Tom Newhall wrote:
I agree, simple is better, but I don't think that "definition" = "description" Not to mention, that translation of the word "Aikido" comes with a lot of ambiguity, and inaccuracy.
Good responses, but keep trying...
I agreeTom that the translation doesn't give the best depiction of what the art is like but in the action of performing the joint locks, pins, throws, one must indeed harmonize energy to make it work, save, a steven seagal iriminage.
When asked, I usually just give the literal translation and if the curiosity continues, I explain in enough detail so perhaps they may want to come by and check out practice.
I would say to each individual that trains aikido, "aikido" istelf may mean something unique to that person. For example, one might train aikido because:
1. It workd in synergy with my religion
2 .I need to feel martially competant.
3. I need to excersie the mind and body to become one.
4. I like to throw people
4. I seen a Steven Seagal movie
So, people have different reasons for training and for the person that is in to aikido for spiritual benefits will highlight that atribute when aske the same question but saying "Yeah, we throw people and defend ourselves but it really works in harmony with my spiritual nature and helps me to get in tune with....yadda....yadda.
I might be rambling here but regardless of the various reasons that one "thinks" aikido is good for, there are invariant truths to the nature of training the art itself. No matter what, it will probably take the learning of 5000 techniques to master a few and truely gain the concept of what it means to devlop a path of harmonization to allude danger and restore peace.