"Aikido is not a martial art"

[Tony Maxwell]

Actually, its not that hard...every technique in the syllibus of aikido can pretty much be traced right back to Daito ryu. The nomenclature is there and clear to see. What was taught to the students (hidden mokuroku of Daito ryu) was posted on the wall of the kobukan dojo. The original students have clearly written about what they learned. It was Daito ryu...not something else. www.aikidojournal.com is the correct link. Stanley Pranin's website. Check out any of his books. For years there was speculation about where aikido came from...the speculation is pretty much over.

I posted in the thread you linked...

Best,
Ron

Ron,
Thank you for the info-sorry that I over looked your post on that thread. I apologize for this over sight. However, I do not contest that the techniques of Aikido can be traced to Daito Ryu. I suggest that that may not be the original origin.

It is my humble opinion that the principles and the origin of these techniques can be also traced to other systems-and not just Japanese systems... Yoshimitsu was given the credit for developing Daito Ryu-I only suggest that there were other lines of training that developed in a similar fashion.
Here is a link of some interest:
http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=461

If Yoshimitsu was able to make these connections based on his experiences in Chinese military tactics-were others from Japan able to do so, and were some of these principles learned from Shaolin Chi Na?
here is another link-go mid way down page:
http://panda.bg.univ.gda.pl/~kwachu/...A_Seminar.html

I have enjoyed this dialog,

Tony Maxwell

[Ron Tisdale]

I don't doubt that chinese martial arts had a huge impact on japanese martial arts. I don't doubt that there are many japanese forms of jujutsu that share techniques with Daito ryu...but that does not mean that

Morihei Ueshiba developed Aikido from many different styles, including Diato Ryu...

.

Those are two vastly different statements.

Best,
Ron

[Trevor Johnson]

I'll have to see if I can scare up my copy of The Dynamic Sphere. I seem to recall it had a list of arts that were used in the synthesis of aikido. Could be wrong, been a while since I've read it.

[Tony Maxwell]

I don't doubt that chinese martial arts had a huge impact on japanese martial arts. I don't doubt that there are many japanese forms of jujutsu that share techniques with Daito ryu...but that does not mean that

.

Those are two vastly different statements.

Best,
Ron

Ron,
Is it coincidence that others who studied Daito Ryu did not develop the same stylization that lead to the development of Aikido?

If you look at Daito Ryu the principals of the technique are similar, yet are not exactly the same.

Is it coincidence that Yong-Sool Choi techniques in Hapkido are similar but not exactly the same as Daito Ryu?

The point is that Taijitsu is similar in many different Japanese systems. Aikido may have been developed from Daito Ryu-yet without exposure to other types of training I suggest that it would have remained Daito Ryu.

Trevor Johnson
"I'll have to see if I can scare up my copy of The Dynamic Sphere. I seem to recall it had a list of arts that were used in the synthesis of aikido. Could be wrong, been a while since I've read it."

Trevor is right Aikido and The Dynamic Sphere, page 29 paragraph 1, gives at outline of training.

I have enjoyed this dialog,
Tony Maxwell

[Ron Tisdale]

As to the list of arts, be carefull in accepting what the aikikai said at one time as fact....for years they tried to minimize and downplay the historical significance of Daito ryu to aikido. I'm pretty sure that list is pretty much standard fare for what the aikikai said at the time of publication. Again, check out Stan Pranin's research...this is really old news now. A list of arts trained in **is not the same** as 'developed from many arts'. I've had this discussion many times...it always comes down to trying to back track and correct bad wording...

I deleted some messages in my inbox, I should be able to recieve PMs again.

Best,
Ron

PS I also would not take the sketchy research of two shodans over many differing sources...

[Trevor Johnson]

I should interject here that, if you train in an art, at least SOME vestige of it is going to inform your practice from there on out.

This may be an acceptance and inclusion of techniques, or a rejection, crying "No, I will not have this in my art!" It may even be a modulation, saying, "I like this stuff, BUT not in this way, there's a better way to do it. "

Ueshiba was one of the foremost martial artists of his day. If he made a modification, acceptance, or rejection of something, I'd be VERY interested to know why, because I'm sure that the reason is a good one.

Aikido, from what I know of it, is a way of exploring the softer skills of harmonization with an opponent. One can continue to harmonize as one takes over, or one can disrupt the other's technique and body, but the initial response is to harmonize. I'm not sure that I would use it on its own for fighting, but I think that it can inform one's other arts to an astounding degree, especially if you do a hard style of fighting.

[Ron Tisdale]

Total agreement on the informing of hard styles...some of the bigest proponants of aikido that I have met and trained with were 'hard style karateka'. They really blossomed under aikido. And I didn't want to fight them *before* they took aikido either...

Best,
Ron

[Tony Maxwell]

I should interject here that, if you train in an art, at least SOME vestige of it is going to inform your practice from there on out.

This may be an acceptance and inclusion of techniques, or a rejection, crying "No, I will not have this in my art!" It may even be a modulation, saying, "I like this stuff, BUT not in this way, there's a better way to do it. "

Ueshiba was one of the foremost martial artists of his day. If he made a modification, acceptance, or rejection of something, I'd be VERY interested to know why, because I'm sure that the reason is a good one.

Aikido, from what I know of it, is a way of exploring the softer skills of harmonization with an opponent. One can continue to harmonize as one takes over, or one can disrupt the other's technique and body, but the initial response is to harmonize. I'm not sure that I would use it on its own for fighting, but I think that it can inform one's other arts to an astounding degree, especially if you do a hard style of fighting.

Trevor I completely agree that variation of technique occures from instructor to instructor; I have had a chance to observe Nisho sensei's technique and Yamada sensei's (both student's of O Sensei) -They teach the same principle yet each has thier own variations on the same ideas. Despite the fact that each of these students shared similar training.

It has been my experience that people are shaped by thier experiences, it might be a mistake to discount early forms of training in the creation of Aikido.
Thanks,
Tony Maxwell

[Judo_Iaidoka]

Aikido isn't Ma as in war art end of story. Don't feel bad all DO arts are no longer war arts.

[kenkyusha]

Ueshiba was one of the foremost martial artists of his day. If he made a modification, acceptance, or rejection of something, I'd be VERY interested to know why, because I'm sure that the reason is a good one.

The reasons were probably quite complex, but it seems possible that as Ueshiba sensei's involvement in Omotokyo (and other esoteric practices) deepened, and his relationship to Takeda sensei was... severed... he wanted methods that would distinguish what he was doing from what was being taught as Daito Ryu... (though to read Takuma Hisa's statements, it sounds as if this began fairly early in the Kobukai).

Be well,
Jigme

[Tony Maxwell]

Aikido isn't Ma as in war art end of story. Don't feel bad all DO arts are no longer war arts.

Judo_Iaidoka
I Don't feel bad. The question does not ask if aikido is a war art-only if it is a martial art.

I consider Judo a martial art as well, Professor Kano studied Kito ryu Jujitsu before the development of Judo. Prinicples of Judo are taught to the US military despite the fact it was developed as a sport. This is because it is martial by nature. The same is true of Aikido.
Thanks,
Tony Maxwell

[Roy3]

Lets not loose touch with the topic of the thread, Is it wise to say, with Aikido you will be able to take on larger or multiple attackers. Is this not in itself a gun-ho statement?

[Roy3]

Oops! Please ignore the last post.

[shikami]

Peace be with you all,

In 1942, O Sensei is quotes as saying to his uchideshi at the time, Kanshu Sunadomari :

This budo is both martial art and religious faith.

Understanding this and many of the other quotations which O Sensei spoke I have a hard time arguing either side of this debate.

Peace.

[Troll Basher]

Peace be with you all,

In 1942, O Sensei is quotes as saying to his uchideshi at the time, Kanshu Sunadomari :

This budo is both martial art and religious faith.

Understanding this and many of the other quotations which O Sensei spoke I have a hard time arguing either side of this debate.

Peace.

I think I read somewhere that Ueshiba was a religious fanatic even before he trained in the MA.