"Competition"

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: I think there was a problem with the translation. The original statement was probably "We ceaselessly pray that fires should not occur. For this reason we strictly prohibit matches in Aikido" Makes more sense this way.

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: I think there was a problem with the translation. The original statement was probably "We ceaselessly pray that fires should not occur. For this reason we strictly prohibit matches in Aikido" Makes more sense this way.

Here is the website of one of the two translators of the quote I introduced:

http://www.brushmind.net/index.html

Tanahashi Sensei is an amazing scholar, artist, and zen practitioner and student of Osensei since he was a boy in his early teens. He has contact information (and I hope he doesn't mind me pointing out that fact!) on his website. I'd be curious as to how many ways certain things could be translated...

but fires (assumably metaphorically) or fights, is there any potential discrepancies about the "strictly prohibit matches in Aikido" part?

Oh wait, you're putting me on, right... thanks Janet - that's how thick I can be...

Corky Quakenbush wrote: Other than that I take from it that those interested in competing are not interested in what Osensei called "true budo."

Is this also for Kendo, Iaido, Jodo, Judo.....?
When you enter a shiai with 100persons, only 1 will be champion (? ) all the rest are losers. I don't think most of the competitors are joining a competition to become a champ, they join the competition to understand their own level under pressure. A competition can learn you a lot about yourself. Once Kenji Tomiki ( and also his assisten Hideo Ohba) said randori/shiai is painting in the eye of the dragon.
In Tomiki Aikido, the competition is only a small part of the training. It is not the ultimate gaol.

My thoughts,
Eddy

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: I think there was a problem with the translation. The original statement was probably "We ceaselessly pray that fires should not occur. For this reason we strictly prohibit matches in Aikido" Makes more sense this way.

Demetrio

Thank you for some sound common sense

Henry Ellis
Co-author `Positive Aikido`
http://britishaikido.blogspot.com/

Chris, of course we can only write about what makes sense to us, and in my practice I have found that the further I stray from a mind of acceptance (including say, an acceptance that If I fight there is someone in the world who can beat me) the less likely I am going to experience the magnificence of an effortless manifestation of aikido. In my dojo, no one goes along with a throw and if I try to throw anyone the aikido will fail or both partners feel that force was used to obtain a result - a throw.

Usually the evidence is in retrospection, that is I thought I was being non-competitive at the time, but in the failing of aikido to manifest, I must acknowledge the fact I had a disguised intention which was ultimately defensive, not harmonious.

By working this way, aikido for us will only manifest with intention to connect to uke's center in a harmonious way, even in harmony from a hard style aikido perspective, but the way that connection is made also produces an effect on the conflict resolution or lack of.

One can send a concentrated flow of ki to uke's center (hard style aikido) or send that energy with the intention of supporting. When this state of being occurs within nage, whether nage is a seasoned instructor or our lowest ranked student, the aikido manifests instantly. It will manifest instantly as well if the state of mind is about counter attacking with using aiki principles, but in terms of victory over self my purpose in practicing aikido failed because it makes me feel personally powerful, no matter how my ego wants to dress it up in some kind of faux humility. I definitely prefer the feeling of the matter turning out well at no one's expense.

I see no reason to compete for this reason and from my perspective, anyway, my reasons are in alignment with Osensei's reasoning. It may not appear like that to anyone else.

I mostly entered this forum discussion because people were saying they could find no written evidence of Osensei prohibiting competition, and if he did, why? and I had been reading that very page the other day.

As for whether Osensei was there and allowed that struggle to ensue in the "rendezvous with adventure", as brilliant as Osensei was if you read the biography in the book Aikido you can see a mere human trying to live up to his own visions and ideals, not a god (who like you and I, never shows one sign of hypocrisy or ego!). I can't imagine Osensei watching his student go at it with this brute from the U.S., pitting aikido against good old grab-and-throw-ya, and thinking "Yes! My student has found the essence of this art!" Can you? All I can imagine is that Osensei had retired for the day and that student was really lucky that Osensei never caught that show on netflix... lol

Corky Quakenbush wrote: Chris, of course we can only write about what makes sense to us, and in my practice I have found that the further I stray from a mind of acceptance (including say, an acceptance that If I fight there is someone in the world who can beat me) the less likely I am going to experience the magnificence of an effortless manifestation of aikido. In my dojo, no one goes along with a throw and if I try to throw anyone the aikido will fail or both partners feel that force was used to obtain a result - a throw.

That's fine, of course, but that doesn't mean that other people don't have different experiences.

Corky Quakenbush wrote: As for whether Osensei was there and allowed that struggle to ensue in the "rendezvous with adventure", as brilliant as Osensei was if you read the biography in the book Aikido you can see a mere human trying to live up to his own visions and ideals, not a god (who like you and I, never shows one sign of hypocrisy or ego!). I can't imagine Osensei watching his student go at it with this brute from the U.S., pitting aikido against good old grab-and-throw-ya, and thinking "Yes! My student has found the essence of this art!" Can you? All I can imagine is that Osensei had retired for the day and that student was really lucky that Osensei never caught that show on netflix... lol

It's pretty well documented that Tohei engaged in the match with the full permission of Morihei Ueshiba. No need for imagination.

Best,

Chris

Christopher Li wrote: That's fine, of course, but that doesn't mean that other people don't have different experiences.

Yep!

Christopher Li wrote: It's pretty well documented that Tohei engaged in the match with the full permission of Morihei Ueshiba. No need for imagination. Best, Chris

if you say so, but still, what about the many ways of saying competition is "okay in Aikido" that can be mistranslated into "strictly prohibited?"

If you are saying the Founder of Aikido is guilty of hypocrisy, I wouldn't argue with that - but which do you think he really believed? And if he believed competition in aikido was okay but allowed himself to be quoted in print in a book he conceivably wanted to be seen around the world saying the opposite, that kind of makes the Founder a bull$#!T artist, doesn't it?

Corky Quakenbush wrote: Yep! if you say so, but still, what about the many ways of saying competition is "okay in Aikido" that can be mistranslated into "strictly prohibited?" If you are saying the Founder of Aikido is guilty of hypocrisy, I wouldn't argue with that - but which do you think he really believed? And if he believed competition in aikido was okay but allowed himself to be quoted in print in a book he conceivably wanted to be seen around the world saying the opposite, that kind of makes the Founder a bull$#!T artist, doesn't it?

Well, there are a number of places where he was...flexible with the truth - but that's another discussion.

If you're read my other posts you'll see that I'm not arguing that he was secretly in favor of comptetion. In this very thread, I said:

I think that it's fairly clear that he was opposed to competitive matches for a number of reasons.

OTOH, we have him participating in "matches" on a number of occassions, and endorsing "matches on others - so it seems clear that an argument for an absolute prohibition would be pretty difficult to make.

It seems to me that he made general statements against compteition, but his actual behavior was not quite that strict on a case-by-case basis. Pretty typical for Japanese, really...

Best,

Chris

Was Tohei in a match? If it's the one in that old black and white film I wouldn't call that a match. I'd call it using Aikido with someone who wants a match. Ueshiba invited the demonstration, hardly a match.

You could say everyone he ever invited to test him was a match but as he described pretty ceaselessly was about within yourself.......not to do with the other really. Hikitsuchi explains his words plainly enough I would say.

Inside you know if your intention is to beat, to win, to dominate etc. or if it's to give joy to, give life to, give comfort to etc. A high aim granted but those who do it successfully to any degree get an understanding of what no competition means.

My two pence.

Peace.G.

Graham Christian wrote: Was Tohei in a match? If it's the one in that old black and white film I wouldn't call that a match. I'd call it using Aikido with someone who wants a match. Ueshiba invited the demonstration, hardly a match.

I wouldn't really call it much of a match either - it's just the phrasing that was used in Corky's original post.

Best,

Chris

Christopher Li wrote: I wouldn't really call it much of a match either - it's just the phrasing that was used in Corky's original post. Best, Chris

Indeed. Found a couple of your 'interview' postings very interesting recently. Nice.

Peace.G.

The reason I called it a "match" is because that is what it was called in essence by the American... "Herman is still skeptical about how aikido will do in a rough and tumble. His instructor (assumably Tohei) agrees to operate on the principle of gentleness..."

What is the next intention after "I'm skeptical" that would lead to what you saw on video besides, "prove it to me" or "let me prove it to you?" It was a testing, not a real attack with real aikido. It started with respectful bowing for gosh sakes. What kind of real conflict starts with your assailant bowing to you? Really Graham? someone agreeing to take on someone looking for a match isn't agreeing to a match?

Nor was it training. At least I've never seen aikido training that looks like that. I think you really have to stretch to consider what they were doing was NOT a test, a match, a contest meant to show both participants who had the better method for dealing in "rough and tumble."

But if you guys are accurate in your assertion that this was not a match or competition, and what was shown during that part of the video was really aikido, and not someone trying to prove aikido is ineffective against "rough and tumble" with the other participant trying to prove it is, then please tell me that your own aikido looks like that in your dojo.

If not, can you tell me why it doesn't?

Corky Quakenbush wrote: The reason I called it a "match" is because that is what it was called in essence by the American... "Herman is still skeptical about how aikido will do in a rough and tumble. His instructor (assumably Tohei) agrees to operate on the principle of gentleness..." What is the next intention after "I'm skeptical" that would lead to what you saw on video besides, "prove it to me" or "let me prove it to you?" It was a testing, not a real attack with real aikido. It started with respectful bowing for gosh sakes. What kind of real conflict starts with your assailant bowing to you? Really Graham? someone agreeing to take on someone looking for a match isn't agreeing to a match? Nor was it training. At least I've never seen aikido training that looks like that. I think you really have to stretch to consider what they were doing was NOT a test, a match, a contest meant to show both participants who had the better method for dealing in "rough and tumble." But if you guys are accurate in your assertion that this was not a match or competition, and what was shown during that part of the video was really aikido, and not someone trying to prove aikido is ineffective against "rough and tumble" with the other participant trying to prove it is, then please tell me that your own aikido looks like that in your dojo. If not, can you tell me why it doesn't?

I said that it wasn't much of a match, as in - it was a pretty poor "match", if it was one.

Anyway, we don't have too many "matches" with out of shape American TV reporters, which is probably why it doesn't look like that.

What are you getting at?

Best,

Chris

I am getting at the same thing I started getting at Chris - it was a match (whether much of a match or not) because it was two people out to prove something by seeing who could better the other.

Tohei Sensei, in agreeing to the competition, had to put himself in a mind to win, not in the mind of someone who wants no fight. This shows in how many times he tries to throw the American, the only time the guy goes down is when his intention to deck Tohei transcends his reflex to stay balanced.

I'm pointing out that competitions look like this (ugly), but aikido never does...

Corky Quakenbush wrote: I am getting at the same thing I started getting at Chris - it was a match (whether much of a match or not) because it was two people out to prove something by seeing who could better the other. Tohei Sensei, in agreeing to the competition, had to put himself in a mind to win, not in the mind of someone who wants no fight. This shows in how many times he tries to throw the American, the only time the guy goes down is when his intention to deck Tohei transcends his reflex to stay balanced. I'm pointing out that competitions look like this (ugly), but aikido never does...

Well, perhaps Aikido never does if it's in a constrained and agreed upon situation, which covers the way that most dojo train.

In any case, I don't happen to think that competitive situations look particularly "ugly" - just a little messier.

Best,

Chris

Eddy Wolput wrote: Is this also for Kendo, Iaido, Jodo, Judo.....? When you enter a shiai with 100persons, only 1 will be champion (? ) all the rest are losers. I don't think most of the competitors are joining a competition to become a champ, they join the competition to understand their own level under pressure. A competition can learn you a lot about yourself. Once Kenji Tomiki ( and also his assisten Hideo Ohba) said randori/shiai is painting in the eye of the dragon. In Tomiki Aikido, the competition is only a small part of the training. It is not the ultimate gaol. My thoughts, Eddy

My sentiments echo Eddy's comments. I train in Aikikai aikido, but I think any kind of aikido or martial art would greatly benefit from some sort of competition. I also train classical weapons arts and we engage in all sorts of tests and competitions among ourselves, but it's not about one-upmanship and defining winners and losers, but about self discovery, pressure testing and serious study. So far I have not seen people being crushed spiritually or fostering wrong personality traits from engaging in competitions; on the contrary I see it bringing people together, becoming better friends and training harder (as a good competitive outcome will clearly and unequivocally identify areas for improvement). I think some form of standardized testing and/or competition would greatly help aikido with the issues of delusions of skill, hero-worship, and passive-aggressive BS.

Eddy's mention of iaido among other arts (that include matches/competitions) makes a good point: can anybody say that iaido practitioners (or Kendo, jodo, etc.) are not doing "true Budo"? Furthermore Ueshiba didn't become so famous by just talking... he had to test his skills against a most likely hostile and demanding crowd didn't he? And what if he did really mean to prohibit matches and competitions in Aikido? Is it possible he might have been wrong and matches and competitions are actually good for Budo? Shouldn't we at least try it?

-Gerardo

Corky Quakenbush wrote: The reason I called it a "match" is because that is what it was called in essence by the American... "Herman is still skeptical about how aikido will do in a rough and tumble. His instructor (assumably Tohei) agrees to operate on the principle of gentleness..." What is the next intention after "I'm skeptical" that would lead to what you saw on video besides, "prove it to me" or "let me prove it to you?" It was a testing, not a real attack with real aikido. It started with respectful bowing for gosh sakes. What kind of real conflict starts with your assailant bowing to you? Really Graham? someone agreeing to take on someone looking for a match isn't agreeing to a match? Nor was it training. At least I've never seen aikido training that looks like that. I think you really have to stretch to consider what they were doing was NOT a test, a match, a contest meant to show both participants who had the better method for dealing in "rough and tumble." But if you guys are accurate in your assertion that this was not a match or competition, and what was shown during that part of the video was really aikido, and not someone trying to prove aikido is ineffective against "rough and tumble" with the other participant trying to prove it is, then please tell me that your own aikido looks like that in your dojo. If not, can you tell me why it doesn't?

Well I'm sure in the days of samurai in that age of their budo it was imperitive to bow first (and not lose face) and also a match in those days, in that environment, would have to be seen in it's context rather than modern day context when using the word. The result of such a thing would be death. Persons of that ilk, which I call the real fundamental martial attitude, boy do they respect. The attitude wouldn't be much different to the old English gentleman, take ten paces, turn, fire.

Ueshiba for instance trained to kill before the war as did those doing that kind of martial art. It was to kill, not to contest or test or play. That type of mindset also is a kind of no competition mindset too for it is only a do or die mindset. Thus their harsh training was do well or get hurt badly.

So Aikido technique wise and indeed and especially mindset wise did indeed have it's roots re: daito ryu etc., especially the sword work and thus swordsman or weapon man attitude.

So when someone wanting conflict full of bravado and mouth and any other disrespectful thing challenges I myself am not interested. To me they are not worthy and in fact are too cowardly to be honest. Show me someone who bows so to speak or gives immovable respect and I'll show you someone I see as more than worthy.

You are right in one respect therefor that it was not a real match. I would say it was much more real to the American guy for he was trying his best but as you say yourself Tohei was just showing a little, a principle of gentleness.....that's all. That principle of gentleness was part of his Aikido was it not? Just that small part was enough to satisfy and also give the American something to think about was it not? He thus got an answer to his question didn't he? Plus a little bonus of course at the end, one finger wasn't it? So it was a little demo of a small part of the art answering a question.

The fault as I see it is once again people. The fact he asked for how it would do in a rough and tumble doesn't mean the person agreeing is then going to enter into a rough and tumble. No, he entered and kept to a few certain principles only. Thus one was doing rough and tumble while the other was doing something he didn't understand.

Can you not see that asking how Aikido would do in a rough and tumble is like asking how would no competition do in a competition? That was the demo. Yet the real demo of course was via Ueshiba himself, as I recall I was amazed when he seemed to drag the guy like he was a weightless rag doll.

As far as seeing Aikido training looking like that I've seen plenty and I'm sure you have too if you think about it. It usually happens after training when people are experimenting it also happens when someone is testing theirself against let's say an experienced wrestler or judoka and both are let's say for arguments sake about second dan level or less. So things 'looking' the same I've seen plenty. So once again you are right for it wasn't what would be called training.

So back to life and principles. Rather than getting stuck in the view of if you agree to partake when someone wants a match or competition means you have entered into a match or competition look at it this way. What about just agreeing, unbeknown to the other, to have some fun.

I once used to go play a board game called Risk on a friday night. Boy were they all into competition and outwitting and all the usual. They just couldn't work me out. I didn't care for I knew what I was doing, I was having fun just playing. It freaked them out really because they couldn't see how I was having fun and not caring as to whether I won or lost. So it's a choice. I could play that game to win or to enjoy.

So that's an introduction to the concept of game. A match is a game, a contest is a game. The opponent is thus playing a game. Why play his game? When you do you have entered the contest. When you don't you haven't. I demonstrated this point to a boxer last year. I told him when he asked a similar question re: if he used boxing. I said if I competed with him he would win every time. I even showed him. Of course I had no chance. I then sparred with him wher I did what would really be called keeping ma-ai but mixed with mirroring everything he did. It was a no contest. No winner, no loser. Then I did a demo of Aikido. Again no contest but this time others would consider I was the winner.

I did not enter his game, his competition, his considered match.

Have you not ever experienced doing similar and being met with a response of 'yeah but you use Ki, or you used that stuff you do or similar? In other words "you didn't play by the rules!" Thus, enter those rules and you are indeed in a competition, a match. That's a different game.

So as I see it potentially there is a state of no competition, a state of continuous winning. Thus there is a state also of no match no matter what the other is doing or how it's perceived by anyone watching.

Now I don't know your view on what I am about to say but I will give you my view anyway.

The state of continuous winning is similar but not the same as beneficent intention and universal love. For me it is part of 'true' aikido (as we all like to call it) but is purely the expression of active non resistance. To make it even harder to grasp is the fact that all aspects including beneficent intention and love are also non resistive. Thus all is potentially divine.

To put it succinctly your way of Aikido or the main core of it that you talk about and demo I would equate with a fan. The pure non resistance I speak of is more a life giving sword. So most times when watching Ueshiba I see a sword dance and later in life more fan. However I never see competition.)

Give me a couple more lifetimes and I'll come and show you

Peace.G.

Oh, by the way Corky. If someone asked me to watch that 'incident' from the view of competing or even resistance for to me they are one and the same, then I would be busy pointing out when he wasn't in competition and when he was. In and out. in and out. For as much as I admire and even promote Tohei's way he did have quite a bit of ego and thus it showed or interfered if you like at that time. I wouldn't be surprised if Ueshiba arranged that on purpose actually so that both may learn something.

Peace.G.

To derail this thread a bit further; I always use the example of Tohei and the American whenever someone tells me that there is (should be) no competition in Aikido. And that's what Aikido looks like unless you have very cooperative uke's or someone with superior skill. And Shirata also comes to mind, whenever they needed someone, in those days, to clean out someone who doubted aikido, he was called upon and Ueshiba approved of this, to say the least. And Ueshiba himself, he became famous for what? For saying whenever he was challenged: 'No, I don't do competition, only a fight to live or die'.

Of course I am using 'competition' in a broader sense than the one limited to actual matches with rules and judges. Competition in Tomiki Aikido are those very visible events which are what everyone talks about. But those competitions are only the visible part of a methodology, a methodology that consists of a three step program to develop skill: kakari geiko, hikitate geiko and randori. (Anyone who recognizes a similar system in Shinkage Ryu?) A step by step program with at one end two people going at full speed with all the conviction the can muster. Tomiki believed that a there was a dual road to proficiency, kata and free style. They should be in balance as both ways should influence (inform and penetrate) each other. It's not just about doing beautifully choreographed movements or just fighting. Putting the eyes back in the dragon, he called it.

Exactly Patrick - great post.

Some of the most elegant and beautiful Aikido I have seen was during randori. Perfect timing, focus and kuzushi - it takes real skill to pull off that level of aiki under those conditions.

just to stir the pot a little further.
Chiba Sensei once told me about a challenge issued to the Hombu by a sumitori.

Tohei Sensei was delegated to deal with it by O'Sensei and I remember Sensei telling me all of the then deshi lining up to watch "to see who would win" - sounds competitve to me.

BTW Tohei Sensei won; apparently using a combination of Aikido and punching/striking.

Phillip, you wrote, " BTW Tohei Sensei won; apparently using a combination of Aikido and punching/striking"

I just sit here contemplating that sentence with a small frown on my face. Tohei Sensei "won." Using a "combination." Aikido AND striking.

Man, we could spin off a couple good threads on that sentence, right tere....

Eddy Wolput wrote: Is this also for Kendo, Iaido, Jodo, Judo.....? When you enter a shiai with 100persons, only 1 will be champion (? ) all the rest are losers. I don't think most of the competitors are joining a competition to become a champ, they join the competition to understand their own level under pressure. A competition can learn you a lot about yourself. Once Kenji Tomiki ( and also his assisten Hideo Ohba) said randori/shiai is painting in the eye of the dragon. In Tomiki Aikido, the competition is only a small part of the training. It is not the ultimate gaol. My thoughts, Eddy

Well said Eddy, you must be a Tomiki guy as well. Good to know there are a few of us out there.

Wow - old thread revived. I taught wrestling in NZ for five years and was always astounded at the rate of progress of my high schoolers. They were competitive of course, but more than that, when shown new techniques their immediate impulse was to test it out and to try to make it work against 100% resistance, in the true wrestling scenario. No messing about with kata - straight to the point, And that, I believe, is why they learned so fast. More than being competitive and wanting to win, they were just really hungry to learn and to know that what they learned worked. And if not .. how to make it work. And it did work as they came back with several medals in national competitions. Competition can be a great tool for learning ... but fails if it produces conceited arrogance. It works for wrestling because the rules keep it safe.