Aikido: Confronting a Crisis

[Gerry Seymour]

If you're going to dismiss what I'm saying because you want to stay mad, then do that.


No. I said that ballroom dancing is better than aikido IF learning how to dance is what you're looking for. BUT, if aikido is available and ballroom dancing lessons are not (an unlikely scenario), could aikido possibly be a substitute?


Ah, so:

Comparing aikido to yoga: not a derogatory comparison
Comparing aikido to judo: not a derogatory comparison
Comparing aikido to ballroom dancing: a derogatory comparison

I've never stated anything negative about any of the three things that I've compared aikido to do. If you personally have a level of respect for yoga and judo that you do not have for ballroom dancing, that's all you. Don't put that on me.

You don’t seem to understand the term “derogatory comparison”.

 

[Hot Lunch]

You don’t seem to understand the term “derogatory comparison”.

Nor anything else that's going on up in that noggin of yours.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Nor anything else that's going on up in that noggin of yours.

I appreciate the honesty.

 

[Taiji Rebel]

A few words from Ellis Amdur's book Duelling with O'Sensei:

But if you are committed to aikido, remember to what end you are doing it. What was really promised to you? Skill in combat, however necessary you believe it to be, was not aikido's main promise, at least not as stated by the founder, Ueshiba Morihei, and not by Useshiba Kisshomaru, his successor, and not by his leading disciples. Aikido is training in reconciliation - in the ability to step into a conflicted situation and effect the most peaceful resolution that is possible under the circumstance, and martial effectiveness is regarded as a means to that end, not an end in itself.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Some arts do emphasize the philosophy and the connection between training on the mat and everyday life more than others. Theoretically, you would expect those arts to be more likely to produce students who exemplify those philosophies in their personal lives. But based on my personal observations over the decades, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Any sport or activity in which people have a passion to teach will often tie life lessons into the training. Anyone who has played on a sports team for a school when they were younger would recognize this. People often say things like "my coach taught me more than just the sport."

Some martial arts do more of this than they focus on fighting because they either don't know much about the fighting part or have simply made a choice not to focus on the fighting. The ones that do it by choice have at the least sparring experience. The ones who do it because they don't know anything about fighting are the ones who get extreme with it.

The reality of it all is that many Martial Arts schools tend to separate the philosophical side of martial arts from the fighting side. Which is ironic because the originators knew the fighting side and much of their philosophy was born from that experience of doing, of fighting. Yet we have schools who believe that they can learn the non-violent portions without learning the violent portions. If that wording sounds too harsh to some then. I'll put it this way.

Some schools ignore the value of the physical components of sparring and choose to focus on philosophy without ever doing the physical. It reminds me of how people only tried to get what was good in milk by creating skimmed milk. Then later scientists discovered that the fat in the milk is what helps to absorb vitamin D. This is what I see in Aikido and some other schools that go overboard with the philosophical stuff. They only try to get what is good from Aikido without realizing that it's the physical components of fighting that help to understand the philosophical points.

My guess is that the founder of Aikido would hate aikido had he not had his previous experience with fighting. I would go even as far as to say that Aikido wouldn't exist without the founder's fighting experience. Yet that's what many schools try to do. Cut the fighting experience, and the result is a bunch of students who are unable to use Aikido. It is like Aikido doesn't exist.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Aikido is training in reconciliation - in the ability to step into a conflicted situation and effect the most peaceful resolution that is possible under the circumstance, and martial effectiveness is regarded as a means to that end, not an end in itself.

The problem with this is that Aikido was born from the experience of the founder's fighting experience and knowledge. Ask yourself this. Would Aikido exist without that knowledge? Could you do what the founder was able to do without the knowledge and understanding of fighting that he had? I often see Kung Fu Wang talk about how forms aren't needed, but his own greatness was not born absent of forms. In fact, he did a lot of forms and doing forms. Sometimes we may not fully understand the value of something until we take it away.

For example, when we take sparring away from Aikido we get Rokas and people who cannot use Aikido. We get people who do not know "fighting resistance." They only know the resistance that is used in class. If it's cooperative resistance, then their Aikido and their understanding of it is only informed of "cooperative resistance." The founder understood fighting resistance and that is what informed his Aikido.

There ability to step into a conflicted situation...What conflicted situation do Aikido students train in. Is someone telling me that I can be an expert swimmer without having to experience the conflict of being in the water? I've seen what people look like when they get in their first conflict. They panic, they stumble. It is like "they have never been in the water before." They look out of place and lost. That peace that they championed so much is gone. Context is everything. When someone is "Stepping into a conflicted Situation" is this the conflicted situation that Aikido is thinking of?

Just me personally. I'm always surprised at how people with more experience than me, often say that something isn't needed, but the irony is that they have the exact thing that they claim isn't needed. This also fits well with what Gerry was saying about how he think Aikido wasn't something that he thought was the beginning, but a "finishing martial art" that enhances existing martial arts experience. I took that as Learn striking -> Learn Grappling -> then learn Aikido which would enhance the Striking and Grappling that I previously learned. This means I would have the Physical Experience requirement that is needed to fully make use of what Aikido tries to teach.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I often see Kung Fu Wang talk about how forms aren't needed, but his own greatness was not born absent of forms. In fact, he did a lot of forms and doing forms.

The form training is good to be used to build up foundation. When you start to develop your combat skill such as combo (use move 1 to set up move 2), your form may not give you enough information.

At some point of your life, you will need to use the grammar that you have learned in your forms to create new sentences. For example, your form may have jab-cross combo. You can use that grammar to create:

- jab-jab
- jab-hook
- jab-uppercut
- jab-overhand
- ...

When you train your new combo such as jab-uppercut, you are no longer training your old form. You are training a new form that you have just created.

 

[Taiji Rebel]

Aldo Naldi's On Fencing was first published in 1943. In the book he proposes fencing as a superb way of building wisdom and health in American youngsters. It also features the following thoughts from the French physician Alexis Carrel:

"The intellectual standard remains low in spite of the increasing number of schools and universities... A man's value depends on his capacity to face adverse situations rapidly and without effort. Such alertness is attained by building up many kinds of reflexes and instinctive reactions... Moral habits are created in an identical manner... Honesty, sincerity and courage are developed by the same procedures as those used in the formation of reflexes."

Most traditional arts in Japan are meant to offer lessons which are applicable in everyday life.

Kenwa Mabuni says the following in his book, Introduction into Attack and Defense Techniques in Karate Kempo:

"But Karate is not only a self-defense technique. In social life, the spirit of karate and the inner strength make a person behave gently towards others. People who practice karate want to develop this emotional state. Kendo too, is not a method to kill other people with a sword. It is a method to control one's own needs and wishes. In the same ways karate is a means for mental and spiritual education to control one's one's own desires and promote a spirit of modesty. It is not the actual meaning of karate to punch and kick around recklessly and frighten people and fight in the streets."

America has a different cultural mindset toward karate and the martial arts. America is a competition based culture and this is counter to the original thoughts of those who practiced the martial arts in Japan and Asia.

If Aikido faces a crisis, which I am not sure it really does, then it has more to do with the culture in which it is situated rather than the art itself.

Any art or practice can offer lessons which are applicable to everyday life and living. Aikido is not claiming to be superior in this sense. It is not different to any other martial art. Each one has been devised to fit certain training, practice and performance conditions. They are all perfectly suited to the purpose and environment in which they were originally devised.

 

[BobY777]

MA training has 3 different stages:

1. When you are young, you try to develop your foundation. You concentrate on your personal development.
2. After you have developed your foundation, you try to test your MA skill against others.
3. When you get older, you try to use your MA to maintain your health and live a long life. You concentrate on your personal development again.

Of course, you can skip stage 2. But IMO, your MA training is not complete.

MA training is what ppl Make of it for themselves. There are no any "stages". We are free to form our lifes

 

[Gerry Seymour]

MA training is what ppl Make of it for themselves. There are no any "stages". We are free to form our lifes

While the delineations aren't as stark or consistent as KFW draws then in his post, I do think there are fairly common stages of development within MA. This has nothing to do with our freedom, but is a result of the way our brains process information.

 

[Mider]

Best point on aikido I’ve heard is that many Aikido Dojos don’t train for real life, for those who do it works fine.

 

[JowGaWolf]

While the delineations aren't as stark or consistent as KFW draws then in his post, I do think there are fairly common stages of development within MA. This has nothing to do with our freedom, but is a result of the way our brains process information.

The way Kung Fu Wang presents stuff takes a while to sink in. Give it 4 months and we'll see an example of the thing he just mentioned. lol.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

MA training is what ppl Make of it for themselves. There are no any "stages". We are free to form our lifes

It has to do with your age and body recover rate. When you are young, you can recover your body injury quickly. When you get older, you can't afford body injury.

If I remember correctly, Muhammad Ali retired at the age of 36. It's very logical that:

1. before your are 16, you train MA for foundation building.
2. between 16 and 36, you test your MA skill and build up combat experience.
3. After age 36, you train MA for health and long life.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

2. between 16 and 36, you test your MA skill and build up combat experience.

Here is a picture to prove that I did test my MA skill when I was in my 20 in 1974 (I like to prove what I have said). My sparring partner was my long fist senior brother Nelson Tsou. He ran a "Shaolin 5 tigers MA club" in NYC with over 200 students at that time.