Jason Jordan wrote:
So here's the question. If I practice Mae Geri, and Hiza Geri, and small circle Ju-jutsu, BJJ waza, but apply the "Principles" of Aikido, would it not still be Aikido? A technique is just that... a technique.
But not all techniques are aiki techniques. And not all applications of aiki are aikido.
Jujutsu is a case in point. It is not only possible to apply aiki within a context of goju (hard/soft, push/pull) principles and techniques -- this is what, as I understand it, aiki-jujutsu does. Aikido takes the sword principles of connection (ki musubi) and uses those instead of goju as the operating principle in combat.
It is like the difference in using engine torque to turn a wheel for weighted traction acceleration or to turn a shrouded propeller for ground effect lift. Same basic type of powered torque conversion, slightly different orientation in application and utterly different operating principle for powered motion. Each has its offsetting tradeoffs, costs, uses and limitations.
I can use ground effect aerodynamics and streamlining in a weighted traction context, just as I can use aiki in a jujutsu context. But it is not the same as taking the aerodynamic principles all the way and abandoning weighted traction as a principle of powered motion.
A tracked tank and a typical hovecraft are both rather rectangular, both traverse very tough ground very effectively, can carry heaavy loads, and can follow precisely the same path in doing so, but they do it very differently.
One is not necessarily better in an absolute sense, but grave misunderstandings occur when the assumptions applying to one are used to try to categorize the other. Only if you look closely, and understood what is happening, might you see that the interface of the tank with the ground is utterly unrelated to that of the hovercraft. It is only when the hovercraft hits the water that it starts to seem really spooky, especially if you thought it was a tank you were watching, and are not well-versed in ground effect dynamics.
Jason Jordan wrote:
But Aikido being a Do...path, way trancends simple technique. Doesn't it?
Too true. But the differences are real, not merely formal.