Hi Guys, I am new here and I would like some help on a certain topic. Mods of this is in the wrong forum please move it to wherever appropriate, thanks. Is Aikidio a incomplete martial art ? as Uesheiba fully expected his students to come from a striking background and they were usually much older then your usual typical beginner. A friend of mine has asked me this question and I am not to sure on how to answer it, therefore I decided to ask somewhere with more experience and knowledge then myself, thanks.
Well I can't seem to find anything thats why I posted here. I have found other things but none answer my question specifically.
I would say yes. I enjoy aikido, and I really think it's a great defense art, but there's no offense to it. I'm sure, however, if you're able to cross-train, it would solve the issue.
Click green button next to koyo go to personal profile click all threads started by koyo. regards koyo
Heh heh heh! That put a grin on my face! But the answer turns on what "incomplete" means. To be complete do you need an NRA Firearms certificate? Do you have to learn any weapons at all, and if so, which weapons specifically? Do you maybe have to learn CPR and Red Cross First Aid? And how to put back together the people that you break? Is high kicking part of "completeness" or not? Etc etc etc. This thread has links to discussions about what makes up aikido. This one has talk about good and bad aikido training. There's also a "FAQ" thread at the top of the Aikido forum. Give 'em a read and then start posting questions in the Aikido forum. Some of us have only done aikido and some of us have done other stuff and some of us regularly train in aikido with people from other backgrounds.
Just a side note Guv,and koyo will correct me if I'm mistaken,most if not all of the founders top seniors,at least in the early days,were high ranking Judo-ka. I would hazard a guess that the majority of his students regardless of age were more experienced in Judo than striking arts as Judo was taught in the educational system.You did that or Kendo.
Let me first say that my experience with Aikido is confined entirely to things I've read, primarily "Aikido and the Dynamic Sphere". As such, when it comes to the actual inclusion of techniques to the art, I defer to those who have actually trained in the art. However, it is true to say that most modern martial arts are "incomplete" because most arts represent a sub-set of other fighting systems where the founder was a specialist at that particular sub-set of skills. The evolution of Japanese martial arts provides a good example of the process. When Kenjitsu, Aikijujitsu, et al were first concieved, the need for actual fighting ability was high and hence the purpose of training was building skill at fighting. After the Tokugawa shogunite took power, there was a gradual reduction in the need for samurai who were good on the battlefield which continued until the Mejii restoration and the disolving of the samurai class in favor of a standing western army. During that period and continuing into the 20th century, men who were trained to fight figured out that their training also produced character building benefits thru discipline and respect etc. As the need for fighting ability diminished, the point of training became producing better people instead of competent fighters. You also saw greater specialization in the arts as the pursuit of character perfection progressed. For example, Iaido (sword drawing) became an art unto itself seperated from the rest of the sword fighting techniques. Aikijujitsu from which Aikido is decended, was concieved as a way to fight against people wearing samurai armor. Punching an armored warrior didn't get you very far, hence it focused on grappling techniques that supplemented the weapons of the day. Today however, swords and armor aren't the rule on the street. Striking is effective, yet because the focus of training had shifted to character development, aikido- as well as most modern martial arts- has never re-focused it's techniques. From a practical fighting standpoint, I would say yes, Aikido is incomplete as are most modern martial arts. However, very few people train to learn actual fighting skill; they train for the other benefits of character development, health, socialization, and to be overall better people. From that standpoint, Aikido might be one of the most complete of all the martial ways.
I'm by no means an aikido expert but I looked into taking an aikido school and i thought it was incomplete. From the spiritual side of MA I think it's very good as it looked pretty relaxed to me, but from a practical viewpoint, unless the guy runs at you with his arm outstretched I don't think it'll get you anyhere.
Aikido riai means aikido complete this includes strikes throws sweeps pins and the use of and defence against weapons. Many modern day teachers have diluted the art eschewing the strikes others have over emphasised the spiritual aspects. Most of the early aikidoka were judoka or kendoka before taking up aikido so a very powerful and competative nature was natural to the training. The wrist grabbing that has become common is a basic training method for balance and body alignment and must NOT be done fast the way thayrea describes it and quite rightly says would be of no value at all in a practical situation. Try to find a club ran by a fukushidoin (ist generation teacher) who has not changed the art to suit "modern" tastes. regards koyo Hi Brat If you study aikido riai there are offensive and pre-emptive techniques where you attack first. Below atemi (striking)You may reognise tenchi nage or irrimi nage about to be executed with strikes causing the imbalance needed to perform the throw.
Does your PC have the largest and most carefully indexed photo library in the martial arts world Koyo? Or do you just have the largest and most carefully indexed memory? MItch
Worked a lot with military and police.They index and photograph everything. regards koyo and I have the photos to prove it:evil:
Hi, I'm no Aikido expert either, but this is an interesting question. Personally I thought the founders of Aikido were from Jiu Jitsu backgrounds and not Judo. Ueshiba, who was very skilled in Jiu Jitsu, also became a peace-loving Bhudist (I'm sure that's spelt wrong!) and decided to "refine" his JiuJitsu into a "non-violent" art, i.e. purely defensive, non-lethal/damaging techniques... in order to just throw his assailants around until they learnt the errors of their ways and thus ascended to a higher moral plateau But is it incomplete? Well that depends... if an Aikidoka can deal with, i.e. neutralise a given attack then it's not incomplete. Ok most Aikido schools use a fairly limited scope of attacks, BUT if one can deal with an attack using Aiki principles of balance/movement then it is not incomplete. No they don't ground fight, strike hard, strangle, break or generally maim in anyway.. .that's not the philosophy of Aikido. They do not fight on the ground because their movement and sense of balance/unbalancing an attacker means they do not end up on the ground (that's the theory as I understand it anyway)... and arguably if they did, the principles would not change if you were on the ground or standing. Aikido also does not strike hard, break, strangle and maim because Ueshiba's Bhudist ways do not permit such acts. I believe Aikido can be very effective, if done correctly and if the technician trully understands the principles of Aiki... which unfortunately would most likely require 10+ years of study. Thanks
Ah ok, well what ever religion he was into, it effected his martial arts. The knealing and clapping he did before training was a religious thing.
Aikido is NOT a religion. This was stated time and again by Ueshiba. NONE of the original shihan who brought aikido to the west emphasised any religious or esoteric influences.Ueshiba clearly stated that his spiritual pursuits were for his own personal growth. The kneeling and clapping is a respectfull action rather than religious. (not unlike western boxers touching gloves) As for the art being incomplete that sadly is true in many cases since many modern instructors have changed the art to suit their own "understanding" rather than train in aikido riai the complete art which includes severe fighting techniques and weapons training. Aikido is a dynamic art that srikes right through the enemy's intention to attack (O sensei Ueshiba) regards koyo
I didn't say Aikido was a religion, I said Ueshiba was religious and it had an impact on his martial arts... it's hard to be all about peace and universal harmony when you are breaking people And modern Aikido, yes I agree, leaves a lot to be desired, but that is the fault of the teachers, not the art.
As I said gronk Ueshiba's spiritual journey was his own. The martial arts training that the original shihan received was nothing short of brutal. It is the new wave aiki bunnies and mystics who have emasculted the art to suit their own DISpositions. Display a stronger fighting spirit than the enemy, attack at all times intimidate and dominate his fighting spirit .This was the first principle taught. regards koyo philosophy twice strong is he who has his battle just thrice strong is he who gets his blow in furst (Scottish spelling):evil:
