View Single Post
Old 09-07-2002, 03:04 PM   #29
JPT
Dojo: trad
Location: UK
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 69
Offline
"Do" means way or path, & thus implies that the core principles are to be used in all areas when dealing with situations & other people in our day to day life. Therefore Aiki or harmony must be also interpreted in the light of the mental & spiritual aspects of life.

If you take this bad man situation & examine the different aspects then yes on a physical level he could use Aiki to attack & steal the lunch money. However on a mental & spiritual level there is no Aiki (harmony) in his actions. His thoughts about "attacking somebody" or his spirit of "stealing from another" can be not be considered to be in "being in synch/coordination" with his fellow man, rather it is to be in some kind of conflict or disharmony. Therefore (in my eyes) he is not following the Way/Path of Aiki & thus is not doing Aikido

Further to this O'Sensei also translated Aiki to mean something like "universal love", Ai means love, Ki meaning universal energy etc.... This adds a wider dimension to the meaning of "Aiki" reinforcing the harmony aspect & changing it into a more harmonious/peaceful/loving/caring way..
Quote:
What then differentiates a technique that uses aiki and looks like aikido but isn't aikido from one that that uses aiki, looks like aikido, and is?
This is a great question Kent & took me a while to refine the answers. I apologies in advance for the confusing way that the statements are written.

To simplify things I have used the following definitions.

"Philosophical Aiki" meaning the mental & spiritual elements, (ethics, morals, thinking, intentions etc...)

"Physical Aiki" meaning body synch/co-ordination elements, (timing, blending, leading etc...)

If the technique is done based on both Philosophical & Physical Aiki providing the end results of the technique fall within ideals of the Philosophical Aiki then it is Aikido. If the results of the technique fall outside the ideals of the Philosophical Aiki then it cannot be considered to be Aikido.

If it technique is based purely on Physical Aiki, providing the results of the technique fall within the ideals of the Philosophical Aiki then it can be classified as being the same as Aikido & thus could be called Aikido (After all Aikido is only a name). If the results of the technique fall outside the ideals of the Philosophical Aiki then it cannot be considered to be Aikido.

Now to further expand this to include the other options which are covered by the original post question....

If the technique is done based on the Philosophical Aiki but not based on Physical Aiki. Providing that results fall within the ideals of Philosophical Aiki then it can be classed as being the same as Aikido & thus could be called Aikido. If the results fall outside the ideals of Philosophical Aiki then this cannot be considered to be Aikido.

Finally if the technique is not based on either the Philosophical or Physical Aiki & the results of the technique fall outside the ideals of Philosophical Aiki then it cannot be classed as Aikido. However if the result of the technique somehow falls within the ideals of Philosophical Aiki then it can be classed as being the same as Aikido and thus could be called Aikido.

To conclude it is the end result that really matters, if this falls within the ideals of Philosophical Aiki then it can either be called Aikido or classed as being the same as Aikido & thus could be called Aikido.

Ultimately though whether the technique is Aikido or not will depend on the individual interpretation of the Philosophical side of Aiki.


Last edited by JPT : 09-07-2002 at 03:11 PM.
  Reply With Quote