rokyo/rokkyo

Hi, I was just reading another thread (snap punches) and rokkyo (sp?) was mentioned.
My own (limited) opinion is that this move isn't really aikido. It is just waki-gatame from judo. What other instances of a straight arm-lock are there in aikido?
Is it not specifically against the tenets of aiki to use a move that goes against the natural movements of the body?
I'm not saying that I'm right, it's just that what I've been taught before rokkyo followed the ideals of aiki, but this move doesn't.
Hope someone has an answer for me, cos this move annoys me. (And can be done better sometimes in judo when changed to ude-gatame)

Originally posted by mj Hi, I was just reading another thread (snap punches) and rokkyo (sp?) was mentioned. My own (limited) opinion is that this move isn't really aikido. It is just waki-gatame from judo. What other instances of a straight arm-lock are there in aikido? Is it not specifically against the tenets of aiki to use a move that goes against the natural movements of the body? I'm not saying that I'm right, it's just that what I've been taught before rokkyo followed the ideals of aiki, but this move doesn't. Hope someone has an answer for me, cos this move annoys me. (And can be done better sometimes in judo when changed to ude-gatame)

Four Thoughts:

1. What makes you think that rokkyo has to be done as a "straight arm-lock"? Why can't it be done in a manner that fits your definition of "aiki"? Perhaps more emphasizing a spiral downward and just using the rokkyo lock to keep connection?

2. What makes you think that your definition of "aiki" is anyone else's? I think my definition of what you're referring to as "aiki" is doing the very least that restores "harmony" be it verbal or breaking someone's elbow.

3. Why would you think to have even a limited opinion of what is and is not _aikido_? That's a really huge concept.

4. What makes you think that the elbow doesn't move naturally in the direction that even an elbow-dislocating rokkyo does? It does. A dislocation occurs from moving it past the normal range of motion. How is that any different from ikkyo, nikyo or sankyo?

Sincerely,

Hi all! Actually I think rokkyu is one of those technique, when you get it right, feels really great, effortless and very aiki. The movement of ukes arm (and ukes center!) is never stoped just spiraled down and up. Having his/her punch not collide with anything but insted redirected in this manner and with his/her elbow locked, uke will feel his shoulder and center forced down with no effort from nage - Aiki! according to my concept of it.
Picture a bird coming with great speed to land. In the last second the bird does a narrow circle and ends by direct the speed up. Now all the speed has ended just above the ground and the bird lands comfortably.

Hi,
I'm the one that first mentioned rokkyo.

I would agree with Jacob, in that rokkyo doesn't have to be unblending. One of the important aspects to it (as far as I do it), is blending with the strike (and extending it further)so you can raise the wrist and drop ukes shoulder without force. You then have a pin of similar form to ikkyo, which you can take diagonally back down the length of their arm (rather than putting pressure directly on their elbow, although the elbow is locked).

To me techniques in themselves are neither 'aiki' of 'non-aiki. Every aikido technique I know can be found in other martial arts (usually ju-jitsu, judo or tai-chi) [except yonkyo, though I may be wrong abou that one]. It is very much how you do them. Gozo shioda is said to have discussed a strike to someones sternum (in a real situation) as a realisation in aikido because he put his whole body behind it (Angry White Pygamas book - though I wouldn't believe everything that is written there).

It is a fallacy to consider that aiki does not go against the natural movements of the body. Although many 'stretch' ligaments, I would query whether these are natural (nikkyo induces pain to put someone down, as does yonkyo to some extent). Also there are techniques which can go against the joints e.g. rokkyo, sumi-otoshi (i.e. the one where you raise their right arm with your right hand and extend your left arm under their elbow), even an ikkyo pin goes against the joint. I think this is maybe why some people feel that Aikido is not effective - because they don't realise that with some of these techniques people are compliant because to do otherwise is not beneficial. The idea however is to blend to the extent that they feel it is them throwing themselves (ideally). That is my view anyway, and I'm sure it will change in the future.

Ian

Hmmm, all fair points. Except I don't agree with the sumi-otoshi one, because I threw someone with that earlier this year, and 'felt' it.
Hi Greg, to answer...
1 Cos that's the only way I've been taught it

2 I wouldn't presume to say that my opinion is better than any other, but I still don't think that a straight armlock is aiki.

3 Of course I have an opinion of what is/not aiki, it develops and changes, and if I'm puzzled I ask questions. When I'm (regularly) stuck, I find help.

4 This is a harder point. As I have been taught rokkyo, it's not a dislocation move, it breaks the elbow, also... as every one has different physical extension abilities, you do not know if your initial move will permanently injure the other person, which is likely. So I don't see it like the other osae-waza.

Of course, that is why I asked. I'm not flaming, just confused. I haven't seen rokkyo in any authorative books. ie Budo/Essence or Dynamic Sphere

Well wakagatame or rokkyo is one of the basic 17 techniques of Kenji Tomiki and as such is in any number of authoritative books.

There is no need to bear down on the elbow, what it does prevent is uke from standing up because then he applies the pain to himself. Uke's mobility is restricted and at the mercy of tori who could be a right bastard if he wanted to by just dropping down. Most of the effect is through the control of the wrist.

Like most Aikido techniques you can shift from control to nasty with very little alteration in intent and action.

Again it all depends on what your definition of Aiki is - but if it is the use of your opponents energy then the application of wakagatame is pure Aiki.

Originally posted by mj 4 This is a harder point. As I have been taught rokkyo, it's not a dislocation move, it breaks the elbow, also... as every one has different physical extension abilities, you do not know if your initial move will permanently injure the other person, which is likely. So I don't see it like the other osae-waza.

Originally posted by mj Hi, I was just reading another thread (snap punches) and rokkyo (sp?) was mentioned. My own (limited) opinion is that this move isn't really aikido. It is just waki-gatame from judo. What other instances of a straight arm-lock are there in aikido? Is it not specifically against the tenets of aiki to use a move that goes against the natural movements of the body? I'm not saying that I'm right, it's just that what I've been taught before rokkyo followed the ideals of aiki, but this move doesn't. Hope someone has an answer for me, cos this move annoys me. (And can be done better sometimes in judo when changed to ude-gatame)

You cant say this is not aikido its judo it doesnt work like that. Any tecnique in judo Im sure Ive seen many high grades in aikido performing. The body can only move in certain, so there are not tecniques which are specific to one art it is universal. I have a picture of o'sensei performing a choke...thats judo you say, well know it is still aikido. You also hear, 'that guy is performing his tecniques with lots of power, he's not doing aikido hes doing jujutsu' no this is also incorrect. You dont arrive at jujutsu by doing soft aikido and vice versa. ie. you have kotegashi in jujutsu, judo , aikido ,silat and many many others. You could say '' but in judo you have sacrifice throws etc you have them in aikido also Ive seen 8th dans in aikido perform tomenage throws in international demonstrations, along ateji such as knees and even elbows. This is all still AIKIDO, and I personally feel this is one of the biggest misconceptions in aikido. The phrase that enoys me most when people are describing aikido is ''in aikido there is no attack or offence'' is the purpose of irimi lost on these people? If someone is attacking your girlfreind entering and using a sokamun iriminage on them and removing them from your partner is STILL aikido. The people who come out with that statement, have obviously not investigated the art properly. Its like saying 'in KARATE you only use your feet'.

Back to what you were saying about the arm lock. You are entitiled to your opinion, and im sorry if it seemed like I was giving a lecture.

I wish you happy training


Matt Banks

please forgive earler spelling mistakes. I rattled that post off v.quickly





Matt Banks

It's cool Matt, I understand.
I'm not arguing with anyone, I've done less than two years aikido. However (uh-oh) what I'm saying is... I can't find anywhere that O-sensei taught this technique. Now I know aiki develops... it has it's own life, I just can't get my head around where rokkyo CAME FROM, see?
I agree that many moves are seen in different arts and are interchangeable, especially judo/aikido. But I have tapes of O-sensei, Chiba, Tohei, and many others (not Tomiki) and I have NEVER seen an armlock. I've seen 'ude-garame' but not 'ude-gatame'. The first is a dislocation, the second a breaking (kansetsu) waza. I don't mean disrespect, because I'm sure you all have more experience than me. When did armlocks become part of aiki? Why is it aiki? (Obviously, your version, not mine) (Help )

Doka of the Day - May 09, 2001
Aiki!
A way so difficult to analyse.
(But one needs only to) follow
The natural rotations of the
Heavens.

- Morihei Ueshiba

That's my opinion of aiki!

Originally posted by mj I've done less than two years aikido. However (uh-oh) what I'm saying is... I can't find anywhere that O-sensei taught this technique.

Well there is a lot out there that's not on tape or in books although rokkyo is. The fact that all Aikido styles have something like rokkyo is a pretty big clue that it came from a common denominator - read Ueshiba M - and pretty early on.

Now I know aiki develops... it has it's own life, I just can't get my head around where rokkyo CAME FROM, see?

The technique, as used in Tomiki Aikido, is attributed to Tenshinyo-ryu although I have seen similar techniques which were attributed to Daito-ryu. I trust the former source much more than the latter source though.

The first is a dislocation, the second a breaking (kansetsu) waza, not mine)

Kansetsu waza means joint techniques - does not matter if you are talking control or dislocation/breaking. Both 'ude-garame' but not 'ude-gatame' are kansetsu waza.

Not sure if it's what you mean to do but it sounds like you are pre-defining what Aikido is. This techniques goes against certain esoteric principles therefore it can't be Aikido. Aikido never discarded techniques, some styles, more or less, modified techniques.

Hi, PeterR
Kansetsu, as far as I know is to do with breaking. Anyone can break. What I think of aiki is ... say this maybe... ikkyo ni,san,yon,go, shiho, tenchi, irimi, kaiten, kote. No breaking.
O-sensei said there are six pillars of aikido. Kokyo, Shiho, Irimi, Ushiro, Osae and Kaiten. Breaking is not part of any of those, as far as I know. Now, I certainly don't claim to understand these principles, and I don't mean to offend or argue with anyone. Breaking bones doesn't seem to me to be aikido, or aikido-like. It's only what I think, I'm not making a stand on this. I understand what you say about Tenshinyo and Daito, but they aren't aiki, are they? If I want to permanently damage someone, I might as well kickbox (no offense to them) or do weightlifting. Aikido IS an esoteric art, isn't it?

Originally posted by mj Kansetsu, as far as I know is to do with breaking. Anyone can break. What I think of aiki is ... say this maybe... ikkyo ni,san,yon,go, shiho, tenchi, irimi, kaiten, kote. No breaking.

All I can say is that Kansetsu-waza are part and parcel of every style of Aikido. I have always been told it refers to joint techniques although in the Aikidofaq dictionary it is referred to as dislocation technique. How you apply the technique is up to you. I have been taught rokkyo as a controlling technique, how is it less Aikido than for example shihonage which I can also use to destroy an elbow. Every single technique in Aikido can be used to destroy or control - it is all in the intent.

I understand what you say about Tenshinyo and Daito, but they aren't aiki, are they?

Aiki is an ancient term. I don't know about tenshinyo but it was used in Daito-ryu and several other schools long before Aikido.

Aikido IS an esoteric art, isn't it?

Most Japanese arts have an esoteric element but as I said Ueshiba did not discard techniques based on any esoteric principle - it is all in the intent - how those techniques are used.

Surely the purpose of aiki(do) is not to defeat others, but to make ourselves better. You can't do that by being brutal. Or more brutal than your attacker? When, in aikido, did O-sensei use rokkyo? (Thanks for the reply PeterR)
Rokkyo goes against the joint, doesn't it? SNAP

Aikido, when it comes down to it, is the art of defeating a man so that you can help him. be it mentally/spiritually or physically. going against the joint in waki gatame is just a means to control the center of a man. Let me put it this way. As my sensei has taught me, aikido is just part of jujutsu. aikido is jujutsu with a different philosophy. o-sensei didnt just sit around and say, "this arm bends like this when i do this, so i am going to create all these techniques for my new art." Aikido is jujutsu. its a fact. BUT, its not jujutsu because of its mutually protective nature.so when waki gatame is used by an aikidoka, the elbow is not SNAPPED, but is used to control the center. The best waki gatame i have seen was done by Nariyama shihan and it totally flowed with the ukes forward energy. But in the hands of a jujutsuka, it would definately be used more as a break to the elbow. and kansetsu is joint, not breaking (as far as it is used in aikido). in the kata that waki gatame is in, junannahon no kata, the set of techniques that waki gatame is in is called hiji waza, or elbow techniques.

Originally posted by mj Kansetsu, as far as I know is to do with breaking.

Kansetsu waza do not, in my mind, have any necessary connotation of breaking. "Kansetsu" in and of itself just means "joint" and that's about it. In my mind, the vast majority of techniques in aikido are kansetsu waza.

(I'll attach an image of the characters of the term "kansetsu" to this post for anyone who cares.)

You earlier referred to rokkyo as wakigatame. When someone who really knows how to apply wakigatame on me, it doesn't feel like he or she is applying pressure on my elbow to break it but to take my center.

"Gatame" comes from the verb "katameru" which means "to harden, tighten, freeze" amongst others. None of the definitions I know of that term refers to "breaking."

Anyone can break. What I think of aiki is ... say this maybe... ikkyo ni,san,yon,go, shiho, tenchi, irimi, kaiten, kote. No breaking.

In the same way, any of the techniques that you mentioned can be used very easily to maim and kill. Have you ever felt a truly powerful ikkyo and landed on your chest with your legs flipped up in the air?

The techniques that you mention when applied "correctly" do not necessarily cause permanent damage. In the same way, rokkyo can be applied in such a way to immobilize uke without needlessly "breaking" him or her.

Another technique which is sometimes misunderstood to be an elbow break in aikido is tenbin nage (or hiji nage). Some variations of shihonage also include a very distinct locking of the elbow to take uke's balance as well (not as a way to break it)...

Aikido IS an esoteric art, isn't it?

In my mind, at least, not any much moreso than any other martial art.

-- Jun

I have spoken with several orthopedic surgeons (two who were students of mine) while I worked at a large hospital about the effects of joint locks, etc.

These doctors reports and what I have seen in actual situations is that joints "usually" don't "break." The most common injury is a radical dislocation. Parts of the joint may break during any dislocation (such as the condyle) because they are delicate.

I have personally seen three arms that suffered radical dislocations (90 degree bend the opposite way that's natural) and nothing was "broken" except possibly the assailant's aggressive attitude. These three were all the result of ude gatame, hiji kime, or wakigatame type actions.

Whether this fits in with some folks' philosophy of what "aikido" is or isn't doesn't interest me. These instances were all the result of the assailant trying to power out of the situation and not the intent of the defendant to "break" an arm.

I have numerous reports of the use of wakigatame by law enforcement personnel to great effect and success. Much better than a club to the head.

Regards,

Originally posted by mj Hmmm, all fair points. Except I don't agree with the sumi-otoshi one, because I threw someone with that earlier this year, and 'felt' it. Hi Greg, to answer... 1 Cos that's the only way I've been taught it 2 I wouldn't presume to say that my opinion is better than any other, but I still don't think that a straight armlock is aiki. 3 Of course I have an opinion of what is/not aiki, it develops and changes, and if I'm puzzled I ask questions. When I'm (regularly) stuck, I find help. 4 This is a harder point. As I have been taught rokkyo, it's not a dislocation move, it breaks the elbow, also... as every one has different physical extension abilities, you do not know if your initial move will permanently injure the other person, which is likely. So I don't see it like the other osae-waza. Of course, that is why I asked. I'm not flaming, just confused. I haven't seen rokkyo in any authorative books. ie Budo/Essence or Dynamic Sphere

1. Perhaps you missed something your teacher was trying to get across.

Rokkyo can be as smooth and gentle as any technique in the aikido repetoire.

Cradle uke's arm above his elbow in your arm pit.

Apply energy along the length of his arm rather than torquing against the elbow. Do this by spiraling down and in the direction his arm is pointing.

2. Then you should carefully say "my own personal view of what is aiki" and explain what that view is.

Rational debate is begun by defining terms and agreeing on assumptions. You'd find very little agreement on what aiki is.

3. You'd find it much "lighter" to not have opinions about things of which you are uninformed.

My instructor has been studying aikido for over 28 years and says he's still just in awe of aikido and is finding/refinding insights almost every day.

4. As Clark Sensei points out, what rokkyo threatens is a dislocation of the elbow. An elbow can break...sort of. Actually the humerous breaks just above the elbow. It's a common injury among children right now from falling off razor scooters.

Nikyo does not work via pain. It works by taking the joint to the end of its range of movement in order to form a connection between nage's center and uke's. I.e., it's a lever and nage uses that lever to move uke. If uke struggles back up through the nikyo, he will dislocate/break his wrist.

Sankyo will get the wrist or the elbow, one or the other...I'm not sure which would go first and I'm not willing to experiment.

Ikkyo, nikyo, sankyo, yonkyo, gokyo, rokkyo, nanakyo...they and I guess just about every other technique are about forming a connection.

One way to do that is to take a joint to the limit of its range of motion. If uke is stupid enough to force back through it, well...they say stupidity is self-correcting in the end.

I don't think the two texts you mention could be considered authoritative. I don't know that _anything_ can be considered authoritative in an inexact context such as aikido.

But, to go right to the source:

In "Aikido" by Kisshomaru Ueshiba, the late Doshu is seen performing rokkyo (directly against the elbow I might add) on page 139. I personally do it higher on uke's arm than that to be friendlier to his elbow.

In "Budo" by the Founder, you see the Founder doing rokkyo on page 64.

Sincerely,

Originally posted by PeterR [b] All I can say is that Kansetsu-waza are part and parcel of every style of Aikido. I have always been told it refers to joint techniques although in the Aikidofaq dictionary it is referred to as dislocation technique. How you apply the technique is up to you. I have been taught rokkyo as a controlling technique, how is it less Aikido than for example shihonage which I can also use to destroy an elbow. Every single technique in Aikido can be used to destroy or control - it is all in the intent. [b] Aiki is an ancient term. I don't know about tenshinyo but it was used in Daito-ryu and several other schools long before Aikido. Most Japanese arts have an esoteric element but as I said Ueshiba did not discard techniques based on any esoteric principle - it is all in the intent - how those techniques are used.

Osensei's aikido changed alot. Look at Shioda and then look at say Tohei...two very diffrent aikidoka tecnically. I dont agree that Tohei tecniques are more aiki than shioda's are. As one guy mentioned wisely earlier, to restore the peace one may have to break ones arm...this is still aiki.

Decide what your aikido means to you. Some say in early training with styles similar to the yoshinikan, that it is not very flowing.

After Shioda's ninth dan test osensei said this to him

''Shioda you have the best base, with what I have taught you dont let anyone defeat you.''

Soke Shioda was surprised as before osensei had hardly said anything to him before. He felt that in the beginning of your aikido journey, you must first build a good base, to gain maximum efficieny out of each tecnique, then later one would go on to effortless flowing tecniques. He made a statement in a tokyo demonstration once saying ''alot of aikido these days is hollow, if the truth be told there is no right and wrong posture in aikido you must find what fits you. But training should begin with the fundamental movements (kihon dosa)''

Matt Banks

I pretty much agree with you Matt. Also, Saito does rokkyo in weapon work as a bokken take, and it was obviously very useful technique in this resepect. (I often use it for tanto work, 'cos it smothers the blade away from uke).

The way I train now, is to be as blending as possible, but always to be aware or potential actions I can take if my 'blending' is not up to it.

Ian

What we have here is the standard misunderstanding that Aikido, because it is no-violent in intention, is necessarily non-destructive in technique. That is simply not the case. Usually the techniques we practice have been changed a bit in order to allow full force application without injury to our partners. But that is for training.

If I am attacked by a knife wielding assailant I would be idiotic to execute a technique in the same manner I would do in class. Oh, but you might say that injuring the attacker isn't "aiki". I would counter that by dislocating the elbow, I have countered the threat of an armed attacker. He is now disarmed. I can then establish control and perhaps be spared the necessity of killing this fellow. I would say that dislocating the elbow of an attacker who is seeking to kill you could be seen as exercising retraint. It is in a sense the "loving reponse" that O-Sensei might advocate. Afterall, if your response is weak, you die and you have made a murderer of your attacker. By having a strong and effective response you save both yourself and the attacker.

The idea that the only response that is Aiki is is one in which we all end up weeping on the subway is nonsense. Aiki is not even a term that carries a moral judgement in that way. It is quite possible to use Aiki for dark purposes a la Darth Vader.

Yes it is an ideal in Aikido to protect yourslef without doing harm to the attacker. If you have a very high level of skill you may be able to control an attacker without the need for any technique that creates dysfunction in the body. But that largely depends on the level of intention and the experience which the attacker has. O-sensei repeatedly pointed out that in Aikido we are dealing with the issue of life and death in an instant. That is one of the reasons that we don't generally (except Tomiki style) have competition in Aikido. These techniques are dangerous and potentially destructive. It is important to not confuse the manner in which techniques are done for practice in the dojo with how they might be executed in a real self defense situation in which your life or the life of another depends on your ability to end the threat decisively.

I could not agree with you more George.


Matt Banks

Thanks, these later replies made much more sense... to me that is ?... than the earlier ones. I see what you are saying, all of you.
I had just been taught rokkyo differently, that's all. Sincere thanks for the clarification.