Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.
If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!
i was thinking of starting out this post by stating my admiration of and loyalty to aikido... but i think it is unnecessary. my actions, past, present and future, will be sufficient.
perhaps every so often, the traveler on a path questions the path they tread.
as i have had posted a few weeks ago, i have begun cross-training in Systema, and so far i have enjoyed the sessions quite a bit.
one thing i have considered prior to starting - or indeed, has led me to begin - was the possibility that Systema is more of what O-Sensei was intending Aikido to look like, than the Aikido that we practice today.
amongst O-Sensei's [paraphrased] quotes that gets bandied every so often are that 'Aikido has no set techniques', and that 'every time you do a technique, it is different'. Another popular one is that 'Aikido is 70-90% (the percentage varies depending to source) atemi'. if i simply use the two training methodologies as the bases for comparison, then i would argue that Systema is more consistent with my understanding of O-Sensei's vision for Aikido - or at least the physical aspects of it.
is it possible that Aikido as we know it today has veered far away from what O-Sensei intended? i am not the first to ask this question, and i'm certainly not the last.
until i find an answer, if ever, i shall just have to continue my shugyo. onegai shimasu.