Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 73

Thread: Aikido?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Commerce City, Colorado
    Posts
    2,823
    Originally posted by jun_erh
    I freind of mine took it for a few years before swithing to BJJ. He said akido was "great if someone is running at yu like this" and made a motion of someone sort of diving at you with two arms.
    Classic example of having learned the technique but none of the priciple.

    There is this one kick/block/punch/grab compo in one of Pai Lum's forms that is usually done wrong for that very reason... You must adapt the technique to work in the NOW 'cause ain't nobody with 2 brain cells go'n'a punch right in that 4" pochet you just formmed with your fore arms.

  2. #32
    Originally posted by EmptyCup
    And since I know very little about this art (but a bit more than just watching Under Seige 1 & 2 ), can anybody tell me what kind of attacks are used? Whether it be open palm, knifehand, or fist. I can't recall ever hearing about such techniques used. When are the locks used? Are there any kicks? What is the stance like? All that I've seen seems pretty static to me with the practioner not really moving from one spot but waiting for the opponent to come to him.
    The techniques that Steven Seagal uses in his movies are not Aikido per se, they are pure Hollywood. You'll notice that in his earlier movies, he never really punches and kicks, but later they are added. IMHO, this is because most action choreographers can't understand the concept of an action hero not punching and kicking. His movie "Aikido" has become more and more "Karatefied" over the years.

    Attacks in Aikido are meant to illustrate principles and encourage understanding of vectors. There are no kicks as such, because the technical curriculum of Aikido predates the major importation of Okinawan Karate into Japan. There are a variety of strikes, but again they're mostly there to illustrate certain principles and angles. Suffice it to say that Aikidoka don't do Hollywood Aikido. The only demonstration of straight Aikido in Seagal's movies is in "Above the Law". If you watch the beginning, he is teaching an Aikido class. Although IMHO Seagal relies too much on his size and speed to accomplish irimi (direct entry), this is a good demonstration of irimi nage technique.
    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
    In practice, there is.

  3. #33
    Originally posted by backbreaker
    I don't know any aikido , but I've heard they use no sweeps or kicks. It seems to me that putting a leg in between the opponent and the ground would allow more opputunities to end a fight. Does this have to do with the aikido philosophy or something?
    Aikido doesn't contain anything you'd recognize as a sweep. However several techniques can be adapted very quickly to a sweep if one is so inclined.
    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
    In practice, there is.

  4. #34
    Originally posted by Christopher M
    Also, they use kuzushi (offbalance) like in judo. Tomiki claims the other aikido styles primarily use speed and power, whereas his uses offbalance. Perhaps because of this, the Tomiki stylists favor higher, neutral and natural stances over the deep entries found in other styles.
    Unbalancing and the taking of an opponent's balance are not unique to Tomiki sensei's Shodokan style. However most Aikido schools do not use the term "kuzushi" because this is a Judo term. Tomiki sensei, being a student of Judo (8th Dan I believe) was naturally inclined to use the terminology he already understood. He also incorporated shiai because he agreed with Kano sensei's philosophy of martial art as physical and mental conditioning for the general public.
    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
    In practice, there is.

  5. #35
    For those of you talking about the history of Aikido:

    The correct name of the Daito Ryu is Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, not Aikijutsu. "Aiki" is a term and/or principle that is/was used in many koryu. The Daito Ryu name did not exist until Ueshiba sensei's teacher Takeda Sokaku. The roots of DRAJ date back to the Ono ha Itto Ryu school of swordsmanship (still taught as a separate curriculum in several DRAJ schools), the family jujutsu of the Takeda family and Oshiki-uchi, the inner palace art of the Aizu clan. Daito is the name of the primary fortress of the Aizu clan.

    Although many people have asserted claims that Ueshiba sensei learned (and mastered) several arts, the historical record shows no such thing. He did dabble in a couple of jujutsu schools in his youth, and also received some instruction in Yagyu style swordsmanship, but the bulk of his learning came at the hands of Takeda Sokaku in the art of Daito Ryu. DRAJ was the ONLY art that Ueshiba sensei ever received a teaching license (kyoju dairi) in. That being said, the dabbling of a natural like Ueshiba sensei cannot be likened to that of dilletantes like us (yes I'm talking to you). I'm quite certain that weeks or months of instruction for Ueshiba sensei was quite enough for him to grasp more than most of us could in a lifetime of study.
    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
    In practice, there is.

  6. #36
    Originally posted by kenso
    Unbalancing and the taking of an opponent's balance are not unique to Tomiki sensei's Shodokan style.
    Surely not; but my understanding is that they take a different approach to it - probably owing to the judo influence, as you noted. The idea that non-Shodokan aikido uses "power and speed" whereas Shodokan uses "off-balance" is a concept of Tomiki's and so simply illustrative of how he saw things.

    Anyway, my point was only that the Tomiki styles have a distinctive flavor which I find intriguing, and presumably others might as well.
    Last edited by Christopher M; 11-14-2003 at 06:52 PM.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Lone Star State
    Posts
    2,223

    Thumbs down this is all surface skimming of something greater

    and deeper than you can understand.

    Aikido is a way of living ones life away from violence and aggression. it is THE esoteric form of defense,,which states that to defend oneself against an attacker is to not be there to be attacked NOR do you attract that sort of violence or attack to you.

    Sensei Ueshiba Morehei lived a VERY hard life in service of his government, he was a soldier as well as a well respected swordsman, his path was that of the external and a very violent external path that evolved towards a peaceful internal one.
    His story of enlightenment and the things that HE alone was capable of doing were amazing and extra-ordinary. No he was not a superman or invincible. He WAS what he taught and preached.

    Aikido looks inneffective to most, and with good reason. for why would someone in aikido want to pit themselves against the very nature of what they are trying to avoid in thier life?and why would a hardened fighter of the tournament circuit want to give up what he does if he likes to be submerged in the violence and aggression? But Aikido is not useless at all. in fact when one practices the techniques one is able to see how they really would work in a confrontation. locks throws and submission is the surface of what the moves are about in aikido. but very few of us, including myself, lack the discipline that Sensei Moreihai had to make the system work. aikido was the first "martial art" i ever did and all that i learned to do was to fall properly and to receive an attack(hehe but not so properly at times, LOL)
    it takes precision timing and good footwork to make Aikido work.
    which is why most aikido people do not enter competitions or try to test themselves out there on the street(it defeats the purpose of the art anyway to do this). Aikido takes a long time to grasp, and i believe Sensei Morehai made it that way so that it WOULD BE a life long process.
    If you really love fighting and competing and you love to hit things and kick things and hurt others willingly then Aikido is not for you,,,,go do something else.

    Peace,,,,TWS
    It makes me mad when people say I turned and ran like a scared rabbit. Maybe it was like an angry rabbit, who was going to fight in another fight, away from the first fight.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Behind you!
    Posts
    6,163

    Vectors: the road to self defence Part One!!!

    Ok, so the title is flippant, but here's my take on some of the background reasons why aiki can be effective for self defence...

    I would agree with Kenso's analysis of aikido 'attacks' primarily being a way of understanding vectors (good word, had never thought about using that one really... but makes more sense than 'angles' which I usually use...: cheers Kenso ).

    I think it is practised like this for three reasons:

    1)Historically as Kenso said, it predates many arts with striking as a primary focus (though of course, many kobudo and old jujutsu styles include a lot of striking);

    Technically I hope this will help to explain:

    2) A lot of the techniques themselves are said to come from sword disarms, and techniques with a sword. And later, Jukenjutsu - the bayonet - shows its influence, albeit mixed with Jojutsu techniques. Ueshiba learnt Jukenjutsu in the army and is documented as having picked it up frighteningly quickly and having used very effectively against (live!) resisting opponents (! !). Many of these techniques are disarms, or controls of a sword arm. In some cases there are techniques whose original purpose was to enable you to draw or strike with your sword when somebody was trying to control your sword-arm.

    A good example of this is the wrist-lock known as ikkyo or ikkajo: the first principle which probably crops up Hollywoodized in every Seagal movie but the only one I can remember offhand is Under Seige 2 when he teaches it to his daughter and she uses it in the climax- somebody grabs your sword hand as you try to draw your sword, so using your body positioning you draw and cut down their centre anyways (!) which should also drop them to their knees with the tight wristlock coming on naturally at the centre of the circle.

    This is a historical reason why studying vectors of attack is more important than dealing with the focus of an unarmed strike: you don't want to block, you want to get your body well out of the way at the same time as closely controlling the attacking arm.

    From the 'attacker's' point of view it is easy to understand the aikido 'attacks' with reference to the sword arts. There are three basic 'attacks' apart from the obvious grabs and the lapel grab (the Scooby-Doo zombie double-handed lurch grab as described by Becca and Jun-erh). These are shomen (strike to the top of the head), yokomen (diagonal downward strike to the temple) and tsuki (basic thrust 'punch') as seen in many kendo and kenjutsu schools as staples.

    To take one of these as an example, the original reason for the tsuki (basic 'punch') being so 'weak' was that it comes from the idea having a three foot piece of highly sophisticated sharpened steel in your hand! It is taken as read that you have to avoid the end of this so the focus of the attack loses importance to the vector, and which also is why aiki techniques tend to start from a distance of approximately one-and-a-half miles (er, metres! ), and concentrate on timing, maiai (distance) and of course, the associated footwork. This also explains the reason why aikido tsuki attacks are stepping forward with the same foot forward: it's the way many sword thrusts are practised.

    Many sensei stress maiai. My kendo sensei who is an adept and avid student of old Japanese also, tells me that the old characters for maiai were often those used for 'devil' or 'evil spirit' and 'meet' (nowadays they are nearly always less poetically 'gap' and 'meet'), and this concept of 'meeting the devil' underscores the founding spirit of aiki's irimi (or 'entering body' techniques). Step in, confronting the danger. As Sun Tzu, Musashi, Ueshiba's doka ('Songs of the Way' - like kuen kit) and Bruce Lee have all paraphrased: 'when the enemy comes in, rush in to greet him'.

    When you rush in like this, when you make strong advancing contact, what happens?

    If he is stronger than you (be it in structure or physical strength), the forward energy of his attack keeps coming strongly... and... you get squished.
    If he is weaker than you (or he is trying to retract the limb you are trying to control or some other kind of yielding motion), your forward energy will overwhelm him.
    Thus another common thread with the above masters: 'take what comes, see off what goes'... or 'push when pulled, pull when pushed'...
    (though in aiki, with its circular motion, pull becomes 'turn away', but the control principle at this point of contact is the same as in most arts which have a variation on this saying I would guess).

    All of these mental concepts, underlying the physical principles of aiki, and being the base of the techniques that you hope to pull out of the bag when you need them; rely more on the basic premise of a vector rather than a focus of attack.

    3) The techniques are too deadly!!!

    OK OK, my nostril-hairs are already crinkling to a crisp in the wave of flames sweeping towards me buuuut... shall we just say, as anyone who regularly practises joint locks will know:

    i) Frequent hard practise will cause RSIs, arthritis, calcium spikes, tears in the cartilage, or similar problems.
    ii) When practised with a cooperating opponent, and when taken to the point of so-called pain-compliance, there is a small difference between a point of control, and the point where the joint will break.
    iii) If practised on resisting opponents in a sparring situation, assuming the opponent can wrench his joint away from you, or beat the **** out of you with his other three limbs/head,or whatever, when the adrenalin wears off, he often finds he can't train with that limb for one, two, three + weeks.

    So the history of why aiki practises using vectors rather than 'real attacks' aside, there are still practical reasons why it is advisable to a degree .
    its safe to say that I train some martial arts. Im not that good really, but most people really suck, so I feel ok about that - Sunfist

    Sometime blog on training esp in Japan

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Behind you!
    Posts
    6,163

    ST100: grappling vs SD.

    Let's remember, the thread is about self defence!

    ST100, your experience of aiki fits mine exactly.

    I got owned when I first started sparring with other grappling arts!

    However for average geezers who have the patience and who want to get a basic idea of self defence against your average geezer, this does not explain why you think that there is absolutely no value to even badly-taught aiki as self-defence.

    1) The understanding of attack vectors and the evasive footwork with a basic guard should be a large percentage of getting out of the way of any initial attack and providing a safe opportunity to run away.

    2) Plus, the surprise angle of the attacker wanting to take your head off, and expecting some form of confrontaion, and meeting with well, nothing... is also helpful to practical self defence.

    3) Plus, strangely given that the distance at which aiki techniques start, the principle of keeping a certain distance, and as soon as that distance is breached, being able to recognise that there is a potential danger in a relaxed and focussed manner is essential to awareness of many attack situations in a bar, on the street, etc. this is often enough for the practitioner to understand a danger and vacate the situation (go to the toilet or leave or something!). Of course, this is very much a ***** attitude (why should you have to leave a bar or go and hide among your equally geeky friends when there may be some danger!!!??? ), but I thought everyone on this board had some understanding of this one aspect of awareness for self defence: recognise danger, or identify potential danger, and don't be there. Given many aikidoka's natural peaceful (= ***** ?! ) and humble mindset this awareness of what Geoff Thompson might refer to as a barrier theory is a useful combination.

    4) Practically, if you can do it, it rocks!

    5) Even with a few weeks of practise you should have a couple of useful things to use.
    its safe to say that I train some martial arts. Im not that good really, but most people really suck, so I feel ok about that - Sunfist

    Sometime blog on training esp in Japan

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Warrenville Il
    Posts
    1,912
    If the title is about street self defence than I go with ST00's first answer. A big resounding no.
    Regards

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Behind you!
    Posts
    6,163

    Problems with technique heavy training in aiki for self defence.

    Simplified cos I'm bored, hungry, and hell, you can wait for the book!

    1) People are shown technique, technique, technique.

    There is no explanation of the principles. Of course the techniques should illustrate the principles so they should learn them anyway right? Wrong! What you have is people who think that putting a wristlock on somebody is going to break their wrist, drop them to their knees (breaking them too) and leave them begging for mercy. What they get is someone wrenching away from the wristlock and turning them in a broken quivering blob. If you understand the aiki principles of distancing, and displacing the centre of balance/disrupting the structure, you should recognise that it a wristlock will provide you with an opening to escape, throw them, or kick the crap out of them. If you are very lucky, it will break their wrist.

    2) Following on from technique-heavy training: pain compliance!
    No no no no no NO! In training you put your dainty wristlock on your helpful partner, and he taps himself and says, 'ooh, ow, that worked'. In the street the crackhead giggles a little as he rips your arm off, bites you in the face, rapes you, your whole family, the dog, and your descendants forevermore, and steals your wallet. Before shooting you. I've known pain compliance to work on the door, usually when coupled with a large amount of pain from, say a punch in the nose... and by LEOs, usually accompanied with a large amount of authority and associated fear of going to prison for resting arrest and spending the rest of of your life in a very small space with your own faces and a huge gorilla who calls you Betty.

    3) Er, also following on from technique-heavy training. There are no strikes, sweeps or even set-ups! Nonsense, every time you meet your opponent, you should be striking them; every time you occupy their space having broken their balance, the natural continuation of your own footwork should be sweeping them; every time you try one thing and it fails, you shouldn't be stopping and going, 'hmmm, why didn't that work, let's try again' because sensei's gonna shout at you for doing the wrong technique: you should be flowing into the next one, following the opponent's 'vector' of retraction (and striking to tense/loosen him) until YOU FINISH HIM. Can I say bwuhaha here?

    This complaint includes that over-complicated locks always have a simple follow-through movement.

    4) Following on, blah, people expect Scooby-Doo attacks, usually with one hand.

    etc etc etc.

    With these and some other probs in mind Red, if you wanna try it, it'll help your understanding of body mechanics, and give you a few extra strings to your bow. But remember to try it in your sparring and try not to break your friends' arms!
    its safe to say that I train some martial arts. Im not that good really, but most people really suck, so I feel ok about that - Sunfist

    Sometime blog on training esp in Japan

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Behind you!
    Posts
    6,163
    Originally posted by Black Jack
    If the title is about street self defence than I go with ST00's first answer. A big resounding no.
    Well thank you for your in-depth analysis based on your experience of visiting a couple of (bad) schools a couple of times.

    As opposed to 13 years+ of using it in sparring against people from many arts, on the street, in bars, on the door... and various LEOs' and doormens' experiences of the same...

    How very ****ing KFO.

    Cmon BJ, I know you're no noob, and no stranger to self defence (or should I say attack -) training, tell us why you think that. Or **** off with your trite BS answers.

    Cheers,

    Regards to you too.
    its safe to say that I train some martial arts. Im not that good really, but most people really suck, so I feel ok about that - Sunfist

    Sometime blog on training esp in Japan

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Behind you!
    Posts
    6,163
    Originally posted by Water Dragon
    ST00
    How valuable do you think Aikido training would be to a Judo black belt?
    For a bb judoka with an interest in SD, maybe the following (according to my sempai/kohai with exp of both - I don't):

    1) A couple of extra footwork options, to keep your distance a little while taking their balance, before stepping in to throw, or so as not to tangle yourself up in event of a failed throw, esp with extra attackers.

    2) Another couple of ways of entering, of getting past their arms, or of initiating the throw from a slightly longer range (I suppose forearm to forearm... dunno, my friend didn't explain that one too well).

    3) To give you a couple of different ways of pinning/breaks/controls on the ground, and a couple of nifty disentanglements to release yourself if they try to keep you on the floor after a throw: in short, ways of getting free and kicking them on the ground.



    For a competition bb judoka with no interest in SD: Bugger All Value Whatsoever . Except:

    1) A good laugh at their koshiwaza.
    2) A warm glow of superiority.
    its safe to say that I train some martial arts. Im not that good really, but most people really suck, so I feel ok about that - Sunfist

    Sometime blog on training esp in Japan

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Behind you!
    Posts
    6,163
    Originally posted by Christopher M
    They use shomenate (straight push/strike) as a foundation rather than the shomenuchi (straight chop) common to the other styles. Although it seems like a minor difference, so much of the meat of the actions is in bridging and entering, which are precisely the mechanics that get changed in this variation.
    I would argue that other styles don't necessarily rely on shomen uchi as a foundation. From the start most styles teach most things with taking the same hand's wrist.

    Apart from that, I agree that the meat of the actions are in bridging and entering, but I would argue that the vector of the shomen ate in Tomiki is pretty similar to a shallow shomen uchi in say Yoshinkan or Aikikai. This shallow shomen strike is even found in ki-aiki, where although it's the least like a 'real' attack, they aim to catch it (or rather 'blend with it') on the rise, which makes the angle even more similar to Tomiki.

    I suppose the basis for the overhead attack can be likened to the difference between an ikkyu kendo (sho)men strike with its big overhead crashing arc, the end of which (the 'cut through') is taken and refined into the shodan kendo men strike, which is a lot more shallow and therefore direct.

    And don't forget in Yoshinkan, the shite (tori, nage, or 'geezer what does the technique innit'!!! ) uses the shomen uchi to provoke the uke (receiver) to counter his strike to set up taking control of his arm.

    So, looking at those three shomen varieties, I would argue that Tomiki's shomen-response drill starts earlier, and so has a shorter distance (thus more direct and shallower), so is basically one aspect of the same movement as the other aiki styles.

    Overall, it shouldn't make a difference to a rounded or more high level aikidoka, as they should be practising with all strike patterns anyway.

    Also, they use kuzushi (offbalance) like in judo. Tomiki claims the other aikido styles primarily use speed and power, whereas his uses offbalance. Perhaps because of this, the Tomiki stylists favor higher, neutral and natural stances over the deep entries found in other styles.
    As Kenso says, so do the others, they just don't call it kuzushi. Not sure what you mean by power either in this case. I like the Tomiki stance though, but again would argue that as in kungfu, all aikidoka (with the possible exception of ki-society) learn in low stance for practise, and higher stances for the higher level practitioner.
    its safe to say that I train some martial arts. Im not that good really, but most people really suck, so I feel ok about that - Sunfist

    Sometime blog on training esp in Japan

  15. #45

    What is Aiki?

    Here is an article I discovered and translated.

    Yoshimine Yasuo - Budo Free Talk

    Number 26 – What is Aiki (2002/06/02)

    There aren’t many words which are misunderstood to the extent of the world Aiki. It is quite unfortunate that many dubious martial artist use this term purely for their promotional purpose. As of current state, as far as magazine or books are concered, thre are very few which provide correct information about aiki. If there are ten articles about aiki, probably at least eight of them are incorrect.

    The reason why the matter has fallen to such sorry state is because aiki is very difficult to master. So only external forms have been transmitted and it is very rare to encounter genuine aiki techniques. Accordingly, even among people who call themselves Shinan (instructor), unfortunately, only few know it. When someone asks “What is aiki”, often, answers are like “This is beyond the description by words” or even “It’s transcendent ability”. (You may not believe me but true). Hopefully, I think more open and modern/enlightened attitude will slowly change this and make aiki easier to learn.

    Then, what is aiki? I will write technical or methodological detail in my book so pardon me if I'm brief. But anyway, stuff like magazine tend to describe aiki as something mysterious but in reality, aiki is very scientific. To cut the long story short, if you seek the origin of the word aiki, answer will reveal itself.

    I wrote this few time in the magazine “Hiden” but aiki is originally kenjutu (Japanese sword arts) term and it describe a state where you and your opponent’s seichu (central) line is face to face. (This word is used even in modern kendo as in original meaning). Easiest way to see it is to just pick up swords with your partner, hold it in the middle until the tip of the sword face each other. Obviously, this situation is stalemate. So you have to diver your opponent’s tip of the sword. To do this is called “Divert Aiki”. It’s not even incorrect to state that entire koryu kenjutu techniques are based on methodology of diverting aiki. For example, in case of Shinkage ryu (shin=true kage=shadow ryu=style), they often use technique to enter diagonally to divert aiki. In case of Onoha Ittoryu (Ono branch of one blade style.), it’s characteristic is in how to divert tip of the sword by central breakthrough. Aiki of Daitoryu is application of this principle of central breakthrough of Onoha Ittoryu into taijutu. That is, you deliberately force the state of aiki as in sword fight then proceed to break this state through penetrating into centreline of your opponent. Accordingly, the basic stance use the same one as Onoha Ittoryu. And in aiki, attack target are neck and hip (and occasionally chest) and this is, in fact, same as the thrust targets of Onoha Ittoryu.

    Therefore, there are broader definition and narrower definition of the term aiki. The broader definition of aiki is the entire methodology of crushing opponent’s attack stance through central penetration. This includes atemi (strike) into upper part of the body. Narrower aiki means techniques of neutralising attack from the contact, exemplified in technique, aiki age (aiki lift).

    Now, as of aiki age, presently, even this technique are often misunderstood. Many people confuse this with Kokyuho in aikido. They looks alike but their purpose is completely different. That is Kokyuhou or Tenchinage in akido originally meant atemi into jaw with palm. In Daitoryu, there are no concept to push someone down with charge like in sumo. The correct concept is to uplift your opponent or smash opponent directly below and the techniques which exemplify this fundamental principle are aiki age (aiki lift) and aiki sage (aiki takedown). These two use entire body and are not mere hand techniques. Hence by looking at even one photo, one could tell whether someone has managed to do it or not. Extremely bad example is when one push someone down just by using body weight . If one do aiki age from kneeling position, if someone standing losing balance on top of you even if your back is straight and your haven’t broken your keeling, then it is the real deal. And if you have opportunity to experience aiki age, pay close attention to the feeling when you grab this person’s arm. With someone who can really do this, there are rarely any sensation of grip because there is no collision of power. Accordingly, anyone who push back with force are out of question. And the biggest difference between correct aiki age and the incorrect one are whether one can make the movement smaller and smaller through training. If one try to push back with force or using body weight, one will never be able to do it. That is, true purpose of aiki is to utilise aiki in every taijutu technique by making it smaller and shaper through polishing your technique. That is why I mentioned in other place that if you got wrong teacher, you never make it.

    As of side note, it is often said that the secret of aiki age is to “Open palms as in Asagao (morning face, common Japanese flower)” but this is often transmitted incorrectly. “Open palms as in Asagao” in fact point to the entire arm movement in aiki age and not pointing to how one open palm. The reason this theory has spread is probably due either to do with teacher intentionally hid it or someone who hasn’t learned it properly spread it. Once you get used to aikiage, you can do it with your hands closed and the reason one have to open palm is only because it is easier to learn. An important point when you open palm is not to put too much force into your finger. This is bit difficult to get unless demonstrated in practice but in beginner’s level, you open your palm like when you do paper in stone/paper/scissors. When expert do Aikiage, especially little fingers are very relaxed. And often this technique are split between Aiki of Kote, when someone grab your writs, and Aiki of Mune (chest) or Aiki of Karada (Body), when someone grab your collar or other such places but these two are the same. This is also easier to understand in demonstration but if you know the gist of it, the latter one is much easier one to do it.

    Daturiki (Relaxlation) is another equally misunderstood word like aiki, and this world is also uttered in sort of aspiration as in the word aiki so I mention about it here just in case. Daturiki doesn’t mean you don’t use muscle. Even in aiki, one is of course using muscle. “To relax” simply means “use only necessarily muscle”. The phrase “To issue ki” is same with this principle.

    To add further, when he was alive, Sakawa Sohan swung steel training staff every days and someone said “That is just muscle work”. This is like making speech with your pants down without understanding the fact that aiki as well as koryu kenjutu use entire body movement. In fact, it is natural to arrive at this kind of training if one think about what is needed in Daitoryu. (However, unless one learned proper way to swing sword, one could damage one’s body so I won’t recommend it.)

    As stated, aiki is in practice, very scientific. It is true it is based on rather sophisticated principle but it has nothing to do with mysterious transcendantalism. Therefore, to describe aiki mesteriously or even religiously is self evident sign that one hasn’t got proper transmission. It is like someone wondering in amazement at magician's work because he doesn’t know that magic is a trick. For magician, trick is easy to perform. And the fact that aiki is scientific mean that everyone, as long as they practice seriously can master it. To add further, in some part of Daitoryu, it is said that one can master aiki even if you can’t lift anything heavier than chopsticks as long as you receive oral transmission but that is nonsense. This is because the effect of aiki differs according to individuals. Once you got the gist of movement, then you have to reduce the margin of error by applying aiki many many times to various different persons. That is to aim perfection through repetition of movements based on logic. This is the same in any martial arts.

    That is it. This time it was rather metaphysical but as I said, I clarify more practical description of technique or theory in detail in my book. So pardon me for that. The next topic will be “utilisation and paradox in form”
    Should I post this as a separate thread?
    Last edited by Vapour; 11-15-2003 at 06:25 PM.
    Engrish does not mine strong point.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •