Article: Did Morihei Ueshiba Invent Aikido? by Peter Boylan

I guess we aikidoists tend to think that aikido is unique in its philosophy. But let's not forget that all Japanese MA are based on the Budo ideal, with all what it represents.

Osensei's aikido is based on an even higher philosophy. That's true. But not all aikido styles accept his vision. Yoshinkai aikido for instance never mention Osensei philosophy but does this mean that their technique is empty? I don't think so. Because it's full of Budo spirit.

On the other hand, Chris, if you take out the philosophical side from aikido and leave only the technical, you would get something like the Yoshinkai. Does this make it similar to Daito-Ryu? I guess not. I myself see a great difference.

Cheers,
Edward

Originally posted by Edward I guess we aikidoists tend to think that aikido is unique in its philosophy. But let's not forget that all Japanese MA are based on the Budo ideal, with all what it represents.

The Budo ideal? What exactly is that?

IOsensei's aikido is based on an even higher philosophy. That's true. But not all aikido styles accept his vision. Yoshinkai aikido for instance never mention Osensei philosophy but does this mean that their technique is empty? I don't think so. Because it's full of Budo spirit.

Actually, if you read what Gozo Shioda actually wrote he talks quite a bit about the philosophy. He's just not as religious in his terminology (a lot of Aikikai folks aren't either).

A "higher" philosophy? I won't even touch that one . Different, sure, "higherW, well I suppose it depends on whose point of view you're looking from...

On the other hand, Chris, if you take out the philosophical side from aikido and leave only the technical, you would get something like the Yoshinkai. Does this make it similar to Daito-Ryu? I guess not. I myself see a great difference. Cheers, Edward

See the above.

Best,

Chris

Ya know, I always love reading these threads. Aikido history is interesting. However, when the same banter has been going on for over a month, and it starts becoming, well this happened in O sensei's dojo, no it didn't this happened, and Takeda said this , no he didn't,......I can't wanting to scream WHO CARES.......and repeat what many have before me.......shut up and train train train.

My opinion only, you are entitled to yours, however wrong you may be.

Peace, Kenn

With all due respect, could you please tell us how often do you practice, how come are you reading this thread instead of shutting up and training, and who is forcing you to read the threads?

Originally posted by Kenn Ya know, I always love reading these threads. Aikido history is interesting. However, when the same banter has been going on for over a month, and it starts becoming, well this happened in O sensei's dojo, no it didn't this happened, and Takeda said this , no he didn't,......I can't wanting to scream WHO CARES.......and repeat what many have before me.......shut up and train train train. My opinion only, you are entitled to yours, however wrong you may be. Peace, Kenn

Awwwwww, don't get all riled. I was only pokin' fun. In answer to your questions, I try to train at least 3 times a week. Wish I could do more, but.....family, work, etc.

I have no problem with posting or reading on this thread. I just found that discussion a bit petty is all.

Like I said, you're entitled to your opinion, however wrong you may be.

Peace, Kenn

I can't say I have any kind of answer to this point - perhaps someone who has spent more time with the historical sources than I can lend a hand. I am wondering if two particular aspects of Aikido can be attributed to Osensei - as the first person to bring these elements into Budo (which I will list below in the last paragraph). Before I list the elements though, I would like to comment briefly upon the discussion up to this point.

I would have to agree with Peter in the sense that one can certainly point to both technical and philosophical antecedents, prior to Osensei, in regards to what has become known as Aikido. Hence, if the absence of these things is what you need to refer to Osensei as the inventor of Aikido - you really aren't justified then in calling him an inventor. This goes all the way from the superficial, such as kote-gaeshi, or clearing the line of attack, or not resisting force with force, to the more "mysterious," such as a martial art being a means of self-cultivation (e.g. purification, spiritual awakening, being a good citizen, bringing about a social peace, etc.). The presence of these antecedents is a historical fact and is, in my opinion, really beyond dispute. So here, I would whole-heartedly agree with Peter. In this sensei, Osensei did not invent Aikido.

On the same note, I'm not sure how fruitful it may be to point out or to speak of "stylistic" demarcations (so that one can say that there is some sort of structural break between Daito-ryu and Aikido on the basis of style) since one can hardly point out a definitive something that could be called an "Aikido style". (I think we can see this absence of a definitive style in the part of the thread where the two discussants are stating different experiences with both Aikido and Daito-ryu.) What I mean by this is that Aikido as an art has always had many "stylistic" interpretations and will always continue to do so. This is not to say that some "styles" are not more representative than others. I am only saying that because we cannot really count out, on the grounds of stylistic variation, one style as "non-Aikido," it's hard to use "style" as a criteria for determining what IS Aikido. Some people are hard, some are soft, some are circular, some are linear - some are all things at all times, some are all things at different parts in their lives, etc. Still, this is not to say that there is not some sort of "break" between Daito-ryu and Aikido - this is only to say that matters of style may not be our best means of describing this break. It is in this light that I can consider Peter's point of seeing Osensei's students as playing more of a primary role in what we commonly hold as an understanding of the word "inventor". I think many aspects of contemporary Aikido can be traced directly back to various uchideshi and doshu and not further. (This is not to say that they were not influenced by Osensei, but only to say that for historians, or for people interested in historical matters, the claim to have something attributed to someone prior to your presence - something you see a lot of - has to always been seen in a somewhat skeptical light.) Things that can be attributed to Osensei's various uchideshi - loosely off the top of my head - are: a systematized weapons curriculum, the current multi-tiered ranking system, the current testing requirements and/or established "basics", the point that weapons is not a needed part of Aikido training, the inclusion of mainstream Zen practice, the disappearance or downplay of kiai from training, the further development of ki theory/practice, the secularization of Aikido practice/training/space, a silence over the role of God in Aikido practice, the position that Aikido is not martial, etc. Of course not every reader here can or will agree with these things either being part or not part of Aikido training, but that precisely speaks to my point of Aikido styles. We can see, however, with a broad perspective, that such things do in fact exist within what we refer to as "modern" Aikido, and that none of these things can really be 100% directly attributed to Morihei Ueshiba - for whatever reason. Too note another discussant, who I think had a very close analogy, in the way that Jesus the Jew did not invent a new religion, his followers did, Osensei did not invent what we have come to know as Aikido (generally speaking), his followers did and still do. And as another discussant suggested that we can take away Osensei's uchideshi and still have (what is known today as) Aikido, but if we take away Osensei, we would not - Well, I would have to disagree, take away the uchideshi and doshu, and you would not have (what we know as) Aikido. Again, I agree with Peter on this point.

However, and this is what I am wondering about, may there still be a way in which we can attribute some level of invention or at least some level of "being the first one" to introduce one or more defining aspects of Aikido - a an aspect that is quite in fact both revolutionary and delineating - to the man Morihei Ueshiba? Two things that have always stood out in my mind through my own historical pursuits is the following: 1. The concept of Love in Osensei's Budo/Aikido; and 2. The concept of a universal creator-divinity (e.g. God). (I am not suggesting that Osensei did not have all those other aspects of Budo that Peter has so rightly noted as existing prior to Osensei. As with all things religious in Japan - one thing does not necessarily count out another. So, for example, a belief in the 10,000 kami of Japan in no way is affected by the belief in a universal creator-divinity. Osensei clearly had both beliefs.) But in my own research, which I admit only overlaps here and there with Aikido's history, these two concepts (at least in appearance) cannot really be traced to any martial artist prior to Osensei (Heck - one even has a hard time finding them today in current practitioners! Yikes!). It is obvious that such concepts came from, influentially speaking, Omoto-kyo with it's own doctrine being influence by Christianity and the World religious movement, but I am wondering if any other martial artist prior to Morihei Ueshiba so keenly linked them to Budo training? If not, then in this sense, it would seem to me to be quite plausible to speak of Morihei Ueshiba inventing something: the link between Budo, Love, and a universal creator-divinity and that this thing might in fact be called "Aikido".

kindest regards,
dmv

Originally posted by Dean H. Nothing under the sun is new....right? -Dean

You are very correct in dating what we call Aiki-jujutsu back to the Egyptions. My research has also shown that this form of martial arts is also practiced by the Masai tribe in Africa. It seems that even the hakamas are even a representation of the African Loin Pants.

Apologies if I repeat stuff from previous posts but reading them all is hard work!

Did Ueshiba invent Aikido? I think yes.

Did he invent the techniques? Everyone knows this to be no. No one claims otherwise.

I believe he recognized the essence of all budo as being governed by the Tao. Yin and yang are brought together to create ki. (positive and negative, heaven and earth whatever).

To me it seems a bit like splitting the atom only in reverse.

Pretty heavy stuff.

While other arts may have evolved a philosophy and some may be just techniques I feel this approach is what differentiates aikido from other arts although possibly some of the tai chi variants come close.

Some posters are saying that Aikido techniques are just Daito Ryu techniques or Sword techniques.

Well they may well be but whereas originally the focus was on creating a perfect form the goal of aikido is to use the technique as a tool to bring yin and yang together to create ki.

The recognition of this is Ueshibas creation.

Respectfully

D

Peter Boylan wrote: Actually, I'd say that Kisshomaru Ueshiba, Gozo Shioda, Kenji Tomiki and Koichi Tohei are responsible for aikdio as we know it today. Ueshiba M. wasn't known for teaching things. Peter Boylan

I suppose that depends on your definition of "teaching." If these men learned from OSensei, then it's fair to call him a teacher, in my opinion.
...who's more responsible for getting the pop fly to home base? The center fielder who threw it to the short-stop? The Short-stop who threw it to the catcher? Or the catcher who's standing over the plate? Truth is, Aikido, as we know it today, is just as much the work of those who transmitted the lessons they learned as the one they learned it from. Their impressions were shaped by the man, who's impressions were shaped by other men, and so on down the line into pre-history.

Gotta say I'm surprised Mr. Boylan didn't include Morihiro Saito in his list of venerated Sensei.

Ken Koek wrote: Ya know, I always love reading these threads. Aikido history is interesting. However, when the same banter has been going on for over a month, and it starts becoming, well this happened in O sensei's dojo, no it didn't this happened, and Takeda said this , no he didn't,......I can't wanting to scream WHO CARES.......and repeat what many have before me.......shut up and train train train. My opinion only, you are entitled to yours, however wrong you may be. Peace, Kenn

Here in the United Staes we have the Constitution. A bunch of guys two hundred years ago wrote it. We have the thing in front of us, we've spent years and years studying it and interpreting it. One of the most important distinctions people make when they interpret the Constitution is "what was the intention of the framers" how would they intend their ideas to be applied to these modern stiuations we face. We put a huge weight on this because we respect the wisdom that the original founders of the country had in setting up this system of givernment. So two hundred years later we still care what they intended.

O-Sensei dies in 1969. There are still many people alive who trained directly with him. I think that specualtion combined with a lot of research is quite valuable in trying to understand this art which he created. Why? Because he was wise enough to create the art in the first place. Many of us care what he thought about it and what he intended for it. It matters to us what the individual contributions have been by the people who learned from the Founder and taken his art and made it their own. I hope this is still going on in a hundred years.

Bryan Sardoch wrote: Gotta say I'm surprised Mr. Boylan didn't include Morihiro Saito in his list of venerated Sensei.

perhaps because the ones he mentions were already leaders and teachers when Saito Sensei started aikido as a teenager.

their Saito's sempai
different generation.

AikiWeb System wrote: Discuss the article, "Did Morihei Ueshiba Invent Aikido?" by Peter Boylan here. Article URL: http://www.aikiweb.com/general/boylan1.html

Mr. Boylan, thank you.

Yes. He said, in essence, nothing is new. Nature is older than you, me, us. We need it to survive, we are its' product. The techniques of aikido bring us into accord with life, survival, and eternal essence. What was unique was Senseis' context of application. He left a lot of people behind when he stepped in the truth of his personal, universal realization. We are nature; we are one. So yeah, it isn't new. The tree came first? Or is it the seed? The study of meta-natural principles is the study of all living arts.
Let's all commit to listening and lose our precious opinions in the interest of true happiness.
There's so much to love and enjoy on this road. Let's also be sure to be respectful to all arts, all of us, all the time.
Thank You

Why are you all so caught up in 'who invented this and that' just worship in the fact that you are fit and healthy to practise Aikido.

Ross Groves wrote: Why are you all so caught up in 'who invented this and that' just worship in the fact that you are fit and healthy to practise Aikido.

Yep, that's pretty much what we've been doing since the thread ended... ALMOST A YEAR AGO!!!!!!!