Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-28-2015, 02:43 PM   #26
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Jon Reading wrote: View Post
A couple of things to consider:
1. Aikido is an "aiki" art. I think the best categorization would be that.
2. You have established several scenarios of aikido that are probably (unfortunately) true, but not the embodiment of the art. I am not sure if this is intentional but it certainly sets up some number of incorrect conclusions.
3. Much of the curriculum of aikido is based upon a variety of initial movements, some body controls and some strikes. Some styles also use weapons, which have their own properties. I would look rather at the variety of contact with which aikido trains, not necessarily a specific attack.
1) What is 'Aiki'. Its one thing to say it if you have been training aikido for decades and your understanding is so high, it passes back to simple. And saying it because we don't know what aikido is and are just parroting our senseis, all respect due to them of course.

2) I just feel that it is rather rubbish that an aikidoka could not hold his own against a untrained but resisting opponent. Either we are training wrongly or we have been wasting our time, which is nonsense of course.

3) Variety of contract?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 02:47 PM   #27
Jonathan
Dojo: North Winnipeg Aikikai
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 265
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

I agree with Robin about the snarky and dismissive responses to the OP's thoughts. Dial it down a bit, people. Sheesh!

"Iron sharpens iron; so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend."
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 02:49 PM   #28
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
Regardless of reasons for training, I disagree with your assertion or thesis that a martial art is by definition effective for combat in any situation (lances against napalm?).
In fact each martial art by definition is a system, with its own curriculum and principles, and will have unique strengths and weaknesses based on its focus.
To call a sword an implement for striking is I think to misunderstand the use of the sword.
At root, your basic fallacy is assumption of dualism: "a martial art must be grappling or striking."
Why is everyone bringing in napalm and other weapons of mass destruction? Seriously? Why not talk about nuclear bombs while we are at it?

Each martial art is a system with a purpose. Kenjutsu's purpose is to use a sword. Sojutsu, spear. karate, the body as whole weapon and so on and so forth. What is aikido's purpose? we train ikkyo to gokyo, we practice shiho nage, irimi nage, standing and kneeling waza, and ukemi but for what purpose? What do we aim to do with all that training? That's what I classed martial arts according to grappling and striking, not as categories, but as to their primary focus that is being trained towards.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 02:52 PM   #29
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Phi Truong wrote: View Post
i was going to mention Ellis Amdur's Taikyoku Aikido video. it's quite interesting with his presentation of atemi hidden in plain sight within aikido practices. the question for the OP is do you recognize it or not? does your aikido practice understand it or not? my aikido practice, through Saotome sensei lineage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjk_cLB8yHw, is quite flexible in term of what can and cannot.
Hidden atemi? good! how many dojos actually train atemi as a focus rather than as a by the way to the main aikido techniques. I am putting across that atemi should be the main aim of aikido training and throws come from atemi, rather than the other way round.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 02:58 PM   #30
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Robin Johnson wrote: View Post
Man. Maybe I misread the responses here, but I think I see a lot of unnecessary vitriol towards the OP regardless of the merit of his arguments. If we want to promote thoughtful discussion on Aikiweb, I think we need not to be so dismissive and snarky. Just saying.
Thank you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:12 PM   #31
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Cliff Judge wrote: View Post
No, I just think if you focus on moving and organizing your body in such a way that you could deliver strikes, you will work against your goal of developing the effective Aikido you want.
But what if Aikido was a striking art in the first place?

In most of the recorded duels between in Aikido annals involving O sensei, has it ever been on record that he actively threw opponents in the manner of grabbing and throwing? Or did the throws just... happened? We see a lot of demonstrations where O sensei would utilize sweeping, soft movements to fling ukes around but is that how O sensei actually fought?

Another thought, in one of Gozo Shioda's biographies it was recorded that O Sensei spoke of Shioda as having the 'strongest basics amongst his students'. Now in demonstrations, Gozo Shioda never utilized the sweeping movements that characterised his sensei's technique, instead his demonstration repertoire is all atemi or very straight, no-nonsense movements. Could this mean that aikido fundamentally was a striking art?

Very circumstantial I know, but more research will be done definitely.

Quote:
Cliff Judge wrote: View Post
At the level where the principles are the same, grappling is the same too.
The rhythm of a karate match is very different from a judo or wrestling match I'm afraid.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:43 PM   #32
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,896
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Hidden atemi? good! how many dojos actually train atemi as a focus rather than as a by the way to the main aikido techniques.
why would you care how many dojo train in atemi? budo isn't a group thing. it's mostly personal, as in, for that person only.

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:57 PM   #33
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,568
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
A sword cuts, a fist hits, truly here is a difference. However, does the principle behind behind getting your sword to the target or the fist to the face differ? On a technical level perhaps, but when one looks deeper, the principles are the same.
I support your broader observation about the primacy of striking -- even in the non-striking applications -- wholeheartedly. But at the point of drawing equivalence \between the principle of the fists and that of the sword, I would strongly argue that they are NOT the same and it is that distinction that drives the difference of action involved in the respective arts. A fist impacts bluntly, a sword penetrates and separates. Two entirely different mechanisms of action. And the underlying physics and mechanics of the sword -- not blunt impact -- operate in aikido, even when the sword is not actually present.

Quote:
There is a correlation between the two areas [weapons and empty hand] and as aikidoka or any other martial artist, this is something that should not be neglected.
On this I agree but my ordering is the inverse, and the nature of the sword defines aiki. Even the work with the jo is applying the principles of the sword in a different medium as taijutsu applies it in yet another.

Another way of looking at it is that it is simply aiki being applied across all three domains in aikido, which is not wrong -- but apart from the unnecessary tautology - the sword is the source, in my view.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 05:42 PM   #34
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,316
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Aikido is a martial art, which means that it was used in battlefield situations way back when. Not bare-handed mind, but alongside weapons, formations and any of the other techniques that concerned military affairs in the day.
You might want to familiarize yourself with the history of aikido....

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 05:46 PM   #35
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,316
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
and what then do you hope to achieve with training?
The question is actually what you hope to achieve through your analysis. It seems to me that a deeper understanding of the art in general, and of its relationships with sword, striking, and grappling traditions in particular, can best be discovered through practice.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 05:52 PM   #36
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,316
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Each martial art is a system with a purpose. Kenjutsu's purpose is to use a sword. Sojutsu, spear. karate, the body as whole weapon and so on and so forth. What is aikido's purpose? we train ikkyo to gokyo, we practice shiho nage, irimi nage, standing and kneeling waza, and ukemi but for what purpose? What do we aim to do with all that training? That's what I classed martial arts according to grappling and striking, not as categories, but as to their primary focus that is being trained towards.
The focus (道) toward which aikido (合気道) trains is to join (合) with the energy (気) of the situation in order to bring it back into balance. Grappling and striking are both means toward that end.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 07:04 PM   #37
Jonathan
Dojo: North Winnipeg Aikikai
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 265
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
The focus (道) toward which aikido (合気道) trains is to join (合) with the energy (気) of the situation in order to bring it back into balance. Grappling and striking are both means toward that end.
Well, this is one focus, but not the only one - or even necessarily the primary one - of Aikido. And how do you see the "energy of a situation" brought back into balance with, say, a knock-out punch to the face of your attacker, or a neck-breaking throw of your enemy?

"Iron sharpens iron; so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend."
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 07:04 PM   #38
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,246
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Each martial art is a system with a purpose. Kenjutsu's purpose is to use a sword. Sojutsu, spear. karate, the body as whole weapon and so on and so forth. What is aikido's purpose? we train ikkyo to gokyo, we practice shiho nage, irimi nage, standing and kneeling waza, and ukemi but for what purpose? What do we aim to do with all that training? That's what I classed martial arts according to grappling and striking, not as categories, but as to their primary focus that is being trained towards.
Still a false division. Sorry. Complete traditional martial arts systems (koryu) include empty hand, weapons, use of voice, etc. It is a false dichotomy to categorize them as focused on grappling vs striking; I also think it won't get you far to categorize an art as being "about" either grappling or striking. However if it works for you to investigate in this way, have at it...just note that many of us would consider it a blind alley.

Modern martial arts like karate, aikido, judo were never battleground martial arts.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 07:47 PM   #39
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,053
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Labels are what people want to place on what they wish to do. By saying that you wish to train in aikido, you are already labeling yourself. When you say 'I want to train for (x) reason." Doesn't that label you as training for that specific reason? But then I may be wrong as I did not really understand that point Sincere apologies for that.
Hey, not to worry. The reason I replied as I did -- and I admit I may be very unusual in this -- is that I don't really train for a reason. I don't have some kind of goal or objective. For me, it's "the doing of the thing". And yeah, martial effectiveness, striving for same, is part of that (among other things, there are many parts). But it's not a goal as such, and it's not why I train. I dunno, maybe that's all just a lot of semantic babble. Maybe I'm completely aimless.

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Aikido is a martial art, which means that it was used in battlefield situations way back when.
I don't think this is historically true, but I suppose it depends on what you define as "aikido". The name itself certainly hasn't been around that long.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 07:54 PM   #40
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,053
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
In most of the recorded duels between in Aikido annals involving O sensei, has it ever been on record that he actively threw opponents in the manner of grabbing and throwing? Or did the throws just... happened? We see a lot of demonstrations where O sensei would utilize sweeping, soft movements to fling ukes around but is that how O sensei actually fought?
There are other options than "grabbing and throwing" and "the throws just happened". In my admittedly limited experience, aikido techniques are mostly (entirely?) expressed in those other options.

Maybe the word "throw" is throwing you off, if you'll pardon a pun. It implies that I pick something up and fling it through the air. Consider, instead, what happen if you come running at me and you encounter my arm at head height -- not a strike, necessarily, but there and too solid to ignore. Imagine the result. Did I "throw" you? I certainly didn't grab you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 11:54 PM   #41
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,316
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Jonathan Hay wrote: View Post
Well, this is one focus, but not the only one - or even necessarily the primary one - of Aikido. And how do you see the "energy of a situation" brought back into balance with, say, a knock-out punch to the face of your attacker, or a neck-breaking throw of your enemy?
Attacker lying on the ground unconscious is no longer attacking and therefore no longer contributing negative energy to the world.

Or, if you prefer more precise terminology, all of his kinetic energy has dissipated harmlessly.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 02:01 AM   #42
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Phi Truong wrote: View Post
why would you care how many dojo train in atemi? budo isn't a group thing. it's mostly personal, as in, for that person only.
But that person, learns from the dojo, and what the dojo teaches will stay with that person for the rest of his martial practice. All martial arts moves from the dojo, whether it be big, small or modern, therefore the practices in the dojo must be constantly examined for any flaws and weaknesses. Why do you think finding a good dojo is such a priority for martial artists?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 03:12 AM   #43
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
You might want to familiarize yourself with the history of aikido....

Katherine
Unless you are telling me aikido is not based of Daito-ryu aikijujitsu, which was taught by Takeda Sokaku to O sensei and that aikijujitsu does not have a lineage of perhaps 900 years starting from yoshitsune minamoto and that aikido was not developed from O sensei's studies in swordsmanship, spearmanship, and aikijujitsu and his experiences in Mongolia, against rifle wielding soldiers in the middle of a civil war where he developed a liver condition after being forced to drink salt water which plagued him to his dying day.

I'll concede that aikido is quite recent and it has deviated from aikijujitsu, but it's history is most definitely martial and in fact it has been used in modern military and law enforcement today, which are modern battlefields if nothing else. And if you are saying that that is wrong.

Fair enough
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 05:52 AM   #44
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
There are other options than "grabbing and throwing" and "the throws just happened". In my admittedly limited experience, aikido techniques are mostly (entirely?) expressed in those other options.

Maybe the word "throw" is throwing you off, if you'll pardon a pun. It implies that I pick something up and fling it through the air. Consider, instead, what happen if you come running at me and you encounter my arm at head height -- not a strike, necessarily, but there and too solid to ignore. Imagine the result. Did I "throw" you? I certainly didn't grab you.
What is a strike? If not introducing one's face into another's hand? Why not call that a strike? A strike by any other name will bruise just as easily.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 06:42 AM   #45
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,896
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
But that person, learns from the dojo, and what the dojo teaches will stay with that person for the rest of his martial practice. All martial arts moves from the dojo, whether it be big, small or modern, therefore the practices in the dojo must be constantly examined for any flaws and weaknesses. Why do you think finding a good dojo is such a priority for martial artists?
again, why do you care? and it's not about finding "good" dojo, but finding dojo that fits you.

if you look at O Sensei students, everyone of them did/does aikido differently from each other. same teacher, but different results. why? because each one of them favored a certain thing that fit with their personality. similar with foods. there are certain foods you like, some dislike. i'll bet that some foods i like but you would hate. the student finds the teacher that fit them. if you like atemi, then find the teacher(s) that favor atemi. as i said before, budo is a personal thing.

in my dojo, i do internal stuffs. folks in my dojo aren't interested in it, so i do my things. sometimes they asked why my aikido worked better than their. i said because i worked on these boring internal stuffs. i shown them some of the things i do. they shrugged and went back and did their things.

those who seek find.

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 06:51 AM   #46
jonreading
 
jonreading's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido South (formerly Emory Aikikai)
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,069
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
1) What is 'Aiki'. Its one thing to say it if you have been training aikido for decades and your understanding is so high, it passes back to simple. And saying it because we don't know what aikido is and are just parroting our senseis, all respect due to them of course.

2) I just feel that it is rather rubbish that an aikidoka could not hold his own against a untrained but resisting opponent. Either we are training wrongly or we have been wasting our time, which is nonsense of course.

3) Variety of contract?
In this thread you reference Daito Ryu, so I assume you have some familiarity with aiki arts. The defining characteristic being the use of energy in interaction. And yes, there is a large number of people who are imitating seniors without success in learning aiki, but that does not change what is aiki. If you've never seen the color blue, how do you describe it to someone who has also never seen the color blue?

It is rubbish that more aikido people are not able to cross train with success. Again, pointing to training habits and people who are clearly not intended to cross train and exclaiming "see, they can't cross train" is not the best approach to that argument. And yes, I think there are training opportunities that are both a waste of time and being done incorrectly. You're looking very close at what is wrong in aikido, while not holding the same scrutiny for your comparative arts.

Contact. Aikido is an exploration of contact and interaction. If I have aiki, the manner in which my partner contacts me is not critical. Punch, kick, grab, tackle, whatever. I think the best way in which we define the interaction in aikido is contact. This is why we can perform the same core technique from a variety of initial movements. From one technique springs 1000, and all of that.

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 06:51 AM   #47
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
Still a false division. Sorry. Complete traditional martial arts systems (koryu) include empty hand, weapons, use of voice, etc. It is a false dichotomy to categorize them as focused on grappling vs striking; I also think it won't get you far to categorize an art as being "about" either grappling or striking. However if it works for you to investigate in this way, have at it...just note that many of us would consider it a blind alley.

Modern martial arts like karate, aikido, judo were never battleground martial arts.
No martial art is ever a battleground martial art if you want to put it that way. All martial arts are focused towards preparing a soldier towards the use of weapons in war and the demands of a battlefield so martial arts as we know it are not battleground arts. Technically.

However, aikido at least, is being used in modern battlegrounds. Police forces, the Russian army and the Singapore Ghurka contingent if memory serves, so in that sense, aikido is a battlefield martial art. In practice.

You are right in the sense that traditional martial systems included all aspects of combat, however, there are still divisions as to how a throw is executed or a punch is thrown. Could one punch properly in a clinch? Can one clinch at punching range? Pankration involves multiple elements of combat and each must be understood seperately by pankrationists in order to bring it into a cohesive whole. If Aikido is a complete martial art, we need to understand its component parts before we could bring it together into something that transcends the divisions, and to understand the components we need to identify what exactly is 'striking' or techniques meant to be used as atemi, and 'grappling', techniques that is the traditional form of aikido.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 07:05 AM   #48
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Jon Reading wrote: View Post
In this thread you reference Daito Ryu, so I assume you have some familiarity with aiki arts. The defining characteristic being the use of energy in interaction. And yes, there is a large number of people who are imitating seniors without success in learning aiki, but that does not change what is aiki. If you've never seen the color blue, how do you describe it to someone who has also never seen the color blue?

It is rubbish that more aikido people are not able to cross train with success. Again, pointing to training habits and people who are clearly not intended to cross train and exclaiming "see, they can't cross train" is not the best approach to that argument. And yes, I think there are training opportunities that are both a waste of time and being done incorrectly. You're looking very close at what is wrong in aikido, while not holding the same scrutiny for your comparative arts.

Contact. Aikido is an exploration of contact and interaction. If I have aiki, the manner in which my partner contacts me is not critical. Punch, kick, grab, tackle, whatever. I think the best way in which we define the interaction in aikido is contact. This is why we can perform the same core technique from a variety of initial movements. From one technique springs 1000, and all of that.
1) I think as intelligent practitioners of Aiki and aikido we should make the effort to explain what is aiki in proper, layman terms, to the best of our ability. This is how reasonable men think and aikido is a reasonable martial art.

2) Of course I am looking closely at aikido, I love it and I want to bring it higher, aikido is me and I am aikido, why would I not scrutinize the flaws in my own person to further my development?

3) One technique springs 1000. Very true, what is that one technique? From a punch, a thousand possibilities, from a tackle a thousand holds. But from what physical technique in aikido springs forth the thousands?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 07:31 AM   #49
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Phi Truong wrote: View Post
again, why do you care? and it's not about finding "good" dojo, but finding dojo that fits you.

if you look at O Sensei students, everyone of them did/does aikido differently from each other. same teacher, but different results. why? because each one of them favored a certain thing that fit with their personality. similar with foods. there are certain foods you like, some dislike. i'll bet that some foods i like but you would hate. the student finds the teacher that fit them. if you like atemi, then find the teacher(s) that favor atemi. as i said before, budo is a personal thing.

in my dojo, i do internal stuffs. folks in my dojo aren't interested in it, so i do my things. sometimes they asked why my aikido worked better than their. i said because i worked on these boring internal stuffs. i shown them some of the things i do. they shrugged and went back and did their things.

those who seek find.
That is a rather personal question. Well I love aikido, and since dojos are the place where we learn aikido, shouldn't I care about what a dojo is teaching? Its not just about what suits others, but dojos are responsible for inspiring aikidoka to constantly train and improve, passing on a heritage that extends centuries, and teaching life lessons to the people who step through the doors. Even if it is for a day, even if it is for an hour, even if the student learns other martial arts, a minute spent on the mat should be a minute where one is exposed to a new possibilities and knowledge, this is a standard that all dojo should meet on a general basis, because the art we practice demands that standard, regardless of how we train.

It does not matter if you focus on internal or external, but the fundamentals must be there, if not, you are just doing yoga or some health thing, not martial arts. The martial aspects must be taught, even if you do not focus on them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 07:42 AM   #50
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,896
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
1) I think as intelligent practitioners of Aiki and aikido we should make the effort to explain what is aiki in proper, layman terms, to the best of our ability. This is how reasonable men think and aikido is a reasonable martial art.
the fact that we practicing aikido brings the whole intelligent thing in to question. if we are smart about it, we shouldn't go anywhere near it, but we are here.

men aren't reasonable or even rational which kinda questions the whole martial arts thing, which includes aikido. reasonable men shouldn't be wearing skirts, except for the scotts, but they have an excuse. reasonable men should spend time and money on foods, drinks, and comely member of the opposite sex or even the same.

then the whole question on the explanation of aiki. asking 10 aikido folks on aiki and you got 11 answers. there are threads about aiki on aikiweb that went back to the dawn of time, when men first step out of the cave, scratching their privates and wondering if left over mammoth still good for breakfast. aiki wars had been fought over aiki that burned down half the net, and the other half went looking for a place to carouse and be a public nuisance. many of us still have scars and in therapy with other uggly men armed that with uggly sticks with nails on them. we don't like to talk about it other than over a pint or two or three. you really don't want to know about aiki. i would suggest that you stick with "do", and perhaps, re and mi come along for the rescue.

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If you could buy just ONE book about Aikido techniques, what would it be? Karol Kowalczyk Techniques 45 01-31-2014 11:35 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 24 Peter Goldsbury Columns 6 07-07-2013 05:40 PM
A Consideration of Aikido Practice within the Context of Internal Training Ellis Amdur Columns 71 03-21-2013 08:15 PM
I'm Leaving Aikido Daniel Ranger-Holt General 122 10-07-2010 08:01 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 12 Peter Goldsbury Columns 32 05-16-2009 06:05 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:40 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2016 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2016 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate