How much kuzushi REALLY exists in aikido ?

wolfie,

I think at a point the translations don't matter as much as the intentions of O-Sensei in the name he chose for the art. For the majority of us, apparently, we are much more into a martial definition for the terms used.

For example, AI could be translated as "coordinated, assembled, harmonized, or concentrated" and KI could be translated as "consciousness, spirit, or mind", so in terms of aiki-jutsu, the concept of aiki could be translated to "the concept of total coordination of one's own reaction to an aggression with the aggressor's own power of attack."

This would keep one's study of aiki-jutsu relevant to real world application of technique. However, O-Sensei, I believe had a broader idea of aiki that went beyond combat effectiveness. Perhaps Aikido could be translated to "the philosophy of coordination".

Note: Much of what I say I derived from the book, "Secrets of the Samurai" by Oscar Ratti and Adele Westbrook.

 

The feeling is mutual...you do realize that every single step a human being takes that they are naturally off balance for an instant? Naturally, and nobody else like a nage had to help them by breaking anything.

 

I definately feel he had the knowledge to use the openings he created on a way that did not require atemi. He had the skill to see these openings and do with them what he pleased, I don't think atemi was his main focus, the way it seems to be here on this forum.

It is highly possible that since the others who followed him, high ranking blackbelts in sword, judo, karate, sumo...who could not do what he could do, relied more on atemi since that is what they were proficient in already.

Don't get me wrong here, I include atemi in my training, and teaching, but it is not the main focus, at times I will deliver atemi to the kidney once uke is already down, or pull the hair back and deliver atemi to the now exposed throat...and yes I use it from time to time to facilitate or enhance a technique, but it is not my focus, goal...if and when the options are available I may or may not take advantage of it, generally I am already moving far along enough into the technique to deliver the atemi at the point it would have been most effective, and since it was never an intended part of what I was doing it matters little whether or not I delivered an atemi from s position in which I no longer occupy.


The above quote is from a description of how to perform Ikkyo. This is the use of atemi in Aikido as part of attacking through a kuzushi.[/QUOTE]

 

The thing is, I'm looking at translated writing from O-Sensei written around 1938 and they are full of the use of atemi as part of technique.

I believe he TAUGHT his students to use atemi quite prolifically when Aikido was formed but as evident with Saito Sensei's words, O-Sensei concealed this in video.

Bear in mind that the art of atemi is not just visible striking with the hands and feet. The whole body is a weapon and there are hard, soft as well as hidden atemi.

 

Rebel, I am not sure O sensei even called it aikido then. The changes he made to the art pre and post WWII are what he developed and evolved to. This is what he was teaching and demonstrating in his final years, that which he himself said he was just comming to understand.

I have no doubt that he taught atemi, in fact I have seen it as taught by one of his students, along with the principles behind the strikes, but definately a part of the techniques themselves.

Take a look at jujitsu also, in both offense and defense many those applications are easily performed without reliance on atemi.

And then in his more recent instructions he actually told those students (who were still with him at that time at least at hombu) to forget what he was doing before, that what he had developed in his later years was the true aikido.

Anyways, just some stuff to think about, interested in your take on this.

Thanks

 

Which ryu-ha are you referring to?

Please explain which applications don't rely on atemi and why.


Btw Jujitsu is incorrect it's Jujutsu.

 

And then there is the real world.

The Bear

 

Izumizu,

Do you perceive your own Aikido to be akin to your perception of Ueshiba's Aikido? i.e. ki will be more useful than Kusushi or atemi, and that you can successfully cultivate your ki to become capable like he was?

Just wondering on your motivations somewhat.

 

The process of walking does not include falling over each time you take a step so, whilst I accept that one is not as stable when positioned on one foot as you take a step, you are most definitely not off balance.

You can exploit that weakness in order to create kuzushi in someone else but, we're not creating it for ourselves just because we take one step in front of another. As usual, you're clutching at straws as the basis for your point of view.

This thread is about whether or not kuzushi (the standard contextual usage of the word in martial arts), not what you think it is, is really present in much of today's aikido and, if the role of uke has become generally complacent to such degree that aik-kuzushi has diminished.

 

The initial body alignment in Aikido will give you the possibility of numerous strikes, either to unbalance and allow the use of kuzushi or to put your partner down straight away.
Striking combined with use of kusushi is the most effective way to unbalance your partner and make a technique.

Sometimes though, when training gets enthusiastic speed and strength can lessen the use of proper kuzushi, but it should be remembered that this will not always work and at this point it is up to each of us to realise this and return to basics.

One thing about training with Koyo was that even though we were younger and stronger it was always us who ended up gassed and sweating, while he remained composed………wonder why??

 

dave,

kuzushi does exist in modern aikido. i'll give you an example from the 5 kyu test (because this is what i know), katatetori shihonage omote. granted, this is a static position; in a dynamic situation i would expect atemi to get the hips to turn. anyway, to start the technique from a static position, nage has to extend his/her hands from the center while taking a step across uke's center. if uke hangs on, then that unbalances for nage to perform shihonage. where i was taught, uke would not let nage perform the technique without unbalancing first. here's the video i used when practicing for the test....yamada sensei's instructional video. this is just the first part of the whole test; shihonage starts at 4:47.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MPwI4RmHeU"]YouTube - 5th Kyu Test Requirements (USAF) Part 1[/ame]

as a side note, yamada sensei is an incredibly nice fellow and an incredible teacher. the three times i've worked with him (twice in chicago and once at the ny aikikai), i was amazed at well he explained things for me, a sometimes two-left-foot kind of guy! uke in the video is donovan waite. i got to meet him too and also an incredibly congenial fellow.

kuzushi seems like a fundamental concept of the art, no?

 

The teachings of Aikido in the later years of O-Sensei can represent the warrior giving up the sword and returning to the land.

The part that many miss, IMHO, is that you first must develop practical application as a warrior before you can "give up the sword and return to the land." This isn't restricted to Aikido, this is the way of Budo. It would make sense that long time students were shown the way of giving up the sword so that they could address the sickness in the world, not with violence, but with love... heal the land.

Many that had not trained for years prior to that with O-Sensei, however, take O-Sensei's teachings in the art of peace as the path for themselves, but what they are doing is not effective martial arts in many cases. What they are striving for is something more meaningful than martial arts... what they are learning is the expression of love, compassion, and healing of the land. This is not Aikido as a martial art, however, IMHO. What they end up with is a watered down, impractical, shadow of martial arts, hidden behind the veil of pre-programming of students to act in a certain way to make it appear, falsely, as effective martial arts.

Here are the Five Principles of Aikido as taught by O-Sensei... there is nothing here of martial value UNLESS you actually train for practical application. These principles are greater than martial arts in meaning:

(from page 17 of "Aikido and the harmony of nature" by Mitsugi Saotome)

1. Aikido is the path that joins all paths of the universe throughout eternity; it is the Universal Mind that contains all things and unifies all things.

2. Aikido is the truth taught by the universe and must be applied to our lives on this earth.

3. Aikido is the principle and the path that join humanity with the Universal Consciousness.

4. Aikido will come to completion when each individual, following his or her true path, becomes one with the universe.

5. Aikido is the path of strength and compassion that leads to the infinite perfection and ever-increasing glory of God.

 

Exactly RW to be able to do Aikido anywhere like Ueshiba did in his later years you must first go through a more martial way of training and this may take more than one life time.

 

I think people forget that Ueshiba was somewhat of a scrapper in his formative years.

Just because you can fight, doesn't mean you have to. If you can't fight however, you've got nothing.

When I see aikido billed or advertised as self defense, I can't help wondering if those teaching under this guise have ever tested what they know beyond the dojo environment. I'd suggest, that number will be relatively low.

Indeed I wonder, how many people contributing too or just reading this thread (who are actively involved in aikido) have taken any regular conditioning in the form of kicks, punches and strikes to their own body to prepare them for the practicalities of taking such shots during a real fight. I'd suggest the number will be even lower.

If I'm honest, what sticks in my craw somewhat, is when I read or listen to people (aikidoka) who talk about aikido being practical for SD when they themselves have never been in a fight aside from when they occupied a school playground.

 

i hear you dave. i'm lucky in that i've never had to use judo/hapkido/aikido/bjj outside of a dojo. the one time i've gotten in a fight outside the schoolyard (before starting in martial arts), i was not able to run away quickly enough. i can only speak to my personal experience. and i can say that without a doubt, aikido has served me very well in brazilian jiu jitsu. my first bjj class ever, i ikkyo-ed a purple belt who dared to grab my sleeve on the ground while allowing me to move my hips into a good position. another time recently, in a no-gi class, i was in the middle of a scramble with a gentleman who had ended up on his back, i kept him from getting up using kokyu ho, then mounted him. moving from the center without the arms, balance, kuzushi...these are all things i use regularly in my bjj.

as a side note, one of the reasons i decided to get involved in bjj was my interaction with koyo via threads and pm. he actually encouraged moving arts as i was needing something a little different from my training.

i really hope i never have to use this stuff on the street. a.) what are the odds that the interaction will be weaponless? very poor b.) this stuff works and hurts people. i don't want to hurt anyone.

 

Wonder why

Dead simple, Billy trained for over 40years. Cheers, Joe.

 

And that is the key to good Aikido train long train hard, with time comes the understanding of how technique is structured, rather than the monkey see monkey do approach. Although to get to this position you need to have a good quality instructor to follow.

Without kuzushi, and the understanding of how the posture can be broken, the correct direction of attack when applying technique that take advantage of this weakness, is really only a dance and not Aiki.

Even when studying Kata although Tori and Uke work as a team correct distance timing and kuzushi must still be applied.

 

And then there are martial systems such as judo (yes I know judo has atemi, but it is not needed to set up technique, nor is it needed for kuzushi), sumo, Greco roman wrestling , take away the rules and barred applications and you have potentially deadly systems in which atemi is not the goal.

Also, watching videos of j Kano, one can clearly see that his movements, as I have described in reference to o sensei, are quite similar in the expendeture of sticking with the uke until the technique is ready to be applied, not because of atemi an kuzushi, but because they are there with the attacker at the point kuzushi happens naturally.

Reality? Yep. One in which the principles of the techniques work not because of atemi, kuzushi, or compliant ukes, but because the principles involved in the the movements before, during, and after conflict.

No I am not there yet, and to answer the question about my ki, most of it is spent recovering from hangovers. Yes, I trained practically as well and then I began to look at the gents in their 70s and 80s still doing the same movements without the strength of a young 30 or 40 year old. The vids are out there. They rely not on atemi or forcing kuzushi the way one watches a struggle in judo. They rely on movement and application of principles.

@Dave
though I have not conditioned my body to recieve such blows, if one were to take a close look at my hands, one would see scars from splits and deformations from conditioning my hands to deliver such blows. Many, many years ago, one of my favorite conditioning activities was hitting brick walls with my fists.

 

Izu sometimes I think you live on a different planet than me or else your understanding of atemi in relation to Aikido is just so alien that... oh well... lol

Did not O-Sensei say, "atemi is 90% of Aikido"?

There is a significance to the use of "90%" in sayings as that is the amount of an iceberg that is below the waterline. It is the hidden part of the iceberg with the other 10% being the visible part. This represents the "secret" of martial arts or just about anything as that part that is not visible to the naked eye.

You might see a punch for example, but do you see the hip check, the block that strikes the soft tissue, the parry that is really a hard check, step that is an attack to buckle the knee... etc.? The art of atemi is vast and does not include just the visible atemi, but the atemi hidden in all movements, even the possibility of atemi. If you do not know this, you do not understand the fundamentals of atemi. The fundamentals of structure to attack suki in an instant. IMHO.

In Aikido, what keeps uke from just letting go and moving back? Why do they grab an arm? They do so because of the possiblity of atemi if they disengage... if uke was to disengage and leave themself open, then tori could strike them... this is the use of suki. In Aikido tori is using the "possibility of atemi to occupy the space that uke needs to go".

Those that do not study atemi as part of training in martial arts, often do not see or realize the possibility of atemi. If you do not see the possibility then your body will not intuitively atemi when needed. WHEN needed is the key in Aikido. If uke is open to atemi, then atemi will come, but if uke moves to counter atemi, then Aikido works off of that reaction.

Take anyone who has never trained in Aikido but has trained in something like MMA... they probably will not see the possibility of atemi the same as an Aikidoka... the way you teach them is to atemi... possibility becomes reality. If you don't atemi... good luck, cause luck is all you will have. Well then you can always grab, but grabbing is part of atemi training... but if you think there is no atemi, then you probably think there is no grabbing either because atemi and grabbing go together. That only leaves kokyunage... but wait, how does kokyunage work without the possibility of atemi? Let me know how that works for you.

There is no kokyunage without the possibility of atemi, IME.

Izu, the art of atemi is vast and mostly hidden. One of the first principles of the use of atemi is to stun or unbalance on contact. This is almost always done with the concepts of atemi including using atemi to occupy the space the enemy would need to occupy... it can, however, be done also through grabbing. Grabbing is part of the art of atemi, as I stated.

The only pure striking or grappling exists in sport only. In real world, fighting involves both striking and grappling.

 

@rebel
ye, different planet, lol...

When you look at the roll of uke, then aikido is at least 50% atemi. Are we nage or are we uke. "there is no uke, there is no ueshiba."

when you look at other martial arts such as karate or TKD, I would say those are mostly atemi, striking arts, that train striking arts significantly. Aikido does not train striking art to that degree, nor to that effect.

Many striking arts land a blow to kill, break bones and rupture vital organs. Also to shock the system, stop the heart, or cause unconsciousness. The fight is over. Why does aikido train atemi? So that they can break kuzushi, and the execute a fancy technique, so that then it is possible to execute a joint lock, or now it is more feasible to actually throw you attacker?

Is that what separates aikido from other ma, those others strike with a purpose to cause severe bodily harm, and aikido does so to set up a technique? Huge difference in the approach to training and applications of martial principles there.