PDA

View Full Version : aikido Vs ju jitsu


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


joe_bloggs
01-21-2001, 01:41 AM
hi,

i bet heaps of u have argued which one is better & more effective. ^_^ but here goes... i am interested in pursuing either aikido or ju jitsu and since this is an aikido website, i think some of the readers out there might know a bit about these 2 martial arts.

i have tried some introductory ground fighting techniques based on brazilian ju jitsu, but i find a couple of these techniques not applicable to the real world (maybe i am wrong). for example, if u r in the guard position, can't a attacker go for your groin??? but i guess it's useful to know what to do in case some big muscular fella does a bear hug and pulls u to the ground and starts to pummel u with his fists and elbows (which was demostrated to me in a carpark).

does aikido involve techniques to counter an attacker who is sitting on u and smacking your face non-stop or choking u till u pass out (like what joeysola said)? i know the best way is not to get pulled down, but some times it can be from behind, totally unsighted and unavoidable. does aikido involve any ground work/fighting, leg locks, arm bars, take-downs etc?

another question, what are the basic differences between aikido and ju jitsu? does one art concentrate on one technique more or something else?

sorry if i touched on a nerve. :) but i am a newbie wanting to know more before taking the deep plunge in. and yes i will be visiting aikido and ju jitsu schools to see how they train.

to summarise, i just want to know which of these 2 arts r better to defend myself against most attackers? and which art is faster to learn so that one can apply his knowledge if needed. i know each art has it goods and bads.

any comments will be much appreciated! :)

Roar
01-21-2001, 04:57 AM
The speed at which you learn an art is relative to many factors. Depends on your effort and your point of view. The real world is where all scenarios are possible.

Would you take a knife to a gun fight?
I would if I knew I would be standing behind him with the knife at his throat.

One on one I would give jujitsu an edge if winning is the only wanted outcome. They stand right in front of their oponent . They do their business delibertly and decisively. They kick and choke. Are you comfortable that no one will jump in?

If there are multiple attackers and survival is the #1 I would rely on my Aikido. The majority of the time Aikido people will stay at a dead angle to the opponent. Off line!

Is it a question of what works more affectively?
Can you feel good about your actions afterword?

Matt Banks
01-21-2001, 07:12 AM
I train in Yoshinkan Aikido. An example of how similar the tecniques are in jujutsu and aikido is that the head of our club in england Soke Eddy Stratton was awarded a 6th dan Jujutsu by Bob Maters's (WJJF) Aikijujutsu federation.
Jujutsu styles are soooo varied, eg huntai yoshin ryu jujutsu is basically all sword work. There are massive diffrences. In the styles of Aikido such as Yoshinkan and Iwama which I suppose are considered ''hard styled'' are just like jujutsu in terms of hard tecnique. I spoke to a 7th dan in jujutsu in London about what he thought the main diffrence between aikido and jujutsu. He said, in Aikido they aim for devasting tecniques with flow and spiritual aspects, which in jujutsu they only train in and get towards much later in their training. He thought it was a shame most jutsu schools didnt train like aiki. He explained that learning jujutsu from the begining is like karate katas and brawling and to put it in his words ''there not aiming to be enlightened warriors like you guys''. I will say that the pre war styles of aikido are more similar to jutsu than any others. You might like to know that for fun I entered an amatuer jujutsu competion in devonshire and I got silver without extensively training in jujutsu. I just got a book on the rules of what you could and could not do, and used what I learnt in aikido. when you talk about do we do ground work in aikido. If you join a good club of Aikido they will deal with it. At the end of most sessions we have a ''back to back'' using guard and mount position tecniques. If your perplexed by the gracies, dont be. Their focus on helio side is money, they sue other family members etc etc for the right to the art. The introducing more and more competion, more worried about merchandise than the actual art. Give it a decade and it will have been corupted beyond belief.


Matt Banks

Matt Banks
01-21-2001, 07:17 AM
In depends on the club of either art. We deal with practicallity greatly .
i.e. a few weaks ago we did gun defence using a bibi gun, tory wore goggles and uke held the gun to the head , tory had to control the gun without being shot.

Find a good club with good instructor and students. What I will say though is that some jujutsu is sport jujutsu, thus practicality etc etc will be lost in the pusuit of ''fair sport''




Matt Banks

Mike Collins
01-23-2001, 08:36 PM
Try them both for a few years. There is no way either one would be useful to you in less time than a few years (unless you are a fanatic and trained daily, hard). Either one is good, each takes different approaches. Jujutsu utilizes more pain/compliance, Aikido utilizes more structural weakness and leading. Both work kuzushi, just different ways of getting there.

If winning fights is the real main thing you want to accomplish- run, lift weights and discard your conscience, you'll be just fine. Just remember, fights hurt, and you aint getting any younger.

samurai_x
01-23-2001, 09:55 PM
I T D E P E N D S............

* on how sincere the student is w/ his
training .
* if the student is a fast learner.
* on the frequency of the training
schedule.
* on how good the sensei is.
IT ALL ENDS UP W/ THE STUDENT.SO, IT DOES NOT MATTER W/C ART IS BETTER. COZ,ALL ARTS ARE GOOD DESCIPLINES. SOME
HAVE ADVANTAGES THAN OTHERS AND JUST AS DISADVANTAGES.GO FOR THE ART THAT UR COMFORTABLE W/.


AIKIDO
The WAY of LIFE

TUOCS
Mactan Ki AIKIDO Society
Musubi Dojo
Philippines

Yozzer
01-26-2001, 04:23 AM
If these are the 2 arts you are interested in, try them both as Mikey said, or start with one until you become competent and then start the second art to compliment your training.

I don’t want to go into which art is best as this is a debate that will never be satisfactorily concluded. But if you are interested in winning fights you will need a combination of skills including punching, kicking, groundwork and a complete lack of morals in order to put your opponent out of action.

Real fights are VERY VERY unpleasant and should be avoided at all costs, if your ego can take it there is nothing wrong with running away if it will keep your face in one piece or keep you alive.

Anyway, I digress. Forget about real fighting and learn the martial art that you enjoy the most and with time will come competence and awareness.

Paul

andrew
01-26-2001, 06:02 AM
joe_bloggs wrote:
hi,



another question, what are the basic differences between aikido and ju jitsu? does one art concentrate on one technique more or something else?



The difference between aikido and the jujitsu style that influenced it most (daito ryu) is that aikido focuses on learning principles. O Sensei took a large syllabus of techniques and condensed and modified their usage and teaching into a comparitively small number of principles. (He explained this in "Budo")
For instance, the principle of Ikkyo replaced, I believe, 30 simular techniques which had to be mastered in the Daito-Ryu. And so forth.(I source this from an interview with daito ryu sensei Katsuyuki Kondo on the aikidofaq. random quote "Ikkajo consists of thirty techniques, but only the ippondori technique became ikkyo in aikido.")

What use this has to your deciding which to choose I don't know. Try both and see which you're interested in sticking with. You might find you're not interested in either after a month.
andrew

andrew
01-26-2001, 06:08 AM
OK, I also just read this snippet from an old interview with O Sensei. He also said:
---------------------------------------
(interviewer): How many techniques are there in Aikido?

O Sensei: There are about 3,000 basic techniques, and each one of them has 16 variations . . . so there are many thousands. Depending on the situation, you create new ones.
---------------------------------------

So I'm assuming that each isn't learned individually, especially based on the last sentence.
andrew

Sam
01-26-2001, 07:14 AM
The idea that any martial art is better or easier is not something that anyone can judge.
The only thing that really counts is the quality of the instruction received in that art.
Because I do aikido of course I think that what I have chosen is the best. I have done a lot of different arts and I was drawn to aikido by the personality of the intructor and the quality of his instruction.
It is unfortunate that you have had a nasty experience which has led to you seeking personal protection skills and any art that is taught well and studied diligently will give you personal protection skills.
Why I like aikido is its subtle nature. I have trained for six years and I couldn't describe it in one sentence and I don't feel 'tough' but I have taken care of myself when I needed to. A beneficial side effect of being thrown as part of your training is that if you decide you are not going to fall over, very few people will be able to knock you down even if they catch you by surprise.
An art that teaches aggressive kicking, punching, shouting and imaginary blocking is dangerous because those people believe they are fighters, but cannot apply the shouts and pretend punching to real life.
What I'm trying to say is judge by experience (learning the art) rather than what a paragraph in a leaflet will tell you.
A small note on ju-jitsu (this will probably get me in trouble). The brazilian jujitsu you talk about is probably the gracie brothers style. It is not classical ju-jitsu and is just a small collection of techniques copied from classical ju-jitsu. It is really a style of street grappling which it very good at what it does, but you will reach a point quite quickly where you have learnt all they have to offer and you may feel disolusioned.
Traditional ju-jitsu evolved into judo and aikido and only now exists as daito-ryu ju-jitsu taught mostly in Japan. Most other schools are a mish-mash of random techniques without any real system. My experiences of ju-jitsu has left me very concerned about both the students welfare and what is being taught out there. If you look though there must be good jitsu instructors, just make sure of their quality.

Good luck

(sorry to bang on everyone)

bulevardi
03-19-2010, 01:25 PM
http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/544

ChrisHein
03-19-2010, 04:23 PM
Aikido sort of is Jujutsu. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is a specific kind of Jujutsu. Aikido has its merits and so does Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. Study either and you will learn a lot.

Don't worry about what is practical or not for now. You don't have enough experience to understand what is or is not practical, if you did you wouldn't need to ask this question. Spend some time with either system, then you can start to ask these kinds of questions.

For now trust that the inventors of both systems know much much more about martial arts then you. Learn their systems and try to understand them.

Abasan
03-19-2010, 06:42 PM
BJJ is great and gives you a lot of mat time and because of that they dispense with most of the other aspects of the art.

It doesn't make them invincible. I can't remember the name, but Helio, one of the bigger names in BJJ lost to an official match against Kimura a traditional Japanese Jujitsu player. That of course doesn't automatically make Trad. Jujitsu better, it just means the better man won that day. It could easily have gone either way.
Those days however, even with fights that had rules, the fighter's were willing to die on the mat. Helio's arm was broken by Kimura but never gave up, so it was considered a TKO instead.

Royce was also famous in BJJ being the son of helio. He lost to little known Eddie Bravo in a no gi fight. Eddie and his teacher practically invented 'bjj' without gi. Although the Gracies too sometimes practise without gi and their family frequently took part in no rules matches, somehow they too still stuck on to traditional gi wearing in their training. Eddie specialised and thus he had a clear advantage in the fight. If it was a gi match, I suspect Royce would have taken the match quite easily. So in this case, it was the situation that gave Eddie the upperhand. Again, this was 'then'. People learn. On a side note, Hughes defeated Royce in UFC much much later too. That makes it very interesting, because Roosevelt once wrote in a letter that he thinks for all the techniques and skill a japanese had with jujitsu, he believed the stronger american wrestler if trained in jujistu will definitely come out on top. His rationale being that americans are bigger and stronger. Coupled with the same skills, they should definitely come out on top.

In anycase, you can see where this is going. Encounters are seldom the same for everyone. Sometimes it will be advantageous to you, mostimes it won't. All arts have their lessons, and if you do learn it, it will make you a better man. Some may choose not to learn it and focus on the fighting instead. Some people don't take up the gun to keep the peace. They think a gun is for shooting people. Just think about that.

Lastly. I've mentioned earlier that it seems if all skills are at par, Roosevelt believed that the stronger man will win in a jujitsu fight. Aikido seeks to disabuse this. In creating Aikido, Osensei seek a way to bypass strength, speed and technique. He talked about harmony and being one with the universe. He talks about anyone attacking him, is actually in disharmony with the universe and thus have already lost. Since most of us have not yet reach this point of harmony, we tend to think this is whimsical thinking and that the old man was mad. Certainly a lot of his direct students seem to make light of his teachings.

They didn't know how he did the things he did, but they sure did not believe him when he told them about the secret to aikido. So decades down the road, here we are talking about the same old thing.

gregstec
03-19-2010, 07:45 PM
to summarise, i just want to know which of these 2 arts r better to defend myself against most attackers? and which art is faster to learn so that one can apply his knowledge if needed. i know each art has it goods and bads.

any comments will be much appreciated! :)

Hi Joe,

Short answer to your question is neither - bottom line is that none of the martial arts taught are really designed to teach someone how to fight in a real combative type of situation. They are simply physical manifestations of concepts and principles that need to be applied when a true physical confrontation happens.

Learn the principles and concepts and the techniques will naturally come out as required for a particular confrontation.

I don't mean to burst your bubble, but that is the reality of the issue. If you are just looking to defend yourself, I can teach you about three principles and five techniques that you could master in about a month that would put you at about a 99% advantage over anyone that will ever attack you on the street.

Good luck in you endeavors

Greg

Josh Reyer
03-19-2010, 08:32 PM
So, none of you guys realized you're responding to a nine year old thread? Aside from Mike Collins, none of the participants have been active on AikiWeb since 2008!

Gorgeous George
03-19-2010, 09:53 PM
So, none of you guys realized you're responding to a nine year old thread? Aside from Mike Collins, none of the participants have been active on AikiWeb since 2008!

...I wonder if he ever took up aikido. Maybe he's a dan grade by now...

Ahmad: I believe the fight you refer to was Masahiko Kimura, apparently regarded as the greatest ever judoka, Vs Helio Gracie, the man who created BJJ/Gracie jiu-jitsu:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helio_gracie#Kimura_versus_Gracie

Abasan
03-20-2010, 03:24 AM
right, I remembered kimura because of the lock. Though I think the greatest judoka for me would be Mifune.

Michael Fitzgerald
03-20-2010, 04:08 AM
http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/544

From the article: "Don Draeger said, “Uyeshiba's aikido is a highly weakened form of hand-to-hand combat. Aikido is essentially noncombative in nature. Further, the omission of atemi (strikes) from its techniques removes aikido from the category of practical hand-to-hand combat styles.” "

I don't suppose anyone has an idea of what publication/ where Draeger was known to have made this statement- or any like it? (wasn't mentioned in article).

L. Camejo
03-20-2010, 04:31 AM
I don't suppose anyone has an idea of what publication/ where Draeger was known to have made this statement- or any like it? (wasn't mentioned in article). I believe this was said in one of his books - "Modern Bujutsu & Budo Volume III: Martial Arts And Ways Of Japan".

Anyone with a copy can verify this, I can't find mine. Imho Draeger had a very distinct separation between Do and Jutsu arts which I don't think was shared by many Japanese practitioners who often used the terms interchangeably.

Best
LC

sakumeikan
03-20-2010, 05:02 AM
From the article: "Don Draeger said, "Uyeshiba's aikido is a highly weakened form of hand-to-hand combat. Aikido is essentially noncombative in nature. Further, the omission of atemi (strikes) from its techniques removes aikido from the category of practical hand-to-hand combat styles." "

I don't suppose anyone has an idea of what publication/ where Draeger was known to have made this statement- or any like it? (wasn't mentioned in article).

Mr Draeger [assuming the above quote to be true ]like anyone else was entitled to express his views on Aikido .Unless I am mistaken Mr Draeger did not study Aikido.He was primarily a Judoka, and studied Iaido forms.He was one of the first men to write books on Martial Arts but I do not accept that because he writes books etc means he is an authority on Aikido.
Any experienced aikidoka knows[or should know ] that atemi can be used in applications of Waza ,however in the majority of the time atemi is not always utilised fully basically for safety reasons.Cutting and striking/thrusting waza is also part and parcel of both Jo and Ken training .

sakumeikan
03-20-2010, 05:20 AM
...I wonder if he ever took up aikido. Maybe he's a dan grade by now...

Ahmad: I believe the fight you refer to was Masahiko Kimura, apparently regarded as the greatest ever judoka, Vs Helio Gracie, the man who created BJJ/Gracie jiu-jitsu:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helio_gracie#Kimura_versus_Gracie

Dear GG,
While Kimura Sensei was an undoubted master of Judo he was beaten in a contest [the only time in his career ] by Kenshiro Abbe 8th Dan , founder of Kyu Shin Do .Abbe Sensei , having met him ,was in my opinion one of the greatest Martial artists ever.Abbe Sensei , was also a student of Aikido , and he was instrumental in bringing Aikido to the U.K.On a personal note , seeing Abbe Sensei and training with him in Aikido, inspired me to study Aikido.I was at that time studying Judo.As a judoka Abbe Sensei may well be the greatest ever.

Michael Fitzgerald
03-20-2010, 05:43 AM
I believe this was said in one of his books - "Modern Bujutsu & Budo Volume III: Martial Arts And Ways Of Japan".

Anyone with a copy can verify this, I can't find mine. Imho Draeger had a very distinct separation between Do and Jutsu arts which I don't think was shared by many Japanese practitioners who often used the terms interchangeably.

Best
LC

Thanks for that info!:)

I realise that Draeger made the distinction between Do and Jutsu plain.

It is interesting to me though that while apparently making such a statement, he would appplaud Higoanna Morio as quite combative indeed- a little anomalous it seems (in the context of Do VS Jutsu as an indicator of combative usefulness). He certainly seems to have been a complex character...

The IHS has some interesting reading on similar topics.

Abasan
03-20-2010, 07:10 AM
Having not seen Abbe sensei in action I can't say aye or nay, but is he the same teacher who taught the original hell dojo in UK?

Interesting. Some of Mifune's vids are on youtube by the way, have a look see. Kimura despite his wins was a big and strong fellow. Mifune is Shioda's double with a moustache.

gregstec
03-20-2010, 07:35 AM
So, none of you guys realized you're responding to a nine year old thread? Aside from Mike Collins, none of the participants have been active on AikiWeb since 2008!

Looks that way - well, all I can say now is that I hope Joe has learned something since then :D

(mental note: look at post dates in the future...)

Michael Fitzgerald
03-20-2010, 10:14 AM
So, none of you guys realized you're responding to a nine year old thread? Aside from Mike Collins, none of the participants have been active on AikiWeb since 2008!

should threads this old be locked?

ChrisHein
03-20-2010, 12:53 PM
So, none of you guys realized you're responding to a nine year old thread? Aside from Mike Collins, none of the participants have been active on AikiWeb since 2008!

There aren't many questions that weren't asked 9 years ago. Those questions still need answers though. And they will again 9 years from now, and 900 years after that.

Josh Reyer
03-20-2010, 04:26 PM
Unless I am mistaken Mr Draeger did not study Aikido.He was primarily a Judoka, and studied Iaido forms.
I'm afraid you are mistaken. Draeger was dan-ranked in Shodokan Aikido, and according to Ellis Amdur, was very good. And beyond judo and iaido, he was highly ranked in kendo, karate, Shinto Muso-ryu Jo, and Katori Shinto-ryu kenjutsu.

Gorgeous George
03-20-2010, 05:10 PM
Dear GG,
While Kimura Sensei was an undoubted master of Judo he was beaten in a contest [the only time in his career ] by Kenshiro Abbe 8th Dan , founder of Kyu Shin Do .Abbe Sensei , having met him ,was in my opinion one of the greatest Martial artists ever.Abbe Sensei , was also a student of Aikido , and he was instrumental in bringing Aikido to the U.K.On a personal note , seeing Abbe Sensei and training with him in Aikido, inspired me to study Aikido.I was at that time studying Judo.As a judoka Abbe Sensei may well be the greatest ever.

Sensei Curran,
I remember reading about that fight, yes...

I make no claims to have any informed opinion on judo, having never studied it...
I am aware of the story of how Kenshiro Abbe came to study aikido, so i knew he must have been quite good at judo.

Ketsan
03-20-2010, 05:10 PM
There aren't many questions that weren't asked 9 years ago. Those questions still need answers though. And they will again 9 years from now, and 900 years after that.

Most of those questions had answers 9 years ago and still have answers now.

Gorgeous George
03-20-2010, 05:54 PM
From the article: "Don Draeger said, "Uyeshiba's aikido is a highly weakened form of hand-to-hand combat. Aikido is essentially noncombative in nature. Further, the omission of atemi (strikes) from its techniques removes aikido from the category of practical hand-to-hand combat styles."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JARaet_Bwfw

I don't think he got that memo.

sakumeikan
03-20-2010, 06:42 PM
I'm afraid you are mistaken. Draeger was dan-ranked in Shodokan Aikido, and according to Ellis Amdur, was very good. And beyond judo and iaido, he was highly ranked in kendo, karate, Shinto Muso-ryu Jo, and Katori Shinto-ryu kenjutsu.

Dear Joshua,
Perhaps there is an oversight on the part of Mr Draegers biography/ies on the Net no mention is made of him training in Aikido.Any biographer worth his salt would surely have mentioned this if indeed he studied the art.There is of course confirmation that Mr Draeger was proficient in the above arts mentioned by you.
Whether or not he was an aikidoka I consider him mistaken when he states that atemi has been removed from Aikido.

sakumeikan
03-20-2010, 06:47 PM
Sensei Curran,
I remember reading about that fight, yes...

I make no claims to have any informed opinion on judo, having never studied it...
I am aware of the story of how Kenshiro Abbe came to study aikido, so i knew he must have been quite good at judo.

Dear G.G.
To state that Abbe Sensei must have been 'quite good at Judo' is almost like saying a Rolls Royce Silver Shadow is 'just a runabout, like a Ford Fiesta'.
Hope you are well,
Cheers, Joe.

Gorgeous George
03-20-2010, 07:00 PM
Dear G.G.
To state that Abbe Sensei must have been 'quite good at Judo' is almost like saying a Rolls Royce Silver Shadow is 'just a runabout, like a Ford Fiesta'.
Hope you are well,
Cheers, Joe.

Hahahaha. I understand, and defer to your judgment - 'quite good', as it is. ;-)

I am well, thank you; i am beginning to progress (a very relative term) in recent times, and the Spring Course was an excellent 'jolt' to make me step up my aikido training as something more martial and intense (no matter what Don Draeger says aikido is).
Your advice was gratefully received, and hopefully not in vain!

I hope you are well too.

Ellis Amdur
03-20-2010, 10:37 PM
I've seen a video of Donn doing aikido - among the best I've ever seen. He had a 5th dan from Tomiki Kenji.

Uyeshiba's aikido is a highly weakened form of hand-to-hand combat. Aikido is essentially noncombative in nature. Further, the omission of atemi (strikes) from its techniques removes aikido from the category of practical hand-to-hand combat styles." "

Combat - Donn was, I believe, in combat in the Korean war. That's what he meant by the word. Furthermore, when considering a martial art, he defined the term in a very circumscribed fashion - "martial" referred to the arts of war. Therefore, TSKSR was a "martial art" -in that the training was passed down thru a hereditary warrior caste, and the training methods were, allegedly, focused on the battlefield - albeit one in the past. Such disciplines as iaido, karate, aikido, etc. were civilian arts, not practiced as part of an exclusive warrior class for military aims.

Best
Ellis Amdur

Stormcrow34
03-21-2010, 05:24 PM
right, I remembered kimura because of the lock. Though I think the greatest judoka for me would be Mifune.

I'm with you one that one...

Dan Rubin
03-21-2010, 08:23 PM
From the article: "Don Draeger said, "Uyeshiba's aikido is a highly weakened form of hand-to-hand combat. Aikido is essentially noncombative in nature. Further, the omission of atemi (strikes) from its techniques removes aikido from the category of practical hand-to-hand combat styles." "

That quotation, from Donn Draeger's Modern Bujutsu & Budo (1974), is both incomplete and taken out of context.

At p. 144, as part of an entire chapter devoted to aikido, Draeger began a discussion of some differences between Morihei Ueshiba's aikido and Sokaku Takeda's aikijujutsu (the discussion continued on p. 161, the intervening pages containing only photographs):

"There is no conflict between the practical use of Ueshiba's aiki-do and his philosophy of love for human beings when it is understood that Ueshiba intended aiki-do to remove all thoughts of aggression from people's minds. All techniques are applied without any thought of defeating or injuring an aggressor. Ueshiba rejects the concept of kobo-itchi that underlies all classical bujutsu; this concept asserts that, in combat, attack and defense are one and the same thing, and which of the two receives priority depends entirely on the situation. Ueshiba substitutes instead the concept of absolute go no sen, a defensive initiative. Through application of this concept Ueshiba's aiki-do becomes purely defensive in nature, a response to aggressive actions, and this fact makes it theoretically impossible for two exponents who abide by this concept to attack each other.

"Ueshiba's aiki-do is not a system of conflict with an aggressor, but rather the means by which a state of ai, or harmony, is established between the adept of aiki-do and his antagonist. Only after an aggressor has launched his attack does the defender become physically active. He does so first by avoiding the attack, then blending with it so as to use the attacker's own force to overcome him. An assailant is literally led to his own destruction. Leading is accomplished by use of ki, which is ‘extended' by the exponent of aiki-do and joined harmoniously to the ki of the attacker. A great sensitivity to the attacker's state of mind and his direction of movement must be developed, for until the exponent can ‘read' the attacker's mind and recognize the direction in which he is applying his forces, the exponent cannot harmonize (ai) with him and lead the attacker to realize the folly of his actions. If an attacker is injured in assault against an expert exponent of aiki-do, the attacker has literally injured himself.

"In sharp contrast to Ueshiba's spiritually oriented aiki-do is Sokaku's traditional aiki-jujutsu, the primary purpose of which is to provide a method of hand-to-hand combat. Sokaku's aiki-jujutsu is based on a technical essence that enables the exponent to apply severe measures against an assailant. Ample use is made of atemi, or blows directed against anatomical weaknesses; and atemi always precede the seizure and subduing of an assailant. Physical strength, economically used (ju no ri) in conjunction with technique, is desirable and greatly respected by all exponents of aiki-jujutsu. The classical [p. 161] method of instruction—master to disciple on a personal basis—characterizes the teaching method of the traditional sect. This conservative method of teaching guarantees a high degree of technical excellence in disciples that is unobtainable when disciples are taught by the mass-class method; at the same time, of course, it greatly limits the number of disciples.

"In view of the nature of Sokaku's aiki-jujutsu, Ueshiba's aiki-do is a highly weakened form of hand-to-hand combat. Aiki-do is essentially noncombative in nature because it does not function according to the concept of kobo-itchi; further, the omission of atemi from its techniques removes aiki-do from the category of practical hand-to-hand combat styles. Taught through group-instruction methods, aiki-do has for its purpose the development of a healthy mind and body together with a wholesome spirit. All exponents of aiki-do aim to live in harmony with themselves and with those around them. Thus, when the idea of combat is dismissed from mind, Ueshiba's aiki-do is an outstanding system of discipline for the pursuance of those spiritual and sociological aims it has made its own. Sokaku himself viewed aiki-do somewhat more mundanely than Ueshiba: ‘Aiki-do is to adjust your movement to that of the opponent, and to defeat him by making use of his power imposed through the smooth circle movement. It is much like an elegant dance of the old days.'"

Draeger then talks about some of O Sensei's disciples:

"Kishomaru, a mild-mannered man, succeeded the elder Ueshiba on the latter's death in 1969. Aiki-do for Kishomaru is not a jutsu form concerned with combative effect but follows the classical concept of do. There is no carnival hocus-pocus in Kishomaru's interpretation of ki, or in his performance of aiki-do in general; in fact, he deplores the actions of those who sometimes use this approach to popularize aiki-do, ‘Aiki is a natural flow,' says Kishomaru, ‘in which human beings unite through adjusting to the circle [cycle of nature]. This exercise leads to self-protection and self-perfection.' Not [p. 162] all of the elder Ueshiba's disciples follow precisely his kind of aiki-do, and many have established their own distinctive styles in which the emphasis on ki is greatly reduced. The foremost innovators of Ueshiba's aiki-do are Shioda, Tomiki, Hirai, and Inoue. Shioda's Yoshin aiki-do is oriented towards combat and closely approximates the traditional sect of aiki-jujutsu in regard to technique, though its spiritual purpose is attuned to that of Ueshiba's. Tomiki style aiki-do is a system of physical education that contains practical elements of self-defense and is practiced competitively. Hirai's Korindo aiki-do is concerned with self-defense. The Inoue system is called Shinwa taido, a blend of self-defense and sport…."

Except for the page numbers, all spelling, brackets and italics (or lack of italics) are as in the original.

bulevardi
03-22-2010, 02:46 AM
So, none of you guys realized you're responding to a nine year old thread? Aside from Mike Collins, none of the participants have been active on AikiWeb since 2008!

Sorry, I always like bumping up old topics :blush:
But on the other hand, you don't have to start double topics that already existed before.

Josh Reyer
03-22-2010, 05:41 AM
Very nicely done, Dan. Far from the seemingly dismissive tone of the original excerpt, it seems obvious that Draeger had a full, nuanced view of aikido.