Aikido and Internal Arts

[StickyHands]

No, not "nuff said", I dont really care what this grandmaster said or that grandmaster said, I am trying to figure out how it will help me, in the end, it's my life to protect, not his royalty and lineage.

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by StickyHands
No, not "nuff said", I dont really care what this grandmaster said or that grandmaster said, I am trying to figure out how it will help me, in the end, it's my life to protect, not his royalty and lineage.

Did you check the Video on the other Thread that features CXW, I guess you will find your answers there.


As for saving your butt, get a gun and become street-wise.

MA will give you maybe an advantage in a fight, there are NO guarantees regardless of which art you study.

MA like any skill will only be as good as the person using it and how well you keep it honed and trained.

TMA were designed to ENHANCE your existing skills, not give you skills you don't have.

Remember like with any venture in life what you will get out is in direct proportion to the effort you put into the venture, there are no short-cuts or magic solutions.

Seeya.

[StickyHands]

Which other thead, what's the link? I know what your saying, that's the most obvious thing redeemable. But I rather be a fool and ask stupid question now than 10 years from now and wonder, oh sh1t, i should have studied this art or that, or something is wrong with my teacher, even though I am doing my best. Reading things that Kumkuat said makes u wonder. Just a few years ago, I used to think Karate was the best, hands down.

[Laughing Cow]

Sticky hands.

This Thread:

Tai Chi Vid clips

The Chen clip is very good.

As for wasting time, sooner or later you will have to make a decision which style and under whom to study.
You can collect as many opinions as you want but need to remember that most of those are tainted and might not be a good reflection of what is really going on.

Every time you sign up at a new Dojo it will be a gamble to a certain degree.
Just because style X and Sifu Y are good for 100 people does not mean that you will click with him.

The Sifu is a guide along your path to mastering the style/system, the effort & mastery comes from within you.

That's why I feel that which style or which Sifu is less important than your dedication to mastering what you do as the Student.

IMHO, a good MA will suceed not only in his MA style but in everthing he decides to pursue.

Too many people look at Masters like CZL or CXW and ask how can I be as good as them and compare their current skill to the masters current skill.
The question should be:
"If I study style X for 30yrs will I be as good as (fill in master) is/was after 30yrs of dedicated study."

I know the answer in regards to my own studies and regarding my Sifu's skill.


Cheers.

P.S.: Too much thinking/comapring can cloud the mind too, sometimes it is better to go with the gut instinct.

[StickyHands]

LOL. good points made. thanks. i guess the only one i havent heard of so far in a long time and probably remember is the "gut instinct." To know what I like.... hmmm, my conscious is telling me to pretend as a Japanese samurai. haha.

[Becca]

Originally posted by StickyHands
im sure younger generation would love it if they knew what it can do.

No, they are too impatient. Why spend 5 years learning to use internal arts to kick some one's butt, when you can break bricks in 6 mos? The returns of IMA take longer to see, and we don't like to wait even five minutes to get a burger and fries.

A thought to ponder: Have you ever tried to hit a spinning target? your hand bounces off and little of the force is transfered to the target. It also can throw your balance off if you're not ready for it. Very easy to grab that arm once the oponant is off balance. Aikido/Aiki Jujutsu/whatever other variation of the style, IS internal to some degree. We are trained to take the hits we can't avoid and turn them into something useful, like leverage or use the momentum to strengthen our next attack.

I haven't studied Kung Fu nearly as long as Ninjitsu, but I do see alot of similarities in the way the two styles deal with punches/kicks/locks. The theories and training differ, but the outcome is the same.

[Becca]

Originally posted by StickyHands
Which other thead, what's the link? I know what your saying, that's the most obvious thing redeemable. But I rather be a fool and ask stupid question now than 10 years from now and wonder, oh sh1t, i should have studied this art or that, or something is wrong with my teacher, even though I am doing my best. Reading things that Kumkuat said makes u wonder. Just a few years ago, I used to think Karate was the best, hands down.

Who's to say it wasn't the best for you at that time? The only wasted effort is one you got nothing from.

[Vapour]

"the uchi-deshi at honbu, particularly Chiba, started giving me a raft of **** that I was being disloyal to O-sensei by studying with Wang, ...."

- Typical! Sad.

"According to sources within Chen TJQ there are 5 levels of skill within the system."

Yep, it's four guardian warrior side of lineage thingy. Aside from quality of taijiquan,

The level one is begginer student
The level two is intermediate student
The level three is advance student and begginer master/instructor
The level four is intermediate master
The level five is advance master

There supposed to be only 10 people in the world which are level five.

As of aikido not training in roots, you are wrong. They have completely different conceptual approach. They emphasise *floating* and *raising tantien*. If you raise taintien, you make your body uplight and strangely, I notice that you lower body sink into the ground at the same time. Aikido approach certainly emphasise mobility side of this but it's totally the same thing in high level. In Ki style of aikido, they have standard exercise called ki exercise where your and your partner test the stability of each aikido posture by applying pressure.

If you read taijiquan classic, it say you sink ki to tantien, then you *raise shen*. Since I practice both aikido and taijiquan, I think aikido is on shen side first. It's the same thing with different roads.

I would somewhat say that aikido is not as deep as CIMA because it's curriculum are designed to be taught to mass in class room format. This doesn't mean CIMA are better. In fact aikido produce far more competent fighter (especially because it is taught widely to Japanese police) than CIMA. How many Chinese internal martial arts practioners are there? Plus how many tai chi practioners know taijiquan is a martial art?

Btw, you don't show your back when performing aikido techinque. It's actually your side, not to mention that this is only training routine. If one apply techniqe for real, you often dont even turn but you utilise small intrenalised circle.

[Vapour]

Let me add another thing. Concept of being double weighted. Another major Chinese Internal/external martial art concept not at all emphasised by aikido.

In ki aikido, they have an exercise known as ki exercise where one hold one of aikido stadard postures and one's partner push to test the stability of posutre. Before I get pushed, I'm totally double weighted 50/50, but when my partner push from side, that push is redirected to either one of my leg so I become signle weighted. The floating and relaxation is the key in this exercise. More I float (raise tantien) and more I relax (expecially my empty leg but in practice one relax both legs), I can absorb more and more of the push.

I don't know what is the source of the claim that jujitu originated from Chinese Internal martial arts. I also read story claime by few Kung Fu practioners that aikido's internal aspect originate from Morihei's trip to Manchuria, compeletely ignorant of the fact that Morihei have mastered aikijujitu already at that time.

If aikido/jujitu originated from Chinese IMA, can anyone answer me why Japanese empty hand martial arts (karate originated from Kung Fu so it doesn't count) only practice single technique kata. Even in weapong arts which has Kung fu like kata, the form is relatively short and most style has only one form and the rest of training are concentrated on technique drilling (suburi).

Why two main concept of chinese martial arts, rooting and not being double weighted totally absent in aikido. If I talk about rooting or double weight I often get "Huh????" from aikido practioners. Aikido take completely opposite concept which in practice do the same thing.

[chen zhen]

Good to hear answers from Aikidokai and not aikido-ignorant people like me

[Former castleva]

"I don't know what is the source of the claim that jujitu originated from Chinese Internal martial arts. I also read story claime by few Kung Fu practioners that aikido's internal aspect originate from Morihei's trip to Manchuria, compeletely ignorant of the fact that Morihei have mastered aikijujitu already at that time."

It seems to be this China statement is done for warmth and fuzzles (from CMA´s of course)
This has been discussed to a great degree and probably at least many a aikido practitioner recognizes this possibility but while it´s entirely possible in theory,it still remains as a non-falsifiable hypothesis at best.

[Kevin Wallbridge]

Its my experience that in China they don't talk about Japanese martial arts at all. That someone has made the claim that Ju Jitsu comes from China is not surprising. Lots of people say lots of unfounded things. To presume that this is a standard way of thinking is stretch, however. Anyone who knows their history will see the relation between the old Kumi-uchi armour grappling methods and old Aikijitsu. Jujitsu is simply the police version intended for restraint.

When Ueshiba was in the occupying army of northern China I don't think its fair to say he had "mastered" Akijitsu. He was certainly a practitioner and was known for his skill, yet he was still a relatively young man by master standards of the time.

I have touched lots of Aikidoka and I don't see them being able to open and close their joints very well. When you can quickly change from elongating through a joint to drawing a limb in longitudinally, then the large circles and foot work of Aikido can easily be taken away. Everytime I touch a new Aikidoka they try "dai" or leading and with Baguazhang I find it easy to get past their spiral and reverse it or to steal the lead away. After a while they become more cautious, but the first touch is always the same.

[Rockwood]

Although these arts are not the same, they have a number of similarities. I trained in Aikido for 5 years or so, followed by the same amount in various internal CMAs.

Aikido in practice uses lots of joint locks and throws. People need to realize that you don't just walk up to someone and put on a joint lock. That is utterly impossible if they resist with any effort.

In Aikido if your opponent has an opening you attack. If they don't block or avoid it you knock them down. If they do block it you apply a lock or throw. This is the same simple strategy used by almost all martial arts.

In practice Aikido always assumes that your opponent will counter your first assault, so the bulk of practice is done on throws and locks.

Repeat: You only throw someone after the attack has been countered.

Aikido uses two primary attacks.

Shomenuchi: This is the equivalent in IMA to Pi Chuan in Xingyi. You knock him out by advancing into his space and cutting his structure down like chopping wood with an axe. It is powered by the forward step, not the arm's strength. It's a more vertical strike.

Tsuki: This is the equivalent in IMA to Beng Chuan. You knock him out by advancing into his space and punching his torso, neck or face right on like a battering ram. Again, it is powered by the forward step, not the arm strength. It is more of a horizontal strike.

Although there are others, these are the primary attacks of Aikido, which by conincidence are exactly the same as Xing Yi's two most feared and effective attacks.

From my perspective, these are the core of Aikido, just as much as Xing Yi. All the joint locking and throwing only happens if the opponent withstands your attack.

These two attacks are less common in other JMA, thus the rise of the idea that O-Sensei may have learned them during his many years of travel in Northern China during WWI and WWII.

After one year of either Xing Yi or Aikido the practictioner should be the equal of any external martial artist trained the same amount of time. It shouldn't take a "Looooong time" to learn IMA or Aikido for fighting.

If however, the Aikidoists Shomenuchi and Tsuki are not understood and heavily trained, then of course he will get his ass kicked. Same goes for the Xing Yi man who doesn't train Pi Chuan & Beng Chuan obsessivly.

The only real difference I see between the two arts is that O-Sensei didn't leave behind a solo training method, he cut out the forms, but kept the applications. The Aikido people don't have a good way to train their attacks daily, so they get into faking it in the dojo just to get on to the throws and locks. If Aikidoists got back to mastering their core attacks, they would be dominating the UFC by now! Ok, maybe that's a bit much.

Once you have those two attacks built into your body, you have a basis to get into the fun stuff. Until then you are merely faking it.

-JessO

[shaolinboxer]

IMO, Aikido does qualify as an internal art because of the stress placed on yeilding, relaxtion, sensitivity, flutuation between mobility and immobility, and visulization of ki (chi).

Remember that aikido has two sides. We are all familiar with the throws, locks, atemi, etc. However, ukemi (lit. "receiving") is just as valuable if not more so. This is how aikidoka "invest in loss" in many cases. It is at the core of transmission without verbal instruction. In order to do the kind of ukemi that makes people say "oh man that looks so fake" requires the practitioner to acheive a true statue of "mushin" or "no-mind". This is very difficult and a worth while persuit, since it expresses total adaptablity and harmony.

Aikido also focuses on breath, rhythm, using the mind to control the ki through the body, and practice can (if the practitioner is motivated and aware) allow one to experience their own humanity and experiment with their ethics.

Aikido is about self, other, and the discovery of one's relationship to the world. That is not to say that martial efficacy is not a major concern. It is. However, it is only a small part of an art that can open many physical, psychological, and spiritual doors.

[Becca]

"Repeat: You only throw someone after the attack has been countered. "

They are also used to stop an ambush. I.e. if they come up behind you with a side head lock. You grab the locking arm to prevent strangulation, then flip them over your head. Actually, this is a good example of why you don't start with a lock/throw.