Is Aikido designed for defence against an untrainned attacker?

Hi David I am one of the first generation aikidoka having trained for over forty years and still training. A major lesson I was taught was that aikido philosophy was our way of life. If I got into a fight then my philosophy had failed. But if I was defeated in the fight then I had not been training in proper aikido technique.Off the mat it is life on the mat it is life or death. A bit extreme but then I was uke to Chiba shihan for tenyears.True aikido both the philosophy and practical pragmatic technique work depending on the circumstances.
Bill (koyo) Coyle

 

Sensei,

It is a pleasure to chat with you, you and I have shared the same mat space once or twice for sure

Regards

 

Hmm, this is fascinating,

Dave, I doubt you would be calling someone Sensei without good reason, also from Koyo's post and profile it would seem he must be in his late 60's. With the exception of you being sarcastic in this case (which i doubt) It seems this man is worthy of a considerable level of respect.
Though i obviously have never trained with you, from the manner in which you speak, and the knowledge you impart, i would say you are one of few MAP users that i hold in very high regard. I'm not exactly how the term is to be used in a sentence, but the term 'Reishiki' (courtesy? respect, etc ?) comes to mind.
If all is as it appears, i would like to extend the most sincere greeting, and respect to Koyo. I look forward to you're future posts. It is the older generation that i believe has by far the most to offer on a mental and phylisophical (spelled wrong i suspect) level. For this reason i hope Koyo is so kind as to, and able to find time to post and share experiences, knowledge, and any other thoughts he would care to.

I did'nt see a intro post from you Koyo, so i'd like to exptend my greetings now. Welcome, and i hope you enjoy MAP

paradoks

 

Oh, by the way Dave,

I't only clicked now that you're a diver! I guess thats another interest we have in common. I'm only an oepn water diver, but i do hope to go onto some specialty courses in the near future. I predominantly want to do the first deep diving course so as to be able to visit some 'real' wrecks, subs, etc. I'm a little clostraphobic, so i dont know about cave diving, but there's a whole lot more options besides caves and deep obviously! I probably should have posted this in Off topic, or personal message, but it just felt like this thread would do for the one post.
Perhaps we could start a 'diving' thread on the off topic section (if there is'nt one of course)

Anyway, take care

('Dave" somehow does'nt feel right, thats why i did'nt use it originally! Mr feels to formal, sensei....still sorta off) Dunno, You mentioned 'dave' being your preference, so dave it is i guess.

be well

 

Indeed, and although I am prone to levels of sarcasm, especially with some of the muppets in the weapons forum, with regards to Coyle Sensei, I have a fair amount of respect for anyone who trained with and took regular ukemi from Chiba Sensei.

Thank you for your kind words.

Regards

 

"Dave" is correct I reserve formal terms for far more experienced people than me.

Diving.. well where do I begin lol

I'm presently experienced to 49 meters using mixed breathing gases however, due to now running my own dojo, this is consuming all of my spare time thus, I haven't had the time to devote to my diving activities.

Heres a couple of pics of my twin set attached to this post

Regards

 

The idea of sending some one to see Chiba for proof that Aikido is martial is very funny. (only because i'm a safe distance away, if i was close enough to be called for ukemi it wouldn't be funny at all)

 

That dive unit is pretty different to the standard basic unit. Whats the red part between the tanks and BCD? is it part of the BC?
Regarding Kazuo Chiba Sensei, after reading interviews etc. with him, i see why he is held in such high regard. All other factors aside...I respect and envy anyone who's trained with O-Sensei Morihei Ueshiba

Also, I tried reading up on 'Nitrox'...and now i'm seriously confused. I always thought we try to avoid Nitrogen...... adding additional Nitrogen to air....i know i'm missing something here. I read a site about nitrox, and i still dont get it... oxygen poisoning...nitrogen narcosis....which is it we need to worry about? Because my training only extends to reducing Nitrogen. With that in mind i would think adding nitrogen is like dropping gasoline/petrol on a forrest fire. I know i'm missing something...perhaps you could explain Dave?

P.S Dave, you being in the UK, i'm wondering if you knew of my masters master, Soke Robert Lawrence? Founder of Fudoshin Bujutsu in the U.K. My masters name is Anthony Ball (currently highest ranked Fudoshin in the world)?

Be well,

Paradoks

 

Might I suggest taking the nitrox whats thingy conversation to the off topic area or PM where it would be more suitable.

 

Dear Paradocs

Check out makotokai.co.uk I have placed quite a bit about my thoughts on aikido there.Her is one concept you may wish to consider and comment on.
Aiki wo hazu is a term which states if you wish to prevail in martial arts you must avoid aiki. Aiki is the state in which the combatants are using the same rythm or/and timing. An experienced martial artist will immediately sense this and easily defeat the other. On the mat we must destroy the other's balance break his timing and deny him control of distance. This would seam to fly in the face of those who demand harmony from the partner during training. Another thought for you Chiba shihan told me that aikido was the confrontation of two spirits!!
Let's hear from you and thanks for the welcome.
Koyo

 

Sensei
Be careful admiting that you spent time on the mat with me ages you! I have replied to paradocs and would be most interested in your comments. Thanks for the welcome
Bill makotokai.co.uk

 

Hello again Sensei,

I'm a member of the UKA and Chiba Sensei was the first exposure to a Japanese instructor I'd had. Although we haven’t met (in the formal sense) having been to your website and seen images of your good self, this confirms I have had the pleasure of taking ukemi from you.

I know Joe Curran and a small number of the BA on a personal level having made their acquaintance in the UKA before the BA was formed.

I trust you are well

Regards as always

 

Hi david (i dropped the sensei so please call me Bill) do not want to intimidate the aiki muppets.
I would like to hear your comments on the reply to paradoks maybe we can get some interesting sessions going rather than the politacal rubbish that some seam to prefare

Bill

 

"Harmony" now there's a word for debate.

In the dojo or indeed anywhere where two or more people interact there has to be an element of compromise, without compromise we would be in confrontation with each other all of the time.

To be "in harmony" with other human beings (lets keep this simple and talk in terms of aiki taiso).. is an ideology because it cannot truly exist equally between two people if the training is going to be (at some point at least) realistic. One person has to be attacking with the commitment of controlled aggressiveness and the other has to be dealing with that confrontation using aiki gensoku of awase and kuzushi. To achieve harmony requires intent to do so but, an attack by definition isn't a harmonious event. Awase is in my opinion the means to harmony but only for one person (tori obviously) harmony doesn't describe a mutual or possibly collaborative state as this would result in aiuchi.If uke's attack is filled with an intention of "harmony" then it really isn't an attack, it simply becomes an opportunity to practice a given set of movements. This is certainly fine and quite acceptable in the early stages of learning complex sets of movements but somewhere along the journey, attacks should be committed. Indeed Mr. Philip Smith told me recently during seminar he gave within my dojo, what Chiba had commented about having "respect for him" [Respect for Chiba Sensei] to want to kill him [Chiba Sensei] when attacked.

I am of the opinion that "we" as aikidoists get far too wrapped up in the ideology/philosophy of our art and forget that its origins are far less forgiving, and whilst I accept and agree that AIKIDO has, at its heart; a means of conflict resolution without violence, the definition of "violence" can and very often does alter for every person on this planet. This means we have a potentially indefinable ideology.

I am of the opinion that we must first grasp the martial - "I'm able to dump you on your head and beat you to death with your severed limb" techniques; before we can effectively apply compassion toward our adversary and exercise the ideology of resolution of conflict without violence.

Harmony... (lol) Gotta love the Japanese I like to think that in terms of aikido, harmony exists only for tori - he/she is harmonised with the conflict whereas, uke; should be at the opposite end of that scale and in complete disharmony with his attack, his posture/balance and importantly his ability to use his mind for the short period of time that it take to effect aiki waza.

Martial harmony is not; in my humble opinion when,

A. two people continuously co-operate to achieve technique and think that will work in an oyo waza environment; or,

B. a state where both uke and tori are equally harmonised together (one might appear to be the same as the other)

In terms of A: this type of harmony (for want of a better expression) is simply a pre-set group of movements where a predetermined end will always results - Pretty much Kihon waza studied in "co-operative mode" provided of course this training isn't considered "realistic"

In terms of B: This could easily be equated to ball room dancing where two people are closely connected and move seamlessly together.

Co-operation is a wonderful thing; it allows us to learn in a safe and controlled environment however, there must come a point where co-operation begins to diminish and students learn to make their waza work against resistance - without I might add, adding animosity, anger or force in to that equation.

I've often heard "Harmony", "Philosophy", "Ideology" used as excuses for not engaging in solid martial study. People forget or maybe ignorant to the fact that M.Ueshiba didn't invent the term "Aiki" or indeed the principles which make the physical acts function. Aiki (as you already know from your experiences with Chiba Sensei) can and very often is a brutal, functional martial method.

Regards

 

I would agree, but I would also like to say that this compromise isn't always between the two people. This compromise can be forced or greatly influenced by the culture, politics, and others around. The confrontation between two people isn't always about the two people, especially outside the dojo.

I don't know about this, I don't think that is an ideology. In my humble opinion, it isn't that you try to be in harmony, it is more in accepting that harmony is natural or in other words, that it is natural for balance to come. If tripping to the ground, a person will naturally try to regain their balance unless trained otherwise... but even if they fail to gain their balance, when they hit the ground they will stop (rather abruptly) and balance will be restored (e.g. they won't be falling anymore).

I believe that as part of accepting that things naturally come back to balance either gracefully or abruptly, that in Aikido one can grasp technique/application so as to stack the odds more in our balance coming back gracefully and uke's balance coming back more abruptly.

This to me is a good point that emphasizes the importance of experience. Ueshiba Sensei walked the walk, putting what he found to work to the test. Those before him that walked similiar paths were the ones that in one way or another had survived conflict, most likely life or death conflict more than once.

If they sought a means to not kill the opponent, then this could very well lead down the path of what we today call Aikido. The difference is that these forerunners to modern martial arts were "bad asses" who had walked the walk and they had plenty of experience and skill to back up what they did with something more destructive if needed. IMHO.

I think when there is a "false state of confrontation" this is more to a lack of experience in real situation than to be ignorant of the teachings of Ueshiba Sensei. The simpliest form of attack is what I describe as a unilateral approach... e.g. attack down the middle and overwhelm the defender with strength, power, and speed. Aikido and many of the martial arts stemming from Japan have a distinct bilateral approach (e.g. collapse the middle and flank the enemy on the weaker sides).

Experience against and in using a strong unilateral attack is a good eye opener to learning why the bilaterial approach can work against a stronger and larger opponent. It also puts into perspective when is a good time to use atemi as a form of unilateral attack instead of always trying to be bilateral.

Lack of experience against a strong unilateral attack leads to misconceptions and untested technique.

This is true, but not always possible with all. There are many paths, some take longer than others, but in reality not all are ready for the down and dirty way.

If anything, one needs to address their own limitations and internal conflicts. Teach someone a means to hurt another for self-defense, that does not mean when it comes time to actually use those teaching that they will not hesitate because of internal conflicts.

You have to believe what you are doing is the right thing to do, accept it. There is no time to debate these things internally when your life is on the line.

The philosophy in Aikido I have personally found helps me to acknowledge what I am willing to do and not do to an enemy in different situations. I accept this and work my application along those paths. Hopefully this works, nothing is for certain, but I have found that having "no mind" is much better than having "internal conflict" and over-thinking things... hesitating.

Experience? Is this a question of experience, maybe? How can a student gain experience in application so that they can develop practical application? Certainly I would agree that there has to be some resistance and adversities for one to test things out and learn from it.

Well, yes, but isn't Aiki principle to blend with the actions of uke so that you can unbalance them? For some moment in time there is balance before there is unbalance.

e.g. I'm not going to be in disharmony to a knife thrusting at me, I must clear the path for the knife and parry before I can fully get off the line of attack and apply aiki waza, or else I might be stuck like a pin cushion. (Note that this example applies to blending or turning, it may be instead I enter with irimi and intercept or the combination of entering and turning.)

Well good, but what about pushing hands in Tai Chi? Certainly there must be some value in both sides working together in an exercise? What of sensitivity drills?

Now I'm not saying that sensitivity drills teach you how to fight in the streets, but they do teach some things of value... don't they?

 

Hi guys

Aikido is a dynamic art which cuts straight through the enemy's INTENTION to attack.(O Sensei Ueshiba)
In swordsmanship and aikido the term debana waza means to strike immediatly and
directly while the enemy is thinking about mounting an attack or when a suki (opening or loss of spirit or concentration) appears.If we have to blend with an attack it means that the attacker has managed to mount a powerful attack. At I higher level of aikido it is most dificult to find an opening to attack. But that is a different thread all together. I have found your comments most interesting. My thanks.
Koyo makotokai.co.uk

 

Unfortunately, it is my experience that many schools of aikido only teach and study "reactive" aikido where, blending means waiting for an attack. Indeed reactive training is pretty much where most if not all students learn their craft but, the problem for me is that this reactionary mindset is easily infused with the philosophical nature of the art IE "Non violent" thus; aikido shifts further and further away from a martial system with an associated ideology to an ideology with an associated martial origin.

In my humble opinion a person using aikido should be able to switch their mental state from 'passive' (no intent to harm) to 'active' (an intent to harm) and back again when ever the situation requires, indeed I would go so far as to say that aikido really should be more jutsu from a training point of view so that students understand the difference between passive and active waza.

Many of the founder's uchi deshi came form established martial arts and or lived in an age where Martial Arts/Budo was still considered a means of fighting; for those people who already understood how to seriously harm their adversaries the ideology/philosophy of aikido made perfect sense. Today many people have never engaged in anything other than a playground scrap thus have no concept of actual bodily assault and the vast differences in the strategies behind reactive and pro-active methods.

Regards

 

of all the lessons from on the mat that I took from Aikido, I think irimi has interested me the most.

Aikido class was also the first place to teach me not to help uke off the ground, not to hand uke a weapon back after disarming, how to leave uke on the ground in a position where they are not an immediate threat, and not to stare uke straight into both eyes... just to name a few practices. I believe I was already a black belt in karate at the time and Aikido was my first introduction into such things.

 

Very good observations Dave.

I wonder if part of this issue has to do with the fact that most techniques are trained with "one step." I recall reading that the reason why a uke takes a step is to give time for tori to learn to read the signs and intentions of uke.

I agree that one step is a good starting point, but the transition for self-defense today is often "no step". The enemy is within striking range before the target realizes they are truly in jeopardy.

I have worked with some Aikido trained people in helping them to learn how to apply what they know from close quarters (within punching and grabbing range). They absolutely must have the idea of how to pre-empt the enemy as there is no time to wait for the attack. Footwork also has to be adjusted accordingly.

I also have met and trained with some folks that can from one or two steps away strike very quickly without an easily detectable intention. If there were more people of this calibre in classes, then I feel that "one step" would quickly be the same as "no step" for most people as they realize that they don't have time to completely react (wait for the attack).

Gosh, can this even be taught to most people? I know of a few with true "killer instincts" and they are rare amongst the general population. To them it is an automatic switch to kill/exploit weakness and they have to consciously hold back from going too far and killing or maiming someone.

Or maybe I'm just mis-reading your words.

 

Yeh, only a slight misunderstanding of what I wrote, perhaps I wasn't really clear re-reading my own words.

What I meant to say is that without first actually appreciating what "jutsu" means toward your opponent, you cannot really understand what compassion means in terms of aiki-"do" because if that's all you assume you know [compassionate waza], then the crunch comes, many years of training may well be worthless. Remembering that "Harmony" is IMHO an ideology which we strive to achieve, many however will never reach the top of that mountain.

Look at it from a karate perspective.

You can choose to kick the living crap out of your opponent [“jutsu” mentality] or, just knock him of his feet [“do” mentality]. You can make that choice because you've trained for both options.

Regards