Aiki vs useless waza ?

In my view "aiki" and technique or waza are two seperate themes, but I strongly believe the one leads to the other just like being young has got nothing to do with being old but still there is a clean connection in the sence that the one leads to the other- I guess..?

Why should we distinguish between the two and whats the purpose of that ?

Any thoughts on this anyone ?

Cheers
Lars

Lars Beyer wrote: In my view "aiki" and technique or waza are two seperate themes, but I strongly believe the one leads to the other just like being young has got nothing to do with being old but still there is a clean connection in the sence that the one leads to the other- I guess..? Why should we distinguish between the two and whats the purpose of that ? Any thoughts on this anyone ? Cheers Lars

"I move and techniques are born." Ueshiba.
"Aiki, in me, before Aiki between thee and me." Harden

Most people have no idea how to produce the actual "aiki" that Takeda and Ueshiba were doing and why the above quotes makes so much sense and are the same thing. It is a 180 deg turn around from the way most people even see their art. As I said back on the aikido list "It's full speed ...in the wrong direction." So.....the modern approach substitutes movement and waza to cover their structural flaws and openings.
Ueshiba, Takeda, Sagawa all knew and explained that:
Aiki begins inside you.... not between two.
The modern approach, by its very nature "depends' on the two!!
Another way to look at it is:
The old way is movement of energy
The new way is the energy of movement.

I am taking Jun's and other folks advice these days and spending an effort to explain why, instead of just being critical of the modern approach. Most everyone keeps pointing to the old way and bragging on the skills of Ueshiba and his prewar people without considering those same peoples approach to do what they did.
Dan

waza is the reality, aiki is the mystery

waza will give you very small hints how aiki works

Dan Harden wrote: "I move and techniques are born." Ueshiba. "Aiki, in me, before Aiki between thee and me." Harden Most people have no idea how to produce the actual "aiki" that Takeda and Ueshiba were doing and why the above quotes makes so much sense and are the same thing. It is a 180 deg turn around from the way most people even see their art. As I said back on the aikido list "It's full speed ...in the wrong direction." So.....the modern approach substitutes movement and waza to cover their structural flaws and openings. Ueshiba, Takeda, Sagawa all knew and explained that: Aiki begins inside you.... not between two. The modern approach, by its very nature "depends' on the two!! Another way to look at it is: The old way is movement of energy The new way is the energy of movement. I am taking Jun's and other folks advice these days and spending an effort to explain why, instead of just being critical of the modern approach. Most everyone keeps pointing to the old way and bragging on the skills of Ueshiba and his prewar people without considering those same peoples approach to do what they did. Dan

Now where have i heard that before -

Greg

Mario Tobias wrote: waza is the reality, aiki is the mystery waza will give you very small hints how aiki works

VERY small hints
Ueshiba had an extensive solo training regimen
So did Shirata-Kisshomaru banned it
So did Takeda
Takeda said never teach white people, and only teach one or two per generation.
So did Sagawa
As Sagawa noted:
"Aiki is about training the body, only a fool thinks you can get it from practicing waza."
Here we are decades later.............mostly westerners....talking about aiki from waza.

Okay...who do we want to feel like?
What did THEY do?
They each had a solo training regimen....why?
What did it do?
Dan

Greg Steckel wrote: Now where have i heard that before - Greg

Cool how so many different quotes-spanning eras and cultures...all fit.
Almost like they involved the same type of work!!

Dan

O´sensei was one of a kind and so was the other geniouses of aikido.
Wery few of us will ever be able to reach their level for many very good reasons.
This doesn´t make aikido useless I feel.

My question still stands: What´s the purpose of distinguishing between aiki and waza ?

Aiki is the state or condition and waza is the motion, the 'do'.

Peace.G.

Dan Harden wrote: Cool how so many different quotes-spanning eras and cultures...all fit. Almost like they involved the same type of work!! Dan

Very true - however, I really like this one so much I put it in my signature line because it comes directly to the core of why movement focused training fails for development of internal skills; the focus needs to be the energy

Greg

Greg Steckel wrote: Very true - however, I really like this one so much I put it in my signature line because it comes directly to the core of why movement focused training fails for development of internal skills; the focus needs to be the energy Greg

Still my questions stand, so what will it be ? Answers or not ?
:-)

Lars Beyer wrote: Still my questions stand, so what will it be ? Answers or not ? :-)

OK, fair enough - IMO, you can have waza without aiki and you can have waza with aiki - waza will not create aiki, but aiki can create waza.

Greg Steckel wrote: OK, fair enough - IMO, you can have waza without aiki and you can have waza with aiki - waza will not create aiki, but aiki can create waza.

Assuming you are a white belt 6´th kyu, how do you even begin to understand aikido if there is no waza and only aiki ?
Waza leads to aiki and aiki leads to new realizations thus new techniques. That´s life.
:-)

Lars Beyer wrote: Assuming you are a white belt 6´th kyu, how do you even begin to understand aikido if there is no waza and only aiki ? Waza leads to aiki and aiki leads to new realizations thus new techniques. That´s life. :-)

Never said there is no waza - did say that waza will not develop aiki, but waza can (and should) be used to help understand the effectiveness of aiki. Aiki development is separate from learning waza forms - however, they can be brought together as long you understand the relationship between them; which waza leading to aiki is not one of them, IMO.

Greg

Greg Steckel wrote: Never said there is no waza - did say that waza will not develop aiki, but waza can (and should) be used to help understand the effectiveness of aiki. Aiki development is separate from learning waza forms - however, they can be brought together as long you understand the relationship between them; which waza leading to aiki is not one of them, IMO. Greg

Youre right, there is allways waza and whether or not it develops understanding of or the ability to develop aiki is the same to me.
The buttomline is that waza is indistutable in terms of learning aikido and so is aiki in terms of enhancing your training over time. Afterall were all doing aikiDO- no ?
Cheers,
Lars

Correct motion helps you develop correct condition and correct condition helps you develope correct motion. Interdependent.

Peace.G.

Lars Beyer wrote: Assuming you are a white belt 6´th kyu, how do you even begin to understand aikido if there is no waza and only aiki ? Waza leads to aiki and aiki leads to new realizations thus new techniques. That´s life. :-)

The grand irony of this is it is all backwards, it's sort of like asking: If you've never done math, how can you even begin to understand math if there is no calculus and only learning how to count or do arithmetic? Do we expect people to critique Shakespeare when the only words they yet know are Mommy and Daddy? Look at how most Chinese martial arts conducts learning: body skills, how to move, are primary. Only once the body understands how to move, so that the students' mind is not scattered in a hundred directions just trying to take a step, just trying to hold a defensive stance, just trying to throw a punch, etc. do you even begin to learn to techniques, to learn to fight, etc. I'm not just talking about how to do irimi or tenkan, or how to take a fall, I am talking about how to move, like everything down to the way you wiggle your toes or point your fingers. When that is at a subconscious level done correct, then you do waza. That is a process that by itself takes years. Why is it that aikido has decided it is proper to go the other way, trying to teach waza when a beginner can't even stand upright in-place correctly?

Lee Salzman wrote: The grand irony of this is it is all backwards, it's sort of like asking: If you've never done math, how can you even begin to understand math if there is no calculus and only learning how to count or do arithmetic? Look at how most Chinese martial arts conducts learning: body skills, how to move, are primary. Only once the body understands how to move, so that the students' mind is not scattered in a hundred directions just trying to take a step, just trying to hold a defensive stance, just trying to throw a punch, etc. do you even begin to learn to techniques, to learn to fight, etc. I'm not just talking about how to do irimi or tenkan, or how to take a fall, I am talking about how to move, like everything down to the way you wiggle your toes or point your fingers. When that is at a subconscious level done correct, then you do waza. Why is it that aikido has decided it is proper to go the other way, trying to teach waza when a beginner can't even stand upright in-place correctly?

I like your observations.
From my experience it´s possible to learn techniques- maybe not perfect the first couple of years-
but gradually over time all the small adjustments you are talking about falls into place.
In a way I feel basic understanding of our motory skills from the outset are more important than understanding aiki from the outset.
Sooner or later awase will emerge by itself as a consequence of training.
I don´t believe awase is something that can be taught and learned in 6-12 months.

Lars Beyer wrote: Youre right, there is allways waza and whether or not it develops understanding of or the ability to develop aiki is the same to me. The buttomline is that waza is indistutable in terms of learning aikido and so is aiki in terms of enhancing your training over time. Afterall were all doing aikiDO- no ? Cheers, Lars

The real bottom line here is that your view of aikl and my view of what it is are very different - based on that fact, your statements make no sense to me and mine no sense to you -

Greg

Greg Steckel wrote: The real bottom line here is that your view of aikl and my view of what it is are very different - based on that fact, your statements make no sense to me and mine no sense to you - Greg

Maybe, maybe not. Who knows ? Maybe I understand more than you assume and vice versa ?

Lars Beyer wrote: Assuming you are a white belt 6�th kyu, how do you even begin to understand aikido if there is no waza and only aiki ? Waza leads to aiki and aiki leads to new realizations thus new techniques. That�s life. :-)

Actually, I've found that people who haven't burned in the wrong habits over the years with repetitive kata practice actually tend to do somewhat better picking this stuff up.

"Waza leads to aiki", in theory, in practice I think it's very difficult for most people to extract the principles from the morass.

Best,

Chris

Christopher Li wrote: Actually, I've found that people who haven't burned in the wrong habits over the years with repetitive kata practice actually tend to do somewhat better picking this stuff up. "Waza leads to aiki", in theory, in practice I think it's very difficult for most people to extract the principles from the morass. Best, Chris

Well, you may be right, but then again you may be wrong.. I have a hard time figuring out how to apply constants and fit generalisations to aikido practitioneers.. But from a personal perspective I speak like I do because my first teacher taught me there was no technique and only aiki for 4 years. Then i decided to move dojo and learning technique all the irrational stuff slowly gathered itself to give meaning- but only through UNLEARNING bad posture and bad movement- that took about 3 years.
Thats why for me there is no such thing as no waza.
And still I believe aiki is equally important- when youre ready for it !
But I also feel that if you only learn aiki and poor posture and bad movement from the beginning your aikido will surely suck.
Please bear in mind this is my PERSONAL opinion and not ANYBODY elses !

Lars

Lars Beyer wrote: Well, you may be right, but then again you may be wrong.. I have a hard time figuring out how to apply constants and fit generalisations to aikido practitioneers.. But from a personal perspective I speak like I do because my first teacher taught me there was no technique and only aiki for 4 years. Then i decided to move dojo and learning technique all the irrational stuff slowly gathered itself to give meaning- but only through UNLEARNING bad posture and bad movement- that took about 3 years. Thats why for me there is no such thing as no waza. And still I believe aiki is equally important- when youre ready for it ! But I also feel that if you only learn aiki and poor posture and bad movement from the beginning your aikido will surely suck. Please bear in mind this is my PERSONAL opinion and not ANYBODY elses ! Lars

If you had bad posture and bad movement then...either you weren't leaning Aiki or your definition of Aiki is different then mine.

Best,

Chris

Christopher Li wrote: If you had bad posture and bad movement then...either you weren't leaning Aiki or your definition of Aiki is different then mine. Best, Chris

Like I said,l I don´t really have a big thing for generalisations or people who won´t discuss from a level eyed position.

Lars Beyer wrote: Like I said,l I don�t really have a big thing for generalisations or people who won�t discuss from a level eyed position.

It's not a generalization - in my definition of Aiki posture will be corrected inherently - no way around it.

Best,

Chris

Christopher Li wrote: It's not a generalization - in my definition of Aiki posture will be corrected inherently - no way around it. Best, Chris

What is our definition of "aiki posture" ?