Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
I have seen this growing interest within the internet Aikido community to define "Aiki" as a type of body skill that creates almost magical physical power. I'm very skeptical of this, and would like to attempt a discussion in order to help me develop my understanding or lack there of, in respects to the word "Aiki".
I am a professional Aikido teacher, making my living by teaching on a daily basis. Six days a week I'm in the dojo teaching, exploring and developing my understanding of Aikido. So naturally defining the word "Aiki" is important to me. Beyond an intellectual understanding of the word, it's important to me to be able to study the phenomenon that the word is describing. So I would like to explore the common definitions of the word, their social validity, and the tangible phenomenon these definitions are describing. I have so far found three martial definitions of the word "Aiki": A) A situation created by two people, of equal skill wherein neither can make a successful attack, locking them in a stand off. B) The ability to understand, blend with, lead and manipulate the mind/intention of another person. C) A body ability, that once acquired gives it's practitioner great physical power, making them seem unmovable and strangely forceful. Definition " A" comes from somewhere between the 12th and 19th century Japan. It is used by several different martial arts systems. There is no doubt that this was, at least at one time the known and accepted definition of the word "Aiki" as it related to martial arts. Is this how Ueshiba, and/or Takeda were using the word, questionable, but doubtful. I would love to hear any thoughts on this! As far as it being an examinable phenomenon, yes it is. It is describing something that happens commonly, and we've all witnessed/been a part of. We can see it not only in traditional Japanese martial arts, but also in modern martial arts (when two boxers spend a whole round "feeling each other out") and in non martial situations (like in a verbal argument when both people stop and stare at each other). It is something that absolutely happens, and we can study it in many different situations. Definition "B" comes from somewhere between the 19th and 20th century Japan. It is used mostly by Daito ryu, and Aikido, but does appear in some other modern martial arts (probably influenced by it's use in Aikido). This is basically the definition used by the Aikikai to describe Aiki. Is this how Ueshiba and/or Takeada used the word, this is currently a hot bed of discussion, I would venture a guess that most people in the Aikido community believe it is. As far as this being an examinable phenomenon, yes it is. We can see this type of exchange in many different sporting ventures, from Football to Sumo to Chess and Poker just about any competition the pits one against another. We can see how understanding ones mind, and their proceeding physical actions is possible, and can be studied in many different situations. Definition "C" comes from, it's really hard to say, some proponents of the idea say that it's very old, although I don't think there isn't any historical evidence to prove such a claim. Most likely this definition comes from the late 19th or early to mid 20th century, perhaps Japan or the United States. It is used by some larger Aikido groups who put an enfaces on Ki, and several splinter Aikido and Daito ryu groups. Is it how Ueshiba and/or Takeda used the word? Again, it's very hard to say, lot's of historical references are being made that suggest perhaps they were, but then again, neither of them were big on writing things down themselves, so it's hard (if not impossible) to say. Can the phenomenon it describes be examined. Again it's very hard to say. There is a pretty strong belief among the proponents of this definition that very few people have IT (Aiki by this definition that is). So there is a very small pool of people that could be examined or tested. Among these people there is also lot's of discussion about who may or may not have it. Of those people, who may have it, to my knowledge none have offered themselves up for scientific study, or entered into a competitive venture where their ability gave them a clear and unusual advantage. In one since we could see if someone who claims to have this ability (Aiki by definition "C") seems to have physical power beyond what one of their size should have. However this power must involve another person. There is a necessity for this power to be used on another person, and not inanimate objects. So we can't rely on typical examples of physical power (like lifting heavy things, or moving quickly). There is also an expressed need that the power "be felt" in order to be understood, which by it's nature makes it subjective and not objective. This makes it very hard to examine. Can the phenomenon it describes be objectively examined? I'm not sure. If it can I would love to see examples. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
oldie but goodie FWIW :)
Quote:
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
From Aikido Masters, p279-280.
Quote:
But then again, does aiki only describe a phenomenon? |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Aiki, in my interpretation, is ANY movement to engage in the most natural and straightforwardest manner to absorb uke in the goal of making two bodies into one.
If the movement is not natural and the most straightforward (ie the blending does not come automatically, not most efficient way to go from point A to point B), this is not aiki. My theory is that because of these 2 factors, you can do the techniques with minimal or no contact. Aiki is automatic in the point of view of nage in terms of his blending if these 2 factors are present. Aiki is automatic in the point of view of uke as to his response to nage's intention whether or not the engagement by nage has commenced. Aiki IMHO therefore is not concerned only with nage's control of his mind, body and spirit to unify these but also tries to control uke's mind, body and spirit to unify everything into one body. During the technique, there is no nage nor uke but just one body until uke is thrown. This is just my theory. My 0.0001 cents. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
There is a chapter in "The secret teachings of Aikido" that is named "Aiki is the Marvelous Functioning of Breath". If you have a comprehensive book on qi gong, you may read the capter of Ueshiba and try to use the qi gong book as a "dicitionary". I don't know, whether this works, when one does not practice qi gong or tai chi or another comparable art. But if so you will be able to translate Ueshibas words. Not only it's meaning, but you often will be able to translate them right into certain movements. For different reasons this don't will work in an exact way. There will be many questions, depending on the translation of Stevens, on the different schools and ways of qi gong. And so on ... But: You will get some clue, what Ueshiba is talking about. (And he is clearly talking about something that is goining on within your own body. The relationship to a different person or body or society is something that can and will happen when the individual realizes aiki. You can use aiki in interaction. But the interaction is not described as "being" aiki in which way ever.) This is about what the term "aiki" means. It's not about where the term itself comes from, is used first time and so on. This is a different matter. So I think, aiki is not "a body ability", but it is a way to understand the interplay of body, qi and mind. To form and to train this interplay by certain methods. And finally - if possible - to use this interplay. Be it for getting healthier. Or be it martially. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
I also note that you and Michael Varin seem to know each other (you mention him here http://www.aikidostudent.com/content/?p=324) and that you are both from the Aikido Fresno dojo. But reading his posts on AikiWeb, Michael Varin seems to be in the "C" camp. Apparently he even organised a Mike Sigman workshop in your dojo in march 2010 (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17415). Do you and Michael Varin ever talk about this? Did you participate in Mike Sigman's seminar? Of course you don't owe me or anyone else an explanation, but all this does not make sense to me. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Why exhaustively repeat. Phi will have a fit!! :D
Is this a discussion or a disingenuous effort toward a foregone conclusion and closed mind? A, B, and C, are one but C comes first as part of and to make A and B more efficient. The confusion over C and how it could possible related to A and B, is because so few get C that it is a non starter in any discussion. Once you come to fully realize C the entire "discussion" or debate is resolved and makes perfect sense. Solo training Why did Ueshiba continually discuss solo training and the individual model when asked about "aiki?" When asked about aiki his drawing a circle and stating it is opposing forces has been mentioned by me several times and never addressed. Why and how does this make any sense in producing aiki what-so-ever? When offering to define aiki his stating it was dual opposing spirals in the body makes sense how? How does guest hand/ host hand and five and five make ten, seven and three make ten makes sense in solo first, then in an encounter? Why were they ancient models re-quoted? Discussing Koryu and vector approaches is interesting, though you are of course leaving out drawings of cones as multiple lines of force-starting once again with yourself. How would Heaven/earth/man and six directions (other solo training methods taught as Katori and Kashima shrine) effect the founder of shinto ryu in such a profound way that he said no one could stop his ken once he understood them? Why are those teachings thousands of years old? Why do virtually all of the worlds high level arts focus on solo training? In Taiji, what does it do to make jins? How are jins, aiki? Paired encounters How is the soft power gained and inherent in the type of solo training discussed by so many provide answers to several of the koryu models definition of producing the aiki offered in Yoshimine Yasuo's examples? How would you successfully enter and overcome in those models? Lifting weights? Eating your Wheaties? Better timing? Then Aiki is timing and lifting weights? Maybe solo training changes your body and organizes it in a sophisticated way that entering in and overcoming as outlined is so much easier that warriors noticed a profound difference ...thus giving this type of training a worthy notation as not only different but superior? The masses are always right or the case for the lowest common denominator. Why did certain men who stood out practice differently and so often point to the same methods; Solo training first? What did solo training do for them to cause them to stand out in the first place? What does "Stand out"....mean? What does it mean to be arguing for a case... To feel like everyone else? We can make a case for the gym rats being right; lift, run and practice timing. And that is all there ever was to doing those Asian arts better. I ain't bettin on that....ever. The joining of Internal strength or internal power and aiki I will make a case that solo training gained prominence because changing the body changed the way it responded and felt to the "majority" or masses. So much so, that the difference was profound and life altering for those who encountered it, that they sought out a means to train it. Hence those men in turn, stood out as different and dominant. The "feeling" they produced was soft power and aiki. This soft power creates aiki as a default state and also gave birth to aiki ....as a skill. This is why Ueshiba could state "I...am aiki!" Or "I am the universe!" It was this soft power that is inherent as part of you in a default state, that also produced a more sophisticated skill -that is also aiki. It was this that accomplished "the fitting in" models so described in the koryu models. In other words, Aiki exists as a state *and* a skill beyond the norm. So much so, that it stood out among warriors and fighters who were the masses of average Joe's. I find it perfectly natural that it is the average Joes, the masses, who are just as perplexed now as they were then. It is precisely because of the masses not getting it that there is a yearning to know what the greats did. If not for the greats doing something out of the ordinary: a. No one would have stood out. b. No one would have felt different c. We would not be here having this discussion. The only real argument seems to be the masses wanting to argue that the results they gained (to feel like everyone else) Is supposedly what those who did *not* feel like everyone else...were doing as well. In other words...Do more of what the masses are doing....to be different? Dan |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
From some things I've been reading of late, and something that Dan's comments were just flavored with is, I believe yet another definition of "Aiki". I think it goes a little something like this:
D) A body skill, that once acquired, allows your body to automatically adapt to movements and changes made by an attacker/opponent, that make the opponent feel strange, weak, unable to adapt to you. This definition D is something that I feel is newly arising, and maybe I'm wrong but I also believe Amdur Sensei is kind of talking about (However I am still waiting my copy of HIPS, which should be here Monday). Dave, Michael Varin and I train together on a regular basis, he teaches the Saturday class here at Aikido of Fresno. I don't know what "camp" Michael is in, I have a good guess, but I'd let him speak to it. I am in camp "A" and camp "B". I do believe Ueshiba was describing mostly camp "B", but due to some recent reading, it's hard to say exactly what he was talking about. I'm starting to become a fan of the idea that Ueshiba called anything he "Liked", "Aiki" and anything he didn't like not "Aiki". I am interested in camp "C" because I teach Aikido (the way of "Aiki") it's important to understand the way of the thing you teach. I saw the usefulness of internal, studied it with an internal expert, got what I found useful and moved on. It does seem magical, at first but once you understand it, nothing that couldn't be basically understood/used in a year or two (in a non task specific context). I would also say that most all professional athletes are basically using internal in relation to their specific skill set. It's part of the reason professional athletes seem so amazing. So I don't understand the way that people around here are using definition "C" and exactly what it is that they are pointing too. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Are you saying you can connect your body in "a year or so"??? - boy do i wish that was the case! The body changing method takes years of daily torture for want of a better word. Its not just taking bits from an internal system!!
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
I'm saying that what I found, from training with an internal expert was pretty straight forward. Integrating that into your task specific context will, no doubt take some time.
Like a football running back, understanding the theory of what he needs to do is pretty straight forward, he can learn the exercises, drills and methods of training pretty quickly, he won't be a good running back for years to come. But he also won't believe the process is mysterious or that only a few running backs will ever be able to do it. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
I read your description of type "C" and type "D". I think your description of "C" would be closer to IP / IS and "D" to Aiki. C would then be a prerequisite for D.
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
D. correctly stated is a result of and part of C. But I don't buy the automatic portion of. It all begins with C. If you have studied internals in an internal art- you would understand all of this. In a classic model it is seamless. Quote:
Quote:
I would say that your discussion point of athletes all having internals is empty and unsupported. You logically have to follow that with all exceptional martial artists are just superior athletes then. . Quote:
I would only state that this is the most stunning and unique example of "understanding internals" I have ever read. I think we should send notice to people who have spent 11 years in China and 44 years in Aikido....wasting their time. Chris Hein got it in a year or two. Tens of thousands of people could save a lot of time and money and travel from around the world to train with you. All due respect, Chris, I propose that you don't know what internal training actually is, and why it takes so very long to learn. Dan |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
All things being equal Training under an Aikido shihan (who lived in Japan for 11 years) makes that Shihan an aiki expert? And your logic being consistent, then anyone studying under said Shihan got it one to two years....right? I think it is telling that you continue to equate athletics to internals and external blending to aiki. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
Overall it is ...you...who are saying that is your understanding of what he means. There is a more profound ancient example for up and down energy and forces in the body. Its called heaven/earth/man, outlined by generations of extraordinary martial artists in different cultures..you might have heard of one of them; Ueshiba. Aiki age/ aiki sage as positional dominance through rapid changes to arrive first or take him off his feet. Force his head down and press him into his legs then.....Sweep the leg... is just jujutsu, Chris. But hey..if that is all someone knows then that is all they know. They see everything through those glasses. Your statements that Aiki is just moving around and timing and Athletes are internal experts too ..are going to present a hollow argument to thousands of Daito ryu practitioners and ICMA'ers as well. They know full well there is a higher order. A higher level of training. But I suspect many are used to this sort of explanation. I tried tackling a different explanation for you. Oh well. Good luck in your training Dan |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Dan,
No office but I'm not interested in talking about me. However would like to know more about what you and others think, I shared my experiences as part of a fair trade, to find out more from others. I would like to discus the definition and phenomena that are attached to any definition of the word "Aiki". Thanks. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
I would personally define internal as it relates to what I learned from/of Chinese internal as: The Ideally most efficient use of the body as a tool. Relating especially to physical structure and alignment. Would you say this is something relating to "C" or something similar or something different all together? How and/or why? I can see how "C" might be an important part of learning "D" but not a necessity. Could you briefly explain a bit more? |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have every interest and intention of being polite. I think I left enough material for an intelligent response or thoughtful consideration. Dan |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
I'm sorry if my statements offended you. Now let's get back to the discussion. Thank you.
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Is aiki the same thing as jin? Is there a relationship?
One has to admit if it is something similiar, the chinese have a lot better terminology to describe it. |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
My discussion points stand, most of them not yet addressed. Cheers Dan |
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
What if the word aiki, in native contexts, is no more specifically descriptive than the word internals?
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
Quote:
|
Re: Defining the word "Aiki" and looking at the phenomenon it describes.
I suggest that these are not different definitions of aiki, but causes and effects, provided one starts with the premise that C is the definition of aiki.
If aiki is a body ability, that once acquired gives it's practitioner great physical power, making them seem unmovable and strangely forceful. then it stands to reason that once acquired, it would allow your body to automatically adapt to movements and changes made by an attacker/opponent, that make the opponent feel strange, weak, unable to adapt to you. It would also stand to reason that two equally skilled opponents when looking for an opening would be in a situation created by two people, of equal skill wherein neither can make a successful attack, locking them in a stand off and that if one person was more skilled than his opponent that he would have ability to understand, blend with, lead and manipulate the mind/intention of his opponent. In essence, it's like the blind men and the elephant, each describing a different animal because they each got hold of a different part. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:41 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.