I think Koyo's post 39 has enough "in my opinion" type of language to put this talk on track. Koyo heard some stuff by qualified people, he tried that stuff on the mat, and it's been working for him for a long time now. Fair enough. We'll start there. Who were your teachers, Koyo?
Hi aiki mac In the early fifties/sixties Kenshiro Abe, Nakazono shihan, Noro shihan, Tamura shihan and others Then ten years as uke to Chiba shihan , When he relocated to san deigo I chose to seak instruction from other shihan these included,Yamada shihan and Sekiya shihan. My final instuction to date was under Saito shihan from whom I received a weapons instructors scroll. I do not include kendo and karate shihan since this is not relevant to aikido or two years living with a win chun instructor in London. I am aware that I could write anything here so a visit to the makotokai website shall show photographic proof of at least Noro shihan Chiba shihan and Saito shihan. makotokai.co.uk Koyo by the way and more importantly how did your training go?
It worked well at training tonight. My sensei commented that it was the first time i had been on the mat and not fought, and i also had been relaxed. domo arigato gozaimmashita coyle-san
No need to thank me macker I only suggested it YOU DID IT and in doing so justified my posting. Remember you are your best teacher Koyo
When someone says there is "No xxxxx in yyyyy", I have found that in searching for meaning in that statement I end up looking at principles and positions (state). For instance, I have been told that "karate has no blocks, all blocks are strikes"... however, there are blocking techniques, there are blocks. So now I am presented with the statement, "In aikido there are no stances the art is performed from kamae." But there are stances in Aikido training. I believe Aikido lessons can include ways to move the feet, ways to stand, ways to immitate the posture of a warrior. This is all related to stances. However, if I look at principles and positions (state), I can see that it can be true that karate has no blocks and equally true that in Aikido has no stances. Since this is Aikido forum I will speak of "Aikido has no stances..." Here I ask that when faced in battle or against an enemy in training, does one seek a balanced stance, does one seek to place the feet in a certain place... OR does one seek a way to protect themselves and to subjugate the enemy? I will train students in basics, but when they apply these basics to controlled combat (application training), I tell them concepts/strategies which hopefully they will discover the principles behind these concepts. I will say... (1) protect the center of your body, stay shoulder to shoulder or shoulder to their chest. (2) protect the low and high lines (3) stay behind your weapon, move around your weapon (4) strike with the weapon first (5) act off instinct, train your instinct (6) use fluid techniques, techniques you can pull off without having to think (7) always protect yourself In the above context, my personal experience, there are no stances, BECAUSE one does not THINK of stances. Out of mind, out of sight. IMHO.
Agreed on every point and every point stands true for swordsmanship as well as aikido and IMHO every martial art. Excellent post Koyo
Just to expand on this already excellent thread.. The Chicken and the egg !! From your perspectives (both student and instructor please) which generalised aspect(s) of aikido do you consider more important to learn giving a good overview of the art ? Q1. Should weapons techniques and principles be taught prior to taiso, and if so how complex should that learning be ? (see below) Q1a. Should we learn to cut or strike with bokuto ? Q1b. To better understand tenkan and tenshin, should we understand the nature of nukitsuki ? Q1c. To better understand moving posture should we study more specifically iai based techniques ? Q1d. How much emphasis should be given on mutodori ? Q2. Should taiso be learned from suwari waza before tachi waza (or at least equally in line with tachi waza) Q3. Given the arts generally accepted ideology/philosophy, considering Hombu Dojo (I can only speak as an aikikai student) don't require its students to test in any aspect of the founder's beliefs, who (organisationally or individually) should be responsible for maintaining a quality balance between physical skills (lets call that solid training) and ideological theory so that one never outweighs the other ? Q4. It is generally accepted that aikido is a very "individual" art where we all in some way, at some time, contribute our own interpretations on waza etc through the teaching/learning process of others, do you see this aspect of individualism as an opportunity for aikido to under go a process of devolution ? Q5. Do you hold the opinion that much of aikido isn’t studied in a particularly martial way? If so, what reasons do you feel have contributed to your opinion. For anyone less experienced in aikido terminology or, someone looking in from another art here’s the terminology explained. Taiso : Basically the body art, or empty hand techniques Bokuto : The wooden representation of the Japanese sword Nukitsuki : The act of simultaneously drawing and cutting with a Japanese sword Tenkan & Tenshin : These are two positioning movements used in aikido which have very strong sword related influences Iai (Iaido) : Methods of drawing a Japanese sword, an art which has both technical principles and an ideology very similar to that of aikido. Mutodori : Essentially “no sword” Application of sword disarming technique Suwari waza : Kneeling techniques Tachi waza : Standing techniques Regards
Dave, thanks for the terminology at the end of the post. Very helpful to me. As for my opinions on this topic, my answers are going to be limited to what little formal Aikido training I have had. I think it is good to give someone some basic strategies to go by as guidelines. Anything more than that, I don't have a strong opinion on. I believe that learning to cut with a bokuto (boken?) is more useful in the beginning because the bokuto is supposed to represent a sword. However, particularly with adults, it should be realized that a bokuto is not a cutting weapon, with exception of the pointed tip for thrusting, the bokuto is an impact weapon. I would hope that the work with the jo at some point would transition to the bokuto in how to strike with an impact weapon rather than cut with a bladed weapon. In the end, I like the contrast of bokuto cutting and jo striking, seems more well rounded training IMHO. Probably. This is an area I'm very lacking in. All the drawing of the sword with the left hand. The use of the wakizashi. I sort of understand the nature of it, but I have no practical experience in this area. Still, what I do know does help me understand tenkan and tenshin, IMHO. Don't have a strong opinion on this either way. A suppose at high grades in Aikido, such knowledge would be desired to learn as it will improve things. At beginner levels, I don't know, could help, could hinder development in other areas. No opinion on this. Other than the knees getting banged up, I think suwari waza should be trained in line with tachi waza. I know my suwari waza skills were below par because I neglected them. Students should learn better respect and discipline, strength of character, and good mental attitude. I believe that many of the ideological theory, if given in the right amounts help with the learning of respect, discipline, character and good mental attitude. So I would say that there is a place for such things. However, if the ideology comes out of a firehose, I think that is too much for learning purposes. Everything changes, but some things should not ever change. The basics and fundamentals should change much less than personal application... IMHO. Aikido still holds much of the mental aspects of a martial art, but the testing out of the physical aspects / skills, IMHO, is sadly neglected by many Aikidoka. I attribute this mainly to the lack of time spent with higher grades and cross-training. To pick up physical skills, IMHO, you have to do more than Aikido training at advanced levels. Learn Kendo, Jiu-jitsu, Judo, escrima, boxing... whatever, just go out an do some discovering of what the world has to offer. Test out application against those that don't act or think the same as you do. Test out application against those much larger and stronger than you, etc. In the end, IME, it isn't Aikido, it isn't anything specific, but it is all martial arts. Also, higher grades or those with first and second hand experience just have such a better perspective on some things because they have experience. Many don't have good opportunity or they don't take advantage of opportunities to train with such people of experience. My Aikido instructor had learned many jiu-jitsu variations of the Aikido techniques, because I had been in karate before Aikido for many years, I think that my tolerance to pain was higher than many. She did not feel troubled to apply a jiu-jitsu variation to a basic Aikido technique to really put the hurt on me, I think because she knew I could take it. This way I learned some of the jiu-jitsu while in Aikido. She did not do this to others, as apparently it would be too much for them. The others may not ever have learned such things, I wonder if they might not in their life-times know what they missed. Just like I have missed things I probably won't realize. It makes me wonder how much knowledge and technique is being lost... saddens me at times. Back to the point, if someone has a good foundation in Aikido, IMO, that is a great starting point to build on.
Before this thread goes any further let me make something clear. No where in the TOS does it state that anybody must start a post beginning with "IMHO" or should they even make clear that something they are posting is purely their opinion. Until the rules change only a Chat MOD, Topic MOD, Global MOD or ADMIN can restrict what you can and cannot say in a post. Feel free to ignore anybody else who tryes to assert some degree of authority. By the very nature of this forum most of what is posted is the "opinion" of the poster. If you don't like what has been posted you are free to ignore it. If the post is a direct attack on your self you are free to report it. Just click on the red triangle that appears at the top of the offending post. There is no need for anybody to reply to this post! MOD direction ended.
Dear Aiki wolf As I am new to these forums a question. Aiki mac asked for my instructors names and a brief history followed. As I "do not wish to stand on the shoulders of giants" so to speak is it possible to delete that post now that the contributors to this thread have read it.And if so would you do so as I feel that it is not proper etiquette to use the names of my insrtuctors. Koyo Anyone wishing to check my "credentials" need only check the website makotokai.co.uk
In answer to Davids question regarding does individualism lead to devolution of aikido.I have strong feelings that WE MUST NOT CHANGE THE ART WE MUST LET THE ART CHANGE US. Iwas told and firmly believe that I NEED NEVER QUESTION AIKIDO BUT I MUST CONSTANTLY QUESTION MYSELF. koyo
Devolution? No. Aikido is individualized only after the respective individuals understand the principals that make the techniques work. Principals are the same everywhere, for all people. Yes, and it's the joy and peace that makes me feel that. As a student of other martial arts I left the class thinking about the simulated murders I just performed. That has never happened in aikido, and not thinking about killing feels good on the inside.
That's assuming of course that those individuals have themselves been correctly taught and, its not specifically principle based teachings I'm referring too. I'm talking about situations where people deem themselves able to exclude aspects of aikido from their study (and eventual teaching) because of their own egotistic opinions/nature. We see "Combat Aikido" and all manor of variations upon theme of "modernisation" That's basically what I consider devolution, a shift away from the teaching of the entire syllabus of traditional or orthodox lines of aikido. Chiba Sensei told a story of how he once met a beautiful Princess and he fell in love with her but, realising he would never be able to marry her, he therefore undertook the task of protecting her from the influences of others. He was of course talking about Aikido and protecting the art from being altered. Fair enough Mac, I do respect your line of thinking however, even though I see where you're coming from, no matter how philosophical your outlook, many, many aspects of aikido are derived from applications and techniques which were (and still are) designed to kill/mame. Naturally our intent is not to do so and, to ultimately effect our skills in such a way we neutralise in a relatively non violent way however; techniques alone cannot be compassionate, I don't see the techniques in aikido as any different in nature to jujutsu, we on the other hand are in possession of thought process and can (or should) be able to decide how best to apply them, the problem I see is that many schools of aikido don't approach their training from a martial perspective and totally rely upon a state of co-operative 'harmony' which is an entirely false situation. Indeed to quote Philip Smith [quoting Chiba Sensei] Phil spoke of Chiba Sensei saying "Don't you respect me enough to kill me" when referring to the commitment of an attack even when training. Regards
Ahh, that stuff. Ya, that. I have never considered it a threat to "real" aikido. Devolved arts (if even we can call them arts) will always exist. Rather than worry about the real art being damaged, I'd rather look at substandard aikdio as a reminder to us of what we're supposed to better than. I can look at the devolved version of aikido and ask myself, "Am I really better than that, in any way?" Oh, dude, there's knife applications all over the place! Put a knife in both hands and try some standard, textbook aikido defenses. You'll kill the uke with every move. This is bad-ass stuff if you want it to be that way. What I find beautiful is that it doesn't ever have to be that way, ever. That's so very lovely to me. I do. Take kaiten-nage, for instance, and ignore whatever atemi sets up the throw. At the end of the JJ, kempo, escrima, and silat versions uke has a broken spinal column and/or broken ribs, and uke has a dislocated shoulder, and nage is crouching over him with fist ready to do more damage. In the aikido version uke comes away maybe with a bruise from bad ukemi. (Alternate: If aikido nage has a knife in his hands, uke gets his neck cut. You just killed him dead.) I'm going to keep that quote. That is so true in class. So true. I've tried to do aikido on nages who don't attack: it doesn't work.
Mac.. With respect, I think you're confusing technical application with philosophical based intention. Clearly you understand the martial aspect and origin of this waza however; an aikidoist may apply compassion [a form of intent] or, if the circumstances dictated, rip the crap out of the attacker; I firmly believe for aikido to make physical & philosophical sense a student must be able to do both. Martial training developing philosophical understanding. Here's a line of thinking : Conflict resulting in.. Dislocated wrist rather than broken.. Broken arm rather than severed.. Severed arm rather than immediate killing.. Killing If I have the technical ability to perform all of the above in any given situation, I am far more equipped both mentally [in a philosophical sense] and physically to judge the right level of response. Ideology should never negate practicality or effectiveness, equally, precedence should not be toward purely 'applied' waza. "Harmonious" in this case is an equality of training one's self philosophically and physically to meet all circumstances. Regards
I think Aikido is individualised the moment we begin to train. Even if we were all taught exactly the same techniques by the same teacher we still wouldn't all practice exactly the same way. All of us have different bodies with different capabilities and restrictions and we all have different personalities and life experiences. All of which will contibute to shapeing us as people and therefore the Aikido we practice. Politics will kill Aikido.
What you describe I have no problems with, I expect people to make aikido work for themselves and don't expect students to be carbon copies of their sensei however; there are other factors which have massive negative effects on the authenticity and quality of aikido [regardless of style] As soon as someone decides to start altering the techniques and or principles behind the art, it no longer is "aikido". Too many people hide behind the veil of individualism as a means of excusing why their technique is vastly different (often diabolically poor) to an orthodox line or method. Only last year I listened to a gentleman at a major event discuss his lineage to O-sensei through Kenshiro Abbe, then go on to talk about the aikido he taught having no handed throws
