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

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



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

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

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-29-2011, 12:47 AM   #26
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Cliff Judge wrote: View Post
That stuff Tim posted is surprisingly wrong.
Really? You think? Why do you think he developed Aikido, his ultimate Budo? Or do you actually believe Aikido is about learning how to fight? I wonder...

Ueshiba saw no future in martial ways that destroy the opponent. He understood this was not nature's way at all. Fights in nature occur because of territory(= food), the right to reproduce.

Last edited by Tim Ruijs : 07-29-2011 at 12:58 AM.

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 12:49 AM   #27
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Roger Flatley wrote: View Post
What? Wanna try that again?
Ha! did not see that one coming, now did you?

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 01:45 AM   #28
Jono
Dojo: Machynlleth
Location: Tywyn
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1
Wales
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

I found this thread rather interesting.

When I asked my Sensei years ago what the difference is between Aikido and Aikijutsu i simply got the reply
Aikido gives Uke a way out

years later I began to understand what he meant.

I mix both Aikido and Aikijutsu in the dojo reflecting my thoughts about Aikido in general and as a practical martial art
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 02:58 AM   #29
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Jonothan White wrote: View Post
I found this thread rather interesting.

When I asked my Sensei years ago what the difference is between Aikido and Aikijutsu i simply got the reply
Aikido gives Uke a way out
I like his reply very much! must remember this

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 04:06 AM   #30
sakumeikan
Dojo: Sakumeikan N.E. Aikkai .Newcastle upon Tyne.
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,055
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Graham Christian wrote: View Post
Are there two of you? I'm confused. One Aikido, Krav magna, ninjutsu exponent who learns so much from martial arts and another who gets picked on by girls. mmmmm?
Dear Graham .
A case of Dr Flatley and Mr Flatley [apologies to Robert Lois Stevenson]. Which guy is the one who digs the nails in?
Cheers, Joe.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 08:46 AM   #31
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
Ueshiba saw no future in martial ways that destroy the opponent. He understood this was not nature's way at all. Fights in nature occur because of territory(= food), the right to reproduce.
Tim,

No offense, but, I think one of three things is going on here. Either you don't know what you are talking about, or you are trolling the OP, or you are actually spot-on but are choosing phrases and terms that confuse me into thinking one of the first two is the case.

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
The original form, aikijitsu/aikijutsu, was about combat, hard and exterior form.
Now, aikijitsu/aikijutsu is not actually a thing. It is probably a valid term in many contexts, but there is no martial tradition called "Aikijutsu," certainly not one that antecedes Aikido.

Aikido is descended from Daito ryu Aikijujutsu. If that's what you mean, then aside from a misspelling you are correct, however the OP is not talking about this. He's talking about a type of technique that he and/or his pugnacious friend encountered in their bujinkan training.

If you were talking about Daito ryu, then the term hard and exterior form is kind of appalling. I mean its the art where Ueshiba learned aiki. I'd also take issue with the idea that DR was about combat but that's a different debate.

On the other hand, if you applied the phrase The original form, aikijitsu/aikijutsu, was about combat, hard and exterior form to the training that the OP was referring to, I agree with your characterization but that was not the "original form" of Aikido.

So basically the quote above just sounds like, utterly bonkers to me, and is demonstrably false.

The rest of your post is more you sharing your opinions, which I disagree with but thank you for sharing.

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
The need for this slowly faded with time and to prevent the art from getting lost Ueshiba searched a way to preserve the 'content' by a different more interior way of practise. Which finally resulted in Aikido.
There was not really a change in the "need" for anything in the period of time when Ueshiba stopped teaching Takeda's art and started teaching his own. I mean we are talking about the early 20th century here. The samurai class were abolished, Japan was nationalizing and militarizing and gearing up to conquer the world.

There was a change in "the need for this [type of martial art]" after Japan lost WWII and had to face the shame and the hardship. Before WWII martial arts were an important tool for mass indoctrination, and stuff like Daito Ryu and Ueshiba's Aikibudo may have had a role as something for leadership types to do to gain some kind of cache as a cultured warrior type.

After the war, there was an impetus to shift the martial arts so that the spirit they aimed to inculcate was less of an obedient, unquestioning, militaristic spirit and more of a brave, mannered, responsible spirit.

On to other matters. I have a problem with your assertion that Ueshiba was motivated to prevent anything from "getting lost." Seems to me we wouldn't have the constant debates about whether mainstream Aikido is really Ueshiba's Aikido etc. If he cared about passing his art on, he would have worked at being a better teacher. Koryu have passed very high-level teachings down through hundreds of years, why was it so difficult to for Ueshiba to pass his art on to the very next generation?

I think the narrative is basically that Takeda designed Daito ryu to have a very large catalogue of techniques so that he could impress crowds and attract a lot of students interested in paying per technique. Like other traditional jujutsu schools, Daito ryu had a high-level internal principle, in this case called aiki, that many students never really felt or were taught.

Ueshiba intended for Aikido to be an immersion in aiki. So he ditched most of the abundant syllabus of Daito ryu and stuck to using a small subset of the techniques.

You know, Tim, what is interesting is that there is a lot of agreement between your ideas and mine. I agree that Ueshiba's goal was to extract the internal teachings from the predecessor art and ditch the hard / external techniques.

It is just that:

a) I don't think he actually cared that much about the internal stuff "being lost";

b) the historical paradigm shift that changed the "need" for whatever type of martial arts was after Aikido was created;

c) the types of training methods the OP is referring to have nothing to do with any of this.

Last edited by Cliff Judge : 07-29-2011 at 08:49 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 09:30 AM   #32
Patrick Hutchinson
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 94
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Cliff, I think you mean "cachet." i.e. prestige
Contrariwise I heard some CIA guy on the radio talking about finding a "cachet" of weapons.
Cache: hidden stash.
Sorry to interrupt...
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2011, 10:10 AM   #33
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Patrick Hutchinson wrote: View Post
Cliff, I think you mean "cachet." i.e. prestige
Contrariwise I heard some CIA guy on the radio talking about finding a "cachet" of weapons.
Cache: hidden stash.
Sorry to interrupt...
Thanks for the correction!
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2011, 02:57 AM   #34
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Cliff

You address a lot of points.
First of all aikijujutsu is correct off course. My bad.

I might be mistaken but I thought Jutsu originates from older Samurai fighting arts (i.e. to kill). Jutsu refers to complete fighting system (armed, unarmed, different small weapons).
Jitsu is the practise of one element of the jutsu for study rather than to kill. So to me aikijujutsu means the principles of aiki applied to a complete fighting system.

Jutsu: art for life and death scenario: war/combat (exterior)
Jitsu: study of the art, change of self (interior)

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2011, 08:49 AM   #35
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
Cliff

You address a lot of points.
First of all aikijujutsu is correct off course. My bad.

I might be mistaken but I thought Jutsu originates from older Samurai fighting arts (i.e. to kill). Jutsu refers to complete fighting system (armed, unarmed, different small weapons).
Jitsu is the practise of one element of the jutsu for study rather than to kill. So to me aikijujutsu means the principles of aiki applied to a complete fighting system.

Jutsu: art for life and death scenario: war/combat (exterior)
Jitsu: study of the art, change of self (interior)
First of all, jutsu and jitsu are two ways of transliterating the same kanji, 術. Jutsu is the way you spell it in romanji using the Hepburn system of transliteratiion. Jitsu is a common misspelling of this transliteration. When you see people use the jitsu spelling its a good bet they have never studied Japanese.

Jutsu is generally translated to "art" or "technique." You are correct that we often refer to the older systems as -jutsu where the modern systems are -do ("way of"). And it is not too off the mark to note that some of the older martial systems preserve several different -jutsu.

You are actually free to coin your own terms such as aikijutsu. Japanese people use these terms in a more general fashion than non-japanese martial artists do - we want words ending in -do and -jutsu to be the names of distinct martial systems but they are actually looser descriptors than that.

But jutsu doesn't denote more lethality or combat applicability, it just kinda means "how you do it." Every -do contains methods of training and practicing -jutsu.

So it is not really accurate to say that Aikido comes from aikijutsu - in fact, Aikido training is almost entirely what could fairly be called aikijutsu training. Though it is accurate to say that Aikido shed a lot of aikijutsu as it descended from its ancestor art.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2011, 02:08 PM   #36
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Hi Cliff

My knowledge on this subject is only that what I have read. No, I do not study Japanese and have no intention to. But, I would like to understand correctly since I run my own dojo. Now I know you will ask me where I have read this, but I could not tell you for sure, unfortunately. From other threads I have also understood that some important things may have been lost in translation and perhaps even worse wrongly interpreted...
small search on google (not to say that this is some final proof, but I am not alone with this distinction)
http://www.adrr.com/bengoshi/jitsu.htm

The two words jitsu and jutsu are just that: two different words. They sound very similar in Japanese, but they have quite different meanings.

jitsu
(n) truth; reality; sincerity; fidelity; kindness; faith; substance; essence;

jutsu
(n,n-suf) art; means; technique


What is your take on this and what is your source (so I can catch up my reading)?

I have always believed jutsu was complete (combat) system and jitsu takes one element from jutsu and studies that and only that...
When that is wrong, it is wrong and I have learned something

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2011, 02:37 PM   #37
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
Hi Cliff

My knowledge on this subject is only that what I have read. No, I do not study Japanese and have no intention to. But, I would like to understand correctly since I run my own dojo. Now I know you will ask me where I have read this, but I could not tell you for sure, unfortunately. From other threads I have also understood that some important things may have been lost in translation and perhaps even worse wrongly interpreted...
small search on google (not to say that this is some final proof, but I am not alone with this distinction)
http://www.adrr.com/bengoshi/jitsu.htm

The two words jitsu and jutsu are just that: two different words. They sound very similar in Japanese, but they have quite different meanings.

jitsu
(n) truth; reality; sincerity; fidelity; kindness; faith; substance; essence;

jutsu
(n,n-suf) art; means; technique


What is your take on this and what is your source (so I can catch up my reading)?

I have always believed jutsu was complete (combat) system and jitsu takes one element from jutsu and studies that and only that...
When that is wrong, it is wrong and I have learned something
This word jitsu you bring up, here, is not used to describe or classify martial arts that I am familiar with. I am sure its a word, but I don't think you would find it used in the same way as jutsu. The majority of times you see jitsu, it is a misspelling of jutsu.

jutsu doesn't have a connotation of completeness - jutsus are actually focus areas in most of the classical systems - a ryu may have maintained not only kenjutsu but also sojutsu, naginatajutsu, etc.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2011, 02:49 PM   #38
Eric Winters
Dojo: Aikido of San Leandro and Berkeley
Location: Emeryville, CA
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 80
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
Cliff

You address a lot of points.
First of all aikijujutsu is correct off course. My bad.

I might be mistaken but I thought Jutsu originates from older Samurai fighting arts (i.e. to kill). [I]Jutsu[/i] refers to complete fighting system (armed, unarmed, different small weapons).
Jitsu is the practise of one element of the jutsu for study rather than to kill. So to me aikijujutsu means the principles of aiki applied to a complete fighting system.

Jutsu: art for life and death scenario: war/combat (exterior)
Jitsu: study of the art, change of self (interior)
Just thought I would let you know:

Sogo Bujutsu - Integrated martial art system or comprehensive martial art system.

Have a great day,

Eric
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2011, 07:24 PM   #39
JW
 
JW's Avatar
Location: San Francisco CA USA
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 505
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Tim, I think you should post the "jitsu" question as a new thread in the "Language" section. I am with Cliff on this, regarding "jitsu" being a misspelling of "jutsu" (and a mispronunciation as well). But there are actual Japanese speakers who just aren't going to be reading this thread who could help.

I looked it up after your post-- 実 is a kanji which is one of the ways to write "makoto" or sincerity. An alternate pronunciation is "jitsu." But-- I think Cliff is right that this is not related to what people are talking about when writing "jutsu" and "jitsu."

For instance, to imply the existence of a term like 合気実 "aikijitsu".. I think that is probably nonsense that was never used. Most likely, people who couldn't speak or spell Japanese were trying to write "aikijutsu," 合気術 or "aiki techniques/methods/art."

And I think Eric is right, you may have been thinking of sogo bujutsu.
Jutsu just means art or technique or method, no such implication about completeness of a martial system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 12:55 AM   #40
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Thanx to all of you for your input.
I have assumed something in the past that proves wrong. problem is that I have read about this years ago, so to find out exactly where is a challenge...
Does any term exist to indicate the study only a part of a complete fighting system?

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 05:47 AM   #41
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
Thanx to all of you for your input.
I have assumed something in the past that proves wrong. problem is that I have read about this years ago, so to find out exactly where is a challenge...
Does any term exist to indicate the study only a part of a complete fighting system?
There is possibly such a term, but I don't think it is common parlance. Something named x-do is more general than x-jutsu, though. Ueshiba may have dispensed with a large portion of the Daito ryu syllabus when creating Aikido, but what Aikido ostensibly tries to teach the student is loftier, and more open-ended than Daito ryu.

As an fyi, your assertions have had quite a bit of truth to them, but you seem to have some details and ideas wrong is the thing. Aikido, Daito ryu, and pre-modern Japanese martial arts in general have nothing to do with the type of brutal sparring that the OP's friend engaged in. The type of professional warrior that maintained a standing as the highest social caste would not go in for such things, IMO. So the movement from Daito ryu to Aikido was not a shift from harder, external, more combat-oriented martial arts to more philosophical martial art. It was a shift from a classically constructed, rooted-in-the-past martial art to a more modern, forward-looking one.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 08:18 AM   #42
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

I see. I would like to get that straight and prevent telling the wrong things to my students. So thanks again.

Still I wonder why it is that Ueshiba (seems) able to start to define his ultimate Budo after he met Deguchi. Without a doubt Daito Ryu had a big impact on him. Ueshiba became much more philosophical which also reflects on his technique.

But like you said the person hating war the most is the (true) warrior. He knows...

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 05:24 PM   #43
genin
Location: southwest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 103
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

This is probably an oversimplification, but from what I gather Ueshiba initially began learning aiki-jujutsu and then as he got older and more refined, transitioned to a more fluid form of the same art, which was aikido.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 08:51 PM   #44
matty_mojo911
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 38
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

This is one of the few threads I've really read for a long time.

As for the original discussions, as it has diverged in the last few comments, realism etc is much under debate. I have a big issue with any teacher who talks about "on the street...." and discusses "realism" unless they have some real knowledge of it, harsh maybe. So many martial arts for so many years have been taught by people, who've been taught by people who just don't know what they are talking about.

However, this can be overcome, to a certain extent, if techniques are tested to the best of your ability in the dojo. BJJ is a classic for this, you don't fight each other, but you constantly test techniques against a resisitng opponent (within certain boundaries). This very, very quickly leads to both a refinement, and understanding of what "works" and variations, upon variations, to make techniques work on a resisitng opponent.

The problem with many Aikido instructors is that in the dojo they do not test a technique on a resisitng opponent constantly, so the refinement of the art is ultimately (despite what many think) less a refinement of a martial art, but more a refinement of an actual art.

In itself there is nothing wrong with this just that many teachers can't distinguish between the two. All martial arts are "self indulgent" as long as we are aware of it and when we teach we can say "hey, this technique isn't something I'd recommend on the street, but it is a nice variation." Nothing wrong with this at all, an art should be challenging, changing, and developing.

As for the recent discussions around how Aikido came about etc...people constantly forget that O'Sensei was much, much more religious orientated than martial orientated. He was deeply religious/spiritual, it is my opinion that this was the major factor in the creation of Aikido. People seem to forget this and just seem to assume it was a conglomerate of his prior arts, which of course it was, but it was driven primarily by his spirituality. This means many things as to why, how the art came about, but it should always be forefront in your mind when asking questions about Aikidos origins.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 01:08 AM   #45
Tim Ruijs
 
Tim Ruijs's Avatar
Dojo: Makato/Netherlands
Location: Netherlands - Leusden
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Netherlands
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
...people constantly forget that O'Sensei was much, much more religious orientated than martial orientated. He was deeply religious/spiritual, it is my opinion that this was the major factor in the creation of Aikido. People seem to forget this and just seem to assume it was a conglomerate of his prior arts, which of course it was, but it was driven primarily by his spirituality. This means many things as to why, how the art came about, but it should always be forefront in your mind when asking questions about Aikidos origins.
Agreed.
To me it seems that some people try to find something in Aikido that simply is not there. Allthough the last comment of Cliff and myself are perhaps a bit off topic, I think it is valuable in this discussion. As you correctly point out it remains important to remember what Aikido is about.

The OP perhaps neatly describes what Ueshiba (might have) went through when trying to find his ultimate Budo. Why hurt your body training for something that never happens. Or at least you hope will never happen (warriors do not like war and do not go looking for it either).

Last edited by Tim Ruijs : 08-03-2011 at 01:12 AM.

In a real fight:
* If you make a bad decision, you die.
* If you don't decide anything, you die.
Aikido teaches you how to decide.
www.aikido-makato.nl
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 07:20 AM   #46
genin
Location: southwest
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 103
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

The aikijutsu school's sensei was a cop, so he had some exposure to street level violence, for whatever that's worth. But he's probably spent much more time in the dojo under simulated violent situations, which give him experience as well. Just because it's not a "real" fight, doesn't mean you aren't learning, improving, and conditioning yourself for combat.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 08:37 AM   #47
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Quote:
Tim Ruijs wrote: View Post
I see. I would like to get that straight and prevent telling the wrong things to my students. So thanks again.

Still I wonder why it is that Ueshiba (seems) able to start to define his ultimate Budo after he met Deguchi. Without a doubt Daito Ryu had a big impact on him. Ueshiba became much more philosophical which also reflects on his technique.

But like you said the person hating war the most is the (true) warrior. He knows...
Deguchi was the guy who says to the young talent, "you have something special. You are a genius and if you would only free yourself from the chains you have placed on your own potential, you could change the world. I am going to show you how to release your true self." This sounds very silly to most of us, but those guys were serious enough about changing the world that they risked their lives in a foreign land trying to build a utopia, apparently.

It was something to do with the time, also. Gurdjief and Crowley were actively attracting seekers and pursuing their own paths to godhood at the time.

I think you are undoubtedly correct about the experience of the horror of war and the defeat of Japan as well. But I think the main narrative is one where Ueshiba was frustrated with Takeda's personality which was, my own reading, paranoid and restrictive, and then he found Deguchi who was expansive and gregarious and probably more than a little flattering. And in that environment, he was encouraged to find his "true budo," as you say.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 09:40 AM   #48
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

The question of what "realism" is and what role it should have in training has been done to death on these forums. Since we've diverged quite a bit into the historical roots of Aikido I have a particular thought to share.

You can divide Japanese martial arts into epochs. Modern post war (mainstream Aikido), modern pre-war (Toyama ryu, arguably Daito ryu), edo period (Hokushin Itto ryu, Tenshin Shinyo ryu), and warring states period (Yagyu Shinkage ryu, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto ryu) are the way I usually break them up in my head.

The oldest of those are interesting in that, they are a product of a time when battle was common. They were made by and for men who understood that they might have to stitch up their armor and march to actual war at any given time. So obviously, of all the various arts from the various periods, these would be the most concerned with practical combat skills, right? Talk about street fights, these were guys who had to be prepared for getting knocked off their horse and have to use their swords against multiple spearmen.

So here is a fact about these arts that might interest you: they are all entirely kata based, with no real free sparring involved in training. If free sparring with full resistance was the best way to build martial skill, why wasn't kendo armor developed until the middle of the edo period? My takeaway is that free sparring is not at all the best way to develop the skills that active warriors need, which I believe include precision, relaxation in the face of stress, awareness, etc.

I am a newb koryu sword guy. In the art I train in, we have a set of kata that has been handed down from the founder himself that, as I understand it presently, is meant to teach the exponent to wait in stillness and draw the enemy in.

There is one particular kata where you wait in a strong posture and invite the opponent to strike at your hands. As he begins his strike you move right in and kill him.

This is really really hard to do without getting your hands clobbered. The kata calls for the senior student to strike at a precise spot. It's very hard to do, but you can simply move forward and get him if he strikes at that spot and your timing and patience are right.

However, if the senior student does NOT strike at that particular spot, he will clobber your hands. This is where the whole thing gets very interesting.

Obviously, in a Real Fight, there is no reason why the senior guy would strike at that precise spot. If he was a yokel with no idea what he was doing he might not even take the opening you are giving him. So if this is a technique that can only work if your opponent strikes at a particular spot, it must be a pretty crappy technique, right? Best to change it so that it works! Perhaps the junior should move to avoid the incoming sword, and then strike. Etc etc.

If you are as lucky as I am, you have an instructor who will come by and point out that the kata calls for the senior to strike at precisely one spot so that the junior has the opportunity to learn a very very important principal, which is actually something meant to be applied to a wide variety of situations.

I don't believe you can have a martial art that teaches this kind of stuff if you focus on full resistance and free sparring and "realism". Technique and principle get watered down to "whatever works."

IMO, the more open-ended the engagement you are training for, the MORE restrictive the training sphere needs to be, to give the teacher a chance to pass onto the student the principles that he is trying to teach. Real street fights, real combat, business negotiations, divorce settlements, if you want to improve your odds of survival, you might take a hint from the feudal warriors of Japan who trusted kata based training methods.

Free sparring against a fully resisting opponent can do at least as much to make technique WORSE as it can to improve or refine it.

Last edited by Cliff Judge : 08-03-2011 at 09:52 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 09:51 AM   #49
Cliff Judge
Dojo: Aikido Shobukan Dojo
Location: Columbia, MD
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 816
United_States
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

quick caveat to something I stated about koryu bujutsu from the Sengoku Jidai: I have heard that Maniwa Nen ryu practices some kind of semi-free sparring as part of their training, and that art has one of the oldest unbroken lineages of all extent Japanese martial arts. But I am not sure that it has ever been asserted by the english-speaking koryu researchers that this ryu has always used such training methods; they may have been added later as many other schools did when the opportunities for practical combat experience became limited due to peace.

Its also not clear to what extent you could classify this type of practice as "free sparring against a fully resisting opponent".
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 09:58 AM   #50
Demetrio Cereijo
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,883
Spain
Offline
Re: aikijutsu vs. aikido

Cliff,

Have you read Karl Friday's "Legacies of the sword: the Kashima-Shinryū and samurai martial culture"?

The chapter named "The martial path" is very interesting regarding the kata vs sparring debate.

  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Koretoshi Maruyama European Seminar - Maruyama Sensei will be in Cumbria UK, 1st-3rd August, 2014



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
Martial Ineffectiveness dps General 148 08-20-2012 09:15 AM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 6 Peter Goldsbury Columns 35 03-13-2009 06:16 PM
The continued Evolution of Aikido salim General 716 12-27-2008 10:00 PM
Aikido in Amsterdam, Terry Lax style... tiyler_durden General 11 11-03-2008 08:31 AM
Women and Everybody Else in Aikido George S. Ledyard Teaching 113 03-16-2008 07:27 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:53 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