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 > Spiritual

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 07-23-2010, 09:44 PM   #26
Aiki1
 
Aiki1's Avatar
Dojo: ACE Aikido
Location: Los Angeles
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 346
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Benjamin Green wrote: View Post
martial arts are formalised systems for managing the tensions between the chaos of undirected violence and the long-term interests of society. Hence the excessive formalism in the MA world perhaps.
My experience is different. Perhaps Judo, and in some instances maybe Aikido can be viewed this way, but in everything else I have studied (or am fairly familiar with): various forms of karate, Hapkido, BJJ (not only for sport), knife work etc. - all were specifically training for hard-core self-defense application where the opponant/attacker is disarmed, disabled, or left dead - not to socialize, channel, or re-direct violence, violent tendencies, or tension etc. And I believe that is pretty common. To be sure, sometimes people enroll in a martial art to release these feelings or learn options in dealing with them, but even then, the process is still grounded in violence, for the most part.

Aikido is not grounded in violence (at least mine isn't.) That is one thing that begins to set it apart from at least a good number of other arts.

The rest probably depends on how one defines Aikido, an "age-old" argument, and beyond the scope of this discussiion, although it is at the heart of it.

Larry Novick
Head Instructor
ACE Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 04:45 PM   #27
OwlMatt
 
OwlMatt's Avatar
Dojo: Milwaukee Aikikai
Location: Wisconsin
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 401
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Point of order:
Both Benjamin and Niall brought up the definition of "martial art" here and both said that aikido is not martial in the sense of its techniques being intended for war. The truth of the matter is that aikido's techniques are largely derived from aikijujutsu, whose techniques most certainly were intended for war.

This doesn't really apply directly to the thread, but since others brought it up, I thought I'd point out that aikido is, in the most literal sense, more martial than most modern martial arts.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 05:43 PM   #28
Gorgeous George
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 464
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Matthew Story wrote: View Post
Point of order:
Both Benjamin and Niall brought up the definition of "martial art" here and both said that aikido is not martial in the sense of its techniques being intended for war. The truth of the matter is that aikido's techniques are largely derived from aikijujutsu, whose techniques most certainly were intended for war.
Mitsugi Saotome makes a great point regards this: he says that soy sauce and cola both look the same, but they are different; so you wouldn't use cola to season food, and soy sauce to quench thirst...
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 06:01 PM   #29
niall
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
niall's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
Japan
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Well I was about to say this discussion was about aikido, not aikijujutsu, but Graham's soy sauce comment says it better.

An art that has as its aim harmony and that protects the attacker wouldn't be any use for war really. So the sooner politicians and generals learn the principles of aikido the better. Because humans shouldn't have any use for war either.

It's an interesting concept - aikido as a tool of international diplomacy.

we can make our minds so like still water, and so live for a moment with a clearer, perhaps even with a fiercer life
w b yeats


aikiweb blog|wordpress blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 09:18 PM   #30
OwlMatt
 
OwlMatt's Avatar
Dojo: Milwaukee Aikikai
Location: Wisconsin
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 401
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Forget my bit about aikijujutsu. I was trying to make a semantic point, but it's not really on the topic of the thread.

Last edited by OwlMatt : 07-24-2010 at 09:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 10:46 PM   #31
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Well really if you study the way we are trying to fight the counterinsurgency these days, I see many parallels in the principles I believe in and they are imbedded in the philosophy of Aikido.

It is not easy to do so and not everyone may agree, however, I believe we are finding that in order to obtain peace and stop violence requires something more than technology and bombs.

it requires a holistic approach that runs the spectrum of having the skills and ability to kill and the ability to have compassion and reach out and help people learn to be strong and help themselves.

Sounds like Aikido to me.

  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 10:52 PM   #32
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Sorry, probably should have added this.

My point is, that I would consider Aikido a martial art as it explores what I consider to be some of the most important aspects of the spectrum of conflict or violence.

While it may not be so direct in it's approach to dealing with particular fighting strategies or combatives, I do believe that the skills that are learned in aikido to actually be very useful and in most ways probably more widely used than direct tactical application.

  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 11:58 PM   #33
niall
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
niall's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
Japan
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Great point Kevin. I agree completely.

we can make our minds so like still water, and so live for a moment with a clearer, perhaps even with a fiercer life
w b yeats


aikiweb blog|wordpress blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2010, 12:07 AM   #34
Benjamin Green
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 43
Scotland
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Larry Novick wrote: View Post
My experience is different. Perhaps Judo, and in some instances maybe Aikido can be viewed this way, but in everything else I have studied (or am fairly familiar with): various forms of karate, Hapkido, BJJ (not only for sport), knife work etc. - all were specifically training for hard-core self-defense application where the opponant/attacker is disarmed, disabled, or left dead - not to socialize, channel, or re-direct violence, violent tendencies, or tension etc. And I believe that is pretty common. To be sure, sometimes people enroll in a martial art to release these feelings or learn options in dealing with them, but even then, the process is still grounded in violence, for the most part.

Aikido is not grounded in violence (at least mine isn't.) That is one thing that begins to set it apart from at least a good number of other arts.

The rest probably depends on how one defines Aikido, an "age-old" argument, and beyond the scope of this discussiion, although it is at the heart of it.
If you want to define martial arts in terms of what's involved in learning the techniques, stripped of the formalism surrounding that, Aikido doesn't come with a unique ideology: Perhaps especially so in the case of more damaging arts. If someone just gives free reign to their violent tendencies in pairs work or sparring they're going to end up taking the other guy apart and then no-one will want to train with them. Yet if they can't bring out that intent at all then they're going to hesitate. In order to learn how the little old man can take your head off you've got to exercise conscious control over it. You need trust too, because you're going to have to partner with people who if they screw up are going to hurt you. Restraint, trust, control, consideration of others -- those sound like skills for managing violence to me.

I don't imagine too many people come to martial arts with the intent to learn that sort of thing, I think most people come to martial arts because they're afraid of losing fights and that relatively few of them ever get over that fear; but that they end up learning that sort of thing regardless. Whether they choose to make use of them in their day to day lives on the other hand.... *shrug*

Quote:
Matthew Story wrote: View Post
Point of order:
Both Benjamin and Niall brought up the definition of "martial art" here and both said that aikido is not martial in the sense of its techniques being intended for war. The truth of the matter is that aikido's techniques are largely derived from aikijujutsu, whose techniques most certainly were intended for war.

This doesn't really apply directly to the thread, but since others brought it up, I thought I'd point out that aikido is, in the most literal sense, more martial than most modern martial arts.
Assuming that aikijujutsu was intended for use in war: simply asserting a lineage doesn't endow something with the virtues of its forerunners. Vaccines are derived by weakening more destructive pathogens but I don't consider an MMR jab to be useful as a biological weapon.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 11:44 AM   #35
OwlMatt
 
OwlMatt's Avatar
Dojo: Milwaukee Aikikai
Location: Wisconsin
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 401
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Benjamin Green wrote: View Post
Assuming that aikijujutsu was intended for use in war: simply asserting a lineage doesn't endow something with the virtues of its forerunners. Vaccines are derived by weakening more destructive pathogens but I don't consider an MMR jab to be useful as a biological weapon.
I agree with all of this. I was asserting a lineage to show how aikido fits a term, that's all. My point did not extend beyond semantics.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 12:30 PM   #36
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Niall Matthews wrote: View Post
Well I was about to say this discussion was about aikido, not aikijujutsu, but Graham's soy sauce comment says it better.

An art that has as its aim harmony and that protects the attacker wouldn't be any use for war really. So the sooner politicians and generals learn the principles of aikido the better. Because humans shouldn't have any use for war either.

It's an interesting concept - aikido as a tool of international diplomacy.
Aikido really badly fails to protect the attacker. Judo protects the attacker much better; no Judoka has to jump over their own wrist to protect their joints. No Judoka can execute a technique while smashing someone in the face with their elbow. Judo has been refined to remove all the nasty techniques.

Break someones arm or leg in competition and that technique will quickly be banned in competition and practiced less as a result. Judo has evolved under selective pressures that make it very nice on the attacker.

There's nothing like that in Aikido. Two thirds of our techniques are joint breaking techniques by my reckoning.

So has Aikido been shaped by a desire to protect the attacker? No not really. There may have been an intention to do so but it never worked out that way. Again as I've said before, what are we actually doing on the mat? Well we're punching each other in the face followed by jerking one anothers joints with as much as our body and as much power as we can.

That's Aikido. Whatever the intentions of the founder, that's what was passed on. What this thread is really about is "What was Aikido intended to be and is that what we're doing?"
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 08:45 PM   #37
niall
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
niall's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
Japan
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
Two thirds of our techniques are joint breaking techniques by my reckoning.

Well we're punching each other in the face followed by jerking one anothers joints with as much as our body and as much power as we can.
Well if you're happy training like that Alex and your dojo trains like that it's cool but that doesn't describe any aikido I've ever seen in Japan. Aikido techniques are not joint-breaking techniques and there are no jerking techniques in aikido. Judo has rules because of shiai. And even allowing for differences in teaching styles and personalities and abilities too most teachers I know more or less try to follow the aims of O Sensei.

we can make our minds so like still water, and so live for a moment with a clearer, perhaps even with a fiercer life
w b yeats


aikiweb blog|wordpress blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 09:45 PM   #38
Gorgeous George
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 464
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
Aikido really badly fails to protect the attacker. Judo protects the attacker much better; no Judoka has to jump over their own wrist to protect their joints. No Judoka can execute a technique while smashing someone in the face with their elbow. Judo has been refined to remove all the nasty techniques.

Break someones arm or leg in competition and that technique will quickly be banned in competition and practiced less as a result. Judo has evolved under selective pressures that make it very nice on the attacker.

There's nothing like that in Aikido. Two thirds of our techniques are joint breaking techniques by my reckoning.

So has Aikido been shaped by a desire to protect the attacker? No not really. There may have been an intention to do so but it never worked out that way. Again as I've said before, what are we actually doing on the mat? Well we're punching each other in the face followed by jerking one anothers joints with as much as our body and as much power as we can.

That's Aikido. Whatever the intentions of the founder, that's what was passed on. What this thread is really about is "What was Aikido intended to be and is that what we're doing?"
'Protect the attacker' in what sense, though? I mean, breaking the wrist can protect someone from being killed, for instance...

Isn't what you're talking about competitive judo - i.e., a sport/game, rather than a martial art, like aikido?
Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't judo throws intended to land people on their heads?

If somebody tries to stab you (to death), and you break their wrist, are you not protecting your attacker (from more serious injury, or death?)?

There was a thread here a while ago called 'Deadly Techniques' that might interest you:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showth...dly+techniques

I think the conclusion was that O'Sensei removed deliberately deadly techniques from aikido because his conception of budo was that it is a means of protecting society, and not merely of taking life.

The distinction made earlier in the thread between coke and soy sauce is interesting, too: irimi-nage (say) in aiki-jujutsu is a means of destroying another, because aiki-jujutsu is wholly martial in nature (that is, aiki is understood/pursued only insofar as it has direct application to harming others); in aiki-do it is a means of practicing a philosophical outlook - abandoning the individual will in order to align ourselves with the universal will (in one sense, anyway).
If the techniques of aikido were designed purely to cultivate a martial attitude/ability, then they would just be those of aiki-jujutsu - having the sole intention of the destruction of another; however, they are different, and this is because they have a different purpose; hence, the practice of aikido is the practice of a particular philosophy.

A bit of a tangent; my apologies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 01:23 PM   #39
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Niall Matthews wrote: View Post
Well if you're happy training like that Alex and your dojo trains like that it's cool but that doesn't describe any aikido I've ever seen in Japan. Aikido techniques are not joint-breaking techniques and there are no jerking techniques in aikido. Judo has rules because of shiai. And even allowing for differences in teaching styles and personalities and abilities too most teachers I know more or less try to follow the aims of O Sensei.
The orginal name of rokkyo is "elbow smashing". You do do rokkyo don't you? Do you do ude kime "nage" also? Again lots of pressure on the elbow. Nikyo, sankyo, yonkyo, gokyo, lots of pressure on joints. Kote gaeshi, same thing. Originally these are all joint breaking techniques.

Judo ends up doing by accident what we struggle to do deliberately, that's my point.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 01:31 PM   #40
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post
'Protect the attacker' in what sense, though? I mean, breaking the wrist can protect someone from being killed, for instance...
No doubt but in how many self defence situations do you really need to break someones wrist or elbow?

Quote:
Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post
Isn't what you're talking about competitive judo - i.e., a sport/game, rather than a martial art, like aikido?
Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't judo throws intended to land people on their heads?
I've never heard that. My point about Judo is that by being more competative they've ended up with an art which is kinder than the art that refuses to compete because it fosters an uncompassionate spirit. Irony?

Quote:
Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post
If the techniques of aikido were designed purely to cultivate a martial attitude/ability, then they would just be those of aiki-jujutsu - having the sole intention of the destruction of another; however, they are different, and this is because they have a different purpose; hence, the practice of aikido is the practice of a particular philosophy.

A bit of a tangent; my apologies.
Great then someone still has to explain how kote gaeshi, a staple of Jujutsu for 1000+ years suddenly becomes a way of teaching philosophy and why that philosophy which we're informed is at the heart of Aikido practice, is never taught.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 07:59 PM   #41
Gorgeous George
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 464
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
No doubt but in how many self defence situations do you really need to break someones wrist or elbow?

I've never heard that. My point about Judo is that by being more competative they've ended up with an art which is kinder than the art that refuses to compete because it fosters an uncompassionate spirit. Irony?

Great then someone still has to explain how kote gaeshi, a staple of Jujutsu for 1000+ years suddenly becomes a way of teaching philosophy and why that philosophy which we're informed is at the heart of Aikido practice, is never taught.
'how often...'?

Well, the way I interpret aikido training (the strikes in particular, such as shomen-uchi, and tsuki) is that you are preparing yourself for a worst-case scenario: in training, somebody tsukis, or delivers shomen-uchi, with an empty hand - but the basis of those strikes is the pre-occupation with defence against weapons: knives, broken bottles maybe, etc...

It's the same thing with irimi, multiple opponents, etc. - it's derived from a need to end encounters, in which you are in a really bad position, as soon as possible, with the minimum energy expended. This is also why the pins in aikido are done with the minimum contact, as opposed to using your full body as you would in a one-on-one fight in the UFC or something: so that you can stay mobile and aware of your surroundings/other people.
From what little I know of karate, and it's 'one strike, one kill' ethos, this seems to have developed for a similar need to deal with situations quickly.

But to answer what I think you meant by your question: I think that if you can control someone in order to apply kote-gaeshi, then you can either 'safely' apply it, so that they go down without any injury; or you can safely apply another technique to safely immobilise them.
I mean, I think that whenever I train with a senior grade - particularly fifth dans - they can apply kote-gaeshi so quickly that I haven't caught up yet, and so my wrist is broken; they don't, but they still control me very easily, and I am still subdued.

I guess your response has to be commensurate with the attack - as the law states - i.e., if you break someone's neck for trying to grab your arm and tell you you dropped something, you've over-reacted; if you break someone's arm because they're trying to stab you to death, then that's fine.

Regards judo: my knowledge of it is very limited, so I apologise to anyone who does it if I am mistaken about anything....
My teacher - who did judo for ten years - told me the throws have the aim of landing people on their heads; plus:

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question...4113130AABMN2w

'One of my first instructors had studied Judo. He would always tell us that there were two kinds of judo throws. Those that were for competition, and those designed to drop the opponent/attacker on his head or neck.'

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=11872

It seems that they've eliminated a lot of techniques in order to be able to have competitions, yes (like you need to know how to breakfall in order to do aikido: there's no point in injuring your partners, because you'll have no-one to trrain with) - but then, they're competing with each other, so I don't know how compassionate that is.
I'm not sure, but I think there's sport judo, and martial art judo...

Is judo really kinder than aikido?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YOKtMsF5ds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzr0Hx8H_Wg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZcTycNBKvY

I've also seen a clip where a guy was being thrown in the olympics, and because the other guy only wins if he lands on his back or whatever, he put his arm out to try and forestall this; his arm ended up breaking, though, like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6p3FIWKEBI

EDIT: Here's the clip -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE1JIyAcFIo

In that sense, anyway, judo is a sport, and not a martial art: as I once heard a great aikidoka say: 'In judo there are rules; in aikido - as in real fights - there are not' - or words to that effect.

I was recently talking to someone who used to train in taekwondo: he said he quit because he was sick of hearing parents shouting encouragement to their child while they were having competition: 'Kick him in the head!' etc.

I don't know: i've not got the statistics, but i'm under the impression that injuries in (sport) judo are a lot more common - and serious - than in aikido.

'kote-gaeshi...'

- Well...after you apply kote-gaeshi in aikido, and uke is subdued, you don't practice ending that person's life, do you? I mean, I don't.
So you're not applying it in order to kill another; you aren't killing someone who is no threat to you - who you have pinned.
Like when you move circularly, or apply a joint lock - you are moving naturally, like in yoga; so you're saying that natural movements are to be encouraged, and are superior.
The philosophy of aikido is thus implicit in the practice of it.

My understanding of budo/aikido - as envisioned by O'Sensei - is that it is a means of preserving life - not a means of taking it; it is easy to kill, but it is harder - and more important - to preserve life and care for others.
I'm sure we're all familiar with the horrors which competition has led to...

My apologies for being verbose, and for any errors regarding judo/aikido.

Last edited by Gorgeous George : 07-27-2010 at 08:07 PM. Reason: Added link
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 06:19 PM   #42
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post

'kote-gaeshi...'

- Well...after you apply kote-gaeshi in aikido, and uke is subdued, you don't practice ending that person's life, do you? I mean, I don't.
So you're not applying it in order to kill another; you aren't killing someone who is no threat to you - who you have pinned.
This isn't exactly profound philosophy is it? It's based on one situation most people have never been in and will never be in. In fact I doubt you need to even do martial arts to realise that hurting someone you have subdued isn't exactly moral.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 09:32 AM   #43
OwlMatt
 
OwlMatt's Avatar
Dojo: Milwaukee Aikikai
Location: Wisconsin
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 401
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
This isn't exactly profound philosophy is it? It's based on one situation most people have never been in and will never be in. In fact I doubt you need to even do martial arts to realise that hurting someone you have subdued isn't exactly moral.
You'd be surprised how many martial artists (even young ones) are taught to apply "finishing" strikes to downed opponents, despite the fact that this would be entirely illegal outside the dojo, even in self-defense.

That said, I don't think that aikido's morality is unique. Aikido's morality is certainly more obviously manifest in technique than that of most other martial arts, but that's not enough, in my opinion, to justify the assertion that is the topic of the thread.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 12:11 PM   #44
Benjamin Green
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 43
Scotland
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post
Well, the way I interpret aikido training (the strikes in particular, such as shomen-uchi, and tsuki) is that you are preparing yourself for a worst-case scenario: in training, somebody tsukis, or delivers shomen-uchi, with an empty hand - but the basis of those strikes is the pre-occupation with defence against weapons: knives, broken bottles maybe, etc...
While how people attack is obviously shaped by their training, if any, and what they intend to achieve in the attack - whether they're there to kill you, cut you up a bit, steal from you, scare you, whatever: The body mechanics for edged weapons tend to be very different to the sort of strikes found in aikido. Mainly because you don't need to stick a lot of force behind a knife so you don't need to ground as much. Knives let's you play the room more easily.

If you want an interesting exercise get a couple of long-sleeve shirts you don't care about and a big red marker (one that sticks a decent distance out of your fist) and go at it with some mates. No formalism, no set strikes or defences, no stop start signal.

There are some obvious dissimilarities: It's just a simulation of one context of knife use, more similar to duelling than anything else. It highlights none of the edge control issues that a knife has. It does reproduce many of the issues of distancing, timing, angle and footwork that are the main concern of messing around with sharp pointy things though. So it's still worth a gander.

Last edited by Benjamin Green : 07-29-2010 at 12:13 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 09:20 PM   #45
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,113
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
Judo ends up doing by accident what we struggle to do deliberately, that's my point.
I don't think it's so simple as this. My view is that careful/dangerous is as careful/dangerous does, regardless of the art. I've never really struggled to not-harm my partners.

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 09:49 PM   #46
Gorgeous George
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 464
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Matthew Story wrote: View Post
You'd be surprised how many martial artists (even young ones) are taught to apply "finishing" strikes to downed opponents, despite the fact that this would be entirely illegal outside the dojo, even in self-defense.
Yes, I quite agree. I've practiced with people from (I guess) karate backgrounds, and in shiho-nage, when i'm restrained, they have applied a 'finishing' punch to my face (although, I was recently watching some clips of an aikido style where they did this, come to mention it...), and when they've got me turned around, so I have my back to them, they have kicked me in the back of my knee: totally uncalled for, and unnecessary.

You could justify beating someone you have at your mercy by, for instance, saying that they attacked you, and revenge/punishment is the correct response.
In aikido, you are obviously explicitly displaying a much more forgiving attitude than this.

I think the relevance of this has to be considered in the long background of martial arts in Japan, and maybe the switch of ethos (in the 17th century...?) from the death-dealing sword, to the life-giving sword: the crude view of the martial arts is that they are a means to cause death and destruction - to destroy; but the warrior - samurai, budoka, what have you - uses martial arts as a means of creating/protecting society.
That's my understanding of it, anyway.

There's also the fact that In Japan, in feudal times, the samurai could legally cut a peasant's head off if they didn't bow to him (not 100% on this...), and that all crimes had one punishment: death. Then there's what the Japanese did during World War II...so it's obvious that what is regarded moral is an entirely subjective matter, and not a cut-and-dry case at all.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2010, 09:59 AM   #47
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Matthew Gano wrote: View Post
I don't think it's so simple as this. My view is that careful/dangerous is as careful/dangerous does, regardless of the art. I've never really struggled to not-harm my partners.
I've never had to pause mid throw in Judo to allow the other guy to take ukemi. In fact in Judo I've never really had to worry about the other guys ukemi, if I'm throwing him correctly there isn't much he can do so there's nothing to worry about. If the guy is half way though uchi mata he can't exactly say "Hang on, stop, lets do this more slowly; I'm unsure of the ukemi." It's a nonsensical thing to say in a judo context, which bit of "tuck head in, try to breathe out" does he not get?

In Aikido though I'm always having to adjust my technique to the abilities of my uke. I can go as hard and as fast as I like with people my level and above but I can't do that with people who are junior to me because I end up hurting them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2010, 10:19 AM   #48
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Graham Jenkins wrote: View Post
Yes, I quite agree. I've practiced with people from (I guess) karate backgrounds, and in shiho-nage, when i'm restrained, they have applied a 'finishing' punch to my face (although, I was recently watching some clips of an aikido style where they did this, come to mention it...), and when they've got me turned around, so I have my back to them, they have kicked me in the back of my knee: totally uncalled for, and unnecessary.
Aikido assumes multiple attackers; throwing a guy just to let him back up makes no sense. The guy is still a threat, the threat needs to be taken care of.

That said if you do a technique with power on someone that doesn't know the ukemi a finishing strike shouldn't be needed.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2010, 02:26 PM   #49
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,113
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
I've never had to pause mid throw in Judo to allow the other guy to take ukemi. In fact in Judo I've never really had to worry about the other guys ukemi, if I'm throwing him correctly there isn't much he can do so there's nothing to worry about. If the guy is half way though uchi mata he can't exactly say "Hang on, stop, lets do this more slowly; I'm unsure of the ukemi." It's a nonsensical thing to say in a judo context, which bit of "tuck head in, try to breathe out" does he not get?

In Aikido though I'm always having to adjust my technique to the abilities of my uke. I can go as hard and as fast as I like with people my level and above but I can't do that with people who are junior to me because I end up hurting them.
I think I see where you're coming from, but have you never had to practice Judo technique slowly? I practiced with a Judo guy one time and he nearly tore my arm out of its socket. At the time I felt that if I had been much of a stiff-bodied person I could have easily been hurt. I've never practiced judo though, so I definately cannot compare the two very well.
My very brief experiences in the Shodokan style reminded me somewhat of a bit of the Judo I've seen online, so I tend to infer a little from that. The waza that utilized relatively less joint manipulation seemed to fit what you describe about Judo. The ukemi seemed to be more straight down to the ground which didn't give uke much time to stop and think...which also seemed to make ukemi just sort of happen as a result.
This relates to my more ki-oriented experiences where my sense was that often I needed to keep a very positive pressure on uke to make the ukemi more obvious. I remember backing off a bit with newer students, but not in a way that allowed them to really adjust a whole lot. For many there was that moment where you could feel them trying to disengage "to take ukemi," and if I allowed them to do that they didn't seem to get better at it. The movement became disjointed and neither of us got the most out of it...again, as I perceived it. So I began to get the sense that I could move slowly to allow uke to feel more of what was going on, but with enough pressure that I still had enough control of their center/body, forcing their ukemi to just happen.
Of course I was never particularly good, so I couldn't always keep the movements smooth enough, but that's where I kind of left off in my approach to "teaching" ukemi to newer students who didn't already feel comfortable being thrown/pinned.

As it relates to "finishing moves," I've the sense that it's just another exercise in continuing the movement. In shiho nage for example I've often done a shomenuchi after uke is pinned, but my feeling was that it wasn't necessarily a strike since it could also be a good transition for switching hands, or extending the elbow back a bit more for stronger uke. Also, in multiple attackers, sometimes you might have to hit a guy while he's down to keep him down longer to afford more time to deal with other people.
I imagine it's also a great way to get the attacker's attention. You don't necessarily have to actually hit them to draw their mind to the atemi-like finishing move.
...Some rambling thoughts about that, anyway.
Take care!

Last edited by mathewjgano : 07-31-2010 at 02:34 PM.

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2010, 10:07 PM   #50
Gorgeous George
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 464
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Alex Lawrence wrote: View Post
Aikido assumes multiple attackers; throwing a guy just to let him back up makes no sense. The guy is still a threat, the threat needs to be taken care of.

That said if you do a technique with power on someone that doesn't know the ukemi a finishing strike shouldn't be needed.
Exactly: you would make the technique count, if you had to. In comparison with a throw, a punch to the face isn't much, and with other attackers...
  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
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 17 Peter Goldsbury Columns 41 06-03-2010 10:46 PM
The purpose of Aikido? Reflection Anonymous 100 06-02-2010 08:20 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 6 Peter Goldsbury Columns 35 03-13-2009 07:16 PM
The continued Evolution of Aikido salim General 716 12-27-2008 11:00 PM
The Point of Aikido George S. Ledyard Columns 50 10-04-2007 06:17 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:14 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 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