Likes Likes:  0
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9
Results 121 to 131 of 131

Thread: "Aikido is not a martial art"

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    1,253
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Etch
    Hi David,

    Always a pleasure reading your posts. Personally, I don't like describing aikido as a martial art-- I prefer the term "budo". It requires more definition to the uninitiated, but then again, so does aikido.

    Regards,
    Etch
    bu =martial
    do=way

    martial art, martial way. They're both martial.

    Just as a little food for thought.
    Though I agree that they're not doing what they were designed to do, both polo and ballet are descended from martial arts. One for cavalry exercises and teamwork while atop a horse, the other for sword exercises and the like for the French nobility. (I think it was Louis XIV who had that developed. ) Granted, it was courtsword and not warsword, but what the heck, it kept the nobles out of trouble.

    The difference between these two and aikido is that aikido has retained its martial focus and its concentration on dealing with violence. That focus may only be poorly understood by some of its practitioners, but it's still there. The others I've listed have lost it. If you're trying to deal with violence, ethically or physically, you have the "bu" component, the martial component. If you're simply dealing with the physical aspects, you have "jutsu," if you go beyond that, you have "do."

    So, on the question that started this thread, we have bu, the martial aspect. Aikido is explicitly a "do" style. So, does the definition of "do" include art?

    (The unfortunately logical extension of this argument is that arts like Olympic TKD may be turning into ballet. )
    Trevor Johnson

    Low kicks and low puns a specialty.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Posts
    824
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default martiality

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor Johnson
    bu =martial
    do=way

    martial art, martial way. They're both martial.
    Well, "martial" isn't a perfect translation of "bu".

    "bu" means "stopping violence" and it has a range of applications from warfare to peacefulness. It's more the suffix of "do" or "jutsu" that makes a big difference.

    Mochizuki sensei always said that "bu" means "doing only as much as necessary to stop the violence", but if you ask any number of Chinese what it means, and they will say "Japanese aggression." The same with "do". One of sensei's best friends, an old English teacher, said he grew up hating the character for "do" because it was always associated with right-wing militarism and the tortures he endured as a schoolboy being forced to participate in fanatical training in judo and kendo.

    He changed his mind when he got to know sensei, and realized that there was much more to "bu" and "do" than he had been shown. You could say it was "hijacked" but even people like Morihei Ueshiba were participating in those days, teaching at the Naval Academy an art that "kills at a single blow."

    Still, Japan's loss in WWII seems to have affected Ueshiba deeply and he really changed his techniques after that.

    Amdur's article shows a man who was much more a shaman than a warrior--at least in his late days.

    But as far as real "martial" arts, it's unlikely that a soldier in today's military would even get a chance to use any "aiki" thinking since they follow strict rules of engagement and working as a team is more important than fulfilling any abstraction of ethics as expressed in a Japanese black belt art. It would doubtless help them stay calm, but could also frustrate them when they see things being done inefficiently.

    If we think that aikido is really for combat training, we should prepare to face an opponent wearing body armor and helmet, carrying at least a rifle and a pistol and probably a knife or two--and flanked and followed by others (many others) of his own kind.

    Not to disagree, but to think about this as deeply as I can...
    David Orange, Jr.

    -------------------------------------------------------

    "That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
    Lao Tzu

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    1,253
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    Well, "martial" isn't a perfect translation of "bu".

    "bu" means "stopping violence" and it has a range of applications from warfare to peacefulness. It's more the suffix of "do" or "jutsu" that makes a big difference.

    Mochizuki sensei always said that "bu" means "doing only as much as necessary to stop the violence", but if you ask any number of Chinese what it means, and they will say "Japanese aggression." The same with "do". One of sensei's best friends, an old English teacher, said he grew up hating the character for "do" because it was always associated with right-wing militarism and the tortures he endured as a schoolboy being forced to participate in fanatical training in judo and kendo.

    ...

    If we think that aikido is really for combat training, we should prepare to face an opponent wearing body armor and helmet, carrying at least a rifle and a pistol and probably a knife or two--and flanked and followed by others (many others) of his own kind.

    Not to disagree, but to think about this as deeply as I can...
    By the right-wing militarism do you mean the whole popolarization of "bushido?"

    I know about the literal translation of the bu kanji, but what I'm trying to point out is that martial (dealing with violence in some way) is definitely in the meaning of bu. (Besides, stopping violence often means being violent yourself. Katsujinken, the sword that gives life, is a concept involved in this. Kill one to save a thousand from that one. )

    If you're thinking about martial as battlefield, btw, it's probably not wholly true. Look at special forces now and then. Assassins, spies, etc don't fight on the battlefield, but it's martial when they fight. Violence is everywhere in society, from muggings and murder to war.
    It's true that the specific techniques of aikido are evolved from techniques that were designed for and against armored opponents. That doesn't mean that the art is any less now than its predecessors are.

    Frankly, I really prefer that all arts have some kind of ethical component, nowadays. With the increasing complexity of society, some kind of ethical treatment of violence is probably a good idea for modern citizens. We're not likely to ever need the military mentality about violence as civilians, and we're also unlikely to be conscripted into the military, despite recent U.S. campaign propaganda. This means that some kind of ethical treatment about controlling our own violence, and being responsible for our own capacity to hurt others, is called for. (In some martial arts, this is probably unnecessary, since those arts have gotten so sportified that they're unlikely to be effective in real violence. For the rest of us, however... ) Aikido explores violence and responses to it in an ethical manner. It also contains completely valid, though probably not stand-alone, martial skills. (As normally taught, that is. They're excellent auxiliary skills, however, for anyone who trains in any other violent art.) By me, it's quite martial.
    Trevor Johnson

    Low kicks and low puns a specialty.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    455
    Likes (received)
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    Well, "martial" isn't a perfect translation of "bu".
    Well, nobody here (probably) worships the god Mars, even though they use the term "martial" arts (arts "of Mars") in common speech. Similarly, "martial" is a perfectly acceptable translation for "bu" as it is used in common Japanese speech, IMO.

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    "bu" means "stopping violence" and it has a range of applications from warfare to peacefulness.
    Actually, no it doesn't. That's a popular misconception based upon a misreading of the Shunjusashiden, which makes a lot of sense seeing that the character was used long before the more "peaceful" aspirations of modern martial arts. A literal dissection of the character will show that the meaning of the kanji "bu" is "to advance with a spear", which seems like a pretty good definition of "war" to me.

    Best,

    Chris

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Posts
    824
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default meaning of "bu"

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kimiwane
    Well, "martial" isn't a perfect translation of "bu".
    (Chris Li)
    Well, nobody here (probably) worships the god Mars, even though they use the term "martial" arts (arts "of Mars") in common speech. Similarly, "martial" is a perfectly acceptable translation for "bu" as it is used in common Japanese speech, IMO.

    :
    Originally Posted by kimiwane
    "bu" means "stopping violence" and it has a range of applications from warfare to peacefulness.
    (Chris Li)

    Actually, no it doesn't. That's a popular misconception based upon a misreading of the Shunjusashiden
    Well, it's a misconception among the highest martial artists of Japan, then. Morihei Ueshiba used that explanation and his menkyo student, Minoru Mochizuki used it as well, breaking down the character into component parts.

    (Chris Li)
    A literal dissection of the character will show that the meaning of the kanji "bu" is "to advance with a spear", which seems like a pretty good definition of "war" to me.
    The "top" radical of "bu" does show a halberd, but the bottom part of that kanji is "tomaru", or "stop," meaning "to stop the advance of the weapon."

    Ueshiba described it like that years ago.

    But, to go further with the idea, how is aikido at stopping the RPG?

    My point is that "martial" means killing warfare, while "bu" means "stopping violence." We could say there is no connection, but the people of Nanking saw that character and it was just the beginning of violence.

    But then again, the Japanese weren't attacking with aikido or judo. They were bombing with planes and firing rifles and artilery, and destroying the civilians with bayonets and swords--mostly unarmed civilians.

    Aikido is not an art of war, but an art of protecting life and preserving the peace. And I think that "budo" is intended to be just that.

    Respectfully,
    David Orange, Jr.

    -------------------------------------------------------

    "That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
    Lao Tzu

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    455
    Likes (received)
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    Well, it's a misconception among the highest martial artists of Japan, then. Morihei Ueshiba used that explanation and his menkyo student, Minoru Mochizuki used it as well, breaking down the character into component parts.
    Sure, it's a common misconception among Japanese as well. Anyway, being a menkyo student doesn't qualify you as a linguist, or make you immune to error. My first instructor (Japanese) described it the same way - that doesn't mean that he was, however, corrrect.

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    The "top" radical of "bu" does show a halberd, but the bottom part of that kanji is "tomaru", or "stop," meaning "to stop the advance of the weapon."
    The bottom part is the foot radical, now generally used for "stop" in modern Japanese. If you trace the meaning of the radical, however, it originally meant "foot" or "advance" (as in "walking forward"), which would make "bu" something like "advance with a spear", which as I said before, makes a lot of sense. There's a short explanation of this in the Daijigen, which is a standard Japanese-Japanese monolingual Kanji reference.

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    Ueshiba described it like that years ago.

    But, to go further with the idea, how is aikido at stopping the RPG?

    My point is that "martial" means killing warfare, while "bu" means "stopping violence." We could say there is no connection, but the people of Nanking saw that character and it was just the beginning of violence.

    But then again, the Japanese weren't attacking with aikido or judo. They were bombing with planes and firing rifles and artilery, and destroying the civilians with bayonets and swords--mostly unarmed civilians.

    Aikido is not an art of war, but an art of protecting life and preserving the peace. And I think that "budo" is intended to be just that.

    Respectfully,
    Certainly, that may well be the "meaning" of "budo", just as the "meaning" of "life" is something different from a literal dictionary definition of the word "life". My point was that saying that "stopping the spear" is a literal dictionary definition of the character "bu" is incorrect.

    Best,

    Chris

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Posts
    824
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default The Meaning of Bu (Part One)

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Li
    Sure, it's a common misconception among Japanese as well. Anyway, being a menkyo student doesn't qualify you as a linguist, or make you immune to error. My first instructor (Japanese) described it the same way - that doesn't mean that he was, however, corrrect.
    Well, you are correct about the lower radical of the kanji coming from "foot". And "advancing with the spear" does seem a more correct translation for what the Japanese did under the stamp of "bu" in the first half of the 20th Century. I could understand the Chinese getting really worked up seeing that kanji in a Japanese context.

    Perhaps what we're looking at is a retooling of the meaning, following WWII.

    Even a seemingly valiant saying like Jigoro Kano's "ji ta kyo e" (go forward together with the opponent) was used by the militarists in the years leading up to war. My first mother in law went to China to marry a Japanese farmer she'd never met because the Japanese government encouraged it. He was farming Japanese land and she went there and married him and had her first two children there.

    In 1995, she saw that I was practicing calligraphy by writing "ji ta kyo e" and she almost freaked. My then-wife told me that it was considered a real right-wing thing to write.

    But budo (aikido) is not a real martial art. It's more of a mind/body discipline based on the allegory of war. And in allegory, it becomes a spiritual battle. But that makes it even more important to deal only with the truth. When we integrate falsehoods on a spiritual level, then the fall of our house is assured.

    So based on the allegory of war, what should budo be teaching us?

    Thanks for your insights.
    David Orange, Jr.

    -------------------------------------------------------

    "That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
    Lao Tzu

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Posts
    824
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default skipped your message

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor Johnson
    By the right-wing militarism do you mean the whole popolarization of "bushido?"
    I mean the way judo, kendo and karate were used to push and brainwash Japanese youth into the war machine in the 1930s. Mochizuki sensei's teacher told him, when he was 13 years old, "When I was your age, I fought at (named a famous battle of some fifty years in the past). What would you do if you had to take up a sword right now and fight?"

    And that affected sensei's approach to training. About ten years later, he almost died as a result of his own fanatical training.

    But children younger than he came along in the 1930s and judo and the other budo were used to indoctrinate and shame them and hammer down any outsticking nails. Ishikawa sensei only knew budo from those experiences and he hated it until he got to know Minoru Mochizuki.

    (Besides, stopping violence often means being violent yourself. Katsujinken, the sword that gives life, is a concept involved in this. Kill one to save a thousand from that one. )
    Sensei always strictly limited that to mean "no more than necessary to stop the attack." Any more, and you, yourself, are generating violence. And aiki works on the ura of violence to neutralize it. It should not create more violence.

    If you're thinking about martial as battlefield, btw, it's probably not wholly true. Look at special forces now and then. Assassins, spies, etc don't fight on the battlefield, but it's martial when they fight. Violence is everywhere in society, from muggings and murder to war.
    But spec forces really rely more on the telephone than the fist. Did you read "Ghost Soldiers"? One guy was an expert marksman, but he surveyed and mapped an entire prison camp using his rifle and scope to measure distances and angles. If you get down to hand to hand combat, you have already largely failed in your purpose.

    It's true that the specific techniques of aikido are evolved from techniques that were designed for and against armored opponents. That doesn't mean that the art is any less now than its predecessors are.
    I wish I could find that Ellis Amdur article. I think it's in his blog at Aikido Journal.

    Frankly, I really prefer that all arts have some kind of ethical component, nowadays. With the increasing complexity of society, some kind of ethical treatment of violence is probably a good idea for modern citizens.
    It just seems that some people get lost in the ethics. We have to remember that the real ground of aikido is life and death. Being peaceful does not mean that we should have dull tools. But it goes to the other extreme to think that aikido is a real battlefield martial art--especially for the modern battlefield.

    This means that some kind of ethical treatment about controlling our own violence, and being responsible for our own capacity to hurt others, is called for.
    I agree, as long as the ethic is honest about the foundations.

    Aikido explores violence and responses to it in an ethical manner.
    And in the best of cases, it is also realistic.

    It also contains completely valid, though probably not stand-alone, martial skills. (As normally taught, that is. They're excellent auxiliary skills, however, for anyone who trains in any other violent art.) By me, it's quite martial.
    My sensei had a talk with Morihei Ueshiba about the "stand alone" qualities of aikido. He felt that aikido needed to expand and take into consideration a wider range of attacks than the traditional. Ueshiba rejected this idea entirely, but Mochizuki sensei went on and broadened his aikido considerably, and that is what I learned. And it is quite martial, but not for the battlefield. It's good for personal defense and taming the inner monster, but only so long as it stays true.

    Best wishes.
    David Orange, Jr.

    -------------------------------------------------------

    "That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
    Lao Tzu

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    1,253
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    My sensei had a talk with Morihei Ueshiba about the "stand alone" qualities of aikido. He felt that aikido needed to expand and take into consideration a wider range of attacks than the traditional. Ueshiba rejected this idea entirely, but Mochizuki sensei went on and broadened his aikido considerably, and that is what I learned. And it is quite martial, but not for the battlefield. It's good for personal defense and taming the inner monster, but only so long as it stays true.

    Best wishes.
    Personally, I have never felt any shame in not being in the military or training for the battlefield. Those are not shameful occupations, nor are they ever unnecessary. They just aren't MY occupation! If I'm going to train realistically, I'd better train for my life, not someone else's.
    Trevor Johnson

    Low kicks and low puns a specialty.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    107
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kimiwane
    But budo (aikido) is not a real martial art. It's more of a mind/body discipline based on the allegory of war. And in allegory, it becomes a spiritual battle. But that makes it even more important to deal only with the truth. When we integrate falsehoods on a spiritual level, then the fall of our house is assured.

    So based on the allegory of war, what should budo be teaching us?
    Hi David,

    Your above statement reminds me of a doka of O-Sensei's:

    "The penetrating brilliance of swords
    Wielded by followers of the Way
    Strikes at the evil enemy
    Lurking deep within
    Their own souls and bodies"

    So taking O-Sensei's words into account, to answer your question, my belief is that budo should be teaching us that our lives true arch-enemy is within ourselves-- our ego.

    Best Regards,
    Etch
    Bernard B. Echiverri

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    ENGLAND
    Posts
    14
    Likes (received)
    0

    Talking Aikido not a martial art you must be joking

    Come on you cant be serious I will agree with some people all martial arts progress into into a theory of non violence.This is a path pushed by the modern political correctness in this country (GB) and to gain some funding.Look what has happend over the years to THAI BOXING it got reduced to no kicking to the knee no elbows no knee techniques and became kick boxing.I studied THAI boxing for 12 years before I found AIKIDO.In order to survive in a real situation it is not the art that saves you but your self but this comes from your comiment to you art and are you willing to take your art to the extreme.In the dojo we can't put full power into AIKIDO techniques as we all have to go to work in the morning.So stop debating is AIKIDO A MARTIAL ART and look what AIKIDO GIVES YOU IF YOU TRAIN HARD AND TAKE IT SERIOUSE.All martial arts will have to evolve to meet the demands of the future peoples choice will decide is AIKIDO for self defence or spiritual
    awareness or can we find the comon goal of AIKIDO to self improvement.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •