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 02-22-2006, 12:21 AM   #26
Edwin Neal
Dojo: Ronin
Location: Henderson, North Carolina
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 597
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

doubt all you want... my lineage is solid... who are these 'best martial artists alive'?... why not put them in his profile? I began my study of aikido IN JAPAN under Parker shihan, and Terada shihan of the Yoshinkan, and have studied with many other great teachers... i will trust their opinions over your unsupported sophomoric claims any day... we are not talking about 'martial arts', but about the lack of ANY substantiating evidence to support the position that aikido was derived from a weapons based art and applied to empty hand techniques... try to keep up and stay on topic rather than feeble attempts to disparage my arguments by thinly veiled personal attacks... although this does seem to be your 'tokui waza'...

Edwin Neal


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:28 AM   #27
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

It's not about understanding what someone (of high martial repute) is saying, nor is it about believing what they say is true. It's about putting forth an argument or assertion, and backing that up with researched facts and quotes from published sources.

If you make a statement asserting a position, then you ought to have some facts to back up your assertion, and not expect people to believe you, just coz you sez so. Or get personal if they don't.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:29 AM   #28
ChrisHein
 
ChrisHein's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Location: Fresno , CA
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,628
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Not everyone needs to go about yelling like a braggart.

I don't think anyone who knows the history of Aikido and Sokaku Takada would doubt the link to weapons, have you ever read anything about Aikido?

-Chris Hein
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 12:54 AM   #29
Edwin Neal
Dojo: Ronin
Location: Henderson, North Carolina
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 597
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Michael Varin asked,
"Why were those particular techniques (attacks included) chosen to form the body of aikido?"

back on topic... i believe IMHO that these waza have two aspects... first they are effective 'general' attacks/defenses that allow for some amount of flexibility in application to more specific attacks/defense... from the one, many... so to speak... secondly they are general principles that can be applied across the entire spectrum of martial techniques including specific striking, clinch and ground applications... the "universal applicability" of the techniques and principles of Aikido dawned on me long ago, and has been reinforced by cross training and study of other martial arts... i consider aikido a meta martial art... kind of a graduate school for martial artists... when i was in college i was still relatively new to aikido and the martial arts, but i signed up for a class in Shotokan Karate as a phys. ed. class... after the first class the instructor asked me "how long have you studied Karate?" i said this was my first class... he was astounded because he said i looked like i had studied for at least a year or so more or less... i told him i just watched him and emulated what he did... as we talked and he found out i also studied aikido we both agreed that was probably the reason that i seemed to 'get' it much easier than the other students... now this is just a very basic example of how aikido can help relate or complement another art... i had another epiphany in a Modern Arnis seminar with the late Remy Presas... it seemed as if everything he showed was aikido, and the way he explained was like an echo of my sensei's words... the Guro and several senior students at the school noted that i had a good 'flow'... again this is probably because of my aikido study... this is the heart of Osensei's art... aiki... harmony... having a 'universal spirit'...

Edwin Neal


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 01:18 AM   #30
Edwin Neal
Dojo: Ronin
Location: Henderson, North Carolina
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 597
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

"I don't think anyone who knows the history of Aikido and Sokaku Takada would doubt the link to weapons..."

we don't doubt a link to weapons, but to the AS YET UNSUSTANTIATED claim that aikido was derived from a weapons based art and applied to empty hand techniques... when in fact all the evidence and research implies that most of the waza are in fact jujutsu based... and jujutsu is an unarmed system for dealing with armed and unarmed attackers... NOT a weapon based art...

from wikipedia (although it is by no means the definative source it is quick...)
Jujutsu (also jujitsu, ju jutsu, ju jitsu, or jiu jitsu; from the Japanese 柔術 jūjutsu "flexible/gentle/yielding/compliant Art") is a Japanese martial art that is principally based on grappling and joint lock techniques, though it also includes basic strikes and sweeps as well as varying degrees of ground fighting.

Jujutsu can trace its roots back to the early unarmed styles that where popular among the Samurai. Early martial arts were often categorized narrowly; kenjutsu for sword-fencing, naginata-jutsu for the glaive, and JuJitsu for unarmed. There where many styles of jujitsu with diffrent areas of emphasis such as purely empty-hand fighting in others it was a system of unarmed methods of dealing with an enemy who was armed. JuJitsu much like Karate and Kung-Fu is a very general term and is not limited to only one fixed set of techniques.

from the Aikiwiki on this site (certainly THE definative source!)
On the technical side, aikido is rooted in several styles of jujitsu (from which modern judo is also derived), in particular daitoryu-(aiki)jujitsu?, as well as sword and (possibly) spear fighting arts. Oversimplifying somewhat, we may say that aikido takes the joint locks and throws from jujitsu and combines them with the body movements of sword and spear fighting. However, it may be that many aikido techniques were the result of the founder's own innovation.

so feel free to find some evidence that shows how a system of joint locks and throws that derives from Daito Ryu JUJUTSU is derived from a weapons based art... until then your strident claims with no substantiation are just wind...

Edwin Neal


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 03:16 AM   #31
Michael Varin
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 567
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Hey guys,

I have been looking for some of my older aikido books hoping to find some historical information that relates to the questions that have been brought up. I haven't gotten very far, but the first book that I looked at did have some interesting insights. This is probably not definitive, but it is from recognized sources and in print. I believe that Saito studied with Ueshiba for the longest time and was his most devout student, and Stanley Pranin is a well known aikido/daito ryu historian who is fluent in Japanese.

"In the early 1960's, even though the Founder was still enjoying good health, he did not teach weapons or basic taijutsu techniques anywhere other than Iwama. His teaching elsewhere consisted mainly of demonstration-like performances with little explanation. This is why my aikido was misunderstood …" Morihiro Saito (Commentary on Budo, p. 9, 1999)

"Surprising to some will be the large number of techniques included in Budo that are performed with weapons." Stanley Pranin (Commentary on Budo, p. 25, 1999)

"Ueshiba's fascination and experimentation with weapons training lasted most of his martial career. His training with the sword and the staff, in particular, heavily influenced his understanding of the martial principles of body movement (taisabaki), entering (irimi), combative distance (maai), and timing." Stanley Pranin (Commentary on Budo, p. 31, 1999)

The book is basically Ueshiba's 1938 book Budo with commentary from Saito and Pranin.

I'll see what else I can dig up.

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 06:02 AM   #32
Josh Reyer
 
Josh Reyer's Avatar
Location: Aichi-ken, Nagoya-shi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 644
Japan
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Might I suggest you fellows hop on over to Aikido Journal and read some of Ellis Amdur's past blog entries? Particularly "Aikido is Three Peaches, parts I, II, and III.

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 06:11 AM   #33
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Michael, do you have an ISBN for this?

What I have is a John Stevens' 1991 version of what is claimed to be a translation of the 1938 Budo. In it there is nothing to suggest "the large number of techniques included in Budo that are performed with weapons". Nor is there any suggestion that Ueshiba's aikido is weapons based.

In fact, the introduction by Kishomaru states clearly that "this led him... to break away from the conventions of Yagyu-ryu and Daito-ryu jujutsu, and to develop his own original approach, using applied principles and technique together, to break down the barrier between mind, spirit and
body."

In the actual translated text on (section 5) p35, titled "Hand Techniques":
Quote:
The hands, feet, and hips must be centred and function as one...
But nothing in Stan Pranin's commentary detracts from my earlier post regarding weapons as an extension of the body. The principles of weapons based movement is the same as empty hand movement, and does not imply that aikido is an empty-hand system derived from weapons movements.

Many arts which are primarily empty-handed systems, such as karate, understand the use of weapons as extensions of the body. Likewise with primarily weapons-based arts, such as arnis, understand that the principles of combative movement have universal application to both armed and unarmed modalities.

I'd be interested to see what else you can dig up.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 06:45 AM   #34
ian
 
ian's Avatar
Dojo: University of Ulster, Coleriane
Location: Northern Ireland
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,654
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

There are relationships between all techniques, and the techniques have been arrived at independently in different martial arts (cf. western martial arts). There may be 'new' techniques, but these are just variations on the main theme. Aikido contains the main techniques. Interestingly, they also blend from one to another, so to say - 'this is irimi-nage' whilst 'this is tenchi-nage' is really missing the point that they are very similar and there can be an inbetween technique. Thus, there are not 'lots of techniques', there is only one. Comapre with music - we learn seperate notes, but scales are just used for practise; to play a song there is often a movement from one note to another (e.g. sliding) and the harmonies and changes using a certain rythm is the real objective.

---understanding aikido is understanding the training method---
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 09:26 AM   #35
Josh Reyer
 
Josh Reyer's Avatar
Location: Aichi-ken, Nagoya-shi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 644
Japan
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote:
Michael, do you have an ISBN for this?
ISBN: 4900586560

It's available here

Again, I suggest folks check out Mr. Amdur's blogs, in particular

Fighting on Your Knees? Part 1

Fighting on Your Knees - Part 2

Fighting on Your Knees - Part 3

These deal with exactly the subject of this discussion: how much is Daitou-ryuu (and thus Aikido) weapons-derived?

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 09:39 AM   #36
Meynard
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 32
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Edwin,

Samurai were professional warriors

Professional warriors use weapons in the performance of their duties

For a professional warrior the ability to use weapons well was of high importance because they have to contend with other professional warriors using weapons.

Emptyhand skills were secondary. It was used when they had no other choice such as losing, breaking, or otherwise being unable to access a weapon.

As a back up to the inability to use a weapon for some reason or another professional warriors also learned emptyhand skills.

Some mixed grappling or striking arts with unrelated methods and techniques to their repertoire of combat ability.

Some developed a more efficient method and series of techniques using the principles and mechanics that they already train in their use of weapons. This method in fact simplifies training since there's no longer the need train separate methods of combat, training in one area enhances the other. This is indeed a more efficient way.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 05:10 PM   #37
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Whilst the evolution of empty-handed forms from weapons-based forms is highly plausible, given the historical and cultural contexts, it does not account for the fact that there are stark similarities in - at least the main technical repertoire of - aikido, and certainly Edo-jujitsu, and to a lesser extent Okinawan karate, with the older Chinese art of seizing and grappling (qinna).

Given the potential for cross-fertilization thru trade and migration between Japan and China (and Okinawa) during that period, it is highly likely that the inspiration for incremental change to unarmed combat developments came by way of merchant seamen and Buddhist monks from the mainland.

Unless of course one is suggesting that since people didn't know how to fight unarmed, they learnt to arm themselves, and then (for the reasons suggested by Ellis Amdur) proceeded to re-develop unarmed combat from what they learnt of armed combat?

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 06:08 PM   #38
ChrisHein
 
ChrisHein's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Location: Fresno , CA
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,628
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote:

Unless of course one is suggesting that since people didn't know how to fight unarmed, they learnt to arm themselves, and then (for the reasons suggested by Ellis Amdur) proceeded to re-develop unarmed combat from what they learnt of armed combat?

I think people learned back in the caveman days that arming yourself was superior to not arming yourself. Contrary to what popular movies and television might tell you, if you are going to be in a serious life or death situation you want to be armed. Unarmed means of combat probably come from youthful bravado, mating rituals, and the need to sort out the alpha in the tribe. Real fighting (armed) and social hierarchy fighting (unarmed) have probably always coexisted, but are two distinctly different things.

-Chris Hein
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 06:47 PM   #39
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Let's just try to stick to the following arguments...

That:
1. Aikido is derived primarily from Daito-ryu.
2. Daito-ryu is derived from jujitsu and kenjutsu.
3. Therefore Aikido is derived from weapons.

The issues I see with this argument is:
1. It discounts the evolution of jujitsu from unarmed grappling arts, specifically those from the Chinese mainland.
2. It discounts the similarities of techniques between various armed and unarmed east asian and western arts (some of which were derived independently).
3. It discounts the equal likelihood of evolution of armed combat from unarmed combat.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 08:02 PM   #40
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 860
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Umm is it not the case that in application a samurai would be using Ken-jitsu and Ju-jitsu at the same time, in fact I think the author of "Classical Fighting arts of Japan" states that Ju-jitsu ryuha would often teach Ken-jitsu on the side and certainly the book is littered with pictures ju-jitsu being done by fully armed and armoured people, blurring the distinction between ken-jitsu and ju-jitsu still futher.

Of the photographs the one I found most interesting is a sequence where two armoured samurai have locked swords, the one on the right kicks the other one over and makes shomen utchi, which is parried. The Samurai on the floor then trips the one standing up, rolls into a kneeling position and dispatches his opponent with a sword thrust into the neck.

Imagine doing shomen utchi irime nage with uke holding a bokken and you holding a wakizashi and I think we're closer to reality than the stereotype of two samurai using ken-jitsu until one looses his sword at which point he uses ju-jitsu to defend himself.
In fact the author of the above book states on page 55 "Ju-jitsu should not be defined as a weaponless art". So to say that Aikido is a weaponless art is somewhat shady in my opinion because in effect you're saying it's an unarmed art full of armed techniques.

The ISBN number is 4-7700-2619-6 if anyone is interested.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 08:41 PM   #41
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Other evidence suggests that pre-Edo, training in unarmed combat arts were subordinate to armed combat, the situation being reversed in the post-Edo era.

Just to muddy the waters, here's a different perspective. Several authors make reference to the Kojiki in which the first record of unarmed combat appears in the form of a wrestling bout, perhaps the precursor to sumo, from which jujitsu is purported to have been derived from.

And another, a quote from G. Koizumi, Kodokan 7th dan in Darrell M. Craig's "Japan's Ultimate Martial Art - Jujitsu before 1882...":

Quote:
As to the origin of Ju Jutsu, there are several opinions, but they are found to be mere assumptions based on narratives relating to the founding of certain schools, or some incidental records or illustrations found in the ancient manuscripts not only in Japan but in China, Persia, Germany and Egypt. There is no record by which the origins of Ju Jutsu can be definitively established. It would, however, be rational to assume that ever since the creation with the instinct of self-preservation, man has had to fight for existence, and was inspired to deelop an art or skill to implement the body mechanism for this purpose. In such efforts, the development may have taken various courses according to the condition of life or tribal circumstance, but the object and mechanics of the body being common, the results could not have been so very different from each other. No doubt this is the reason for finding records relating to the practice of arts similar to Ju Jutsu in various parts of the world, and also for the lack of records of its origins.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 09:39 PM   #42
xuzen
 
xuzen's Avatar
Dojo: None at the moment - on hiatus
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 965
Malaysia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote:
Nope, I'm still not getting any factual evidence other than anecdotal statements to the effect that aikido is based on weapons or is rooted in the use of weapons. What documentary proof do you have that aikido is based on weapons or that the empty handed forms are derived from weapons movement?
Ask and ye shall get:

Fact #1: Sokaku Takeda (credited as the modern father of Daito-ryu) taught both Daito-ryu Aiki Jujutsu and Onoha Itto-ryu (This is a koryu kenjutsu school). Extracted from Aikido: Tradition and the Competitive Edge by F. Shisida and T. Nariyama ISBN 0-9647083-2-9 pg 233

Fact #2: Morihei Ueshiba (undisputed founder of aikido) among other thing studied Yagyu Shinkage-ryu (This is also a koryu kenjutsu school) from Kosaburo Gejo. Pls note that M. Ueshiba learned the concept of maai from the lessons learned in this particular field of study. Extracted from Aikido: Tradition and the Competitive Edge by F. Shisida and T. Nariyama ISBN 0-9647083-2-9 pg 23

In this sense, it is quite clear to me that founding father of modern aikido were essentially also swordsman, and it is not surprising to me that aikido borrowed heavily the fundamentals of the sword or weapon. I doubt that aikido is a pure jujutsu art, Vis-a-vis Kito Ryu or Tenjin-Shinyo-ryu the parent art of Kano's jujutsu.

Not convince yet?

Here are more…

"… Aikido is the physical manifestation of the fundamental principles of the sword."

"Well, aikido is not like Judo which first involves physical contact and grappling before moving on to the technique stage. Rather, it is a martial art that relies on timing and body movement at the instant of contact to defeat the opponent. This is precisely the fundamental of the sword."

"Ueshiba Sensei himself was a master of the sword. I believe that he studied both Kashima Shinto Ryu and Yagyu Shinkage ryu ans as he formulated Aikido, he also attained a high degree of skill with the sword."

"Thus, we can see that the body movement of Aikido can be applied to the sword just as they are."

"The body movements of Aikido assume the use of real swords and conform to time-honoured martial techniques."

All the above paraphrase extracted from Aikido Shugyo by Gozo Shioda ISBN 0-9687791-2-3 pg 130-136

I fail to see how some forumers fail to see the close relationship aikido has with the sword/weapon; whilst insisting that it is a jujutsu art. I see the relationship, my teacher sees it, and my teacher's teacher, i.e., Gozo Shioda see it.

<In irritating Bart Simpson voice>… Eyrie, eat my short!

To Edwin, you claim to derived your lineage from Mr. Terada and Mr. A. Parker, clearly two very distinguished aikidoka from the Yoshinkan lineage, however your view is not consistent with the founder's school of thoughts. Could it be that in your study of other Martial arts, has clouded your judgment?

Boon.

SHOMEN-ATE (TM), the solution to 90% of aikido and life's problems.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 10:18 PM   #43
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

From Ellis Amdur's blog @ http://www.aikidojournal.com/index.php?id=74:
Quote:
As for Ono-ha Itto-ryu, it was that it was not really associated with DR until modern times - AFTER Takeda Sokaku. So although they may be the king and queen of a matched suit in some modern groups, but they weren't in the old days. Ono-ha Itto-ryu is specific to DR descended through Tokimune, and please correct me if I am wrong, but he did not learn much of his DR from his father - he learned from his mother, Sue, and from others, if I have read my AJ correctly.
If Daito-ryu was already based on sword techniques, why did Tokimune feel it necessary to tack on Ona-ha Itto ryu as a subsidiary/complementary art?

Secondly, why did Kishomaru make that statement I referenced in post #33?

Likewise, how do you account for the fact that the majority of the pins and throws in aikido, have stark similarities with other non-Japanese unarmed arts????

PS: My views on aikido are clearly listed in post #2.

Last edited by eyrie : 02-22-2006 at 10:30 PM.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 10:40 PM   #44
Meynard
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 32
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Quote:
The issues I see with this argument is:
1. It discounts the evolution of jujitsu from unarmed grappling arts, specifically those from the Chinese mainland.
2. It discounts the similarities of techniques between various armed and unarmed east asian and western arts (some of which were derived independently).
3. It discounts the equal likelihood of evolution of armed combat from unarmed combat.
1. It doesn't discount anything that's just another subject altogether.

2. It doesn't discount that either that's also another topic altogether.

3. Not at all. You simply need to go deeper into the history of combat. That's not within the scope of this topic.

Okay think about this since you're trying to go back to the beginning of combat arts development.

A. The human animal is basically a primate. The human animal is a natural grappler not a striker. Early proto human striking would be similar to how modern apes would strike, basically slapping and hammering down. Not unlike fights between untrained guys. First move is to circle or gauge for away to make contact. The initial flailing, pushing and grabbing eventually leads to clinching and grappling (wrestling). You've all seen fights back in high school, I assume.

B. Early humans figured that they can multiply their force by using tools. A club would be a good example. Imagine yourself as an early human holding that club in your hand and you're about to get assaulted. In the initial contact of the fight you swing your club and end the fight without having to clinch or grapple. The natural grappler figured out the advantage of striking. Wasn't it Ueshiba who said something like aikido is 90% atemi or something? hhhmmm... my percentage could be wrong, I don't remember exactly. Weapon based martial arts have a large amount striking and depending on style also have a large amount grappling. This is grappling that is not like wrestling, but grappling that deals with incapacitating the limbs especially the joints, Chin Na (grasping and locking).

C. When you're dealing with weapons and have to deal with the initial contact in weapon to weapon fighting the first thing you need to consider is entry techniques. I remember someone posting here somewhere about Ueshiba being interviewed and he commented how irimi (entry) is of paramount importance. hhhmmm....

D.When someone is swinging a weapon, a club as per the last example you as the defender would need to figure out how to take the club away so as to remove the advantage that your opponent has. If I knew that a weapon gives me advantage I would also make sure to have a way to keep my weapon. This is pretty much universal among humans regardless of where they are in the world. Humans everywhere faced the same problems and figured out similar solutions. They also figured that in striking the earth never misses. So, throws became a good strategy.

E. After several thousand years of trial and error, the methods evolved and stable strategies survived while others fell by the way side. Someone smart figured out how to integrate all these together into a teachable system. Then he taught it to his children and it became a family system of personal combat based on the use of weapons because weapons provided a great advantage. More than likely this system never left the immediate family. One must keep every advantage he has over his neighbors who one day may become his enemy.

F. It's simple evolution. Some evolutionary branches fade and disappear. Some with more stable strategies continue to thrive and adapt as the world changed. The methods of aikido are the way it is because it came from an evolutionary branch that came from the use of weapons. Using a weapon in combat is a stable strategy.

I know of Silat and Kali masters who keep their methods secret even though they teach their art publicly. In Thailand this was also the way among the krus and ajarns. The Chinese system is no different. It's easy to show the outward applications of techniques, but showing the training method that leads to mastery is another thing.

Do you think Ueshiba would just give his methods away? I certainly wouldn't. Why these techniques? The meaning wasn't revealed. I suspect like all warriors the old man was a bit paranoid about losing his advantage.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 10:48 PM   #45
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,048
Japan
Online
Re: Why these techniques?

Well you can selectively pick and choose - in context and out - guessing and guessing again.

Tokimune Takeda did accompany his father on his travels over a 6 year period. He also talks about training while Ueshiba was a student with his father.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article...light=tokimune

As to the question at hand Tokimune Takeda addresses it specifically here.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article...light=tokimune

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 10:54 PM   #46
Meynard
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 32
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Quote:
If Daito-ryu was already based on sword techniques, why did Tokimune feel it necessary to tack on Ona-ha Itto ryu as a subsidiary/complementary art?
Perhaps he simply didn't get the complete method from his father. It happens.

A simple partial deletion of training methods has a big impact.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 11:25 PM   #47
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

I think the similarities of general technical forms with other martial arts are somewhat relevant to the discussion, since we're discussing the rationale for inclusion of the base techniques listed. Recall that the topic is "Why these techniques?".

OK, let's assume that whatever percentage (70, 80, 90?) of aikido is atemi. If aikido is indeed based on sword movements, then cutting, slashing and thrusting movements would predominate - which I would generally agree it does. From the percussive impact perspective, this is mostly hidden or implied in aikido generally. One would think that this would be openly taught in aikido, as it is with other empty-handed arts such as kempo or karate, especially if the composition of aikido supposedly consisted of whatever percentage of atemi?

But that still does not reconcile, for me at least, how one could conceivably arrive at the point where if the techniques are generally similar in other unarmed arts, how these techniques are based on sword movements.

Don't get me wrong, I can see how aikido's specific technical executions relate to sword movements, but it does not explain how these base techniques in its common form are also derived from sword movements.

Am I being clear? I'm trying to make a subtle distinction here.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 11:27 PM   #48
xuzen
 
xuzen's Avatar
Dojo: None at the moment - on hiatus
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 965
Malaysia
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Quote:
Peter Rehse wrote:
Well you can selectively pick and choose - in context and out - guessing and guessing again.

Tokimune Takeda did accompany his father on his travels over a 6 year period. He also talks about training while Ueshiba was a student with his father.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article...light=tokimune

As to the question at hand Tokimune Takeda addresses it specifically here.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article...light=tokimune
Thank you PeterR-san. Those were gems of an article. Again the evidence seem to favour that aikido lineage is closer to kenjutsu roots than some had argued against in this forum. I wonder how much more evidence is needed to convince the naysayers? Or maybe they are argumentative for the sake of argument?

SHOMEN-ATE (TM), the solution to 90% of aikido and life's problems.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 11:28 PM   #49
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,048
Japan
Online
Re: Why these techniques?

Not sure he did - his father's kenjutsu background was Ona-ha Itto ryu. Any evidence that Tokimune took a different approach than his old man?

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2006, 11:57 PM   #50
ChrisHein
 
ChrisHein's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Location: Fresno , CA
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,628
United_States
Offline
Re: Why these techniques?

Not really sure this is on topic, but I'll tell you what I think,

"OK, let's assume that whatever percentage (70, 80, 90?) of aikido is atemi. If aikido is indeed based on sword movements, then cutting, slashing and thrusting movements would predominate - which I would generally agree it does. From the percussive impact perspective, this is mostly hidden or implied in aikido generally. One would think that this would be openly taught in aikido, as it is with other empty-handed arts such as kempo or karate, especially if the composition of aikido supposedly consisted of whatever percentage of atemi?"-Ignatius Teo


"Well, aikido is not like Judo which first involves physical contact and grappling before moving on to the technique stage. Rather, it is a martial art that relies on timing and body movement at the instant of contact to defeat the opponent. This is precisely the fundamental of the sword."-Shioda, by way of Boon



Basically this is what I was trying to tell some folks a few months back ( AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General >atemi is 90% of Aikido). Atemi, does not mean punch, it does not mean kick, it does not mean hand strike, it means for something to go through space and strike another body. Arrows make atemi, swords make Atemi, baseballs make atemi.

Shioda said it nicely there, that Aikido isn't dependent on the principal of Jiu, it's not something that requires physical force to move you, but in fact a principal that involves timing, timing in relation to another's actions.

It is clear to me that O-sensei was truly trying to develop and work with the principal of "Aiki" in his system; but what was he most proficient at? A weapons system, so that's what he used to explore "Aiki", if he was a dance teacher the techniques of Aikido might resemble the "cha-cha" but what he was most proficient at was the methods of armed combat. This, to me, means that Aikido is a weapons system (technically) focused on the use of the principal of Aiki.

-Chris Hein

Last edited by ChrisHein : 02-23-2006 at 12:03 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Budo Bear Patterns - Sewing pattern for Women's (and Men's) dogi.



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
Diato Ryu Aikijujutsu's relation to Aikido Kelly Allen General 19 11-23-2007 03:24 PM
Gokyo-why? Steve Morabito Techniques 65 11-26-2006 05:18 PM
aikido and competition ewodaj General 129 08-10-2006 10:43 AM
Definition of "Dan"? H. Trinh Language 27 02-10-2006 02:54 PM
Randori kocakb General 26 06-20-2004 08:51 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:58 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