PDA

View Full Version : deadly or non-violent?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


ian
03-27-2001, 06:16 AM
There seems to be a discrepancy in the way we describe aikido. It often seems to be the case that we will say that aikido is a non-violent martial art with the intention of not harming the aggressor. At the same time many of us say we couldn't have aikido competitions because the injuries would be too serious or deadly. Therefore I can only draw one of three conclusions:

1. aikido can only be harmless to the aggressor when they are not expecting a particular defence (and therefore won't try to resist or counter it) i.e. a pretty unskilled aggressor.
2. the idea that aikido won't cause any damage in a fight with a powerful aggresssor is wrong.
3. aikido is not useful for defence and we use these conflicting arguments to get around the fact that we cannot go up against someone who is good at sparring.

I would say at times each of these are true, though I think the attainable ideal is more likely to be the first one. From my 'practical' experience I have only dealt with pretty unskilled fighters, and have not caused any damage. What are your views.

P.S. one point which occured is the use of atemi - a strike which is used to distract and allow a technique, but which cannnot be effective if someone is wearing protective head-gear, and therefore only useful if fighting without protection; a possibility if people are good enough at aikido?

P.P.S. I know Tomiki is competitive, but not in the same one-on-one way as sparring.

Ian

andrew
03-27-2001, 09:26 AM
Well, I think first off you've to seperate training from "real" use. Obviously dynamic training isn't a courtesy you'll necessarily allow in every situation life throws up....

It's a matter of purpose, too. You can throw somebody onto their back or drop them straight on their head with a number of throws...

Most aikido training is dynamic and therefore "safe." This wouldn't translate well into competition as people would struggle and use bad aikido and potentially get injured. (Except perhaps at a very high level?) You can aim your nikkyo properly at controlling the body- or you could snap downwards and try to break the wrist(which isn't much use, is it...)

andrew

DiNalt
03-27-2001, 11:56 AM
ian wrote:


(content deleted)

Ian

Go to
http://www.diac.com/~dgordon/why.html .
Quite an interesting read...

So is this ! -
http://www.aikido_memphis.homestead.com/faq.html

december
03-27-2001, 12:09 PM
Lethal or non, aikido, like any other martial art form, cannot guarantee victory in every struggle. Aikido can help an individual learn to anticipate attack, maintain balance, understand and manipulate the physical limits of the body, and avoid the always defeating hypnosis of combat(fog of war). The form acts as a guideline for neutralizing struggle. There are no absolutes in combat. There is no black or white, just a tiny grey arena were your only real ally is your fear and your ability to guide yours and your opponents movements. The key to any struggle is balance. Keep your balance and awareness, step off the line and guide - guide - guide. Avoid confrontation at all costs, but when unable to avoid - place your opponents force at your feet. Lethal or non, this is self preservation (preservation of order, harmony=world=self), the rest is semantics. If it's not full speed in the dojo it's not full speed in life.
Just be careful.

Brian H
03-27-2001, 01:13 PM
I studied Karate years ago and the problem matrix was very simple: 1)Observe Problem 2) Kick and punch problem 3) If problem persists return to 2) Then I became a cop and that whole "Rodney King" approach is not to prudent these days. I did some looking around and found a good Aikido Dojo and really learned some good things. (Just so you know a moderately experienced aikidoka has more training than the average police officer) Aikido greatest gift to you is control. You control uke, but more importantly you control yourself. Deadly/destructive force is in every Aikido techinque (Try Ikkyo Omote with a brick wall 2/3s of the way through and see if uke will practice with you again). The thing is I don't have to smash an opponant to get them to submit, I can take them down to the ground and they have nothing else to do.

Guest5678
03-27-2001, 02:06 PM
You know, all this has been addressed a million times before and always ends with the same conclusion. I bet we could probably pull, at nausea, all kinds of related posts from the archives......

I wonder if some people will ever realize that what really matters is their Aikido, not what others think of their Aikido........

Personally, I could give a rats ass what others think or say about Aikido. Their opinions are their problems to deal with. I do know what I'm after, and I know I'm getting it from my practice of this art.

Worry less and practice more. (or is it the other way around?)

Dan P. - Mongo

Aikidoka2000
03-27-2001, 04:55 PM
(from december's ealier post)
Lethal or non, aikido, like any other martial art form, cannot guarantee victory in every struggle. Aikido can help an individual learn to anticipate attack, maintain balance, understand and manipulate the physical limits of the body, and avoid the always defeating hypnosis of combat(fog of war). The form acts as a guideline for neutralizing struggle. There are no absolutes in combat. There is no black or white, just a tiny grey arena were your only real ally is your fear and your ability to guide yours and your opponents movements. The key to any struggle is balance. Keep your balance and awareness, step off the line and guide - guide - guide. Avoid confrontation at all costs, but when unable to avoid - place your opponents force at your feet. Lethal or non, this is self preservation (preservation of order, harmony=world=self), the rest is semantics. If it's not full speed in the dojo it's not full speed in life.
Just be careful.
__________________

!!Beautiful!! Well put!, and all too true!
I have yet to see a definition as good as this one in a looooong time:)
Thank you for sharing that.
-Tomu

ian
03-28-2001, 06:07 AM
Cheers for the replies, I think there's pretty much general agreement. There was a point to this, rather than just a semantic argument. I'm aware that dojo training is very different from 'real' situations but;

a. though we go through the movements its important to focus on what we are trying to simulate. Without this it is just a dance.

b. the attitude you have to aikido can affect the attitude with which you perform i.e. if you decide that in a real situation you have to go all out for breaks etc, and that dojo training is just to get you used to the best body movement, then you will do this. However if you believe that non-violence is the aim, you will practise with a different perspective in mind (even though the practise 'looks' the same.)

Sometimes real situations are very hard to assess. Its easy saying, "I'll respond with proportional force" but quite often you don't realise they have a knife (or are very profficient). Often you don't know whether they are aiming to kill you or are just upset or just trying to intimidate you. I am under the impression that Ueshiba was very much of the attitude; 'if they attack, kill them' as he would not give proper demonstrations. However he was obviously different in the dojo.

Ian

Sam
03-30-2001, 03:36 AM
andrew wrote:

Most aikido training is dynamic and therefore "safe." This wouldn't translate well into competition as people would struggle and use bad aikido and potentially get injured. (Except perhaps at a very high level?) You can aim your nikkyo properly at controlling the body- or you could snap downwards and try to break the wrist(which isn't much use, is it...)

andrew

I disagree. In the six years I have been competing the worst injury I have had was a slightly bruised heel. I have never seen any even moderately serious injuries. Of course people will struggle and you do see bad aikido but a lot of instruction is given on how to safely apply technique. Also the referees' foremost responsibility is to protect the players and they do.

However the nikkyo is about the only technique not allowed in competition.

As an aside, the training we all do teaches more fundamental skills that just a collection of techniques.
It improves our fitness, awareness, speed, co-ordination, timing, balance and power. These are the things that cannot be taken away even in the midst of confusion and panic.

andrew
03-30-2001, 07:49 AM
Sam wrote:
I disagree. In the six years I have been competing the worst injury I have had was a slightly bruised heel. I have never seen any even moderately serious injuries. Of course people will struggle and you do see bad aikido but a lot of instruction is given on how to safely apply technique. Also the referees' foremost responsibility is to protect the players and they do.

However the nikkyo is about the only technique not allowed in competition.

As an aside, the training we all do teaches more fundamental skills that just a collection of techniques.
It improves our fitness, awareness, speed, co-ordination, timing, balance and power. These are the things that cannot be taken away even in the midst of confusion and panic.

Competing in Aikido? (sorry, just not too clear.)

I'm basing what I said on a few things: Firstly I've trained with people who I barely trust in a dynamic practise to not try and injure people (very rarely), secondly from injuries picked up by Judoka I know, and thirdly from the disgusted reaction I got from my doctor when I went to him with sore knees and had to explain Aikido by comparing it with Judo.
So you've knocked a hole in my reasoning... I guess I'm a little overcautious.

andrew