View Single Post
Old 10-08-2005, 09:11 AM   #161
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,319
Re: atemi is 90% of Aikido

Mike Sigman wrote:
Here's the original quote, Peter. It does not say what you're attributing to it:

"Secondly, even without being "percussive", I can generate fairly large power in each of those techniques, even if I just put my hand on someone before I do the generating. That power can be learned from suburi done correctly, IMO."
The above is a lot more clear after later qualifications - it wasn't then.
Just because the word "atemi" is being used doesn't mean that we're talking about a specific subject that is restricted to "Japanese martial arts". We're getting back into this Japan versus China versus the West, etc., that is really a "my style is best" discussion, at heart. I think an accomplished martial artist (note that word "accomplished"... meaning having more than just a superficial knowledge about limited issues) from Japan or from China or Indonesia or wherever, just looks at these things as being simply all part of the same thing. "Atemi" has to do with striking and the why's and how's of doing so.
Sorry but I thought this thread was about what was meant by Ueshiba M. when he referred to Aikido as 90% atemi. How did Ueshiba M. think about his atemi, what did he refer to as atemi, this is the basis of the discussion. Like it or not Ueshiba's world was the Japanese martial arts and there is nothing to suggest that Ueshiba's view of atemi was altered beyond those boundaries. We could look at his doka, we could look at what long term students of his say on the matter and how they practice it. Gozo Shioda's view has already been mentioned as was Kenji Tomiki's (not initially by me). My contention is that if you look at the broader definition of atemi used within the Japanese Martial Arts (described by others in this thread) 90% becomes easily understandable.

Insofar as the discussions about Tomiki Aikido, it gets a little sketchy to pretend that a style which has incorporated judo and randori is the same thing as traditional Aikido in all respects. I simply don't see any point in arguing the obvious. Certainly if I taught a combination of Aikido and BJJ I would have the grace to acknowledge that it was not the founder's art instead of impeding all discussions with a "no, no they're the same thing" stance. At least acknowledge the *possibility* and show some flexibility in the discussion.
All the techniques studied at Shodokan Honbu were taught to Tomiki by Ueshiba M. Judo specific techniques are not and never were incorporated - there was a conscientious effort not to (Mochizuki took another tack and did incorporate). Since the discussion revolves around technique (specifically what atemi means), Kenji Tomiki's long association with Ueshiba M., is a valuable reference point. What makes it even more valuable is Tomiki's academic bent - he classified and named technique according to function. Relationships are very clear.

Again as an aside since you choose to play keeper of the faith I have yet to have any visitor to Shodokan Honbu or my dojo tell me that the techniques we perform are not Aikido. That includes Shihan level Aikikai, Yoshinkan instructors and Ki Society. Not one of them had any trouble understanding why atemi waza are referred to as such.

Finally, although I don't consider myself an accomplished martial artist, mainly because I have been exposed to some truely greats, one can't blame me for getting a little tired of these constant suggestions that somehow you are and the rest of us heathan are not. Perhaps it true - perhaps not. Its irrelevant to the discussion.

Last edited by PeterR : 10-08-2005 at 09:19 AM.

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote