Aikidoka

From my personal experience of using the unbendable arm, I have allowed several friends of mine to try and reverse my elbow, or apply an armbar, and they have been unsuccessful. If you were to fully lock out the arm, contracting the triceps to the full extent, then the elbow could be easily reversed, and the arm broken. The defence of the elbow joint is in the arm being bowed, or slightly bent. I cannot explain the technique in terms of ki, or in simple mechanics, other than to say that visualisation is used to employ the muscles in a way that does not directly oppose the agressor's force. If you hit my elbow with a sledge hammer, I doubt that my ki would protect me. In addition, if I was in a position where an armbar had been applied, and I was immobolised on the ground, while I may be able to protect my arms, my Aiki would be of little use. The conflict would be already lost. This is not based on rigorous study, nor am I greatly experienced in Aikido (I have studied for three years), but I hope these comments may be of some interest.

Rabid Hamster: the shaolin monks practise the many styles of shaolin kung fu that have evolved over the centuries such as northern and southern praying mantis, the various tiger styles, white crane, etc. Wushu is a demonstration art and competitive sport developed in the 20th century by the Communist government of China to try and unify all the schools of kung fu into a national sport and a part of their patriotic initiatives. It could be argued that the modern shaolin temple, which was rebuilt by the Communists and has become commercialised and diluted, no longer teaches true kung fu but a pure demonstration art. Kensai: it has been common for more traditional aikido styles to attack the Tomiki school for its use of 'competition', which they claim is against the principles of aikido and the wishes of O-sensei. Whether competitions (or shiai) are actually competitive depends on the individual practitioners and the size of their egos, and this is true of all kinds of aikido training. Practicing kata or kakarigeiko, I have trained with people who felt compelled to use every ounce of force and strength they could muster, to prove what 'great' aikidoka they were. This is what is contrary to aikido principles, as well as being detrimental to their aikido. Shiai is merely training at full resistance (randori) with different opponents, within rules designed to allow real aikido, not wrestling, to triumph. It need not be competitive, or about egos, or winning and losing; it is a way of testing the standard of your aikido in a safe but pressured situation, a place where you discover how calm your mind, and how flowing your technique really is. Your opponent is just another obliging training partner, and you are working together to raise the standard of your aikido.

I understand that here in Britain the most commonly taught martial arts for the police, and even the special forces, is a modified form of aikido/aikijujutsu. They are normally much faster techniques to learn than pure aikido because the goal is simple, reliable moves which are not unnecessarily violent; rather than complex, flowing, 'perfect form'. Therefore, there is a greater use of striking and pain to distract an opponent, and a concentration on defending against the forms of attack likely to be used by an average criminal rather than a trained martial artsist. As always, the best guideline is to learn whatever is avaliable that best suits your purposes.

Three more. I feel the screening on this site is too severe, I had to add an extra 'i' to Sekishiitsu otherwise it gets starred (*) out. Ma-tsu asked Liang: "What sutra are you lecturing on?" "The mind sutra", Liang replied. "By what do you lecture?" Ma-tsu asked. "With mind." Whereupon Ma-tsu said, "The mind is like an actor, the meaning like a jester, the six sense like an acquaintance; how can the mind lecture on sutra?" Liang answered, "If mind cannot lecture, cant no-mind?" "Yes, no-mind can lecture all right." At this point Liang began to leave, but Ma-tsu called to him and said, "Professor!" Liang turned back towards Ma-tsu, who said, "From birth to death, this is how it is." Following this encounter Liang's whole body was drenched in sweat and on his way back to the temple he said to his monks: "I thought it could be said that all my life, no one could lecture better than I on the sutras. Today, a question from Ma-tsu dissolved the ice of a lifetime." A monk asked Ganto, “When the three worlds are attacking us, what shall we do?” “Sit still!” said Ganto. The monk was surprised and said, “Please explain a little more.” “Bring me Mount Ro,” said Ganto, “and I will tell you”. One day Kyozan was looking at the moon together with Sekishiitsu and asked him, "Where does the roundness of the moon go when it becomes sharp, crescent?" Sekishiitsu said, "When it is sharp, the roundness is still there."

Three more: Nine years had passed and Bodhidharma now wished to return westward to India. He called his disciples and said: The time has now come. Why does not each one of you say what you have attained? The disciple Tao-fu replied: As I see it, it neither adheres to words or letters nor is it separate from them. Yet it functions as the Way. The Master said: You have attained my skin. Then a nun, Tsung-chih, spoke: As I understand, it is like is like the auspicious glimpse of the Buddha land of Aksobhya; it is seen once, but not a second time. The Master replied: You have attained my flesh. Tao-yu said: The four great elements are originally empty: the five skandhas have no existence . According to my belief, there is no Dharma to be grasped. To him the Master replied: You have attained my bones. Finally, there was Huike. He bowed respectfully and stood silent. The Master said: You have attained my marrow. A monk had come to see Kuei-tsung and after a very brief stay was making his departure. Kuei-tsung said, Where are you going? The monk replied, Im going all over the place learning the five flavours of Zen. Kuei-tsung said, Yes, there are five flavours of Zen in various places, but here I have only one. The monk asked, And what may be your one-flavoured Zen? Kuei-tsung struck him. The monk said, I understand! I understand! Kuei-tsung said, Tell me what! Tell me what! And as the monk began to speak, Kuei-tsung struck him again. A monk came from Ting-chous assembly to Wu-chiu, who said to him, What do you find in Ting-chous teaching? Is there anything different from what you find here? The monk said, Nothing different, Wu-chiu said, If there is nothing different, why dont you go back there? and he hit him with his stick. The monk said, If your stick had eyes to see, you would not strike me like that. Wu-chiu said, Today I have come across a monk, and he gave him three more blows. The monk went out. Wu-chiu called after him and said, One may receive unfair blows. The monk turned back and said, To my regret the stick is in your hand. Wu-chiu said, If you need it I will let you have it. The monk went up to Wu-chiu, seized his stick, and gave him three blows with it. Wu-chiu said, Unfair blows! Unfair blows! The monk said, One may receive them. Wu-chiu said, I hit this one too casually. The monk made bows. Wu-chiu said, Monk! Is that how you take leave? The monk laughed aloud and went out. Wu-chiu said, Thats it! Thats it!

A good traditional exercise is to sit in as low a horse stance as you can for as long as you can. This produces an incredible burn when you're starting out (stop when your legs start to shake) and tones all the major muscles of the legs as well as increasing flexibility in the groin. Once you find it too easy, try it whilst holding light weights, which you can improvise if you dont want to buy.

I would say that it represents non-duality - that all the dual concepts are illusions of the mind, and in reality are aspects or poles of the same undifferentiated whole. It is all things unified into one - the Tao, to put in Chinese terminology. It also represents the belief that extremes are always temporary, and that all things are impermanent. It reminds Taoists, and Buddhist (esp. from Chinese traditions), to follow the Middle Way or sage's path which lies between extremes. But this is just my understanding.

Thanks KickChick, that was a very interesting read. As a practioner of Tomiki (sport) Aikido, I am always learning about the psychology of Aiki, and I think that magic also shares mental principles with Aikido in a literal way. Both require domination of the attacker/spectator's mind; you decide what they concentrate on, you must be the only one who is truly aware of everything that is happening. I don't want my attacker to realise that he has the ability to defeat me, I want them to worry about what will happen to them if they try to strike. Similarly the magician cannot allow the spectator to realise that he an opportunity to work out the trick (like in the shuffling example), they must be made to concentrate on what's may or may not be about to happen. That other website is truly bizarre Thai Kick, but I'll try to keep an open mind.

I left because I felt that the particular style of aikido, which was Tomiki or sport aikido, had no use as self defense, which is what I wanted to study and I disliked the over competitive mind-set. So I switched to Foshan wing chun (what Yip Man taught before going to Hong Kong), as wing chun was the only style in my area that seemed to fit my needs, and the only wing chun club was this family. However I feel that it was not taught particularlly well, because the only way for me to progress onto more advanced wing chun from the basic punches, kicks and parries was to pay £45 to show them I know straight punches, the basic stance and two parries. This I was unprepared to do. Both my clubs train on Tuesdays and Thursdays, so in the end I decided to train with each once a week, and see in a few months which has more pros or cons. Talking about aikido and wing chun in general, I feel that they match well, allowing reasonable combat efficiency and the ability to control an opponent without chain-punching them to death.

Suprised this hasn't come up before. Maybe it has, but what the hell. Personally I'm a Radiohead nut, plus a little Travis, Coldplay, etc.

For most people who practise aikido, self defense is not their main priority, so they don't worry that people don't attack with a "lunging karate-chop" anymore. Some schools have introduced training against realistic attacks exactly because they have been exposed to them in open competitions, and were unprepared for the low levels of commitment when compared to stylised traditional attacks. Aikido, in my experience at least, only works in a realistic encounter when it is absolutely perfect; something which takes years of training or a one-off fluke to achieve. The highest level practitioners can normally cope with most things mainly because they have near-perfect timing and can avoid attacks lightning fast. At this level, it no longer matters how an opponent attacks. The introduction of sport aikido, fighting against a knife-weilding opponent who is trying not to be thrown and knows all the tricks, has offered an new opportunity to train against an attacker who doesn't offer himself for the throw.

Thanks for the interest guys, but yes; in the past 7 months I left and went back again! Maybe this thread will be of interest to someone in the same predicament though. Thanks anyway

15 minutes cycle ride, and £2.50 a lesson, which is about $3.50

Daito Ryu is still around, but is very hard to track down. Generic aikijujitsu clubs are easier to find and offer a well rounded approach to the martial arts. They teach all the techniques in aikido but more combat orientated, as well as striking and ground-grappling techniques. As my sensei says, aikijujitsu is just aikido with the corners cut off ie. the techniques are the same except sharper and more dangerous. The New York Aikikai look like a descent bunch, and the Aikikai in general are a trustworthy organisation who teach aikido in its 'purest form'. I think you should go for it. Good luck.

I think that cross training is very productive, but I wonder if trying to train in every martial art might mean that you fail to understand any of them. Although almost every martial art was originally designed for self defence, they all take a different approach and emphasise different things. It takes long and diligent study to master the more subtle principles of the martial arts, learn too many and you may become confused or slow your learning. [ This Message was edited by: Aikidoka on 2002-02-28 09:25 ]

I see this topic has caused a lot of argument that has little to do with the original question. However, if I may add a point to my post, aikido evolved as I said, from Daito Ryu aikijujitsu. This style was essentially an extension of sword techniques into unarmed hand-to-hand techniques, hence such attacks as cutting with the hand blade (such as shomen-uchi, yokomen-uchi and gyakuyokomen-uchi). Jujitsu was also, essentially, a method for a disarmed samurai to defend himself against an armed agressor. Because of this, aikido was originally designed to be used against an attacker who was armed and who would attack with commitment. Therefore aikido is more difficult to apply to faster, less commited attacks, such as the karate straight punch or the boxer's jab. However, skilled aikidoka have beaten fast striking opponents, as well as lost to them.

Whether or not aikido includes strikes depends on which style you study. Traditional aikido (aikikai) was a tool for spiritual development and was designed by the founder (Morihei Ueshiba) to further his understanding of the Omotokyo religion. However, Ueshiba's skill was so high that his defensive and 'unrealistic' martial art had become lethal in the amount of power he could release, and the Emperor pronounced him the greatest martial artist in Japan. The style Seagal studies is Yoshinkan and is much closer to the parent art of Daito Ryu aikijujitsu, including more atemi (strikes) and chokes, etc. I too study both aikido and wing chun and feel they compliment each other very well. Some of the techniques even overlap, as jujitsu originated from kung fu's 'chin na' (grappling) techniques. Aikido, however, takes much longer than most arts to become combat effective, because it sacrifices striking for the prevention of injury to the opponent. When mastered it becomes an incredibly effective art, capable of generating devastating power with little strength and dealing with five opponents at once. In answer to the original question, attacks are normally taught to a limited extent using hand strikes, kicks, tanto, jo and bokken but the emphasis is on developing effective defence. An aikidoka becomes skilled at knowing when an attack is about to be executed and in drawing an over committed attack. In wing chun, this commitment would never be given, so fighting someone who knows wing chun is an aikidoka's worst nightmare! [ This Message was edited by: Aikidoka on 2002-02-27 13:15 ]

For a detailed explanation of chain punching, see the topic called 'Chain Punching' in this forum! Always check if a question has been asked before using the search button, because people get tired of repeating the same stuff. Thanks.

While wing chun ain't flashy you will find that they're is plenty to challenge and interest you. Interupted footwork, sticking hands and legs, developing flowing techniques, trapping, centreline and gate theory and learning 3 empty hand, one wooden dummy and two weapons forms are things you can look forward to at advanced levels. The parries are simple and fast but can be weaved into complex combinations to trap your opponents limbs to give you a window of attack. The kicks are low and fast and used to break up your opponent's footwork and intercept their kicks. Plus, wing chun is one of the most effective styles of kung fu. [ This Message was edited by: Aikidoka on 2002-02-18 12:44 ]

I have only watched the first clip but from what I've seen I'm not impressed. His techniques were either very basic or entirely unrealistic. You could teach someone to do what he does as well as he does it in an hour and a half. No flow, no sticking hands, no trapping - just fast with lots of chain punching and brute force!

There is only one way to learn Chi Sau - through one on one practice with a skilled instructor. It can't be learnt from books or videos or experimentation, masters from other styles tried to learn it from slow motion videos when it first became well known, but were unable to. Chi Sau must be learnt first hand, otherwise you just get jerky wrestling matches - sorry Jack.

Could you please explain what they found to prove it? I find it hard to believe that you can ever conclusively say that something as old as martial arts (which have prehistoric roots) were tracked down to a specific area/time. Please expand.

Thanks for the info ChangWuJi.

"Where did the Universe come from? Easternism never answers that" No one answers that. Western science is unable to say where the universe came from because it is impossible to take an objective and detached view of something you are a part of. The study of quantum physics has revealed that the classical Newtonian ideal of an objective study of existence is impossible and the observer always has to be taken into account during an experiment. The idea of something beyond or before the universe is nonsensicle, as the universe is *all encompassing*; hence 'uni' - meaning 'one'. Also, theories of space-time relativity have shown that time is neither linear nor constant, and therefore the idea of something 'before' the universe is incomprehensible. If anything, as KickChick says, Western science is drawing ever nearer to agreement with Eastern religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism with the concept that the universe is cyclical going from Big Bang to Big Crunch and back again.

To quote Fritjof Capra in his book 'The Tao of Physics': "Although the various schools of Eastern mysticism differ in many details, they all emphasize the basic unity of the universe which is the central feature of their teachings. The highest aim for their followers - whether they are Hidhus, Buddhists or Taoists - is to become aware of the unity and mutual interrelation of all things, to transcend the notion of an isolated individual self and to identify themselves with the ultimate reality. The emergence of this awareness - known as 'enlightenment' - is not only and intellectual act but is an experience which involves the whole person and is religious in its ultimate nature. For this reason, most Eastern philosophies are essentially religious philosophies." IMHO: One dimension of the martial arts is the realisation and expression of the unity of mind and body, so it is possible to use martial arts training for spiritual ends. Therefore I believe that while religion should never be forced onto an exponent of the martial arts by their teacher, there are links between martial training and religion/spirituallity. I think there is justification for people to practise martial arts for other reasons than to learn to fight.