is most Law-friendly. By not causing damage, you stay away from jail

Please look at that statement very, very carefully. Aikido can potentially cause GREAT damage. People are hurt on the mat in dojo across the world every day.

Aikido techniques are not safe, non-violent, atacker-friendly. Using aikido technique on someone not trained to take ukemi can be disastrous.

Chuck

Ghost Fox
02-08-2002, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by Tim Griffiths
No, no, and "necessary but not sufficent and vice versa".

Aikido is a martial art. This is not a grey area. Someone who does aikido is doing a martial art. Someone who practices a martial art is a martial artist, good or bad.
To say something else you have to twist one of the definitions so far as to make it unrecognisable, or useless.

Why do you ask?

Tim

First, Aikido is a martial art (budo). I wouldn't be so religously devoted to the art if I thought it wouldn't be effective (with another 10 years of practice;) . I really can't wait for those FORCE powers evileyes to kick in and the gods to flow through me (I'll save that for another post.) My question is not about the art but the artist.

I think the latest poll got me to thinking. If a person goes to an art class to learn how to paint and all he does for 10 years is through paint on the canvass (I know this too can be art in a abstract sense) and pound clay is he an artist? Even if he's enjoying himself and loves to go to class, does the fact that he can't paint a simple flower or sculpt a bust exclude him from being an artist?

If a person goes to a dojo and practices for 10 years without martial intent is s/he an artist ? I know people whos wazas are beautiful, who roll without making a sound, but there is no Thunder (for lack of a better term) in their techniques. Is this person a martial artist? Is a person who goes to the park and pracitces tai chi with a martial artist. I'm not knocking Tai Chi. Chen, Wu and Sun Style tai chi are quite effectvive, but are what the people pracitcing in the park a martial art. If a technique is done without martial intend and just for the beauty (I'm saying this is wrong) is it budo?

Please understand I'm not trying to knock anyone. I'm just trying to get things straight in my mind. I tend to get very focus on a thing and tend to exclude other peoples point of view.

Just another man looking for a better way.

Edward
02-08-2002, 10:06 AM
Hi Peter and Chuck,

The true Budo: What I meant is that since the founder of Aikido called it Budo and intended it to be Budo, so probably it is Budo :) To say Aikido is The true Budo is an exaggeration and I agree with you.

One of the most sophisticated....: Chuck, I never said The most sophisticated. I'm sure there are other sophisticated MA, but Aikido happens to be perhaps the most known. Honestly I've never heard about the arts you mention :)

Life preserving and law-friendliness: It is true that life preservation is the main theme for all Koryu arts, but it seems that aikido teachings emphasize this the most, I guess, not only in words but in practice as well. As for damage potential, it seems to me that Aikido techniques have been modified from their original jujutsu versions in a way to make them much less dangerous. I'm sure that a skilled Aikidoka can reverse this and use Aikido techniques in a damaging way if he wanted to. However, if Aikido techniques as taught and practiced were as dangerous as you say, half of the Tomiki Aikido practitioners would be in hospitals.

I just wanted to clarify my point of view.

Best regards,
Edward

Sid
02-08-2002, 11:58 AM
Thats like saying, "Is tai chi a martial art"?
or "is someone who does tai chi a martial artist"?

The answer, generally, is a profound no, because some idiot got hold of it and got rid of every last drop of martial intent.

Thus, most tai chi "master"'s would get severly hurt in a fight.

All I can do is pray that aikido doesn't go the same way.

sid

shihonage
02-08-2002, 01:23 PM
You read my mind, Sid.

Andy
02-08-2002, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by Sid
Thus, most tai chi "master"'s would get severly hurt in a fight.
How long have you trained in tai chi? How many tai chi people have you challenged to a fight?

PeterR
02-08-2002, 05:53 PM
One of my Aikido sempai (personal interest sempai) also trains in tai chi. I once made similar comments about tai chi and martial intent and was soon corrected.

Originally posted by Andy

How long have you trained in tai chi? How many tai chi people have you challenged to a fight?

jk
02-08-2002, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by Sid
Thats like saying, "Is tai chi a martial art"?
or "is someone who does tai chi a martial artist"?

The answer, generally, is a profound no, because some idiot got hold of it and got rid of every last drop of martial intent.

Thus, most tai chi "master"'s would get severly hurt in a fight.

All I can do is pray that aikido doesn't go the same way.

sid

I applaud your desire to present a strong opinion, but wouldn't it be more diplomatic to say "most of the tai chi I have observed/practiced contains very little martial intent?"

I'm sure you can find examples of tai chi with plenty of martial intent, if you are so inclined.

At any rate, doesn't the subject we're supposed to be discussing become a matter of semantics? As in what's your definition of an "aikidoka?"

Regards,

Sid
02-08-2002, 11:19 PM
Ok, slightly OT, but the end applies to aikido.

Originally posted by jk


How long have you trained in tai chi? How many tai chi people have you challenged to a fight?

Regards,

Approximately 2.5 years, in both Yang and Chen style, under my aikido sensei, and an ex-chinese national champion(in forms).

I haven't challenged many tai chi people to a fight, but I have heard and seen some really disturbing things.

Firstly, that practicing a form( like a kata, a set of martial movements ), will teach you everything you need to know to defend yourself - which, from my own experience, does not happen.

Secondly, that pushing hands ( a tai hci exercise ), is the pinncale of tai chi self defense training. Nonsense - there are two person fighting sets ( known as san sau).

Thirdly, the emphasis on tai chi self defense, seems to be on pushing an attacker away. You can push someone rather hard using tai chi, but they will just get back up and hurt you badly.

I suggest, if youre game, to have a look at two sites -

Firstly, Peter Lim's excellent tai chi history site, where he mentions something called small frame practice - a martially
intended practice - and fa jin -bascially, how to strike an attacker in a relaxed way. Interesting how few ever mention this.
http://web.singnet.com.sg/~limttk/
Small frame - http://web.singnet.com.sg/~limttk/yshsmfr.htm

Secondly, have a look at Erle Montaigue's site. He teaches "Old Yang style Tai Chi" - in other words, tai chi with its full martial intent. Have a look at "The demsie of taijiqaun". http://www.taijiworld.com/Articles/demise.html
Before you dismiss this guy as a fraud, or something, I suggest that you have a look at what the Chinese Wushu Organization, in China, thought of him.


"One of my Aikido sempai (personal interest sempai) also trains in tai chi. I once made similar comments about tai chi and martial intent and was soon corrected"

Obviously, you can find martial intent when you look for it. But how many tai chi people go out, and and train in it? The same applies to aikido, methinks. You can ask most people who have done form work to give you an application, but has it been learnt to a point where it can be used properly, or is it a nice added extra?

While this might be a bit off-topic :), i think that aikidokas should make a concerted effort to prevent this from happening. Look at this week's poll.

Thanks, sorry for the lack of tact,
Sid

Sid
02-09-2002, 12:43 PM
Come on guys, don't tell me I stifled the topic. It has so much potential!

Sid

Chris Li
02-09-2002, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by Edward
Hi Peter and Chuck,

The true Budo: What I meant is that since the founder of Aikido called it Budo and intended it to be Budo, so probably it is Budo :) To say Aikido is The true Budo is an exaggeration and I agree with you.

As a note, M. Ueshiba would never have said "THE true Budo", because there is no "the" in Japanese. He would have said "Aikido is true budo", which has very different implications.

Best,

Chris

Thalib
02-09-2002, 06:24 PM
Martial artist and Aikidoka... Hmmm...

Now you got me thinking... both implies that I do it for a living... I don't make money out of either of them.

I have life outside of Aikido but I have accepted Aikido as a part of my daily life. Sometimes I do use the word Aikidoka loosely, just as someone that practices Aikido, but I can't call myself a true Aikidoka.

Everytime I go to an Aikido practice, I don't see it as just practice, I see it as a class where I learn new lessons. I would rather say that I am a "student of martial arts" specifically a "student of Aikido", and I will forever be a student that will never actually graduates no matter what dan grade I am in.

I don't think there any longer that many true bujutsuka/budoka anymore in the world today. For we live in a relatively more peaceful world where learning the martial arts are no longer seen as a necessity (did I spell this correctly?).


P.S. to Dagore-san:

I believe the martial values of Tai Chi have either been long gone or been kept secret by certain masters. Only the excercises survived for health purposes. When it first concepted, I do believe Tai Chi is a martial art.

As for how many people that learn Aikido to fight? It is sad to say, in my country, people that learn martial arts, most learn it for the fighting/combat values. People do get out there and fight, and what happens? Their frustration gets in the way, and it's not Aikido anymore, it looks more like freestyle wrestling (not even JuJutsu let alone Aiki-JuJutsu).

But what I am proud of, those who takes it for self defense values, have been pretty successful. There is a lot of confessionals from those who have delt with pick pockets, muggers, street thugs that's just looking for a fight, and even knife wielding angry mobs (this particular one is my sensei's personal experience).

Edward
02-09-2002, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by Chris Li


As a note, M. Ueshiba would never have said "THE true Budo", because there is no "the" in Japanese. He would have said "Aikido is true budo", which has very different implications.

Best,

Chris

I agree with you, but this seems to be the standard translation since I've seen it in several places... I noticed that the Japanese usually add a lot of unnecessary "the" when they speek english probably because it's difficult for them to judge when and when not to use it. Same is true for Chinese and South-East Asian people. Maybe the translator had the same trouble :)

Cheers,
Edward

Edward
02-09-2002, 11:22 PM
Regarding the Tai-Chi issue, my personal opinion is that it is definitely a MA. You can see in Aikido that the most basic and simple techniques, the ones with the least martial intent, such as Kokyu Ho for instance, are the most benefitial ones. After practicing "meaningless" form diligently for ages, one becomes naturally a "master". Tai-Chi takes this concept at an even higher level since exercices are not paired. That's why "mastering" Tai-Chi takes a life time, but I have no doubt that Tai-Chi masters are highly efficient martial artists. Aikido and Tai-Chi are known to be internal MA, which efficiency looks doubtful in the beginning (the first 20 years or so), but in the long run prove to be superior to other more basic arts.

It is curious to notice that techniques which are directly meant for self-defence, and practitioners who put emphazis in their training on such techniques, instead of the more abstract but purposeful techniques, do not take go very far in terms of mind-body control, and technical over physical, or Ki ...etc.

Sorry for this very incoherent post. I hope you'll understand anything :)

Cheers,
Edward

Chris Li
02-10-2002, 01:01 AM
Originally posted by Edward


I agree with you, but this seems to be the standard translation since I've seen it in several places... I noticed that the Japanese usually add a lot of unnecessary "the" when they speek english probably because it's difficult for them to judge when and when not to use it. Same is true for Chinese and South-East Asian people. Maybe the translator had the same trouble :)

Cheers,
Edward

Most of the translations come from just a few sources and are copied over and over, perpetuating the same mistakes. In any case there's a danger in trying to analyze translated sources too closely because they can never completely duplicate the original.

Best,

Chris

Ghost Fox
02-11-2002, 09:01 AM
Every morning thousands (if not millions) of people wakeup early in China and go to the park to practice tai chi. I doubt if after 10, 15, 20 years of such practice that can be considered a martial artist or properly defend themselves in a fight.

Tai Chi originated in Wu Mountain; the style was so powerful that tai chi chuan translates into Great Ultimate Boxing (in some definitions). The problem that arouse is as generations past and more branch schools were developed the martial aspects were removed from tai chi. The majority of people who practice tai chi today learn a style that is lacking in martial intent. There are a few styles (Wu and Chen Style) of tai chi around today that have preserved the martial aspect of the art. A matter of fact I was seriously considering studying under Master Ren an excellent instructor of Chen Style Tai Chi before deciding on aikido. The reason that so many people take tai chi lightly is that the vast majority of people studying tai chi study a form with little martial value.

What is to stop that from happening to aikido? Is it happening already?

Martial intent is not about being angry and wanting to kill everybody insight in order to prove that your kung fu is the best. It is like being a lion. A lion is a natural predator. It dominates all it surveys, and yet it does not go around boasting that it is a lion. It is at the top of its food chain (except for humans). It has claws, strong powerful muscles and jaws. It is aggressive without being angry, it kills without joy or remorse. It is a lion; it is a martial animal. My feeling is that many aikidoka think that it is wrong to be martial. That to be martial is to be violent and arrogant. There is nothing wrong with pride. There is nothing wrong with bleeding for your art. There is nothing wrong with trying to be the best.

Does the world still need martial artist? Is there a place for warriors and heroes in this world?


:triangle: :circle: :square:

Mares
02-11-2002, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by Ghost Fox

There is nothing wrong with trying to be the best.



I know this is a selective quote and I'm not sure exactly what you meant, but I believe that trying to be 'The Best' is way too subjective and not worth thinking about. However, trying to be 'the best you can be' is a more productive and noble pursuit.

Thalib
02-12-2002, 12:48 AM
You got me thinking again Lost-san...

Ah... so Tai-Chi originally came from Bu-Tong-Pai (Wu Tang Clan - not the rapper group). Anyway...

Now I see what you mean by differing between an Aikidoka and a martial artist. Your analogy of the lion as a "martial animal" interests me. But it is still an animal nonetheless. We humans are blessed/cursed with strong emotions. It is our strongest yet it is our weakest.

I try to keep a sense of honor, not pride. The word of my sensei that sticks to me even to this day is, "If I have to die by the sword, I will do so with honor." (Not meaning killing myself or recklessly engaging a fight). I will bleed for the protection of the ones I loved, and I will bleed for my honor and the honor of my family.

Warriors and heroes? I know my heart cries out, but my body lays still.

Ghost Fox
02-12-2002, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by Mares


However, trying to be 'the best you can be' is a more productive and noble pursuit.

I think I can do a lot better than that. When I can wrestle with angels and strike awe into the hearts of the gods and fear into the hearts of daemons maybe I will be good enough.

There can be only one.
Connor MacLeod
Highlander

Ghost Fox
02-12-2002, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by Thalib

Now I see what you mean by differing between an Aikidoka and a martial artist.


I see most of the aikidokas leave the mat and forget all that they have learned. It is amazing to go into a changing room with other aikidokas. Some of the technically strongest, more radiant aikidokas almost shrink when they are off the mat. Their posture slumps, there ki becomes withdrawn, they become confrontational with others.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying go out into the world and strike someone down if they don't get out of your path like the samurai of old. I am saying be humble but strong.

I've lived on the mean streets of Brooklyn almost all my life. I'm not a big dog, not by a longshot. I don't go around stompin' on other people. I keep my head down and try to live my life in a peaceful and helpful way. But I carry my aikido on the street, and people sense it. The sense my Zanshin, my awareness. They sense my martial intent. They know I'm a lion not a sheep. I have nothing to prove I keep walking and they let me pass. Unfortunately most victims of violent crimes carry themselves like victims.

Most aikidokas off the mat don't carry themselves like martial artist.




Your analogy of the lion as a "martial animal" interests me. But it is still an animal nonetheless. We humans are blessed/cursed with strong emotions. It is our strongest yet it is our weakest.


Well, I personally think that 95% of the people in this world are no better than human animals (Myself included, although I'm raging against the dying of the light). A human being is a right you earn by years of constant struggle and dedication to becoming a human being. A child when it is born has infinite potential, but it is initially just an animal or should I say acting solely out of the animal (animus/anima) part of its spirit. It is by being in a healthy and safe societal structure that it learns to embrace its higher spiritual faculties (Intellect, Love, Mercy, Justice, Balance, etc…).

Animals have emotions (feelings); they care about their masters, the members of their packs. They feel sadness when someone close to them die, and anger at someone who hurts one of their own. Emotions are nothing but a combination of biochemical and psychic responses to a situation, an impulse a force.

A human being on the other hand has to option to exercise "free will". They can decide to act from their baser instincts (R-complex in the brain) or from the divine shard (soul). They can decide to do what's right. For the most part people don't exercise free will, what they do is rationalize desires/emotions.

Unfortunately in the "modern/civilized" world (and I use the term very loosely) we live in a society where the consumer is king. Were we are bombarded with an endless stream of mass media hype. We are taught to embrace/channel our wants into mass consumption, keeping up with Mr. Ms. Jones. Spiritual and personal development is almost nonexistent. What matter is producing better citizens (by that I mean better consumers), new cogs for the ever expansive machine (Coming to an "underdeveloped" country near you, to destroy your happy and yet "wrong" way of life.)

(Okay Mr. Lost lets step of the soapbox slowly and quietly and we can give you a nice new jacket and show you to your new padded room.) :freaky:




Warriors and heroes? I know my heart cries out, but my body lays still.

Amen

:triangle: :circle: :square:

Peace and blessings.

Thalib
02-12-2002, 10:03 AM
Maybe it would be better to ask the question, "Do you practice Aikido in daily life?" (not just on the mat).

For me, that answer would be, "I'm starting to."

Relaxing, keeping one point, keeping one mind and body, and extending Ki, in order to learn all of those, I have to try to practice it in daily life. But now, I have trouble on opening doors. I am some how never satisfied on how I open a door, any door, I always feel that it is the hardest keeping all of the above.

Now, I pay attention on how I stand and walk, how I sit, even when I pick up a glass to drink. I'm not at the level at being able to keep those principles while asleep yet.

shihonage
02-12-2002, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by Thalib
I will bleed for the protection of the ones I loved, and I will bleed for my honor and the honor of my family.


Not bleeding is good too.

JJF
02-13-2002, 04:29 AM
Hi Damion!
Great post. I can't help noticing your description of walking down the road and showing your martial intent. What I've been discussing with my sensei is the ´good vibrations' one can eminate while walking down the street (please forgive if I'm sounding too 'californish' here :)). I agree that the first thing that creates a victim is looking like a victim, but instead of looking like a lion, I would prefer to look like perhaps a kind elephant (I'm around 185 pounds anyway ;)). Maybe we talk about the same thing but what I'm getting at is, that if your radiance gives the impression of a warrior with a mighty power kept under a lid, then you create nothing good - just fear or unease. If you on the other hand give the impression of being a happy, ballanced well ajusted (sp.) person/creature that smiles to the world, then you can perhpaps create a good feeling of harmony in the world surrounding you.

So while I basically agree with you, I believe there is a significant difference between creating fear and respect, but maybe It's just me. Maybe it's just because I come from a small country, where we have very little random violence compared to what I believe you have in Brooklyn,

Ghost Fox
02-13-2002, 06:54 AM
Originally posted by shihonage


Not bleeding is good too.

But the Gods of Aikido and the spirit of the mat needs an offering of blood from time to time to remain strong and appeased.:D

:triangle: :circle: :square:

Ghost Fox
02-13-2002, 07:38 AM
Originally posted by JJF
Hi Damion!
Great post. I can't help noticing your description of walking down the road and showing your martial intent. What I've been discussing with my sensei is the ´good vibrations' one can eminate while walking down the street (please forgive if I'm sounding too 'californish' here :)). I agree that the first thing that creates a victim is looking like a victim, but instead of looking like a lion, I would prefer to look like perhaps a kind elephant (I'm around 185 pounds anyway ;)). Maybe we talk about the same thing but what I'm getting at is, that if your radiance gives the impression of a warrior with a mighty power kept under a lid, then you create nothing good - just fear or unease. If you on the other hand give the impression of being a happy, ballanced well ajusted (sp.) person/creature that smiles to the world, then you can perhpaps create a good feeling of harmony in the world surrounding you.
,

My aikido side agrees with you completely. There are days where I try to radiate joyful energy, but my conditioning get the better of me.

Besides I prefer to think of myself as a force of nature rather than an animal. Like a flowing river, or better yet a flowing river of lava, fluid and all consuming.
evileyes

Ghost Fox
02-13-2002, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by JJF
Hi Damion!
Great post. I can't help noticing your description of walking down the road and showing your martial intent. What I've been discussing with my sensei is the ´good vibrations' one can eminate while walking down the street (please forgive if I'm sounding too 'californish' here :)). I agree that the first thing that creates a victim is looking like a victim, but instead of looking like a lion, I would prefer to look like perhaps a kind elephant (I'm around 185 pounds anyway ;)). Maybe we talk about the same thing but what I'm getting at is, that if your radiance gives the impression of a warrior with a mighty power kept under a lid, then you create nothing good - just fear or unease. If you on the other hand give the impression of being a happy, ballanced well ajusted (sp.) person/creature that smiles to the world, then you can perhpaps create a good feeling of harmony in the world surrounding you.
,

My aikido side agrees with you completely. There are days where I try to radiate joyful energy, but my conditioning get the better of me.

Besides I prefer to think of myself as a force of nature rather than an animal. Like a flowing river, or better yet a flowing river of lava, fluid and all consuming.
evileyes

One does not beg the sun for mercy.

MaylandL
02-24-2002, 10:45 PM
Hello Ghost Fox

Interesting Thread that you raised. We had a visiting aikidoka to our dojo. He was very experienced, knowledgeable and trained having done aikido for over 25 years.

Over a cup of tea after the training session he commented that aikido was not amartial art in the sense of what the Samuria learned. There is a lot within Bushido that is not covered by aikido such as archery, horse riding and spear. He said what aikido does teach is commitment, spirit and honour. That got me thinking about what aikido was to me and what I really wanted to get out of aikido. I'm afraid that the jury's still out on that one.

There's a lot in aikido besides that martial bits but I think its all interrelated. I not sure that you can practice aikido without principles, philosophies and mental attitudes inherent in aikido.

I also agree wholeheartedly with Chuck. If you are a not trained to properly receive a technique with proper intent, then you can be seriously injured.

Techniques (whether in training or in a self defence situation) need proper intent and control. I guess that's the art part of it and distinguishes it from thuggery. The law, our own sense of compassion and morality will have a part to play too. I dont presume to know the mind of O Sensei, but from what I have read he was deeply and profoundly affected by his experiences and the development of aikido was shaped by these experiences.

I dont think that I will ever get a good understanding of aikido but its sure fun trying :)

Lee Mulgrew
07-20-2006, 04:58 AM
Thats like saying, "Is tai chi a martial art"?
or "is someone who does tai chi a martial artist"?

The answer, generally, is a profound no, because some idiot got hold of it and got rid of every last drop of martial intent.

Thus, most tai chi "master"'s would get severly hurt in a fight.

All I can do is pray that aikido doesn't go the same way.

sid

I have trained in both yang style tai chi and chi kung under the same man, and trust me this guy would not get hurt in a fight (and he would not just push his opponent away). I can honestly say that I have never seen anyone as devestating or felt such power behind strikes/locks/throws as he had. The speed appeared slow but was so fast you did not know what had hit you (it's hard to describe accurately). this man was pushing 70 and could still take down a proffesional body builder who was a 2nd dan kickboxer and a blackbelt in karate (as well as a few other bits and bobs) with no effort almost as soon as he attacked! I saw it with my own eyes on more than one occasion (and said brute was not pulling any punches!).

However, I do agree that most practioners do not study the martial side of the art which is a shame as it is sooo much like akido in it's principles and philosophy.

Shannon Frye
08-02-2006, 11:42 PM
Wow - this can be a rather loaded question, with any answer questioned by anyone for any reason. My hats off to anyone brave enough to post an opinionated response.

MARTIAL: Aikido can be taught, or learned, without the "martial intent", so I believe that YES, you can have an aikidoka that is not a martial artists. Aiki has so much more to offer than most other arts, that I think it can easily attract more than "martial" students.

Tai Chi: Without trying to split hairs here, ther eis tai chi, and then there is tai chi chaun. One isexercise, and the other is a fighting art.