Joep Schuurkes wrote:
Aikido is based on sword movements.
This makes sense if one is a samurai: you only have to learn one set of movement principles.
But aikido was not intended for the samurai, so why base aikido on sword movements?
It leads (or can lead, or whatever ) to an effective martial art, that I don't wish to question. But doesn't it make aikido too difficult? One example would be that aikido often requires a distance in which you would be able to cut with a real sword, if you had one?
So my question eventually is: isn't basing aikido on sword movements in a way overkill? (As in effective, but more difficult than absolutely necessary.)
(I know what I have written above is not completely correct, but it is the closest I can get at this moment to that vague idea I had yesterday. Perhaps I'll do better after some replies.
Does it make aikido too difficult? not for me.
My understanding is that the sword base is used to simplify learning.
very simplistically....You get to cut up and cut down...the location of the butt end of the ken should assist in developing an awareness of ones centre on completion of the cut and at the same time promote a hand position that is also central.
weapons and tai jutsu work are complementary, Aikido can be practiced without learning via both but the cross referencing should simplify things.
In terms of movement principles if you see them as two sets and not one then maybe you need to look at the commonalities rather than the differences.
Aikido is not about becoming a master swordsman.
Just my thoughts