Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/newrep...reply&p=270503
Quote:
Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido. From the biographical book "The Founder of Aikido, Morihei Ueshiba", written by Ueshiba Kisshomaru (translated and reprinted in Aiki News #62). Excerpt originally written by Okamoto Ippei and published in the November 1933 issue of Budo magazine. "[Ueshiba] started with easy techniques using two of his students. Even for an untrained eye, it was clear that he moved very softly... However, in the meantime his students attack him with all their might and still tumble down in a shower of attacks (atemi) to their vital points. In short his art reaches a conclusion before ordinary judo even starts its work. [The Founder] said, 'My technique is 70 percent atemi (striking) and 30 percent nage (throwing).' " From the book "Budo Training in Aikido" (aka: Budo Renshu/ Aikijujutsu Ogi), written by Ueshiba Morihei - published in 1933. Translation by Larry E. Bieri and Seiko Mabuchi (Minato Research): pg. 26 - "True Budo is practiced not only to destroy an enemy, it must also make him, or his own will, gladly lose his spirit (seishin) to oppose you." http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/newrep...wreply&p=63425 Quote:
the instant of contact to unbalance your opponent. 90 per cent of Aikido is done at or before the instant of contact. To paraphrase a sensei of mine, " They should of called it (Aikido) Kuzushi. O'Sensei's spiritual / religious/ philosophical Aikido was based on his martial arts training which was by all accounts effective. dps |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
IMHO I totally, 100%, agree with you.
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
I too agree. Aikido is a martial art, and its techniques are effect and some can be very lethal. It's derived from a very combat oriented art and retained much of that art (especially pre war Aikido). I don't know why more dojo do not practice atemi more, unless they truly do not know how to properly do it in the first place!!!
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
The percentage changes, but I think the underlying statement is atemi represents the establishment of a connective state at a point preceding the physical contact between uke and nage. I still think Ledyard Sensei's article on the role of atemi best explains that function in great detail.
It does however lead down the road to something that I see more and more in re-interpreting (and re-reading) some of the older interviews and writings of O'Sensei and his senior students. That is, no where did O'Sensei ever truly criticize the previous [martial] experience his students brought with them to the aikdio dojo. In fact, for a period of time it seems he favored students with pre-existing martial compentency. Throw in a training style that clearly focuses on initial movement and some of the things O'Sensei said (as well as his senior students) and you get something like... it doesn't matter what comes next IF you connect with your partner prior to engaging him. In my mind that begs the question, does contemporary aikido miss the focus of training by offering a psuedo-jujitsu curriculum that focuses neither on jujitsu core training (basic comptetency), nor an "aiki" connective state that precedes each exchange between partners? This is a generalized statement of course; there are individual instructors and dojo who provide competent instruction on both core training and aiki. Also, it begs the question, would aikido be fundamentally different if Tohei, Tomiki, Mochizuki and other early leaders emphasized striking [techniques] instead of grappling [techniques]? In other words, if we have been training in "aiki" why should the anteceding technique be difficult to alter (arguing of course that the replacement curriculum would necessarily embody the principles of aikido)? Of course, I would argue that many of us probably do not practice aiki in our everyday class and we are really doing modified jujitsu, possibly poor jujitsu technique. Which is of course why we desperately cling to the established curriculum of aikido... |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
So what's atemi, really?
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
The most concise working explanation I've heard:
http://www.aikieast.com/atemi.htm Thank you, Ledyard Sensei. |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Great thread!
Jon, I thought you made a wonderful post. Quote:
Quote:
There seems to be a lot of confusion out there about jujutsu, aikijujutsu, and aikido. People have begun to twist and contort these terms, and suggest that one may be superior to the other. But it really is nothing more than the recognition that it is possible to engage an opponent before physical contact, and that in a weapons, multiple opponents, ambush environment it is a necessity to do so. *** This is off topic and nothing personal… Consider it my attempt at a public service announcement. Quote:
http://begthequestion.info/ |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
regards, Mark |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
In the wrong hands, reliance on atemi can completely contradict the art of aikido. If you want to see how one teacher's exaggerated reliance on atemi affects his interpretation of aikido, read Aikido Techniques & Tactics, by Gary Bennett. On page 41 he explains: "The method portrayed in this book is different in that the initial balance-breaking motion is a good atemi, or strike, that dazes the opponent. The throw relies on the fact that the assailant's balance is now upset and unstable no matter what direction I should choose. There is no need to lead first in one direction and then reverse it. Any motion that is applied to the assailant's balance will result in a throw because the equilibrium is now gone. This approach may seem to some not to fit in this classification of kuzushi, but, even though extremely subtle, it is actually breaking the balance twice." The book, and the author's interpretation of aikido, is reviewed here: http://www.aikiweb.com/reviews/showp...ate=1074812919 |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
If so, I fully agree with you. That makes executing a technique much more effortless that a static attack. |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
Is it saying that any form of initial balance-breaking is considered "Atemi"?? Regardless of whether it is a strike or otherwise?? Or is it saying that ONLY by atemi striking is balance-breaking achieved?? No other ways of balance-breaking is effective?? |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
Traditional Judo Atemi is used for the same purpose as in Aikido (ie: to daze & off-set Uke's balance in preparation for a take-down). |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
It is worth noting that David's quotation of O Sensei comes from 1933; I think it is fair to say that O Sensei's aikido and philosophy of aikido changed a great deal between then and his death.
I'd also like to hear more elaboration on the idea that "Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido". I've known some aikidoists who would say exactly the opposite, that effectiveness is a byproduct of aikido training rather than the goal. I don't disagree with you; I'm playing devil's advocate here in the hopes of getting more explanation. I like what you're saying and would like to understand it better. |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
On the one hand, if your aikido only "works" with half-hearted attacks from people from your own dojo, you're probably missing much of the really interesting study of connection that aikido offers. That study requires attackers who are really trying to take your center, and have some idea of how to actually do so. On the other hand, if your primary concern is making sure that uke falls down (or, as uke, refusing to do so) you're probably *also* missing much of the "good stuff." It's hard to maintain the necessary sensitivity if you're too concerned with "winning" or "losing." If your attackers are good, they'll succeed some of the time, and you need to be okay with that. So I think being aware of openings, aware of breaks in energy flow, etc. is essential to really understanding aikido: as you explore the deeper aspects, the martial reasonableness of what you're doing is one way to tell whether you're on the right track. But that's a much more subtle idea than what most people mean when they talk about whether aikido is or isn't "effective." Katherine |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
What about Saito sensei who learned and taugth atemi in the same way - after the art was named aikido by Hirai sensei? Quote:
What do you mean with "reliance on atemi"? Is there any aikido without atemi? I don't think the cited book is an inspiring example. But there are other books about atemi and aikido. (Traditional aikido, Aikido - It's heart and appearence, Budo, Aikido - Yuruso budo, Aikido shugyo ...) The use of atemi as displayed by Ledyard sensei is very interesting. But first I think it is very important to really learn atemi as a technique in itself even I one doesn't want to use it in such a way. And second I find it also very interesting to differentiate within "a strike as a technique in itself". Because taught as a technique within itself are different possibilities to do a strike. I think striking in yawara, which is the root of aikido, differs from striking in lets say karate. |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
I was under the impression that the atemi in aikido, is what is possible (implied), rather than applied (explicit) - i.e., in ikkyo, you would, in jujutsu, break the arm/elbow - but in aikido, you don't.
And then there are all the techniques which imply that you are holding a sword when you execute them - ruling out the possibility of atemi. And isn't reliance on atemi to break the balance not what you aim for in aikido? - I thought you harmonised with someone, then effected kuzushi through that - rather than hitting them. The techniques i've practiced, which include atemi, I thought that the atemi was used as a distraction so that you could enter - while momentarily vulnerable - and apply kuzushi? And if aikido was all about using strikes to disable someone, wouldn't it be called karate? |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
I heard aikido teachers say you won't try to break an arm, because it is more difficult then to use it to controll the attacker. An I heard teachers of yawara say the same. But more important to me: When beginners start to learn ikkyo, they are told as uke always to bend the arm a little bit. Because otherwise the ellbow may be damaged or even break ... Hm. Quote:
Sounds if your hands are "fixed" like if they really had to hold a sword? We always try to be free and have all possibilities to use our hands, feet, ... everything. Quote:
If the attacker deals with this, techniques evolve. Quote:
What about the atemi to the neck in kaiten nage? The atemi to the side in shiho nage? They are a "surplus" and are not needed to apply kuzushi. They follow it. Quote:
And one reason for not calling it karate is that the (technical) way of atemi in aikido or other traditional japanese arts seems to differ from the way of karate. puh, we don't do a hard or "combative" or very martial style of aikido. On the contrary. But nevertheless my thinking of atemi seems different from yours. |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
And isn't this why so many aikido schools have bokken training, too? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9PTMSwr1h0 'You must be able to employ a weapon using the same movement for a technique to be considered a true martial art.' - Shoji Nishio I loved reading Mitsugi Saotome's Principles of Aikido because he had sequences of photos which would show, for example, shiho-nage performed empty-handed, then with a bokken, then with a jo - and the movement was exactly the same. I guess it'd be good to have your hands free - but wouldn't you feel safer with a samurai sword in them? And isn't that the basis (along with a preparation for ushiro-ryote-dori) of ai-hanmi techniques - someone grabbing your hand to stop you from drawing your sword, or you learning to draw your sword even when your hand is held? I guess I see tai-sabaki as the most fundamental thing: it's no use being able to do techniques if you can't enter, or move off the line - but then, what if someone has you in ryote-dori - how would you strike them? You would have to use aikido... I think I said previously: most or all of aikido is atemi - you just don't see it. This video - like Saotome Sensei's books - is very informative: he talks about how you must know what you can do to a person, in order to choose not to do it to them - i.e., to choose to protect them, rather than destroy them - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bwNbWQUTxU So do I see any atemi when I practice aikido? Yes, I do - i'm constantly aware that I am practicing a martial art, and I am frequently meditating on what aikido means - as a budo, and as a martial art. PS: I train in the British Birankai - Chiba Sensei's organisation. |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
|
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlvGlCP9R8Q |
Re: Effectiveness is the key to obtaining the other aspects of Aikido.
I agree completely with the topic thread of this post.
Most of us are fortunate enough to live in a world where we are NOT constantly called upon to prove the martial effectiveness of our training. Fights can be prevented and avoided easily by someone who is conscientiousness in avoidance; dojo challenges are not only stigmatized but also prohibited by law. This is, of course, a good thing. However, aikido (and all budo) are transcendental in that around the ostensible center of any martial practice (violence) comes a seemingly paradoxical result (nonviolence, or if you prefer, aiki). To my mind, it is the place of the instructor to apply as drastic a circumstance to martial training as is safe while still maintaining basic fundamentals and movements. The student's knowledge then, that they can overcome that conflict, that they've endured that training, that shugyo, allows them theroretically not to seek it outside of the dojo. So, from a martial standpoint (defending our loved ones) as well as a philosophical standpoint, effectiveness absolutely must be at the center of our aikido practice. Nick |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:09 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.