PDA

View Full Version : Aki-Jitsu


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


The One
03-24-2001, 10:14 PM
I recently started taking lessons in a style called "Aki-Jitsu". It is an ecclectic of many systems and styles of martial arts including aikido, judo, karate, wing chun, and tai chi.

What I would like to ask is, what do you guys think of a school that teaches a form of aikido combined with the kicks and strikes and different concepts from karate and wing chun? Would you consider them non aiki? How effective or traditional would you think the aikido in this form would be?

Kami
03-25-2001, 03:15 AM
The One wrote:
I recently started taking lessons in a style called "Aki-Jitsu". It is an ecclectic of many systems and styles of martial arts including aikido, judo, karate, wing chun, and tai chi.
What I would like to ask is, what do you guys think of a school that teaches a form of aikido combined with the kicks and strikes and different concepts from karate and wing chun? Would you consider them non aiki? How effective or traditional would you think the aikido in this form would be?

KAMI : I really don't know...Morihei Ueshiba Kaiso created a system (Aikido) based on Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu, Goto Ha Yagyu Shingan Ryu and a few other arts and he used permanently a lot of atemi(just look at the book BUDO by John Stevens). Also it has been said that the Kaiso spoke : "Aikido is 90% atemi"...:confused:
The only problem I see is the kind of atemi (there are many. Some adapt easily to Aikido, some do not). Apparently Ueshiba Okina used atemi from Yagyu Shingan Ryu.
Perhaps this will help you
Best regards

ze'ev erlich
03-25-2001, 06:58 AM
Ecclectic styles are like a cup of tea with 5 different used tea-bags.

But if you enjoy it...then have a good time.

lt-rentaroo
03-25-2001, 09:06 AM
Hello,

I began my martial arts training in Wing Chun Kung Fu when I started college. When I transfered to a new college (a better one) I was no longer able to study Wing Chun (no dojo around). I started reading about Aikido and learned that the philosophy of Aikido and its principles were very similar to Wing Chun (just without the kicks and strikes). Wing Chun focuses on timing and using the opponents imbalance against them. An example would be during "trapping hands" exercises.

Depending on how the training at your new dojo is conducted, I would say that the two arts of Wing Chun and Aikido make good complements. Both were developed with the intention of not having to use much of your own strength to successfully accomplish the techniques (Wing Chun was founded by a Chinese Nun who saw the need for a martial art that allowed smaller, less physically strong people to defend themselves).

I don't think the art would be "traditional" in the sense that this style most likely only takes the good from each art. You know, it sounds similar to Jeet Kun Do (art founded by Bruce Lee). Sensei Lee combined aspects of Wing Chun, Fencing, Boxing, and Judo when he developed Jeet Kun Do.

Good luck with your training and have a good day!

PeterR
03-25-2001, 10:37 AM
Mochizuki developed a pretty eclectic system but he had major history in Judo , Karate and Aikido. This is a far cry from some guy studying a few things here and there and calling it what sells. All I can say is look deep into the background.

Ubaldo: John Steven's wrote Budo????

Kami wrote:
The One wrote:
A form of aikido combined with the kicks and strikes and different concepts from karate and wing chun? Would you consider them non aiki? How effective or traditional would you think the aikido in this form would be?

KAMI : I really don't know...Morihei Ueshiba Kaiso created a system (Aikido) based on Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu, Goto Ha Yagyu Shingan Ryu and a few other arts and he used permanently a lot of atemi(just look at the book BUDO by John Stevens).

Kami
03-25-2001, 12:09 PM
[QUOTE]PeterR wrote:
[B]Mochizuki developed a pretty eclectic system but he had major history in Judo , Karate and Aikido. This is a far cry from some guy studying a few things here and there and calling it what sells. All I can say is look deep into the background.
Ubaldo: John Steven's wrote Budo????

KAMI : You're absolutely right, Peter! In my opinion, Aikido is an eccletic style, borrowing from many MA, but it was created by a martial art genius and so it should be. It's definitely a far cry from people who "invented a new art", picking a "little here, a little there", without any real knowledge. And I also don't like when someone "invents" a new name, with a pseudo-japanese sounding name.
On another point, "BUDO", by John Stevens is not just a compilation of the old BUDO RENSHU by Ueshiba. It contains BUDO RENSHU, the complete photo sequence at Noma Dojo (where you can see clearly the influence of Yagyu Shingan Ryu in Ueshiba Kaiso's atemi)and a large introduction by Kisshomaru Ueshiba with a biography of his father.
It's a very beautiful book and everyone should buy it.
- "BUDO : Teachings of the Founder of Aikido" - ISBN 4.7700-1532-1 - US$ 23.00
Translated and edited by John Stevens - Kodansha International.
Best

PeterR
03-25-2001, 12:35 PM
Hi Ubaldo;

There are a few martial art geniuses in this city so it is a sore point.

I did not remember John Stevens's being listed as an author of Budo: Teachings of the Founder of Aikido but then again I was busy looking at the picis - it is a beautiful book. On Amazon there are a couple of other books by Morihei Ueshiba where John Steven's is listed as either editor or compiler but not for Budo. Of course that does not mean he did not have his hand in there. Kenji Tomiki apparently was one of those involved in producing the original Budo but understandably only Ueshiba is listed as author. A long tradition of student slave labour - I love it.

aikijames
03-25-2001, 03:36 PM
saposedly o-sensi learn aiki-jutsu before making aikido. i saw that on a video from Sensi DR. Lee Ah Loi

There are many paths up the mountain but they all see the same moon.

James

The One
03-25-2001, 04:31 PM
Both of the systems I train in are ecclectics... Like one of them teaches traditional Karate but with a little jujitsu here and there for self defense techniques. Isn't that ok as long as they fully teach the traditional base art?

Well all I can hope is that this new style that I am taking has enough Aikido or even Wing Chun in it to be not be completely similar to Karate. I wouldn't want to be wasting my money on another school where I learn the same thing.

And btw, is there any kicking atemi in Aikido??? Another art in this system is Savate (french foot fighting).

PeterR
03-25-2001, 04:38 PM
Yes James;

The name Aikido only existed after 1940, before that it was Aikibudo or Aikijujitsu. That was made clear in several of the above posts and any history you read.

The point though is that just because someone calls what they do Aiki-Jitsu does not make it that. It is very important to check background rather than what it says on the store front.

There is a lot more in depth information available on the internet and books than the few minutes Ah Loi Lee sensei was able to cover.

aikijames wrote:
saposedly o-sensi learn aiki-jutsu before making aikido. i saw that on a video from Sensi DR. Lee Ah Loi

There are many paths up the mountain but they all see the same moon.

James

The One
03-25-2001, 05:53 PM
Can anyone tell me what "Aki" means? I know Jutsu and Jitsu mean the art or science of. Or do they both mean different things?

Mike Collins
03-25-2001, 09:31 PM
Aiki- The quick version is blending energy. There are about a million different transliterations, depending on who you ask and what kind of axe they have to grind.

As to what I personally think of an eclectic art- I don't have an opinion of any art, the art is not as important as the teacher. Seek out the very best teacher you can find, and you'll recognize him/her when you find him/her. Trust your instincts about the teacher that best fits you. The art is only a framework, the learning comes from the paradigm and the intent you put into it, not from knowing a lot of "moves". Aikido is a great art, but it certainly isn't the only or the best, unless we individually make it that.

Good luck, have fun, persevere, look deeply.

Mike Collins
03-25-2001, 09:33 PM
I just noticed you aske about aki, not aiki. Beats the hell out of me.

Kami
03-26-2001, 05:48 AM
Mikey wrote:
I just noticed you aske about aki, not aiki. Beats the hell out of me.

KAMI : Sometimes people just want to give a japanese sounding name to arts they "created". Bruce Tegner, of infamous memory in the 60's, "created" an art called JUKADO (you know it...JUdo, KArate and AIkido...); someone devised an art he called "X-Jutsu-Do" (Jutsu and Do together???) and in Brazil an art was "created" called "AMI-JUTSU"("Arte marcial Integrativa" Jutsu - Integrated Martial Art-Jutsu). I think I even heard about a "SUGAR-RYU JUJUTSU" (Heaven help us!)
The list is non-ending...:eek: :eek: :eek:
Best

Arunabha Sengupta
03-26-2001, 06:11 AM
Kami Wrote:
_______________________________________
Bruce Tegner, of infamous memory in the 60's, "created" an art called JUKADO (you know it...JUdo, KArate and AIkido...); someone devised an art he called "X-Jutsu-Do" (Jutsu and Do together???) and in Brazil an art was "created" called "AMI-JUTSU"("Arte marcial Integrativa" Jutsu - Integrated Martial Art-Jutsu). I think I even heard about a "SUGAR-RYU JUJUTSU" (Heaven help us!)
The list is non-ending...
________________________________________

I am from India. There are several clowns out here who claim to have found new Martial Art Forms. After Mas Oyama's Kyokushin Kai Kan style of Karate became popular out here two of the new styles that came out were :
"Byagra Kan" and "Mawtsho Kan"
When you come to know that in local lingo Byagra means tiger and Mawtsho means - hold your breath - Fish !!!, you really can't help laughing.
That too from India, where authentic ancient martial styles like Kalaripayyat evolved and still exist. I don't know why people go copying and mimicking and making clowns of themselves in this fashion.

The One
03-26-2001, 09:08 AM
Yeah," Aki". I already know what Aiki means. Anyway, about Used Tea Bags.

Who ever said 5 used tea bags isn't better than 1 new one? Those 5 bags are different flavors all combined into one. I don't know about you but I wouldn't mind having a 5 flavor tea over 1.

(BTW: I'm in school right now so I might not reply that quick.)

Chris P.
03-26-2001, 06:38 PM
The One wrote:
Yeah," Aki". I already know what Aiki means. Anyway, about Used Tea Bags.

Who ever said 5 used tea bags isn't better than 1 new one? Those 5 bags are different flavors all combined into one. I don't know about you but I wouldn't mind having a 5 flavor tea over 1.

(BTW: I'm in school right now so I might not reply that quick.)

Aikido is just two used teabags, irimi and tenkan ;) I wouldn't give Ueshiba credit for inventing any new martial art, but that doesn't make his achievement any less impressive.

As long as we keep building humans with two legs, two arms, and one head, just like we did 10000 years ago, there probably won't be many new inventions in martial arts.

DiNalt
03-26-2001, 06:45 PM
Chris P. wrote:
The One wrote:
Yeah," Aki". I already know what Aiki means. Anyway, about Used Tea Bags.

Who ever said 5 used tea bags isn't better than 1 new one? Those 5 bags are different flavors all combined into one. I don't know about you but I wouldn't mind having a 5 flavor tea over 1.

(BTW: I'm in school right now so I might not reply that quick.)

Aikido is just two used teabags, irimi and tenkan ;) I wouldn't give Ueshiba credit for inventing any new martial art, but that doesn't make his achievement any less impressive.



"An empty can rattles the loudest."

The One
03-26-2001, 06:55 PM
In all seriousness... What do you mean???

And how can an empty can rattle?

Chris P.
03-26-2001, 07:13 PM
DiNalt wrote:
"An empty can rattles the loudest." [/B]

"We cut windows and doors to make a room, but it is the inner emptiness that makes the room useful.

We seek to take advantage of what is,
but we also find much use for what is not."

The One
03-26-2001, 07:57 PM
I'm really sorry but I still don't see how this relates to my used tea bag thing...

If you please, explain further...

Sam
03-27-2001, 04:45 AM
I personally think that the problem with ecclectic styles is that the founder (or whoever 'selected' the techniques) may have done so on personal preference and I would always wonder what is was missing in those skills which 'didn't make the cut'.
Just like JKD - everyone teaches a different JKD according to themselves (or so I understand).
However if that preson is qualified enough then probably I would trust them. I guess it is all just down to credentials.

On the subject of tea - Even one teabag often contains a blend of different teas.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

andrew
03-27-2001, 04:55 AM
Sam wrote:
On the subject of tea - Even one teabag often contains a blend of different teas.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Typically yes, but not necessarily always.

Also, Tea leaves are much too dry to smoke.

Andrew

mle
03-27-2001, 07:35 AM
The meat of the matter is that I, and other visitors to this forum, do aikido.
If you do not do aikido, then I am not sure what any of us can tell you.
Budo is a fairly universal language when one is more deeply versed in it, but those just learning the alphabet don't yet know that all these different letters can make very similar words.

All arts are derivative of something.
However, snippets of aikido from someone who may not have studied it seriously enough to gain its deep benefits is like judging tea before it is fully steeped. Kinda watery.

Ask your teacher where he studied, under who and for how long. Just conversationally.

I agree that Wing Tsun is a neat addition/complement to aikido. I took it for a little while for that reason.

I now study a system of jujutsu with kempo and weapons integrated so I don't have to "cross train" any more, it's all here for me.
Yes, I still do aikido, have for 8 years or so.

Good luck!

Emily
(weren't we all supposed to be on Real Names here?)

The One
03-27-2001, 09:16 AM
That is a good thing about ecclectic styles though. If it's a good combination, everything is there for you. My Karate style also has a little Jujitsu and my Jujitsu style(at least i think it's mostly jujitsu) has a little karate and wing chun. And they both teach a variety of weapons. I hope to be a very well rounded, skilled, and knowledgeable fighter after training in these styles for a long period of time. Though I still do hope my new style is mostly or at least a big part of it is Aikido.

About the Tea Bags... You guys do know I was talking about a quote that was mentioned a couple posts ago referring to ecclectic systems, right? All this smoking tea stuff is getting me confused.

About Wing Chun... How closely related is it to Aikido? It isn't very popular is it? Wouldn't it be hard to find a wing chun school? At least on east side US, where I live.

Chris P.
03-27-2001, 12:05 PM
The One wrote:
About Wing Chun... How closely related is it to Aikido? It isn't very popular is it? Wouldn't it be hard to find a wing chun school? At least on east side US, where I live.

Wing Chun is quite popular in the US, actually. Principles of centerline usage, posture, and mitigation of the opponent's strength through body positioning, are common to WC and Aikido. WC players are generally more concerned with protecting themselves and less concerned with protecting the attacker, then most Aikido people.

The One
03-28-2001, 09:12 AM
Question: If any of you Aikidoka can remember or anyone just starting, what did you learn on your first day in your Aikido class? What did your sensei tell you about Aikido and what concepts did you learn first?

andrew
03-28-2001, 09:16 AM
The One wrote:
what did you learn on your first day in your Aikido class?

I learned to roll forward, and that if I didn't turn my head when I rolled back I was probably going to hurt my neck.
My first Sensei never talked too much about what Aikido "is," assumedly because just practicing tells you far more about it than talking.
andrew

Mike Collins
03-28-2001, 09:21 AM
The concept of extension- the "unbendable arm"

Seated forward roll- took me several years to get that one.

Standing forward roll- got it basically right away.

Standing sit fall.

Etiquette for bowing in and out of the dojo, bowing on and off the mat, bowing to a partner.

What I didn't ever get told is what to call my teacher. I struggled with that for a year or so, till I relaxed into "Sensei", though I still call him by his given name sometimes.

Rules can be a pain in the butt, but it is nice to know what is polite right away.

The One
03-28-2001, 09:22 AM
So he never talked about keeping your center and how to be a good uke? Did he say anything about Irimi and Tenkan on the first day?

Mike Collins
03-28-2001, 10:07 AM
Nope. My first lesson was about how to get on the mat, where I could begin to learn. My safety was important, as was my ability to be polite. There is only so much one can absorb the first day (after how to tie the obi, and which way the jacket laps.

Irony
03-28-2001, 10:56 PM
Hi,

I've never trained in any other MA other than Aikido, and only that for about eight months, so it may be that I only have a narrow frame of reference regarding other styles. The main question that pops up to me about mixed styles is "if punches and kicks were vital to self defense/ Aikido, why did the founder leave them out, except for atemi purposes?" I'm not saying that the founder was infallible, but with all his martial arts training he had a full range of attacks to chose from when building his art. Why did he leave them out? (before anyone makes a point about atemi I mean attacks that were techniques of themselves, not just distractions etc.)

I think it might have to do with the philosophy of Aikido. A punch or a kick is designed to injure, more so than any throw or pin (for the most part). The whole purpose in Aikido is defense, not attack. It seems that there are those who take the techniques of Aikido and use them without any sense of the morality instilled behind them. As I said before, I've never studied other arts, but what seems to make Aikido unique is that while the morality is there (as it is with some other MAs) it is one of the few that enforces it by the techniques themselves. A properly done kotegaeshi shouldn't seriously injure uke. If so you're doing the technique wrong. But mixed arts seem to say "wow, look at that wrist throw thingie! That looks really effective!" and assimilate it, not taking into account the philosophy behind it. I apologize in advance, because I'm going to quote Jurassic Park here: "They were so wrapped up in whether or not they could they never stopped to think if they should!"

Perhaps I'm totally wrong, and maybe my argument is totally muddled, but that's how it seems to me. That's the same argument I have against cross-training by the way. I have nothing personally against mixed styles (if you do them, have fun and more power to you), and I know that Aikido too, is a mix of styles. But Aikido was put together with a purpose in mind. I'd just be wary of styles that borrow techniques from Aikido simply because kotegaeshi can break a wrist just as easily as throw a person.

Ah well. Sorry about the length of the post; I'm an English major and tend to run on at the keyboard. Feel free to totally blast me, that's cool.

later,

George S. Ledyard
03-29-2001, 05:29 AM
The One wrote:
I recently started taking lessons in a style called "Aki-Jitsu". It is an ecclectic of many systems and styles of martial arts including aikido, judo, karate, wing chun, and tai chi.

What I would like to ask is, what do you guys think of a school that teaches a form of aikido combined with the kicks and strikes and different concepts from karate and wing chun?
Why not? Sounds like it is very practically oriented. Unless you are specifically trying to get to the heart of what O-sensei's Aikido was about, in which case a more traditional style would serve you better, there's no reason this couldn't be a good style of training.

Would you consider them non aiki? How effective or traditional would you think the aikido in this form would be?
It may be very effective if the originator of the style was very experienced. It is not traditional, but do you care? I will say that in my experience the people who often have run out on their own and created very eclectic styles of Aiki based arts generally aren't very sophisticated in their Aiki. Aikido people spend the majority of their time investigating the most minute details of movements that are designed to effect the center of a partner / opponent. Usually the people who have gone off and started eclectic styles like this don't have the background or understanding of the Aikido part of their training to be really high level. This is not to say that what they do is not valuable or effective. I did a style of Escrima for a while that was a combination of Filipino Escrima and Aikido. It was very effective, quite devastating in fact. The teacher under whom I studied was one of the most senior practitioners of the style. His understanding of the details of the locks that they applied was not as sophisticated as mine. Which made not one iota of difference as the style was very powerful and his ability to apply the locks in the context of their training which was with sticks was superior to mine. So this style wasn't traditional Aikido nor was it traditional Escrima. But it was a great style because the Founder of the style was very advanced and could really do what he was teaching.

So the value of what you are doing is: a) up to you; do you like it? and b) based on the depth of knowledge of the Founder of the style and the experience level of your particular teacher. The latter may be difficult for you to assess as a beginner since everybody looks good when you are new. So that is where a traditional style originated by a generally recognized teacher may be important. At least you have some idea of the credentials of your teacher. For instance I do Aikido which was originated by Morihei Ueshiba, generally considered to be a great martial artist. I learned my Aikido primarily from Mitsugi Saotome Sensei who was a direct student of the Founder for many years so I can rest assured that I a received the best training possible. My students can be reassured from my own association with Saotome sensei that they aren't being taught by some charlatan. When you have someone who goes off on his own and creates some new style, you lose that security of knowing what you are getting. Sometimes they are lying about their backgrounds. Other times the reason they started their own style was that they were thrown out by their teacher. Once you are in a non-traditional system you have a very hard time knowing.

History usually takes care of these things. O-Sensei took off on his own and created a new martial art that was very different from what he had studied. Initially he had to do some fighting in order to gain credibility for the art. Over time he became generally accepted and Aikido became an art that now has its own tradition that is widely accepted and recognized. That could happen to the style of training in which you are participating if it is really good or the style will disappear if it isn't, time will tell.

In the case of a non-traditional style you can make the best judgement by looking at the experience of the teacher (as stated by him or her) and judging if it seems reasonable. Thirty year olds are not 8th Dans in any reputable arts, there is no way a guy in his twenties has advanced black belts in four or five arts, etc.

You are best off if the teacher has trained with people whose names you can recognize ie. Dan Inosanto of Jeet Kun Do, the Machados or the Gracies of Jiu Jutsu, an Aikido teacher that appears in Stan Pranin's Aikido Encyclopedia, or some such. This is valuable because you can then verify whether the teacher is telling the truth about his background. The Jeet Kun Do folks post their registered instructors on the net. Every major Aikido organization will tell you if a teacher is certified by them. Do some research... If you find that you can't substantiate the claims of the person with whom you are considering training I would bolt. He is almost certainly not really advanced in what he claims to teach.

There are a large number of so-called eclectic styles that are taught by people who have no depth or essential background in any of the arts they profess to be teaching. So "caveat emptor".

[Edited by George S. Ledyard on March 29, 2001 at 04:58am]

andrew
03-29-2001, 07:24 AM
Irony wrote:
I'd just be wary of styles that borrow techniques from Aikido simply because kotegaeshi can break a wrist just as easily as throw a person.


I really like that point a lot, but you should be careful about describing the aims of Aikido in terms of attack and defence, because you can't. Every response to an attack you call defence can equally be described as attacking an opening your opponent has created.

The reason why there's not a lot of straightforward kicks and punches taught is more likely connected to O Senseis desire to distill things down to their root principles rather than a notion of leaving certain things out. In the start of the "Budo" training manual he says something about this, how each prinicple he teaches is the root of ten thousand techniques. I imagine that's a ballpark figure rather than precise, mind.
Bear in mind also that as you progress you'll find yourself concentrating entirely on your opponents centre, not on his limbs, even when you're manipulating those limbs.

I _think_.

Andrew

The One
03-29-2001, 09:32 AM
I still don't know my sensei's rank or past experience but I won't forget to ask next time. Anyway we did a sort of randori last class. And he said that he did some research and discovered and told to the class that Master Ueshiba(sp?) took Aiki-Jutsu before he developed Aikido. Yes, I already knew this but now I'm wondering why he had to research it.

mornmd
03-29-2001, 09:43 PM
Much of Aikido is a distillation of Daito Ryu aiki jujutsu, an older complex art. Several Daito Ryu sites list over 2000 techniques to master before completing training. Nihon Goshin Aikido, an art formed by Shodo Morita (a contemporary of Ueshiba) is heavily based on aikijutsu/daito ryu. and has been talked about on a different thread on this forum. When you watch the techniques they tend to have more of an economy of movement than Ueshiba's-aikido. Blending is quick, smaller circles, the techniques end quickly too, but beautiful in their efficiency. The style is harder than aikikai as well.

If I ever have time, I would love to explore authentic daito-ryu aikijutsu further.

Matthew

The One
03-30-2001, 09:24 AM
Thank you Matthew, but as you can see what you have just stated has already been posted on this thread and I have known that for quite a long time. You should also notice that the style being discussed is Aki-Jitsu and not Aiki-Jutsu

andrew
03-30-2001, 10:49 AM
mornmd wrote:
Much of Aikido is a distillation of Daito Ryu aiki jujutsu, an older complex art. Several Daito Ryu sites list over 2000 techniques to master before completing training. Nihon Goshin Aikido, an art formed by Shodo Morita (a contemporary of Ueshiba) is heavily based on aikijutsu/daito ryu. and has been talked about on a different thread on this forum. When you watch the techniques they tend to have more of an economy of movement than Ueshiba's-aikido. Blending is quick, smaller circles, the techniques end quickly too, but beautiful in their efficiency. The style is harder than aikikai as well.

If I ever have time, I would love to explore authentic daito-ryu aikijutsu further.

Matthew

Only 2000?
Ha!
"B: 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."

Who have you watched who had greater economy of movement than Ueshiba?

I used to be a bit interested in Daito Ryu too, but there's plenty Aikido I'll never have enough time to learn and now I'm happy to just chase after that.

andrew

Chuck.Gordon
03-30-2001, 11:22 AM
[QUOTE]The One wrote:
>[B]I recently started taking lessons
>in a style called "Aki-Jitsu". It is
>an ecclectic of many systems and
>styles of martial arts including
>aikido, judo, karate, wing chun, and
>tai chi.

Hmm. Then ... it is not aikijutsu or aikijujutsu. Not sure what it IS, but it's neither of those. Of course, the teacher can call the subject matter anything he or she cares to, but an amalgam like that is probably not gonna resemble anything a koryu jujutsu student or teacher would recognize.

Aikijujutsu, which is really just jujutsu (Ueshiba started calling his Daito Ryu jujutsu 'aiki' jujutsu at the urging of Onisaburo and with Takeda's possibly somewhat tacit blessing.

"Aiki" as a term in Japanese budo has been around a long, long time and has been attached to arts such as Kito Ryu jujutsu and Takenouchi Ryu jujutsu, among others.

>Would you consider them non aiki? How

Depends. Define aiki, first. I tend to cleave toward tohe older definitions, but it's a real fuzzy term and is open to wide interpretation.

>effective or traditional would you
>think the aikido in this form would

Effective? Who knows. I really don't care. I'm not much interested in what most folks think of as 'effective.' That's strictly something you and your needs will determine.

Traditional? Nope. Probably not a'tall.

Traditionally-flavored? Maybe. The things I study and teach are pretty eclectic, but are all japanese at the root and are the product of many years' distillation by my teachers.

My teacher did some modern jujutsu, some koryu jujutsu, some aikido and judo and some karate. He taught what he taught and we trained. The end product is pretty cohesive and has a strong koryu flavor, but it is NOT koryu, nor is it a ryuha in the strictest sense.

What I do is MY budo. And I am unaffiliated and stubbornly independant. I do also, however, study Eishin Ryu iaido and SMR jodo and train with koryu and gendai folks at every opportunity.

Who is your teacher? What did he or she study? From whom did your teacher gain authority to blend styles and why is it called aikijitsu? Just curious, not challenging.

Chuck Gordon
http://www.the-dojo.com/

mornmd
04-01-2001, 02:50 PM
If anyone knows the true definition of "Aki" as opposed to "aiki" I'd love to hear it. Couldn't find aki on the vocabulary lists on Aikiweb. "Aiki" is, of course readily found.

Oh, and I wasn't aware that O-Sensei had 3000 official techniques in Aikido with 16 variations each. If someone has a reference for that, please let me know.

M

The One
04-01-2001, 04:41 PM
O-Sensei himself says it in an interview. You can find it somewhere on http://www.aikidofaq.com

Sorry I don't know exactly where it is.

Yeah, I would also like to know if "Aki" is even a word. Anyway, another question, what, if any at all, is the difference between "Jutsu" and "Jitsu". Don't they both mean the "science" or "study" of?