Ted Ehara wrote:
I've seen locking/pinning techniques that used levers or went against the joint. Even though these techniques were shown in an Aikido dojo, I'm unconvinced they are Aikido in origin. They might be Aiki-jitsu in origin, but probably not Aikido.
To "prove" that Aikido techniques do go against the joint, you would have to document a technique that went against the joint. Ideally the documentation would include Budo or other early works on Aikido. Off hand, I can't think of such a technique.
Like Kisshomaru Ueshiba noted, the real difference is the attitude of the practitioner.
on both points for Aikido, not going against the joint and attitude, Kisshomaru Ueshiba and Koichi Tohei are in complete aggreement.
Maybe it's not shared by every "aikidoka", but that these two men agree
on this perhaps should make those who practice aikido consider how they
practice and what their goals are in practice.
The only problem with biomechanics I see is the ways some I have seen practice ikkyo,nikkyo,sankyo that does go against the joint even though there exits just as or more effective methods that go with the joint. Certainly some displays of kotegaeshi or shihonage crank the joints against their natural direction forcing ukes to be highly trained to avoid injury. And what some call rokkyo seems to be effectively operating on hyperextension of the elbow joint in a form of an arm bar (not part of our syllabus but some Aikikai teachers do it). The open question in my mind is whether these practices are a legitimate path for Aikido or just misunderstandings about taking up slack or people introducing alterations/techniques for various reasons. Personally, it's not the path I am interested in but may be why some have trouble seeing distinctions between aikido and jujutsu.