Aikijitsu and Aikido

[Koga-Shinobi]

I was wondering if someone out there can help (Old Sempai seems to be the man)...what is the difference in style and techniques bewteen Aikido and Aikijujitsu?? And secondly, is Aikijujitsu a harder ("more attacking/aggressive") MA than Aikido? What are the similarities/differences between the two?

Any help will be greatly appreciated

 

[old_sempai]

:asian:

I would deem Aikijutsu as a harder style than Aikido. But, also consider this in regard to Aikido. I can only speak from experience in regard to the style I studied [Nihon Goshin Aikido]. Although I have had some exposure to Yoshinkan and Iwama styles as a result of attending seminars. All three styles base response on redirecting the dynamic energy of the attacker, and while the philosophies are similar, Nihon Goshin does not necessarily devote itself to "doing no harm" to the individual, but focuses more on defending oneself.

One could logically ask what would the choice be if I could do it over? There is no choice, when I first began there were very few Juijutsu [spell it any way you want] schools around. However, today Daito Ryu has gained a great following and is noted as a very legitimate art.

For my view, I would take the same course of study, that is a hard style of Aikido [unless you want to follow an extremely passive concept of MA - which in my view is not reality - and I await the firestorm on that statement], Jujutsu [but not limited to any Braziam style, but rather a Japanese based system such as Daito Ryu - a very good choice] Japanese Sword, and Tai Chi, and also add the study of Arnis de Mano to round out training. If your so inclined Muay Thai could also be added to this list. But at 61, I'm no longer a spring chicken, and now have other priorities.

:asian:

 

[old_sempai]

:asian:

Forgot to mention that I have relations [decendant from an English Great Uncle sent to SA in 1898] in your country.

:asian: :asian:

 

[Koga-Shinobi]

Thanks Sempai....so is it fair then to say that Aikijitsu is pretty much jujitsu-based with concepts of Aikido thrown (throws, circular movements) into it? Or would it be the other way around?

 

[Yari]

I would say none. I've never praticed Aikijitsu, but I've know people who've praticed it.

My impression was that 'aikido' is a part of Aikijitsu. From what I was told was that aikijitsu starts off very square, with the techniques hard and very predefined. At a certain stage you 'soften up', that is you implement the 'Aikido' aspect.


/Yari

 

[Caine]

From the little that I have learned over the years, Aikijutsu was a stage in O Sensei`s development from Daito Ryu to Aikido. The main difference between a "jutsu" and a "do" is that the purpose of a "DO" is to improve the self by practice, whereas the purpose of a "JUTSU" is victory over opponents.

Caine

 

[Jon O'Neall]

Hi, new member here (been lurking for a while)… just wanted to jump into this discussion… it looks like a good one.

To say “Aikijitsu is pretty much jujitsu-based with concepts of Aikido thrown (throws, circular movements) into it” is putting the cart before the horse. Aikijujutsu (or Aikijujitsu or Aikijutsu or Aikijitsu) is the parent art of Aikido, therefore it would be more proper to say that Aikido is Aikijujutsu based with many of the concepts of jujutsu largely removed.

Ueshiba studied Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu under Sokaku Takeda (the exact amount of time he did so is a much debated subject in the aiki arts!) and from that training, and with some other martial influences as well, he developed his art of Aikido. However, Aikido was never pure Aikijujutsu (Daito Ryu or otherwise). Ueshiba’s Aikido was very much influenced by his conversion to the Omoto Kyo pacifist religion. This is where much of the “softness” that we see in the Aikido of Ueshiba’s later years comes from IMHO. This “softness” is nowhere near as prevalent in Aikijujutsu. In fact, any softness in Aikijujutsu could really be defined within its Uke Waza, where blending and/or redirection may be employed to gain control of an attacker… but once that control has been gained, Aikijujutsu is anything but “soft” in it’s other waza: Shinkei Waza, Atemi Waza, Kansetsu Waza, Shime Waza, Nage Waza, Osae Waza and Ne Waza. These are all performed with a force and focus that is quite painful indeed!

Because there has been a resurgence of interest in Aikijujutsu in the past few decades, some styles of Aikido (IMHO) have adopted a harder style themselves and have begun to try to emulate Aikijujutsu more and more. Perhaps some day we’ll see some styles of Aikido begin calling themselves Aikijujutsu (IMHO we already have actually).

Hope this helps.

 

[old_sempai]

:asian:

Everyone knows, and agrees that Uyeshiba's art, Aikido had its origins in older art forms that included sword arts as well as Daito Ryu. Without making any claim towards being an expert in language I'm told that Jutsu means "technique" while Do means "way," but these simple definitions are just that; "simple definitions." They miss the mark with regard to the cultural aspects of Japan since "Do" arts were first founded in the early years of the Tokugawa Era as a means of channeling Samurai energies.

However, stating that hard styles of Aikido are just now coming into being because of the competition being created by Daito Ryu, along with the statement that Omotokyo is a pacifist religion is a long stretch. [Omotokyo was far from being a pacifist religion when first created by its founder]. Still, perhaps one reason Uyeshiba came to hate war so much was that he had seen it first hand, knew its consequences. And in his later years saw how Japan was being led down to a path of war at the expense of neighboring countries. But this is a subject that is more to what is found on the "History Channel" or on a show such as Biography rather than this forum.

As for hard styles being new to Aikido, not hardly. Yoshikan, Shodokan [Tomiki] along with Kenjutsukai [sp?] and Nihon Goshin] have been around for 20 or more years, and not all are off-shoots of Uyeshiba's original art. Even Saito's style cleary uses and teached Atemi, and the use of weapons, something not taught in the Iwama [Uyeshiba or Hombu style as some call it]. As a result one can see that these styles along with the introduction of other Samurai jutsu and swords arts under the aegis of Obata Toshoshiro, and others show that many of these arts have been around for a long time. However, with faster means of electronic communication, research, and access to overseas information [including the internet] in the United States many individuals have become aware of their existence. The truth is many arts are not really that "new," rather it is the information that is "new."

Yet, regardless of whether it is a jutsu or do art, the purpose of each is to unite and redirect a person's energy. Whether you dump them on their head or let them down gently is your choice!. And there is no need to expand on this last comment, except to say that it is found in the last word of the previous sentence: "Choice."

:asian: :asian:

 

[Jon O'Neall]

old_sempai,

I meant no disrespect when I used the term "pacifist". I simply employed it because most everything I've read about Deguchi Onisaburo states that he was indeed a pacifist... if I am in error by assuming that the religion he started (which I admit I know very little about) espoused much this same view, then I stand corrected. In fact, let me retract the pacifist tag and simply state that Ueshiba's embracing of Omoto Kyo certainly affected his art of Aikido. Fair enough?

Also, as to your statement that hard styles of Aikido are hardly new... I agree. In my post I stated the resurgence of interest in Aikijujutsu in terms of decades ... not merely years (as did you when you talked about hard Aikido styles, i.e. "20 or more years"). In no way was I trying to imply that (some) Aikido schools just stared doing hard technique in the past couple years. I recognize that some of Ueshiba's students did not necessarily prefer the softer version of Aikido that Ueshiba began practicing after WWII. That is why there are groups like Yoshinkan, Tomiki, etc. But I see it as a completely logical step of deductive reasoning that these practitioners were wanting to seek out Aikido's harder, more martial roots (i.e. Aikijujutsu). And these are the styles I was referring to when I said, "some styles of Aikido (IMHO) have adopted a harder style themselves and have begun to try to emulate Aikijujutsu". And this is probably largely responsible for Aikijujutsu's resurgent popularity over the past few decades. Certainly no one can argue that without Aikido, Aikijujutsu wouldn't be nearly as well known as it is becoming.

Anyway, I don't really see that you and I disagreed on much in either of our posts. Perhaps it's just a matter of perspective (I am not an Aikidoka). At any rate, perhaps by using the term "pacifist" I inadvertently got your Irish up and perhaps you thought I was attacking Aikido. That was not my intention. My entire first post was meant merely as a way of trying to correct Koga-Shinobi's misunderstanding of the parent/child relationship between Aikijujutsu and Aikido. I apologize if offense was taken.

And finally, I'll add that there is a third "choice" when executing a technique. You mentioned letting them down gently or dumping them on their head. But a third choice is throwing/pinning (whatever) with focus and power (btw, power does not necessarily mean physical strength) in such a way that they remain in a constant state of pain and control. This can be done without permanent or even temporary injury (as long as the uke knows proper ukemi and the tori has good command of his technique) and is the basis for practicing strong and realistic techniques in Aikijujutsu. If all one knows is how to do it gently or lethally (i.e. dumping on head) then one misses out on the far more realistic (and usable) choice.

Anyway, I'm sure you realize this and I'm probably just nitpicking... if so I apologize. Again, it was far from my intention to try to start an argument. I've read much of your other posts on this and other forums (note the getting up of the Irish comment earlier) and consider you knowledgeable and well-spoken and I look forward to reading more of your posts and perhaps having further dialogue in the future.

Respectfully,

 

[old_sempai]

:asian:

No need to apoligize, no offense was taken - just two different points of view. Though initially it appeared that some comments could have been misinterpreted by those not well versed in the history of Aikido. After all Mr Pranin's AJ has become the bible for some, but that's not to say everything found within its pages is gospel.

Yes, you are correct in your assessment about some styles of Aikido recognizing the competition being generated by the jutsu arts. This situation is not unlike what happened in Japan just after the War. Aikido created the higher Dan grades as a result of the higher Dan grades being found within the Karate schools that were coming into existence once the Allied Occupation began lifting the ban on Martial Arts.

As for the third method of dealing with attack, well that's why the word "Choice" was used, and I stopped with two. Perhaps these two choices came from reality since "mano e mano" is only found in an old John Wayne or Tim Holt western [now I'm really dating myself]. The reality is that "street predators" do not generally 'hunt" alone. To digress with an example one night while in the city with my fiancee we turned a corner following within a step or two of others. As the group coincidently turned the corner I noticed two locals coming from the other direction. They literally slowed their pace and began looking over the crowd like wolves looking at a pack of sheep. Even my fiancee who is not that street savy noticed it. Guess riding the A train through East New York does can do that to a person [and by the way East New York is a stop in Brooklyn - go figure - only in "New Yoark"].

As for posts on other forums, well lets just say that I recognize that it appears to be controlled by what I've come to call: "A Golden Circle" crowd [clic if you will], and they truly enjoy nit picking, about many many trival things [even when proven wrong]. And found within this group are some that are critical of "long posts" submitted by others. However, they in turn will think nothing of downloading lengthy newspaper articles, one after another instead of simply noting the weblocation of the article. Go figure. Still I visit from time to time because others such as Mr Harry Cook, Dr. Karl Friday, Mr Dave Lowry, etc. may have some meaningful information to share.

Regards

:drinkbeer

:asian: :asian:

 

[Koga-Shinobi]

Thanks John and Old Sempai, really enjoying your discussion, clearing things up quite a bit! Silly question, what does a the term "harder" style of Aikido mean?

 

[Yari]

I think I'll jump in.

My idea of soft and hard aikido are split in three(two).

There is hard and soft were the soft are two parted.

Why I split soft in two is because in Aikido, you have the Aikido that emphesizes ki alot. To some extent not touching the opponent, but using ki. If we keep these out of the equasion, I see the difference between hard and soft as how much they "deflect" the energi that your attacker (uke) comes with.

If I stood in front of you I'd try and show it by showing Ikkyo (the first technique). Which looks like you taking a hold on uke's arm by the wrist and elbow, keeping his arm straight and pushing his " arm" against his center, while going down, so he lies face down whith his arm pointing out to the side.

Kobeyashi (sp?) would make the movements very small and presice. While in Nishio we would "soften" the attack by starting off some kind of tenkan/irimi. I feel that Saito (Iwama ryu) is even more compact in movement than Kobeyashi.

All the styles will use the "same" technique, and emphesize using uke's energi. But people doing Aikido, and usally those who can't feel where and what tori is doing, feel that the "harder" styles are hard. And they feel this because they can't feel where the small and precise movements lead them.

As you probably can understand now I don't think there is a harder or softer style, but that it's uke that can't feel the small differences, and feels that it's hard.

/Yari

 

[2maz]

I think there is a clear difference between "soft" and "hard" aikido, where you could put ki aikido at the soft end, and iwama ryu at the hard end. In ki aikido you run around throwing yourself rather than getting thrown, wich doesn't suite me as a method of training, since I like it a bit more physical. In Iwama ryu you can clearly see the connection to aikijutsu in many of the techniques, wich you cannot in ki aikido.

I believe aikido is like a pyramid though, where the different styles start at different sides while they are all aiming at the same goal (the top). It's just different ways of getting there.

 

[Yari]

Originally posted by 2maz



I believe aikido is like a pyramid though, where the different styles start at different sides while they are all aiming at the same goal (the top). It's just different ways of getting there.

I don't agree on that. Specially when were talking about the extrem aikido styles. I belive a part of what makes Aikido so good, is the emphasize on center. And Ki-aikido poeple (those who point a finger and expect people to fall) are to much centered in their head, and not the natural center of the body.

/Yari

 

[2maz]

hehe... well, just because they aim at the same goal doesn't necessarily mean they all get to the top.

 

[Yari]

Originally posted by 2maz

hehe... well, just because they aim at the same goal doesn't necessarily mean they all get to the top.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

/yari

 

[streetwise]

I am stealing this quote (since I can't remember who I heard say it), I think it came from a seminar tape of one of the Daito-ryu folks.
"When I practice, my technique is Aikijutsu, when I breathe, my art is Aikido. There is no seperating the two."

 

[Yari]

Originally posted by streetwise

"When I practice, my technique is Aikijutsu, when I breathe, my art is Aikido. There is no seperating the two."

Nice quote!!!

/Yari

 

[JAMJTX]

"As for hard styles being new to Aikido, not hardly. Yoshikan, Shodokan [Tomiki] along with Kenjutsukai [sp?] and Nihon Goshin] have been around for 20 or more years, and not all are off-shoots of Uyeshiba's original art."

Yoshinkan is not an off shoot of Ueshiba's Aikido and it's a lot more than 20 years old. After WWII when Ueshiba began teaching again, he contacted Shioda Sensei and told him to start teaching too. Shioda called his dojo Yoshinkan, A Place For Cultivating The Spirit. They were teaching the same art. Of course both have evolved since. Ueshiba taking the more spiritual path with the Yoshinkan concetrating more on Police application and a much harsher training regimen. Hihon Goshin is not related to Ueshiba's Aikido as it is a combination of Daito Ryu and Judo. I think this is like 40-50 years old too.
Keijutsukai, (kei = police" is Thomas Nakayama's offshoot of Yoshinkan and I think he studied Shin Shin Toistu with Tohei Sensei.
Tomiki Aikido is a combination of Aikido and Judo. Tomiki Sensei wanted to create Aikdio competition in order to create the same interest and growth in Aikido as Judo had seen. Ueshiba did not want competition. So Tomiki went off and developed his own competition style and included Judo, as he was a student of Dr. Kano. This is also a very effective self defense art.

Jim Mc Coy
www.jimmccoy.com

 

[MichiganTKD]

The aikido I practice, Yoshokai, I would characterize as a hard style. It was formed out of Yoshinkan, also another hard style. From what I was taught, the "hard" styles are the forms of aikido that developed when Ueshiba was younger, and more directly connected to aikijitsu. As a result, they tend to have more pins, strikes, takedowns, and weapons training. In Yoshokai, we do pins (leg, bicep, rib etc.), bokken-jo-tanto training, strikes (palm, elbow, backfist), and control techniques. As Ueshiba got older and refined aikido further, he eliminated many of the techniques that characterized the older styles so that the aikido would be more flowing and circular. Part of it was probably age. Part of it was also, I think, a result of his changing mindset and philosophy. He saw aikido as a method to achieve world harmony and felt that the older aikijitsu-style techniques did not belong in aikido as he later saw it.