Would you kill someone using Aikido if you had to.

Killing people is kinda hard.I doubt many Aikidoka are even physically capable of it.

William Hazen wrote: Interesting...Perhaps you should try to parse this logic a little bit more and see what you come up with. The question was would you kill someone using Aikido Not does Aikido have any killing moves (Which in fact it does in a sense...Every technique fully applied has the potential to seriously hurt someone.) Bowing down to you. William Hazen

I believe that there are killing moves that exist in aikido. Its just not shown fully through practice or you will run out of training partners real quick. The potential is there and through practice you should be able to see it. Ex. Just throwing someone who doesn't know how to roll can break their neck and lead to death.

Roman Kremianski wrote: Killing people is kinda hard.I doubt many Aikidoka are even physically capable of it.

It depends what kind on aikido you happen to be studying Roman.
For instance, the majority of verifiable deaths caused by aikido in the
past 4 decades were in aikikai. Mind you, these were in a school settings and were probably a result of hazing rituals or overworked students being pushed to far. Aikido does have a rather violent history, regardless of the way its often portrayed. I know for a fact that many of my seniors in Yoshinkan could kill very easily. Drop by the dojo if you get the chance.

Roman Kremianski wrote: Killing people is kinda hard.I doubt many Aikidoka are even physically capable of it.

Some people can die easily whether it be a well placed punch or kick to the head. Or could lead to a long term death ex. damaging the lymph nodes. Even holding a choke too long after the person has passed out.

Roman Kremianski wrote: Killing people is kinda hard.I doubt many Aikidoka are even physically capable of it.

hee hee

William Prusner wrote: hee hee

Will has killed many of people in his lifetime.

Pierre Kewcharoen wrote: Will has killed many of people in his lifetime.

Certainly not!

I just appreciate a good taunt.

Back on the topic: It's not my place to decide when any living creature's existence should end. I'm just too ignorant to make decisions like that. I'll leave those tough decisions up to the Kami or something. I do feel confident making the decision to preserve my own existence, and the existences of those who I love who can't defend themselves, it would be irresponsible on my part to do otherwise. The way I understand the Aikido take on this situation is thus: If a person is attacking me unprovoked, then he is obviously a sick individual, as healthy people do not go around committing acts of unprovoked violence. If he's a sick person, it's not neccesarily his fault that he is that way. How would I be helping this sick individual by hurting or killing him, or for that matter, even allowing him to get hurt, or to hurt himself. I should protect this obviously already damaged person from any further harm. Will it be beneficial to him to allow him to bounce his head off of a curb or a parking bumper? No. I must do everything in my power to keep him from harm or I am allowing my baser self to take control and act as low as I am perceiving his initial action to be. I don't go into a cancer ward and start beating people up because I find cancer dangerous and intolerable. It amounts to about the same in my mind.

I should not even respond, but it's like a moth drawn to light...

The semantics of the questions are wrong. "Your attacker will either kill you, or die trying to kill you; do you fight back?" The answer [I hope] for us is, "I will fight." Whether the fight concludes in actual death, or ceases short of death, is irrevlevant. If you choose not to fight, then you do not have a fighting spirit.

The spirit of the question is wherein lies the answer. "Are you committed to action that may result in death?" This is where we get uncomfortable. We cannot commit 100% to something that might kill someone, so we change our answer to, "No, I would look for any other way not to kill..." blah, blah, blah. We cannot say, "I am committed to my action, regardless of the conclusion," because we are not. We then hide behind various and sundry excuses for why we shouldn't kill, don't have to kill, shouldn't be attacked, etc.

We are either committed 100% to our actions and spirit, or we are working on committing ourselves through training. Obviously, a life/death situiation is an extreme scenario, but our answers tell us where our committment lies. That is why we answer this question with a limitation, " I am commited to breaking my attacker's arm;" "I am committed to running away;" "I am committed to asking my attacker if there is another way to resolve the conflict." Our limitation tells us where our committment lies, and where our training has taken us.

So the question is one that evaluates our committment to action. I remember a old story about a WWII paratrooper would refused to jump out of a plane. After a short conversation with his superior, the trooper changed his mind. When asked why the change, the tropper replied, "I told Sergeant I might die if I jumped. Sergeant told me that I might die if I jumped out of the plane, but he also said that if I didn't, he would surely kill me."

It continues to pain me to see aikido people give up on the validity of aikido as a martial art. Your aikido may not be lethal, but I know several good aikidoka who are lethal.

Jon Reading wrote: "Are you committed to action that may result in death?"

No. I am committed to action that may preserve my life.

Lloyd McWhirt wrote: . Long Answer: If someones dies as a result of my actions, it's not aikido. As far as I know aikido does not have any killing moves. hesitation.

Words of wisdom from O'Sensei when training

"Aikido can determine life or death with a single blow, therefore when training observe the instructions of the instructor, and do not engage in contests of strength."

I know everyone has their interpretation of aikido, and viewing this particular question along with others like it really make me wonder why people study Martial Arts, Budo, or even aikido.

I train to better myself yes, but I train because "My understanding" of protection, or self-defense, Aikido is that I have the ability to respond correctly to the situations that I may face.

I study so that I don't have to kill, but by training diligently and sincerely everyday I know if I have to, "God forbid" I will kill the man trying to kill me or others. Aikido does have within it's everyday training the ability to end a life.

I mean no disrespect to anyone and I may get a couple of responses from people ripping me another but hole.

But I am tired of seeing the "Jedi style Aikido"
I am tired of seeing people play aikidoka, and not really training. Aikido is not some dance, with people stroking their aiki-egos "And yes there are huge ego's within the ranks of aikido.

It is my belief "My Belief" that as an aikidoka I should be peacful, loving, kind to all, and do my best to in love reconcile any one who may ignorantly attack me. But I also train everyday like my life or someone else's will depend on how I train.

"The greater the martial artist, the greater the peace-maker"

Again, I don't mean any offense and I will retreat back into my hiding place.

Just venting.

Jason & Jon,
What excellent well rounded answers to a difficult question. As my sensei says on the rare occasions that he gets philosophical, "Turning the other cheek is an admirable trait, but one that I choose not to follow". If you see a loved one in front of you about to be raped or worse, are you going to question what technique to use, where the attacker is coming from, are you going to question his or her motive, or are you going to commit yourself body and spirit to a resolution which may seem "uncivilized" by some.

Jason Jordan wrote: Words of wisdom from O'Sensei when training "Aikido can determine life or death with a single blow, therefore when training observe the instructions of the instructor, and do not engage in contests of strength." I know everyone has their interpretation of aikido, and viewing this particular question along with others like it really make me wonder why people study Martial Arts, Budo, or even aikido. I train to better myself yes, but I train because "My understanding" of protection, or self-defense, Aikido is that I have the ability to respond correctly to the situations that I may face. I study so that I don't have to kill, but by training diligently and sincerely everyday I know if I have to, "God forbid" I will kill the man trying to kill me or others. Aikido does have within it's everyday training the ability to end a life. I mean no disrespect to anyone and I may get a couple of responses from people ripping me another but hole. But I am tired of seeing the "Jedi style Aikido" I am tired of seeing people play aikidoka, and not really training. Aikido is not some dance, with people stroking their aiki-egos "And yes there are huge ego's within the ranks of aikido. It is my belief "My Belief" that as an aikidoka I should be peacful, loving, kind to all, and do my best to in love reconcile any one who may ignorantly attack me. But I also train everyday like my life or someone else's will depend on how I train. "The greater the martial artist, the greater the peace-maker" Again, I don't mean any offense and I will retreat back into my hiding place. Just venting.

Amen....Preaching to the Choir Brother.

Don't hide for too long.

William Hazen

Jon Reading, thanks for that post!

Best,
Ron

Roman Kremianski wrote: Killing people is kinda hard.I doubt many Aikidoka are even physically capable of it.

that is true it sounds like you have well rounded experience

stan

Jon Reading wrote: I should not even respond, but it's like a moth drawn to light... The semantics of the questions are wrong. "Your attacker will either kill you, or die trying to kill you; do you fight back?" The answer [I hope] for us is, "I will fight." Whether the fight concludes in actual death, or ceases short of death, is irrevlevant. If you choose not to fight, then you do not have a fighting spirit. The spirit of the question is wherein lies the answer. "Are you committed to action that may result in death?" This is where we get uncomfortable. We cannot commit 100% to something that might kill someone, so we change our answer to, "No, I would look for any other way not to kill..." blah, blah, blah. We cannot say, "I am committed to my action, regardless of the conclusion," because we are not. We then hide behind various and sundry excuses for why we shouldn't kill, don't have to kill, shouldn't be attacked, etc. We are either committed 100% to our actions and spirit, or we are working on committing ourselves through training. Obviously, a life/death situiation is an extreme scenario, but our answers tell us where our committment lies. That is why we answer this question with a limitation, " I am commited to breaking my attacker's arm;" "I am committed to running away;" "I am committed to asking my attacker if there is another way to resolve the conflict." Our limitation tells us where our committment lies, and where our training has taken us. So the question is one that evaluates our committment to action. I remember a old story about a WWII paratrooper would refused to jump out of a plane. After a short conversation with his superior, the trooper changed his mind. When asked why the change, the tropper replied, "I told Sergeant I might die if I jumped. Sergeant told me that I might die if I jumped out of the plane, but he also said that if I didn't, he would surely kill me." It continues to pain me to see aikido people give up on the validity of aikido as a martial art. Your aikido may not be lethal, but I know several good aikidoka who are lethal.

Another great post....Thank you. This "commitment" is an important part of the Martial Spirit of Aikido...

William Hazen

This is a largely moot discussion contingent on very rare circumstances.

That said, given the right situation I would use whatever technique(s) fit the threat/attack/etc. If it results in fatal injuries to the attacker(s), then so be it.

Almost any Aikido technique could cause grievous bodily harm or death depending on the speed and momentum of the attacker and the physical environment.

Imagine someone sweeping in quickly in with a knife - the Aikidoka counters with a well executed shiho nage - the adrenaline is pumping and the attacker doesn't know how to fall backwards properly - and all this occurs on a cement surface. There's a pretty good chance the attacker will sustain serious injuries to the back of his head.

I'm not sure that I can think of a situation where killing is the only option. I'm certain that I would be willing to do great harm to protect myself or someone else, but I'd like to think that the finality of taking a life would not realistically be necessary. And I think if I had to do it, the manner would not be particularly aiki in nature. In a lethal scenario, the attacker's problems end if he is killed, but those of the defender are just beginning...

Imagine someone sweeping in quickly in with a knife - the Aikidoka counters with a well executed shiho nage -

Imagine if you will, the skilled knife fighter filleting the aikidoka and serving him for dinner....

In my best Rod Serling voice...

B,
R

Jon Reading wrote: It continues to pain me to see aikido people give up on the validity of aikido as a martial art. Your aikido may not be lethal, but I know several good aikidoka who are lethal.

Osu,
Kindred spirit.
Its the person, not the art.
Rei, Domo.

Ron Tisdale wrote: Imagine if you will, the skilled knife fighter filleting the aikidoka and serving him for dinner.... In my best Rod Serling voice... B, R

You may be right Ron. If I saw the way he or she were handling that knife, I'd think about other options. This is why it is important to train in certain other "arts".

Jon Reading wrote:

We are either committed 100% to our actions and spirit, or we are working on committing ourselves through training. Obviously, a life/death situiation is an extreme scenario, but our answers tell us where our committment lies. That is why we answer this question with a limitation, " I am commited to breaking my attacker's arm;" "I am committed to running away;" "I am committed to asking my attacker if there is another way to resolve the conflict." Our limitation tells us where our committment lies, and where our training has taken us.

Good post Jon!

Level of committment is predicated on Choice.

That is, how much ability to you have to control the situation.

The gap between stimulus and response....is Choice.

Sometimes we have it sometimes not.

Choice makes all the difference in the world.

It is a romantic notion I find, mainly iwthin budo arts, that we assume that we have choice always in reality.

Sure we the whole reason for us training is to expand the gap and to give us skills which in theory gives us more choice.

But in reality...that is a completely different animal!

So, if I have choice..well then of course not...I would not kill someone!

If I have no choice...two outcomes. Either I die, or the other dies....

So therein, lie the paradox!

At what point do you dilineate between choice or no choice?

What point do you commit to taken lethal action?

I think it hippocritical, or at best ignorant to think that we can unequivocally say that we would not kill or be a participant in death or killing.

One perspective assumes we have that choice that we can make the decision...always.

The other assumes that we don't.

It just isn't this easy!

Thanks!

Clark Bateman wrote:

I'm not sure that I can think of a situation where killing is the only option. I'm certain that I would be willing to do great harm to protect myself or someone else, but I'd like to think that the finality of taking a life would not realistically be necessary. And I think if I had to do it, the manner would not be particularly aiki in nature. In a lethal scenario, the attacker's problems end if he is killed, but those of the defender are just beginning...

Again, a complex subject at best!

I have trained most of my adult life as an Infantrymen. One thing that I have focused on is honing my physical and mental responses to understand the conditions, situations, and reflexes under which I would make a decision to employ lethal force.

The realty of it is this. There are certain conditions that must exist within the situation/environment AND the ability.

In all cases that I have rehearsed time and time again....it is a split second, instantaneous decision to employ it. You pull the trigger, commit the knife, or push the button, or commit the attack with the INTENT and past the point of no return.

You MUST completely understand and have thought through these situations because you simply do not have the time to meditate on them.

It is a reflex. You either do it or you don't. It is that instantaneous!

So, the big point of my training in the military has centered around developing this.

I think this is a big part of budo and the discovery that takes place as we train.

If you are training and do not believe that you may have to make this choice....I don't really understand why you would train??

You have already predetermined course of action, and there really is no need to develop any further skill!

This is why I find it interesting that people will say that they would not kill...ever,

Roman wrote:

Killing people is kinda hard.I doubt many Aikidoka are even physically capable of it.

Just about everyone is physically capable of killing given the correct conditions/situation/weapon etc. If you can mentally process it, you are capable of doing it! There is always a way!

The real issue is most people are confused about the conditions/situations in which they might do it...IF a BIIIG IF...they had the tools/ability to do it!

What are the triggers? What are the conditions? What emotional state? How do I prepare myself? Am I willing to sacrifice my life?

Lots and lots of issues surround this and reaching an understanding of yourself and this issue.

I think this is a core reason why we study budo...to understand it, is to understand peace and harmony.

It is a paradox for sure!

George Ledyard put in nicely when he said that Aikido teaches us how not to fight. The ability to sense what is around you and move in a manner that does not create the situations that result in a fight is a high level skill. That does not mean that we may not find ourselves in a situation where that is not an option.

Kevin so eloquently described that condition that we train for. In the moment there needs to be "mu shin." If our harmonized connection with the attacker results in an action in which the attacker dies, that is simply what happened. We did not go into that moment looking to do harm. We simply seek to be in the moment to move and act in a manner that preserves life. That means our life first. We do not seek to act violently to intentionally hurt the other person. It would be ignorant to not believe that what we train to do would lead to such an outcome. It would be inauthentic to act in an less than 100% manner because of some fear that we might hurt the other person.

Unfortunately, we live in a world with a lot of sick and amoral people who would not think twice about killing us for what may or not be in our wallets. We do not look to hunt these people down. We do not look to test ourselves by seeking them out either. We do not hunker down in our gated worlds to try and pretend that they are not there. We work to make our world around us as peaceful and as beautiful as possible. We train to insure that we are still around to enjoy it with the one's we love. If that means that somebody died because of an attempt to seriously harm me, then that simply is the preferred outcome, as opposed to having my loved ones throw dirt on top of my coffin.

We all have the potential within us to kill another person. I can only hope that if it is ever to come to pass, that it was to preserve life.

Marc Abrams

Kevin Leavitt wrote: You MUST completely understand and have thought through these situations because you simply do not have the time to meditate on them. It is a reflex. You either do it or you don't. It is that instantaneous!

But it still is a decision. You just said it yourself:

Kevin Leavitt wrote: In all cases that I have rehearsed time and time again....it is a split second, instantaneous decision to employ it.

And an infantryman has by necessity a different agenda than "man on the street". All I'm saying is that I would have to think, however quickly, about alternatives, or suffer the moral consequences if I did not. Cops (and soldiers) are commonly faced with this dilemma, and many grapple with the paradox and suffer terribly their entire lives. Outside the heat of the moment, every one of them probably wished they had found an alternative.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: This is why I find it interesting that people will say that they would not kill...ever,

I certainly would not say that, as I'm sure I could, but it wouldn't be my first choice, and I'm not the slightest bit embarrassed to admit that.