Aiki vs Martial or Blend

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Phil Ingram]

I would like to get everyones view on this if I may

Those people who have tried to Defend them selfs with Aikido and failed and got hurt.

Do you think it is possible that it is because they have a fundamental flaw with their Aikido Basics

In other words they just go though the motions of training but not really Do the technique because they might not want to hurt there best mate ??,So they have not done a true representation of the technique so in the real world their Aikido falls apart.

Noble but foolish you can still do the technique properly and not hurt anyone this is how we learn control.

So is it possible that people have taken O sensie's teachings and have taken them to literally

In the way of peace,love,and harmony ??
so some people so to the side of the martial way and others go to the Aiki way but Surely the best way to train is to blend the Martial way with Aiki .

Please give me your thoughts

[Alberto_Italiano]

I would like to get everyones view on this if I may

Those people who have tried to Defend them selfs with Aikido and failed and got hurt.

Do you think it is possible that it is because they have a fundamental flaw with their Aikido Basics

In other words they just go though the motions of training but not really Do the technique because they might not want to hurt there best mate ??,So they have not done a true representation of the technique so in the real world their Aikido falls apart.

Noble but foolish you can still do the technique properly and not hurt anyone this is how we learn control.

So is it possible that people have taken O sensie's teachings and have taken them to literally

In the way of peace,love,and harmony ??
so some people so to the side of the martial way and others go to the Aiki way but Surely the best way to train is to blend the Martial way with Aiki .

Please give me your thoughts

Since you request thoughts, I can supply as a thought my current problem.

It is possible that if you have an extremely refined technique, you may apply it. I am not expert enough in the least to judge about this.

But in the Ki-Dojos I have seen, honestly, even most black belts (who should have some technique by now, one would suppose) cannot handle a uke who attacks with a mild speed and energy and who moves in a natural way (that is, no active resistance: just natural motions instead than motions meant to accommodate the incoming technique).
Go imagine what may happen if a real need arises, where an attack is determined and is composed of a combination of physical vigour and repeated, undomited attempts to land fast blows.

In my unlearned opinion, or at least what I lack, is this: the struggle.
You must earn your technique, uke must not be solding it out to you.

Most ki-dojos aikidokas never let pupils experience the struggle. You do the technique, either it succeeds immediately or it fails. Whichever the case, game over and restart/repeat. No real dynamism is ever represented in such a context.

One should try the technique; it fails. You keep contact. You wait to feel how this uke moves, you follow him/her, you try to induce the reactions you want by applying mild pressures that may elicit the counter-response you need. Once the moment arrives, you land the technique. You keep trying till at least one techinque is finally landed.
In this way you may gradually feel a living entity, and manage techniques as something that does not come out of the ordered world of an ideogram that has no counterpart in real life, but out of the disordered, high-entropy driven world of a struggle.

I can't see how any real spirituality can come out from such a convenient world like one where you never have to fight your way in the jungle.
Being spiritual, in fact, is not refusing the jungle: it is dominating it. Refusing it is only being spiritual at a very cheap price: everybody can raise a claim to spirituality, when in order to be spiritual all you need to do is to be there doing nothing to tame the roaming beast - the wild thing.

[Aiki1]

You do the technique, either it succeeds immediately or it fails. Whichever the case, game over and restart/repeat. No real dynamism is ever represented in such a context.


That is because, in my opinion, there are some schools that don't necessarily teach Aikido, but simply a particular way to execute what are considered to be Aikido techniques. There is a huge difference.

[lbb]

Those people who have tried to Defend them selfs with Aikido and failed and got hurt.

Do you think it is possible that it is because they have a fundamental flaw with their Aikido Basics

Impossible to say. You might be able to make a judgment in an individual case, but given the limitless reasons why a self-defense attempt may not prevent injury, it's impossible to generalize.

[ChrisHein]

I have had Aikido technique "fail" me, and I've had Aikido technique "work" for me in daily life mishaps.

It all depends on the context of the situation, and my mental attitude at the time. Aikido only prescribes strategy and a way to train that strategy, the rest is up to you.

This question is hard to answer because every confrontation is different. The best way to get to the bottom of it: apply your Aikido training more often and see what happens. Sorry for the vague answer, but it's a vague area.

[David Yap]

That is because, in my opinion, there are some schools that don't necessarily teach Aikido, but simply a particular way to execute what are considered to be Aikido techniques. There is a huge difference.

Larry, your opinion is a fact. Authentic schools with fake teachers trained by video shihan are plenty.

Regards

David

[SeiserL]

IMHO, the actual application in defense has less to do with flaws in Aikido as in flaws in the individual psychology.

IMHO, when it comes right down to it, its about the person, to the style.

The question may be how do you stop your self from being effective and efficient with your Aikido?

Make sense? Thoughts?

[David Yap]

Question:

How do you stop yourself from being ineffective and inefficient with your aikido?:D

[Kevin Leavitt]

First you have to define the parameters of the problem, then criteria for assessing effective/ineffective or efficient/inefficient.

[dps]

I would like to get everyones view on this if I may

Those people who have tried to Defend them selfs with Aikido and failed and got hurt.

Do you think it is possible that it is because they have a fundamental flaw with their Aikido Basics

In other words they just go though the motions of training but not really Do the technique because they might not want to hurt there best mate ??,So they have not done a true representation of the technique so in the real world their Aikido falls apart.

Noble but foolish you can still do the technique properly and not hurt anyone this is how we learn control.

So is it possible that people have taken O sensie's teachings and have taken them to literally

In the way of peace,love,and harmony ??
so some people so to the side of the martial way and others go to the Aiki way but Surely the best way to train is to blend the Martial way with Aiki .

Please give me your thoughts

I think that you will have a higher incidence of failure of Aikido technique outside the dojo if you have started Aikido practice without any previous training in martial arts or fighting.
It gives you a different perspective on your Aikido training and how to use it in a fight.

David

[sakumeikan]

Question:

How do you stop yourself from being ineffective and inefficient with your aikido?:D

Answer is simple.Train in a manner that is efficient and effective.Why do so many people on this and other Aikido web sites ask so many questions which border on stupidity.

[sakumeikan]

That is because, in my opinion, there are some schools that don't necessarily teach Aikido, but simply a particular way to execute what are considered to be Aikido techniques. There is a huge difference.
Hi Larry,
Totally agree with you here.Aikido has been diluted by some people in such a manner that it has no martial art content.Some classes I have seen would be better of being listed as Sequence Dancing.

[BAP]

I was wondering regarding the general approach taken to incorporating what might be termed "Bad Uke" training at least as compared to what tends to normally exist in dojos.

By "Bad Uke" I mean encouraging training with technique in which the uke is granted permission (encouraged) to actively take nage's center upon the entry and not "go along" compliantly with the counter, and rather if able to still control the nage (as opposed to just stop/blocking the particular technique itself).

I am not saying this should be the default method of practice. At the lower level it is important to have some degree of cooperation in training to further to process of getting a feel for the technique and the physical process of applying whatever the specific technique may be that is being taught. At the higher level it seems this should be much more, at least subtly, the default setting.

The inherent training environment of most aikido does place some general constrictions of this type of bad uke training. Not many dojos have head pads, mouth pieces and other such of materials that could be beneficial if taken to a more realistic power level. Even a small brief scuffle isn't necessarily bad on occasion. Of course, in a perfect aiki world there would be no need for any force more than the inherent blending with the uke's force into some controlled conclusion to the encounter.

Just as a periodic "reality" check it seems that some degree of "bad uke" training isn't necessarily a bad thing even if its intent and result is to open nage's eyes to the degree that their technique may not be quite as effective as they imagine it is from just normal day-in-day-out training. If there is some further refinement that may be needed in certain movements (ie such as sankyo) it is a lot better to realize that with a bad uke in the dojo than a bad uke outside the dojo.

One other issue that having this sort of training produces at least in my (limited) experience is reinforcing the need to appreciate and apply atemi as part of standard technique. Effective atemi helps alleviate some deficiencies which arise in more real-world application of technique and as well as avoid some of uke response to control your center when you begin your own entry and blending.

[SeiserL]

Question: How do you stop yourself from being ineffective and inefficient with your aikido?:D
I stop my self from being ineffective and inefficient by being effective and efficient, by focusing on what I want and not wasting time on what I don't want.

Please pay close attention to the implied suggestions in the deeper structures of the internal dialogue.

[danj]

I think there is a fundamental flaw in just about every school of aikido on the planet and it is arguably necessarily so. You see the limitation of the school reflected in the senior students, be it the Ki styles emphasis on flow, to the harder styles emphasis on martial power. None of the schools provide a universal development path to doing O'Sensei's aikido. Instead they each represent a path that suits a variety of body shapes, temperaments and interests of students. The best exponents of just about any style of aikido seem to have gone beyond their style with a broader, richer, deeper understanding of aiki.

On the subject of self defence I know of dojo 'X' where there are repeated stories of self defence anecdotes and dojo 'Y' where you are lucky to hear of anyone getting into trouble ever ..which is the better dojo/school/style is a tricky question to answer

[George S. Ledyard]

This is just the "Does Aikido work on the street?" discussion in yet another guise...

Every single martial art that exists can have this discussion about itself but usually it doesn't. Instead its practitioners delude themselves that what they are doing is the ultimate art and, of course, superior to all other arts.

The reality is that each martial art was developed in a certain time, for a certain environment, including the social environment. Usually, in that environment, under the same conditions, that martial art would be quite superior. You can see this clearly in the varied styles of Japanese Koryu. Urban styles wee quite different than rural styles, upper class styles different than styles geared for common fighting men.

Aikido is a modern martial art which, I believe was developed for an entirely different purpose than fighting. I think that many of the problems which exist within Aikido come, not from a problem with the art, but a problem with a misunderstanding of what the art is about. As far as I am concerned, Aikido is a spiritual practice with a martial paradigm. It is about personal development, rather than fighting. On the other hand, many people who believe that this is so, totally neglect the martial side, failing to understand that the martial paradigm exists to create the strength of character needed to really live the values of the art. When this happens the art degenerates into a hollow movement system whose paramount value is "being nice".

If you are so worried about fighting, study a fighting style. Aikido is certainly the longest road to martial capability of any art I could name. It is quite complex, has a lengthy learning curve, has an essential form adapted from an environment in which long bladed weapons was the dominant paradigm, and so on.

If you try to change the art into something designed for practical fighting, you lose the movement, you lose the philosophical and spiritual underpinning, you lose the aesthetic, you lose what make Aikido, Aikido.

Maybe Aikido's problem is the illusion of practicality... I never hear my Koryu friends debating whether kenjutsu works on the street. They don't sit around and obsess over the fact that firearms have pretty conclusively been shown to be superior for fighting over swords. You don't hear this discussion from folks who do Jodo, or study Naginata or Yari. No one worries about whether Kyudo "works".

Aikido should work within its paradigm. If some strong grabs my wrist, I should be able to execute a technique. If he does a shomen uchi, I should be able to do ikkyo. That's the practice. If I can't do that, I am not very good at my art. But that practice is only tangentially related to fighting. The same principles might apply but the form is different. You can do very fine Aikido and be unprepared for practical application in a fight and you can be a great fighter and have only rudimentary Aikido skills.

People keep insisting on making Aikido into something its not. If you want it to be that, you will have to fundamentally change it. Many people either quit the art or endeavor to change it into something else without ever actually understanding what the art was or could be. As long as that continues, we will continue to have the perpetual "does Aikido work discussion".

[Budd]

Which is a whole 'nother discussion around what is or is not aikido.

[Aiki1]

Which is a whole 'nother discussion around what is or is not aikido.

Exactly.

[George S. Ledyard]

Which is a whole 'nother discussion around what is or is not aikido.

Of course... I actually wrote a piece on this subject quite a while ago
Does Aikido Exist? (http://www.aikidojournal.com/blog/2009/06/28/does-%E2%80%9Caikido%E2%80%9D-even-exist-by-george-ledyard/)

So when I am talking about Aikido, I am definitely talking about Ueshiba Aikido and even more specifically the Aikido of the Founder himself as it was presented to me by my teacher, who was with him for fifteen years, and my own research and practice.

So, I definitely feel the Founder should be and, in many senses is, in my Aikido. I know Larry had a good point the other day about not looking to "masters of the past". While I understand the sentiment, and in many ways agree, I also understand the degree to which human beings are capable of completely deluding themselves. That's why we've always needed teachers.

While I train to develop my own direct sense of what is true and what isn't, I don't trust myself completely to see my own direction, to know what I should shoot for and what I shouldn't. I definitely look to people who are wiser, more experienced, and more capable than myself to help me with that. So when I talk about Aikido, I look to the Founder and what I understand of his intentions for the art, which he created, as the starting point.

It is absolutely clear to me that the Founder did not intend his art to be about fighting. He said so. He structured it in a way that didn't lend itself to fighting. He repeatedly emphasized the philosophical / spiritual over the martial in all of his post war teaching.

Yes, there are a number of other "Aikidos", especially those that came out of the thirties, which were founded by teachers who were not necessarily on board with O-Sensei's direction after the war. There were post war personal students of the Founder who simply ignored everything except the waza because they weren't interested. There are teachers whose own personalities dictated that their focus was more on fighting than otherwise.

But fairly uniformly amongst the teachers who devoted themselves to following the Aikido of the Founder, teachers like Hikitsuchi Sensei, Sunadomari Sensei, Abe Sensei, and many others, the focus of the Aikido that they pursued was not directed primarily at developing fighting capability. I'm not saying that they didn't have that ability. I am simply saying that it wasn't their main focus. For those people who wish it to be, they will have to necessarily change the essential form and manner of practice to make it that way.

[Shadowfax]

Attended a seminar with Ikeda Sensei this weekend. Two things he said that stood out.
(actually he said lots of things that stood out but these two pertain to this discussion.)

1) Martial arts don't work. No Martial arts work. Not until you make it a part of you. When you can do the martial art as easily as you breath and with just as much thought and effort, then it will work.

My take: its gonna be an awful lot of years of training before my aikido really works.

2) Experienced martial artists who have reached the above stage... don't get in fights. They just don't.

[Nafis Zahir]

Hi Larry,
Totally agree with you here.Aikido has been diluted by some people in such a manner that it has no martial art content.Some classes I have seen would be better of being listed as Sequence Dancing.


Hey Joe! Aikido has been diluted by MANY people. It is truly a sad thing to see in such a wonderful martial budo. We have today, so many dojos where there are weak attacks, slow attacks, no atemi, and most of all, no serious training. We are practicing a martial budo for which one reason is to be able to defend ourselves, aren't we?

BTW, I gave Sensei Lyons your message.

[Nafis Zahir]

That is because, in my opinion, there are some schools that don't necessarily teach Aikido, but simply a particular way to execute what are considered to be Aikido techniques. There is a huge difference.


Excellent response Larry. But even still, many are still not practicing anything close to 'practical'.

[David Yap]

Please pay close attention to the implied suggestions in the deeper structures of the internal dialogue.

I see, the tatemae factor. Thanks for the insight, sensei.

Rgds

David Y

[RED]

Excellent response Larry. But even still, many are still not practicing anything close to 'practical'.

I don't even explicitly disagree with this statement per say, I was just wondering what you base this assumption on?

[Aikibu]

To whom it may concern....:)

Tell you what... You stick with your "Aikido" and I'll stick with mine...

I know for an actual fact that mine works as a Martial Art/Budo and a way of life.

If you don't well...I hope you find "it" out there. :)

Good Luck.

William Hazen

[Walter Martindale]

Attended a seminar with Ikeda Sensei this weekend. Two things he said that stood out.
(actually he said lots of things that stood out but these two pertain to this discussion.)

1) Martial arts don't work. No Martial arts work. Not until you make it a part of you. When you can do the martial art as easily as you breath and with just as much thought and effort, then it will work.

My take: its gonna be an awful lot of years of training before my aikido really works.

2) Experienced martial artists who have reached the above stage... don't get in fights. They just don't.

re: 1)... relates to the 10,000 hours of deliberate practice required to master just about anything. Let's see. 4 hours per week, how many years? Mastery is approached in a rather asymptotic fashion, steep learning curve during the first few hundred hours, gradually decreasing slope of the learning curve as the magic 10,000 hours is approached...

Walter

[Aiki1]

I don't even explicitly disagree with this statement per say, I was just wondering what you base this assumption on?

In my original post, I wasn't addressing the practical issue per se, I was making a distinction between Aikido as an art, and simply learning techniques that are in the "Aikido syllabus" and calling that "Aikido." Practicality is an aspect of that overall discussion at some level, I suppose, but I personally wasn't going there. That's why I agreed with the notion of having to define Aikido in the first place, which is not easy to do for any number of reasons, and even more difficult to agree on.

Just wanted to be clear because of the quoting etc. going on.

[lbb]

Tell you what... You stick with your "Aikido" and I'll stick with mine...

Amen to that.

Show me a hundred aikidoka and I'll show you 99 fundamentalists...

[Nafis Zahir]

I don't even explicitly disagree with this statement per say, I was just wondering what you base this assumption on?

I base it on the fact that what many people are practicing wouldn't work in a real self defense situation and it doesn't even work within the confines of how it is being done in the dojo. It's mostly aerobics, imho.

[Kevin Leavitt]

I can tell you from my experiences in our dojo that we don't practice aerobics. That said, you have a select few folks that understand different aspects of what is on the spectrum of aikido.

Some folks have a better understanding of the combative/jiu jitsu nature of the art, the timing, entries, when/where to apply what to make it work.

Others have a good understanding of the technical aspects of the waza.

Some have both.

Some students have no clue what they are doing.

And we have folks everywhere on the spectrum

I think this is normal. In all cases I'd say most if not all our students are authentic and honest in what they are doing there, they just simply don't have the experience to undestand completely what the totality of the art is and what it should and can be.

That is reasonable I think as most of us are not professional warriors nor have the time, need or inclination to practice things to the level necessary to be "complete".

I would have agreed with the aerobic assessment when I first started as that was my "freshman" assessment of the situation.

With a few years of experience under my belt, and a few more as a "professional" in this field, my opinions I think are a little more complex and I think in many cases the "aerobic judgement" is an oversimplification about what is really going on in alot of dojos.

Of course, if your goals are not being met, there are other arts/methods that will train the things you want to train.

I'll be the first to tell you that Aikido is not the only methodology of training martially I rely on.

However, again, I also don't think that the aerobic judgement is completely fair or accurate either simply because what we do in the aikido dojo may not be an efficient delivery mechanism for "effectiveness", which again, we need to define for the particular problem set, or situation we are focusing on.

[Aiki1]

For me there are, fundamentally at least, four broad levels in the spectrum of learning and knowledge in Aikido.

Content

- techniques, technical understanding, physicality etc.

Process

- position, movement, flow, strategy etc.

Energetics

- Ki, musubi (connection), subtle Aiki (a range of internal and external elements), and what we term Kinesthetic Invisibility (not giving any reference to the attacker such that there is anything to react to or counter)

Spirituality

- surrender, guidance, higher experience

These run from the least to the most subtle, from the seen to the unseen, from easiest to most challenging to learn and grasp. As one moves from the first stage forward, one must find someone to induct them into the experience and understanding of that level. Sometimes that's the same person and/or circumstance, sometimes not. Knowledge of all four levels brings a balance of understanding and skill, from the martial to the sublime.