Likes Likes:  40
Page 16 of 25 FirstFirst ... 6 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 372

Thread: Aiki as a concept- why all the fuss?

  1. #226
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    31

    Default

    Ellis,

    I enjoyed reading your post a lot. To the extent that you've touched on the overall debate and the groups involved I think you have a balanced and respectful view of everyone. One of the points you make is close to one I have been attempting to make in this thread and others.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ellis Amdur View Post
    In my research on my revised version of Old School - which will be out in a few weeks I write about a great mid-Edo martial artist, Honma Sengoro, who is described as doing a feat very similar to that of DR, but perhaps at a higher level. He was pinned face-up by five retainers of a daimyo. Not the same ryu or dojo. And he easily stood up, with five people unable to stop him. He was rechallenged and eventually did it five times. The salient point is that in the commentary of the history, it states something like, "This showed his exemplary skill at kumiuchi." Kumiuchi is a generic term for body-to-body grappling. What is significant here is that Honma is described as being at the top of the heap in a skill that was commonplace, so to speak. In other words, to the Japanese, it was a given that grappling had components of IS. It was a matter of course. (I also take this on in Hidden in Plain Sight, of course, discussing such schools at Kito-ryu and Yoshin-ryu, but the signal point here is that a generic word that was used by everybody sufficed to describe a form of IS).
    A rhetorical question I have been musing over is this: to what extent was Honma an aiki master? What sense does it make to describe his feat as an expression of aiki?

    As you and Mark both pointed out, the term aiki wasn't used by Ueshiba or Takeda until many generations after Honma's day, so in a literal sense the question is nonsense, it is similar to asking "How many Marines held the line at the Battle of Thermopylae?" There were no "Marines" at that battle. Yet, US Marines feel a spiritual connection with the warriors of Sparta, and have taken the Spartan as an in-culture symbol of the virtues they aspire to. So a Marine might point to the valor exhibited in popular understanding of the events of the Battle of Thermopylae and say, "That's what we are, that's us."

    Similarly, someone who is deeply committed to "aiki" might look back into history before the term was used much, find a story of some feat of martial skill and say "That's aiki." It would mean in this case, "That's the kind of thing I aspire to - to be able to be like that," or "to be able to do that." In fact the Honma story is really concrete - right out of the Daito ryu playbook. We could therefore talk about, not something like spirit or character that is in common, but an actual skill. "I train to develop a certain type of skill, which I call aiki. Here are some examples of great men in the past who have exhibited what I am talking about."

    But here's another question - the person who recorded the Honma story called it kumiuchi. What did Honma name the skill he was demonstrating? What was the name of the principle he was exemplifying? What would he say to you if you went back in time and said to him, "Sir, that was an amazing demonstration of aiki?"

    I think he'd ask you to repeat the question because he didn't understand what you were asking. Because the statement that he was demonstrating aiki is only true in some special sense. I think it is accurate to say it is "non-factual" since it cannot be proven or disproven.

    I am not demonstrating, or even attempting to demonstrate, that there is any kind of "trademark" on the term aiki (though I do agree with Ellis's assertion that it is a type of branding). But I think there is a sort of line of appropriateness here that has to do with where you come from and what you represent when you make a statement such as "aiki has been practiced for generations going back to China and India." Because aiki is an inner secret of Daito ryu, and for Aikido, it is an all-encompassing, governing spirit that exists as a philosophical and moral principle as well as a martial skill. It is a particular thing to these groups, and some attention should be paid to how people inside those groups feel when it is applied to other things by people outside.

    Let's say Honma bowed to the lord, and when complimented on his skill, stated, "Oh no, I didn't do that well at all. I have trained neko no myojutsu for many years but I am only starting to learn its secrets."

    So what if someone emerged onto the scene claiming to be teaching "Neko no myojutsu." Let's say the person claimed to have trained in under several different IP masters, and developed his own system of training, and having read the story of Senguro Honma, he decided to name it "Neko no Myojutsu." Would that be okay? You can imagine how the lines would form - the usual suspects would decry that as ridiculous and flimflammy, and call this person a charlatan. Others would say, whatever, he has skills that we want to have, and we enjoy training with him. There are probably ways he could mollify the former group, and ways he could double-down and be even more polarizing and divisive, but at the end of the day, he has taken something that meant something very specific at one point, and turned it into a fairly hollow label, and applied it to his own thing.

    The situation is more complex with the term aiki. In Daito ryu there are subtle differences in the place that term has in the skills and principles of the art as it is transmitted. I read it as more of an effect than a skill in my Daito ryu training. That may change, but I'd like to focus on what my Daito ryu instructors and sempai, as well as the training itself has to tell me about what aiki is in that context.

    Aikido is actually a more complex situation. Personally speaking, in my training with them, my teachers have been vague on the subject of what Aiki actually is. What I think about that, is that they don't think it is appropriate to make a strict, explicit definition of Aiki, but to leave it up to we students to figure it out ourselves. And over the decades, it really seems like a lot of Aikidoka have taken the term to refer to things that are philosophical, ethical, spiritual, psychological, etc.

    Reading about koryu for years and training it for about five years now has led me to believe that an integrated training system is more than the sum of its parts. You cannot break out some piece of a certain system and combine it with other pieces and expect to have a resulting skill set similar to proper training in each system. One of the reasons for this is that application of specific skills is of middling importance in koryu, you are training to be a certain type of person who responds fluidly, instantaneously, and uniquely to a stressful situation, but in a way that, upon later analysis, could be recognized as "exhibiting perfectly the spirit of" such and such a school. So a survey of 1000 martial systems across multiple societies and historical epochs that finds, say, a similar type of breath training, or a similar understanding of cross-oppositional body mechanics, is not really going to show you anything useful. It reduces to realizing that these are all systems created by humans on planet earth; they've all got two feet and two arms and similarly constructed skeletons and nervous systems. It doesn't say much that many of them get into breathing, or studying how their balance works, or what have you.

    And that's basically why it is meaningless to say that Honma was an aiki master. And as for why it is misleading to "retcon" older martial arts as training "aiki," the point is that in those systems, the indicators of aiki you see are probably components meant to instill entirely different things, things that have been lost or are simply different. They are different paths. Everybody here is on their own path, why borrow a name for yours?

  2. #227
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by P Goldsbury View Post
    One of the issues for me in this thread -- and I think you discussed this at length in Hidden in Plain Sight, concerns Morihei Ueshiba. Ueshiba mentions aiki a number of times in his discourses and insofar as he defines this term at all, he does so within a cultural context that he appears to have assumed was known to his hearers. Or if it was not, then it was up to them to work out what he meant. Which they appear to have done, but only to varying degrees. Whether his use of the term was an issue then, or is an issue now, is not something that can be deduced from his discourses.
    Are there any documents, contemporary or not, that might help explain this context?

  3. #228
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ma.
    Posts
    191
    Likes (received)
    25

    Default

    Everybody here is on their own path, why borrow a name for yours?
    For someone who appreciated Ellis's post so much, you sure did miss the salient points.
    His school (among others) have concepts of aiki that predate your own.
    We have no idea whatsoever what aiki was or meant to Takeda Sokaku, where it lines up in importance within his own *borrowing* of the name "aiki" for his own purposes in an art he fabricated long after the concept of aiki being used in Japanese arts. Or what Ellis meant had he not chosen to place it in the name.
    Perhaps you should check in again, as Peter suggested, with your own teachers, teacher: Tokimune, who stated aiki was all over the place in Japan. I'm pretty sure his opinion is more fully realized and informed, particularly when you see him using Chinese internal body methods and quoting their concepts.
    As for rank, I seem to recall him admitting to the police capt. in Sendai that neither he or his father Sokaku... had any rank in anything.
    Dan
    [url=www.bodyworkseminars.org][COLOR=#B22222][B]Ancient traditions * Modern Combatives[/B][/COLOR][B][/url] [/B][COLOR=#B22222][/COLOR]

  4. #229
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ma.
    Posts
    191
    Likes (received)
    25

    Default

    To be clear.
    No one one knows what Takeda's aiki was in context to his entire art and how he taught it or where it came from as it pre-dated him in other arts. Therefore know one can make a claim as to it's unique nature in that art compared to another. Contextually that ties in with Ellis and my point.
    Since aiki predates Takeda and is actually part of other arts. In that sense he himself *borrowed* the term as as much as anyone else.
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 19th November 2014 at 23:14.
    Dan
    [url=www.bodyworkseminars.org][COLOR=#B22222][B]Ancient traditions * Modern Combatives[/B][/COLOR][B][/url] [/B][COLOR=#B22222][/COLOR]

  5. #230
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    685
    Likes (received)
    111

    Default

    Cliff - I never imagined that Honma was an "aiki" master. I have encounter people with a very high level of ability in application of IS, but the only "aiki," as best I understand that specific term I'm familiar with is in Toda-ha Buko-ryu - and it does not seem to relate to IS at all (however, it is clear to me that THBR has waza that only make sense with the proper application of internal strength (and we have no name for such a thing - I think it was such a given that it was taught by kuden- but without it, truly, a lot of waza are impossible in any pressured context).
    I'm not even sure that Honma's ability is out of the DR playbook - because all the DR I've seen (including Tokimune sensei) have done this with their own students, not five un-prepped individuals of bushi rank who surely didn't want to be embarrassed in front of the daimyo by some country bumpkin. But it certainly resembles it.
    I don't know what Honma called what he did - but he trained in Maebashi Araki-ryu, which used the terms torite and kogusoku for grappling and Asayama Ichiden-ryu (I don't know what they refer to their system as, but they were known for a particular application of skill where one couldn't get a hold or pin them - they slipped through your fingers, so to speak).
    And in regards to your hypothetical "Neko no Myojutsu"--I don't think there would have been a problem at all. The only problem is if he claimed to do "Yano Shin-ryu xxxjutsu" and he'd never studied it. However, even then, if he had defeated a Yano Shin-ryu (I made the name up) in a shiai, and asserted that in so doing he grasped the essence of their art, many would still possibly find that acceptable (they surely would if the YSR guy, bowing in defeat said something like, 'you have mastered what I have only reached for.' i think that's why Takeda Sokaku was comfortable giving Ueshiba a menkyo in Yagyu Shinkage-ryu, even though he never studied it - he had menkyo holders of YagyuSR among his students, and surely demonstrated his higher level against them - so it's probable that he "took possession" of their art, because as his deshi now, they were his already.
    Any way, reading thru the rest of your post, I must interject that I never said Honma was an aiki master - rather that he possessed skills that were once believed to be of the myojutsu level, but were commonplace at the time. Hence, I suggest, there was nothing strange about Takeda referring to what he did as jujutsu (particularly if I am right in my speculation in HIPS that he learned something of Inegami Shinmyo-ryu jujutsu, the core of his maternal grandfather's skill, one of only two/three (I forget) otome-ryu jujutsu of Aizu.
    As I said, I'm quite comfortable myself that DR may be Mozart . . . .or Kuhlau/Duscek/Hummel.... (look them up in Wikipedia, if you don't get the reference), but I don't believe that DR aiki is a kind of music unlike any other, even if a) it surely has some unique traits based on how it is trained and how it is expressed b) it is part of a larger context/whole.
    Last edited by Ellis Amdur; 20th November 2014 at 01:25.

  6. #231
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    31

    Default

    I appreciate everyone's comments but I must beg your pardon because I failed to coherently express my thoughts in that last post.

    I am largely onboard with the idea that IS training was more widely available in the koryu period. And before, too, sure, why not? But it wasn't called "Aiki" until the 20th century. In my opinion, saying Honma practiced "aiki" is in most senses ridiculous (and non-factual). He didn't call it that, none of his contemporaries would have called it that, and he obviously never trained in Daito ryu or Aikido.

    Now, someone who was involved with Daito ryu or Aikido who was trying to explain their own art might say that Honma's feat was a great expression of aiki. This would not be a claim of a lineage from Honma, or a claim that they were doing the same thing - it would be a kind of association at a spiritual or essential level. This is my interpretation of Tokimune et. al. saying "Aiki has been around in Japan for hundreds of years." It really means, "the essence of what I am trying to teach you, which we call 'aiki' here in this dojo, has been around. (But it went by many different names)." This is a very different type of claim than the one that goes, "Aiki has been practiced for generations going back to China and India and Ueshiba and Takeda are simply modern exponents of this one grand tradition."

    Its kind of a "the map is not the territory" thing.

    Ellis, Peter, and others on this thread have spent more time in Japan than I have but if I can take a stab at this - this matter of "apprehending the essence" of things is something Japanese folks have always loved to do. They like to find simple, elegant little themes and things which can express everything important and irreducible about a greater, more complex thing, such as a system of information like an art form. Finding that thing is a way to show you have really grasped it. In the west we like to take things apart and lay all the components out so you can see every piece, and that is the way we think we've really come to an understanding of something. When Tokimune said that aiki was commonplace in other japanese martial arts, he was doing the Japanese thing. I think confusion is a certainly if you think he was doing the Western thing - saying "these pieces of our martial art have been components of other martial arts."

    There is a danger in taking the "break it down" approach in general to koryu bujutsu, which is something I have seen in this thread a lot. Because IMO, koryu were not meant to teach collections of discrete skills, they were meant to provide a vehicle for the practitioner to transform and advance their abilities generally and broadly. They were holistic and integrated. You could find a dozen martial systems that had some similar, perhaps quirky technique or training method, and that would say NOTHING meaningful about them being related. The pieces may be similar, but the overall character of the system is entirely different.

    So that's my argument against using the term "aiki" to describe IS that might be found in other historical systems.

    I have also attempted to argue against using the term "aiki" to describe IS that is practiced outside of Daito ryu and Aikido by modern groups. I guess that point boils down to: there might not be a "trademark" on the term Aiki, but that doesn't mean it is right to use it to describe what just any martial artist does. Basically because not everybody in Daito ryu or Aikido defines Aiki strictly as IS.

  7. #232
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    685
    Likes (received)
    111

    Default

    Cliff - you wrote: "In my opinion, saying Honma practiced "aiki" is in most senses ridiculous (and non-factual). He didn't call it that, none of his contemporaries would have called it that, and he obviously never trained in Daito ryu or Aikido."

    I previously wrote: "Cliff - I never imagined that Honma was an "aiki" master."

    You wrote:"So that's my argument against using the term "aiki" to describe IS that might be found in other historical systems."

    I wrote: "Any way, reading thru the rest of your post, I must interject that I never said Honma was an aiki master - rather that he possessed skills that were once believed to be of the myojutsu level, but were commonplace at the time. Hence, I suggest, there was nothing strange about Takeda referring to what he did as jujutsu (particularly if I am right in my speculation in HIPS that he learned something of Inegami Shinmyo-ryu jujutsu, the core of his maternal grandfather's skill, one of only two/three (I forget) otome-ryu jujutsu of Aizu."

    And I wrote: "As I said, I'm quite comfortable myself that DR may be Mozart . . . .or Kuhlau/Duscek/Hummel.... (look them up in Wikipedia, if you don't get the reference), but I don't believe that DR aiki is a kind of music unlike any other, even if a) it surely has some unique traits based on how it is trained and how it is expressed b) it is part of a larger context/whole."

    At which point I wonder if you read my post, or the previous one.

    Best
    Ellis Amdur

  8. #233
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Kyoto, Japan
    Posts
    24
    Likes (received)
    6

    Default

    We do have evidence that the term aiki was the the subject of some contention in bugei during the early 19th century. Matsura Seizan (being the ex-daimyo of Hirado, he moved in fairly high-up circles, and probably (for other reasons as well) had a fairly broad overview of martial arts of the time) wrote:

    "The advanced sayings of swordsmanship speak of aiki—a harmonious contest. What exactly is it? Is it any different from the aiki of harmonious mind? If it is not, the harmonious mind may be something you have already heard of as a part of the normal spirit of the sword. I cannot answer…When accomplished people speak of aiki it is difficult to grasp their meaning."

    (Joseishi Kendan - 1810)

    Whether or not it was IP type skills that were spoken of as aiki is another matter, of course, but this strongly suggests that the term itself was used more widely (even if among select members of various ryu-ha) than most people may be aware of.

    Chris Hellman

  9. #234
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ma.
    Posts
    191
    Likes (received)
    25

    Default

    The concept of duality existed throughout Asia, both in their cosmology and in their martial arts. In the martial sense it is the joining and manipulating the two kis (in-yo-ho or yin- yang theory). These concepts have been widely prescribed to make power and unusual skills. Models or sayings like Six direction theory, Heaven/earth/man are exemplars of the mind of man manipulating the ki of heaven and the ki of earth to produce stability and a disruptive ability to incoming forces. Weapons or no don't really matter, albeit with weapons the effect is enhanced and generally faster. An early reference to this is from 1447 with the founder of Shinto ryu stating that after he engaged in esoteric training in these two concepts at Kashima and katori jingu his sword became unstoppable.
    Since these concepts run throughout the esoteric practices in Shingon Buddhism, of which both Takeda and Ueshiba were also students of, it is quite a stretch for anyone to believe they came up with something unique. And to add to that point, the masters of those arts kept using the very models I just referred to.
    Interestingly, the common pose you saw the aiki guys in frequently- one hand up the other down- is meant to be an expression of heaven/earth/man. Not that it matters much but they tried to tie it in even to the birth of the Buddha. He was said to be born with one hand pointing up the other down and roaring like a lion. Also interestingly, he himself taught of Six direction theory in conjunction with breath training and? Heaven/earth/man.
    It is the manipulation of in/yo that created aiki. The way to do that is the mystery that has lasted throughout these arts.
    Dan
    [url=www.bodyworkseminars.org][COLOR=#B22222][B]Ancient traditions * Modern Combatives[/B][/COLOR][B][/url] [/B][COLOR=#B22222][/COLOR]

  10. #235
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    31

    Default

    Ellis,

    I didn't say that you said Honma was an Aiki master, it was a rhetorical question I was trying to knock down.

    I don't think Aiki and IS are the same thing.

  11. #236
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ma.
    Posts
    191
    Likes (received)
    25

    Default

    I would say it doesn't really matter much what any individual student knows or doesn't know or better stated... doesn't get.... yet. You and other DR members here also stated there is no solo training in Daito ryu. Which has now been shown to be completely wrong, heck even in the very line you practice in!!
    I continue to suggest to you that you at least review Kondo's own teacher; Tokimune, who taught it openly. I personally watched in house video of him doing so in his own dojo. Also ask people who were at Kondo's first visit to the U.S. what the hell we were all doing Sun. afternoon? He was teaching solo training.
    I and others here listed quotations from other DR lines that also teach various solo training methods.
    To which the few members here had nothing to say in rebuttal.
    So I don't really listen to single or small sampling of students. You can get mixed results and wrong information.The opinions of students usually evolve. That's why one well known teacher, when asked about the internet said. "Why argue... with students?"

    Opinions are not required. The teachers in the aiki arts practice Internal power building methods and teach the same yin yang theory found in the higher level Chinese arts. The body skills, right down to contact point manipulation through yin and yang, connecting, stickiness, and even quote taiji classics while doing so. The first time I heard reference to taiji was from a Kodokai instructor. Does it really matter that no one in that room knew what the hell he was talking about? Did it matter that he only explained it to me and one other guy? Did that change the relevance of what he said? Does it matter that apparently many students don't know and are not shown these things and that they are the same explanations in other arts?

    Since you're offering opinions, I will offer one as well: the Chinese are far better at aiki than the Japanese.
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 20th November 2014 at 15:30.

  12. #237
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Harden View Post
    Since you're offering opinions, I will offer one as well: the Chinese are far better at aiki than the Japanese.
    That's not "aiki." I imagine it might actually be insulting to Chinese practitioners to name their martial concepts by a term coined by Japanese Imperialists.

  13. #238
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ma.
    Posts
    191
    Likes (received)
    25

    Default

    No not really.
    I think western students of the Asian arts are the "true believers " and "defenders of the faith" When you get more experienced you see things in a different light.
    But then again I am taking about teachers opinions here and not students.
    Chinese and aiki?
    A pretty substantial ICMA grand Master taught in Japan. He ended up teaching allot of aiki people. He also taught two of Sagawa's students who eventually quit Sagawa for him. He basically said what I just told you. His opinion of Japan's aiki people? "They were all working yin and yang with poor understanding of Dantian. I would say to them all this talk of aiki.Where is yin? Where is yang? How then can there be aiki? You cannot pretend Dantian you will be found out. "
    FWIW, I got an A+ He asked me to come stay at his house for a month in China and share our arts.
    I know where you are coming from. I *used* to think only Daito ryu had this stuff. It's going to be hard to remain so black and white as you experience better players from a broader range of arts.
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 20th November 2014 at 16:30.
    Dan
    [url=www.bodyworkseminars.org][COLOR=#B22222][B]Ancient traditions * Modern Combatives[/B][/COLOR][B][/url] [/B][COLOR=#B22222][/COLOR]

  14. #239
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    31

    Default

    Did he refer to himself as a teacher of aiki?

  15. #240
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ma.
    Posts
    191
    Likes (received)
    25

    Default

    Yes. Er...wasn't that obvious in his comments on aiki? He considers it all exactly what your own teachers also think and why they keep quoting the Chinese....and what it really is: a study of yin and yang. Only that he's better at it. Apparently so did Sagawa's 17 year long students.
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 20th November 2014 at 16:58.
    Dan
    [url=www.bodyworkseminars.org][COLOR=#B22222][B]Ancient traditions * Modern Combatives[/B][/COLOR][B][/url] [/B][COLOR=#B22222][/COLOR]

Page 16 of 25 FirstFirst ... 6 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Okamoto (Roppokai) Demonstrates Aiki-Age and Aiki-Sage
    By Cady Goldfield in forum Internal Power and Aiki Concepts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 4th January 2014, 08:22
  2. Aiki no In-yo-ho (Aiki no On'yoho / Onmyodo)
    By Nathan Scott in forum Aikijujutsu
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 25th February 2009, 03:23
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12th December 2006, 00:08
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 9th August 2003, 11:45
  5. Name for a concept
    By CaptR in forum Budo no Kokoro
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21st September 2000, 16:19

Posting Permissions

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