You can learn an art in days...
No, you cannot. That you think it is possible does much to support the low opinion of you that has so oft been expressed in these forums.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You can learn an art in days...
You can learn an art in days... but proficiency, excellence, and its execution takes years. I claim no proficiency in aikido- merely that I admire its psychology of caring for the attacker.
When I was mugged, in part I am appalled I struck at the persons windpipe... I would like to think, as a person, a philosopher, a martial artist, I can find a way to protect myself without feeling the need to resort to that harm.
Idealism has gotten many killed... hopefully it won't me, right?
You can learn an art in days... but proficiency, excellence, and its execution takes years. I claim no proficiency in aikido- merely that I admire its psychology of caring for the attacker.
When I was mugged, in part I am appalled I struck at the persons windpipe... I would like to think, as a person, a philosopher, a martial artist, I can find a way to protect myself without feeling the need to resort to that harm.
Idealism has gotten many killed... hopefully it won't me, right?
Morehei Ueshiba, the creator of Aikido said that .. "to injure an opponent is to injure yourself. To control agression without inficting injury is the art of peace". This is how I (and many others from a similar traditional Aikikai background) aim to practice Aikido. So you are in many ways correct in your assertion.Thank you for that post K-man. I'm glad to see someone from aikido putting in their 2-cents. I value the philosophy aikido employs- it's dangerous, but result is total nullification without harming anyone. Very ideal.To this degree, I am not surprised in the least to see Aikido taking great advantage of this kind of tactic.
In the Chung Do Kwan system, tactic was essentially synonymous with technique.
You can learn an art in days... but proficiency, excellence, and its execution takes years. I claim no proficiency in aikido- merely that I admire its psychology of caring for the attacker.
Morehei Ueshiba, the creator of Aikido said that .. "to injure an opponent is to injure yourself. To control agression without inficting injury is the art of peace". This is how I (and many others from a similar traditional Aikikai background) aim to practice Aikido. So you are in many ways correct in your assertion.
Ok, I do have one question.
He advocated that injuring Your Opponent is injuring Yourself, and not inflicting Injury is the intent.
Then proceeds to invent a System where You systematically break bones and take people down.
Is it not possible that its more that back then, not injuring someone more meant not maiming them, were now it means... Well, not injuring them?
Or...
I didnt, actually.Back then? You do realize that Ushieba died in 1969?
I didnt, actually.
Im not an Aikidoka, and I havent exactly studied the Systems History to any real extent. My question still stands, though. With that alteration.
You can learn an art in days... but proficiency, excellence, and its execution takes years. I claim no proficiency in aikido- merely that I admire its psychology of caring for the attacker.
When I was mugged, in part I am appalled I struck at the persons windpipe... I would like to think, as a person, a philosopher, a martial artist, I can find a way to protect myself without feeling the need to resort to that harm.
Idealism has gotten many killed... hopefully it won't me, right?
No, you can't! At a mcdojo perhaps, but come on man....
You know, we have rules on this forum against trolling. Are you trolling here?
This why there are different styles of Aikido. The ones from before WWII have more destructive intent and atemi showing the influence of Ueshiba's Daito Ryu background. After the war he was far more spiritual and the quote you ask about was his later philosophy. This plays out through the organisation Aikikai which is the 'softer' aikido passed down through his family.What I would be curious about is when Ushieba originally said or wrote that quote. Aikido went through an evolution from a hard style of jiu jutsu, when it was referred to as Aikibudo to a kinder gentler art as Ushieba got older.
Hi Frank
I really do not know how "Peaceful" Ueshiba was. He was in the military skilled with the Bayonet fought on the frontline and was promoted for bravery. So it is likely he killed people but I don't think anyone really knows if he did. Here is an article discussing similar things about Ueshiba and peace:
http://blog.aikidojournal.com/2011/...r-injure-or-kill-anyone-here-is-what-we-know/
I believe, in another thread, it was held that a person training 5-6 hours is rare. Let's say the ideal is then 2-3. Days, to me, refers to around 3-5, in their entirety, which converts out being between 72 and 120 hours. If you take the ideal training time of 2-3 hours a day, you end up with roughly 2 hours of training, everyday for between a month or two. There are people who attend schools on these boards who only spend a month of time per weapon before transitioning to the next. IF you can't learn a system with 2-3 hours of diligent practice every day, for a month, than you just have a poor teacher at that point. I have had a teacher who received his 1st dan after only 3 months of dilligent study. The same man took over 40 years to receive his 6th dan, in the same system. It comes ultimately to how committed one is, and what the requirements are... to consider having degree in skill, are subjective. Hence why differ from style to style.
To me when I say days of practice... I mean it. But it's next to impossible to do, so I just condense. If, last week, I spent 4 hours a day, everyday training, than I would say I trained for approximately a day's worth of time last week. That is what I meant, and no, I am not trolling, and never intend to.
I have believed that the black belt is just the beginning, that if there's a mountain to climb, you've finally stopped walking toward the mountain, and are starting to walk up it. To me, the only thing a black belt tells me is that the person has arrived mentally to a point where they are ready to seriously begin training and learning. Having a black belt isn't the starting point, but it is for beginning to have true insight into an art. There is no end point, or goal, save for perhaps reaching the next step on that mountain. I'd like to think so long as one focuses on putting one foot in front of the other, and keeping the overall path in mind, we will always reach its top.
But even reaching the top is its own starting point, and every mountain scaled, will have its descent. I like thinking of those who earned a black belt, and through practice, made full circle and turned their belts white. I can't tell a person's skill from the gibberish and collection of symbols on their belts; bars and letters in foreign languages most don't speak. I can though from how they move, their eyes, and if they are in a gi, how worn it is, but well retained and kept.
But even this comes back to a question of what it means to 'learn'. All I'm talking about is memorization of theory and technique, not it's application or execution, and depth of skill as I think is the standard many of you are using.
To me that is perfecting an art, not learning it.
I believe, in another thread, it was held that a person training 5-6 hours is rare. Let's say the ideal is then 2-3. Days, to me, refers to around 3-5, in their entirety, which converts out being between 72 and 120 hours. If you take the ideal training time of 2-3 hours a day, you end up with roughly 2 hours of training, everyday for between a month or two. There are people who attend schools on these boards who only spend a month of time per weapon before transitioning to the next. IF you can't learn a system with 2-3 hours of diligent practice every day, for a month, than you just have a poor teacher at that point. I have had a teacher who received his 1st dan after only 3 months of dilligent study. The same man took over 40 years to receive his 6th dan, in the same system. It comes ultimately to how committed one is, and what the requirements are... to consider having degree in skill, are subjective. Hence why differ from style to style.
To me when I say days of practice... I mean it. But it's next to impossible to do, so I just condense. If, last week, I spent 4 hours a day, everyday training, than I would say I trained for approximately a day's worth of time last week. That is what I meant, and no, I am not trolling, and never intend to.
I have believed that the black belt is just the beginning, that if there's a mountain to climb, you've finally stopped walking toward the mountain, and are starting to walk up it. To me, the only thing a black belt tells me is that the person has arrived mentally to a point where they are ready to seriously begin training and learning. Having a black belt isn't the starting point, but it is for beginning to have true insight into an art. There is no end point, or goal, save for perhaps reaching the next step on that mountain. I'd like to think so long as one focuses on putting one foot in front of the other, and keeping the overall path in mind, we will always reach its top.
But even reaching the top is its own starting point, and every mountain scaled, will have its descent. I like thinking of those who earned a black belt, and through practice, made full circle and turned their belts white. I can't tell a person's skill from the gibberish and collection of symbols on their belts; bars and letters in foreign languages most don't speak. I can though from how they move, their eyes, and if they are in a gi, how worn it is, but well retained and kept.
But even this comes back to a question of what it means to 'learn'. All I'm talking about is memorization of theory and technique, not it's application or execution, and depth of skill as I think is the standard many of you are using.
To me that is perfecting an art, not learning it.