Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
Congratulations to all the people involved in the work leading to the promotion! jmcw 13:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I think a way to improve this article would be more pictures, or sub articles that include more pictures. What a glossary of every Japanese Aikido word? Many are listed in this article but I think more exist. I think there could be some great sub-articles written relating to Aikido. Where do you focus your effort next? Tkjazzer 22:54, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Somehow this doesn't sound right. I don't remember doing a lot of "grappling" recently in my dojo.
What are people's views on this? And what would be an alternative description, which would surely be better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerledan (talk • contribs) 09:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
'Grappling'is quite wrong here. Aikido is characterised by a lack of grappling techniques: how can you 'grapple'with multiple attackers? Grappling implies wrestling. Aikido isn't wrestling. Contrast with judo. Let's look at another example of a 'gross taxonomy' to use JJL's observation. If I say a whale is a subset of fish I am quite wrong except that a whale has some features which could be considered fish-like. But it's not a fish. Aikido has some features which could be considered grappling like, but it certainly isn't grappling. So I suggest a change here.
This is the discussion page, so shall we discuss? Kerledan 14:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
being grabbed, and then doing action that results in that person being thrown, or doing action that results in a joint lock or pin, is most DEFINITELY grappling. I'm not sure what else you could call it. Wwilson 1 14:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Should the the field in the template to be changed to 'focus' in a similar way to the Martial arts article, to reflect that most styels may include amny thigns even if they focus on one area. -- Nate1481 (talk • contribs) 08:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Would Angie from Trauma Center deserve a mention? Or should I keep my trap shut? She does know Aikido. Look at the episode Infiltration in TC:UTK or TC:SO. THOMASNATOR 09:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I think there are a couple of problems with the criticism section of this, otherwise very good, article. Firstly, the sentence stating that 'it suffers from a lack of realism'. This could be said of most, if not all, martial arts as they are practised today - in karate, for example, one does not physically harm another person, the same can be said of iaido, kenjutsu, shaolin etc. etc. In addition, the techniques used in aikido, with the exception of techniques that are specifically designed to break an elbow, for example, are generally implemented with 'full intent', both on behalf of uke and tori. Indeed 'full intent' is very important, particularly with atemi and particularly in Iwama and Yoshinkan forms. The techniques are also practised in response to multiple types of attack (grabs, punches, etc).
Secondly, the point about 'never resisting' is false. To truely perfect ones technique, resistance is required. By practising with a compliant partner, ones technique will suffer because there is no need to perfect the technique. Therefore, in order to progress, one must train with a non-compliant partner, and one must resist when acting as uke. This is also a part of 'full intent'. I think the article should reflect this in some way. Telemeister —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.201.172 (talk) 13:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Peter and Mrand. I don't believe that having a critique that aims to satisfy the ignorant is a goal of wikipedia. As for it being 'nearly useless' for self defense, I would seriously question that. Perhaps this is more of a perception than reality. The Tokyo Riot Police are trained in Aikido (Yoshinkan Aikido on the Senshusei course). I might be mistaken, but I believe the US Secret Service use several Aikido techniques in the course of their work - particularly Koshi-Nage and Nikkyo.
I have been involved with Aikido in Australia for a long time now, and I do not know of any aikido style that preaches a lack of resistance. Of all the styles listed in the 'aikido styles' section, the Ki Society is the only style with which I have little experience, so it may be possible that they don't resist in training but I doubt it. I will have a look at some of my books and see if I can dig up some references. User:Telemeister —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.201.172 (talk) 23:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I think you folks are confusing Uke with nage in terms of resistance. In an Ideal Aikido world, uke would be thrown no matter how he tried to 'resist', and nage would throw him without needing to 'resist' anything himself. The only major problem with resistance I see around here, is some folks 'resistance' to the idea of Aikido being a nice practical martial art on multiple levels. Wwilson 1 00:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps that injury paragraph in the section should be moved. Its not a critism per se but I am not sure where it should go.Peter Rehse 18:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
i thought it was a well known criticism that most Aikido dojos rarely teach striking and therefore many aikido practitioners have a very unusual way of "throwing a strike" when doing drill work their partner - or is this just an well known observation? Does not any reference say this? And the no kicking bit even though O-sensei was a great kicker... aren't there more criticisms about that anywhere in the literature? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.47.161.106 (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
much of this current articles' citations comes specifically from one source
while I do not doubt it's validity, and while I think it is an excellent source. For the good of the article, I feel it might be wise to diversify the citation sources. Even if that means tracking down the original publications the "Encyclopedia of Aikido" was based on.
we should make a subpage for shihōnage. -- a lot of people would click the proposed link in the criticism section since it relates to known deaths in aikido training. Tkjazzer 22:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
As a Japanese translator by trade, I can't say that I've spent more than 2 minutes of all the time I've learned Japanese studying the various systems of Japanese romanization. I've seen at least two ways to write things, I learned the names of the two systems and my teacher always used the less popular one. The next time someone goes through and switches all the romanizations around I'd like to see the rationale or logic behind such a change explained. I'm wondering whether it's not just a game of, "I learned romanization this way so it's the right way", which would be unfortunate. I personally thought the changes just made the romaji less legible. If anyone feels differently feel free to change it back. Let's all please remember that romanization of Japanese is not Japanese, so there is more than one way to do it and there is no need to be overly picky over a 'fake' language.Wwilson 1 22:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I guess a common injury might be a carpet-burn (mat-burn) from being "dragged"/ rubbing the mats. Should we add it? Tkjazzer (talk) 18:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
The other thing I would somehow mention is chance of injury from someone throwing someone in to someone else. It seems to be mentioned in most aikido introduction videos. Tkjazzer (talk) 04:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
http://www.nyaikikai.com/yamada.asp Should this article link in a see also section? Tkjazzer (talk) 18:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
while some styles slap on falls and others don't - I think I definitely am critical of slapping the ground while falling down. I'm not an aikido expert but I do know physics - I understand the concept of making more area - but slapping the ground just adds additional force to an impact. What is up with this? I'm watching a Christian Tissier DVD and the uke (spelling?) is just slapping the ground like crazy... what's the point? I'm sure someone has published this somewhere and we can find a reference for an official criticism - what are your thoughts? 75.47.188.212 (talk) 22:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I reverted the following addition: "Sword-drawing techniques or Iai batto-ho are also sometimes practiced to supplement the training of forms. It is included in the syllabus of Birankai International." It also included a reference to Birankai North America's homepage.
I don't doubt the truth of the assertion that sword-drawing techniques are practiced by some aikido programs. However, I see several problems with including this in the article. First, the article attempts to include as inclusive a view of aikido as possible, and aikido schools or organizations with iai training in their formal curriculums are in the extreme minority. Furthermore, use of the term "iai batto-ho", which literally means "iai sword drawing methods" ('iai' doesn't have a good translation) is in the extreme minority even among schools of swordsmanship. Also, singling out Birankai International, a school that doesn't even have a wikipedia article, as an example gives the appearance of promoting that school (of course, it might be the only one that teaches "iai batto-ho", which is another reason not to mention it).
In any event, a featured article such as this requires rigorous referencing. If a secondary source could be given for the actual point cited, namely that "sword-drawing techniques ... are also sometimes practiced ...," I might feel differently. However, a citation to Birankai's website's iai section only supports the fact that Birankai practices iai, not that the supplementary practice of iai by some aikido programs is anywhere close to notable enough to include in this article. Please feel free to respond to my concerns if you disagree. Bradford44 (talk) 02:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it worth slipping in Kenshiro Abbe's name as the teacher sent to England in 1955?
Kaitenage is more often referred to as 'Tumbling throw' than 'Rotary Throw' in 'Ki' styles. Would an experienced Japanese translator care to offer an opinion as to which is the better translation?
Apparently ~75% vandalism isn't extreme enough for semi-protection --Nate1481( t/c) 14:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I've deleted a number of edits regarding "sugar cane" or another article someone was trying to add. I apologize if I didn't explain the deletions. I've also forgotten to sign my name. J-Guy (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Aikido techniques are normally performed by "blending" or "egging" with the motion of the EGG, rather than directly opposing the EGG. The EGG redirects the EGG's momentum, using minimum effort, with various types of throws or joint locks.[3]
I'm no expert in martial arts or editing wikipedia, but the 'EGG' references do not seem correct. Zupkuck (talk) 13:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I really enjoyed this article and hope there are more like it out there!Historybuffc13 (talk) 02:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Howdy all, Be on the watch for vandalism for the next few days... although it is no longer the featured article of the day (195 edits in one day!), the main page keeps links to previous featured articles for at least two more days, giving vandals easy access to the page. Despite the majority of the 195 edits being vandalism, the page received some nice improvements... you can see the diff that shows before and after.—Mrand Talk • C 00:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
What's up with the use of the {{transl}} template for all of the italicized Japanese words? All this seems to do is render the letters in a font used for kanji, making them harder to read and look wierd. I'm inclined to remove the template unless someone has a good reason why it should stay. Bradford44 (talk) 02:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
The infobox currently lists aikido's parenthood as "aiki-jūjutsu; judo; jujutsu; kenjutsu; sōjutsu". Are all of these appropriate? The Jujutsu article describes it as "a blanket term for a wide variety of grappling-related disciplines", while aikido was specifically derived from Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu, which is already listed. And even though Ueshiba studied Judo at one time, I've haven't seen it named as a significant influence on aikido before. 75.15.117.224 (talk) 13:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted a change of wording throughout the article from attacker to uke, but would like to discuss this further:
Yooden, could you explain why you believe the word "Attacker" would be wrong?
Opinions from anyone else? Thanks!—Mrand Talk • C 14:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't have an objection to using uke, by any means. I am somewhat concerned about how many instances were changed though, so what I'm been trying to do here is play devils advocate and spark up a discussion among multiple people to determine a good criteria for when to use one vs. when to attacker and when to use uke (so as to use foreign words sparingly). Also, do we need to find a concise way to somehow explain what uke means early in the article, or is a wiki-link enough? The wiki entry for uke may need to be improved as well, because the way it is written seems to mostly imply it is with reference to a training partner.—Mrand Talk • C 16:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Great Masters of Aikido such as Seiseki Abe shihan (10th dan), Hiroshi Isoyama shihan (8th dan), and the late Doshu Kisshomaru Ueshiba recognized the importance of the role Seagal sensei played on the spreading of Aikido throughout the world. He definitely deserves the credit, and reference to this should be made on the main page of the article. The opinions of aikidokas concerning his private or Hollywood life should be set aside. His contribution to aikido is true and real. Many came in contact with Aikido (and why not, O-sensei's and eastern thought) through his movies. Let us not forget his credentials: 7th Dan, being the first western to ever teach in Japan, and owner of a very striking-to-eye technique, much more impressive then most famous masters. Seagal is able to impress even those who do not know aikido, a fact which is not true to most masters. Close and direct disciple of the founder, Grandmaster Seiseki Abe, 10th Dan, Aikido and caligraphy master once said "By 1973, he was already a great Aikidoist. He trained with all the top masters in Japan. I promoted him to Godan and later to Rokudan because his aikido is the best I've ever seen" (See the magazine Martial Arts Legends/STEVEN SEAGAL, #4, 1993, page 94. This is a verifiable information, as demanded by the rules of this web site. It must be taken into consideration). These are not the words of a mere aikidoka, Abe sensei was a direct student of O-sensei, being one of the few (if not the only) to have received, straight from the founder, a 10th degree on the art. So who are we to say Seagal´s Aikido is this or that. I stick with Abe shihan's opinion. Justice be made to the man. I suggest you to include a reference and a link to him on the "international dissemination" section, or at least a small coment on any section, on the main article, of his contribution to the spreading of the art, which is not less or greater that any of the other shihans mentioned in the main page. Please do not ignore this fact for, by doing so, you're preventing users of this site from real information concerning the popularization process of this art.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.160.22.66 (talk) 23:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I just reverted the following text out of the article - most of it certainly does not belong in the criticism section. Does anyone think there is anything essential here that needs to be added to the article (whichever section it belongs in), with references? —Mrand Talk • C 23:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Some believe that criticism of Aikido's effectiveness in unarmed martial combat against striking arts misses a crucial point: that Aikido, based on Samurai martial arts (as opposed to so called japanese "farmer" martial arts such as Karate) is a continuation of the principle of battlefield martial arts as a complement to weapons. Hence Aikido is primarily concerned with enabling a surprised Aikido practicioner to rapidly break any number of grips on his person and move regardless of attempted restraint. As a complement to weaponry this allows the practicioner to draw his weapons or reach for his weapons even if surprised. Removing the layer of "peace and harmony" that was particularly attached to Aikido during the period of american occupation after WW2, Aikido can appear as a form of pre-WWII Close Quarter Battle for the japanese officer. The knife, sword (carried by officers of the period), and short spiked staff (rifle-and-bayonet) work complementing the emphasis on breaking grip and unfettered movement. This view would certainly illustrate to non-practicioners why there is a divergence between martial artists competing in unarmed combat, who view Aikido as close to useless, and Law Enforcement and Special Forces, who hold Aikido in high regard. For the latter Aikido gives three things that most standard martial arts cannot: freedom of movement when grabbed, the ability to draw their weapons even when restrained by several attackers, and the option of neutralising an attacker without damaging them (which can always be followed up if necessary with another striking art, or with weapons to hand).
Encyclopedic content must be verifiable and so should cite sources. I would not have a problem with including something like the quoted block if it came with references to reliable sources. As it is, the quote started out with the weasel words "some believe." The quote also makes statements about rather complicated subjects such as what Aikido was before or after WW2, implications about what a "Samurai" vs. "farmer" of the late 1800s to early 1900s may be, etc. Thus while I believe it would be a good idea to include something like this in criticisms it may well come down to a battle of interpretations that'll be hard to present cleanly in the Wikipedia article. I've heard many sensei say many things and have come to see that they are presenting their own beliefs/interpretations. We may nod and and think "that makes sense to me" but unfortunately it's hard to then translate that into a citable/verifiable form that can be used on Wikipedia. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 17:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
We need to separate the criticisms into 2 parts:
And, yes, content must be verifiable and should cite sources. Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 10:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
It should be prominent, near the top, that aikido is not a proven martial art the way boxing or wrestling is, and its philosophy is immature compared to Confucius, Kant, etc. Objectivity, which Wikipedia strives for, should mean comparisons between similar subjects, and aikido is objectively worse than the majority of both martial arts and belief systems.
It's a fighting system, not a religion that is intentionally obscure and unassailable, so it shouldn't be exempt from realistic criticism.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.117.249 (talk • contribs)
My friend, the link below was writen for you as an answer. Please read it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.4.13.87 (talk) 14:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The goal of Aikido, acording to writings of the founder, recorded teachings and direct experiences of his closest disciples, is not to teach fighting techniques. Let these things dwell in the minds of mundane men, who seek foolish glory upon defeating others. It should be clear in the main page that the goal of Aikido, as intended by its founder, is to cultivate inner force, to discover it in a practical way, and from this point on, search the source of this force, which is Love. The core of Aikido's philosophy, practise and goal is this - defeat your real and only oponent - yourself. Discover the nature of true Self, which is divine Light-Love, that's it. In this sense, Aikido is very efective and it's philosophy is much, much deeper than that of Confucious or Kant (as mentioned above), which dwell upon intelectualism only. Ueshiba Morihei's philosophy regards Self-realization, and it can be compared to the taoist bible, Lao-Tse's book, the Tao te Ching, who teaches one to forget duality (yin-yang), and merge in the TAO (way, sometimes translated as God), or Viasa's Bhagavad Gita, for Lord Krishna teaches the same principles to his warrior disciple Arjuna - that the real enemy is his individual consciousness, and that he should use the sword of Yoga to cut away ignorance and discover truth, his real divine identity, the imortal soul, a reflection of God. And beyond that, the search for the human nature's true essence, Love, was also the search of all Great Masters of mankind, such as the Christ, Buddha, Ramakrishna, Saint Francis, Yogananda, among many others. So, in the deepest sense, Aikido is a spiritual path, a religion indeed, an Ueshiba must be regarded as a saint, a great Yogi-Christ-Buddha of modern Japan, a fully enlightened master. And even though the goal of Aikido is not at all to learn how to kill, bear in mind that the science of inner strengh, of the soul's true potential, points out to recent discoveries on the field of quantum physics. The possibilities of the human inteligent inner energy-field (soul-spirit), along with its volition (will), are undreamed of, it is infinite, of a cosmic reality, if one is able to reach it. Ueshiba Morihei was experiencing, talking about and teaching how his disciples could tap into the mystical-miraculous-alchemical-quantic-fractal-geometric manifestations of the spirit in all. Take, for instance, the symbols he chose to represent his art - circle, square, triangle and spiral, which mathmatically represent the building blocks of all creation, from sub-atomic particles to the great spheres of the cosmos. Or what to say about his kotodama, chantigs methods designed to attune one's will, consciousness and vibration rate with that of the primordial sound (AUN, OM, Amen) whose roots are to be found in ancient mantras of India (In the begginig was the word, and everything that was made was the word, and the word was God. The word logos, in the original greek translations of the bible, can also be translated as sound). So, masters like Bodhidarma (who was a Yogi with miraculous powers, and who taught the chinese how to come out of the jungle and become civilized) were, for sure, impossible to defeat with mere mechanical techniques such as most so-called martial arts who drifted apart from their original goal (self discovery). Bodhidarma could anihilate an entire army with his gaze, but he could also materialize things. As the great saint Vivekananda once said "Non violence means being able to destroy all, but choosing not to do so, and use this strength to destroy the root of all evil and sorrow - yourself." Take Christ for instance, He could materialize things. Do you think a MMA fighter could defeat Christ? A God-man who could walk on water? But He allowed Himself to be crucified to show his infinite compassion to all - that, indeed, was a miracle. That is what being a warrior is all about - defeat your ego, the strongest enemy in the Universe, and love all, being able to see the Light of God in everything. Or what to say about these yogis who are able to remain in caves, completely absorbed in their inner-outter divinity, for decades, or centuries, and who die when they choose to do so, not when nature calls them? So, to sum up, Aikido is not for fools. It is not intended to be tested on a filthy mat, with a judge, rules and prizes, for its martial techniques were proved many centuries ago, on Japan's deadly batlefields, and its spiritual techniques were proved by the example of the Godly life of Ueshiba Morihei and other great Aikido Masters. If you really want to discuss the deep and practical philosophy of the east, I recomend that you stop roling on the ground in pools of blood and start meditating, study a bit more. I'm sure you'll be able to see Aikido from a whole new perspective.
Domo arigatou gozaimasu. "Aikido is Love. Polish yourself untill you find the Kami (God) in all." -Ueshiba Morihei, founder of Aikido (the path of the energy of Love) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.4.13.87 (talk) 13:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
All right then, "Aikido is Love. Polish yourself untill you find the Kami (the Divine) in all." ...as if it changed anything. I really think my answer deserved a better coment Nate! And if you want a suggestion to the main page, I say you should openly display the religious aspects of the founder, show him as a saint, and not only superficialy mention the influence of Onisaburo Deguchi on his life. It seems that most aikidokas are fearful of admiting the spiritual and religious background of Aikido. To me, it is the most interesting and important part! Religion played a center role in the life of Ueshiba. He practised a lot of medatation and chanting. His life and teachings were dedicated to Kami (God, the Divine or Spirit), and his experiences on this field were far deeper than those of his guru, Deguchi Onisaburo. O-Sensei reached Nirvana, Heaven, Samadhi, enlightment - complete and unbroken awareness, knowledge, identification with Truth, the Eternal Light-Love-Inteligence of God present in all. He himself afirmed that, that he was a deity, that he was the incarnation of Shinto deities. So please, let's overcome the foolishness of even listening to these folks who want to talk about fighting. The divine Energy of Love, that's what were are seeking in this path, and that only is what O-Sensei wanted his disciples to seek. To discuss fighting efectiveness is to lower the imaculate aiki-consciousness to gross animalistic levels, and a sin indeed. O-Sensei wanted distance from people such as Takeda Sokaku, an iliterate rowdy whose thoughts resided only on his egoistic self afirmation, and whose atitudes resembled a lot the figure of so-called brazilian ju-jitsu patriarc, Helio Gracie, a man worried with fighting, subduing, and proving his superiority. Sometimes I wonder were are to be found the psicological grounds on which such an urge to impose manhood stand - the so-called macho syndrome definetely has a relation with sexual insecurity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.89.215.40 (talk) 15:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
No doubt it is practised as a martial art, but who is the one to be defeated? That is the question O-Sensei wanted his students to find out. "There are no winners while there are loosers" - Ueshiba Morihei. On the other hand, let the truth be said, the criticism on Aikido as being fake is due, since most dojos practice the art with a lack of reality. Very few shihans and senseis still teach Aikido in a deadly and austere way, which also leads to spiritual awakening, since a life-and-death situation put things under perspective and makes you wonder about life, triggering a spiritual process. What you see these days is people flying around with folly atacks, lacking martiality. Few people train real kenjutsu , jojutsu and randori, even fewer practice kokyu techniques, ment to develop KI awareness and power. That's what he meant when he took away the words Daito ryu and jujutsu, and added the word "DO" (path, from the Chinese TAO, which is derived from sanskrit Dharma, all meaning the way...way to what?). This choice of words clearly expresses a change in the purpose of practice . How the vast majority of practitioners consider or practise Aikido is of litle importance. What matters is what was intended by the preceptor of the path. If you practise as a means of defeating, injuring, destroying and killing, you're not practising Ueshiba Morihei's Aikido. You're filling up your ego, getting caught in the web of delusion - in other words, going the direct oposite direction intended by the founder. That's more like Daitoryu. Why do you think there are no atacks, no competitions in Aikido? To prevent egoistic atitudes from the practitioners, which O-Sensei dispised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.203.184.39 (talk) 16:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry budy, the only view on Aikido is that of the founder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.89.74.78 (talk) 17:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Only his fisical body is gone, but he awoke to his true nature, and in that sense, he became imortal. The source of life is ever new, and though it may seem to die to the eye of the average man, it is ever present. Death is only a mirage for he who has gone beyond sense identification. How could death touch the sword of limitless bliss? O-sensei became the Spirit of the Universe. He can never die nor be born. That was, for sure, his belief. If you study his teachings (not just wristlocks and throws) and a bit more of eastern thought and religion, perhaps you'll enjoy aikido as you've never enjoyed before! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.4.13.87 (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect, but you´re wrong. That's not my belief. That's what O-Sensei believed. It really doesn't matter what you believe or not believe. I'm not discussing creed or belief here, but acctual experience of the energy within. You can be very scientific about it, and that would be good. But once you discover it, you must study it deeper, its source. Acording to the founder, its source was divine love and light. Of course O-Sensei didn't insist that his students subscribe to his religious beliefs. No true master would do that. But I'm sure he wanted his discpiles to dive deeply in the art. An open study of all the ancient scriptures of all religions will inevitably come to the same, or similar teachings - a revelation of the nature of soul - divine love-light, a spark of the Infinite Divine Love-Light-Inteligence pervading all that exists - God. That's exactly what the Christ said - "I and the Father are one". Or, maybe "If your eye be single your body shall be filled with light", and "Be still and know that I am God", or even more dramatic would be "The kingdom of God is within you". Krishna also insisted on discovering your true Self when he said:"That which flows through your body, giving you life, is of eternal nature. Nothing can destroy your imperishable soul". And why not, the Buddha said: "shut of your senses and discover your true nature, the Light of lights in the bliss of nirvana." Even Socrates, obviously quoting eastern thinkers said: "Know thy self." All I'm saying is that O-Sensei had spiritual awakening as the goal of his art. Having a spiritual aspect and being touched upon as mentioned above is not enough, it is hidding the true essence. The vast majority of dojos don't even come close to that, and that is the great mistake most aikidokas do - not truly following the founder's true teaching. Besides, according to the founder and all true master of the art, it is impossible to reach deep experiences on KI (chinese CHI, sanskrit Prana) without diving in spiritual practices. And what on God's great earth is KI after all? That's the question friends!! Take his own words as example, as this is the best way to guide this discussion. Like the Jews and Christians, Morihei believed that each human being is a child of God (or god, as if it made any difference): If you have the spark of life within you, you have divinity. Each person is a wake-mitama, an individual part of the Great Whole. This notion is also similar to the hindu concept of jiva (personal soul) and atman (universal soul). On O-Sensei's shodo (caligraphy), his thoughts, feelings and experiences towards Aikido are very clearly demonstrated: The Three Realms of Manifest, Hidden and Divine: Loving and joyous Path of Aiki. He emphasized that meditation was essential for the practice of Aikido, saying: If your chinkon-kishin is good, you can understand everything. (As good aikidokas, I assume you all know what chinkon-kishin is, so I'll spare myself from further explanations). O-Sensei also defined: Tsumi (sin) is ignorance of the Universal, timeless priciples in existance. He also said, to sum up: The ancient methods of war must not be discarded, provided they are used with the purpose of purifying one's body in order to reach spiritual awakening. So, you see, if you´re practising Aikido with any other purpose than this, it is not Aikido, it is something else. What defines what is being done are not the mechanical techniques, as most people do, and what most of you are insisting when denying the true goal of Aikido. The state of mind, purification of the body in order to attain divinity, and yes, in this sense, it is equal to nirvana or heaven or samadhi - that is what defines it. It is not amalgamated religion, it is the common ground in all of them what O-Sensei sought and found, and that is what every true aikidoka should seek. And since this discussion is dwelling upon the deep and true meanings of Aikido and the spirit of O-Sensei, it is quite insulting and lacking on etiquette when you reduce it to a mere study on words. Practicing Aikido without seeking God within is of no purpose. If you seek killing techniques, buy a gun. If you seek health, go for a run in the park. Yes, aikido can teach you these things such as deadly chokes, and also provide you good health, I would never deny it and it would be foolish to do so. But it can take you way deeper, up to the point of revealing the Source of Life! The goal fellows, the goal...that's what I'm talking about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.4.13.87 (talk) 15:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear friend, my suggestion was made earlier, and I'm glad to repeat it: I say you should openly display the religious aspects of the founder, show him as a saint, and not only superficialy mention the influence of Onisaburo Deguchi on his life. Show the spiritual goal of Aikido as the main focus, for that is, beyond any doubt, what Ueshiba Morihei wanted. That's why he created this art, that's why he chose the word DO, that's the great abiss between AikiDO and Daitoryu, between the genious of O-Sensei and the mediocrity of Takeda, that's why the emperor of Japan gave him title of Great Master (O-Sensei) for Christ sakes! He wanted people to be peaceful and loving through his art, and to awake to a more spiritual life, and this should be clearly stated on the main page, since the the purpose of wikipedia is provide accurate information. If you read O-Sensei's writings, or ask any of his close disciples, as I have done, you will know that this is not my opinion. Aikido is first of all a spiritual path. Acording to the late Doshu Kishomaru Ueshiba, is his book Aikido no kokoro(the spirit of Aikido): "Learning to defend yourself its just a colateral effect, it represents only a mere 5% of what the art can offer". Superficialy mention the spiritual goal of Aikido is to prevent users of this fine website from access to real information. That's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.11.108.65 (talk) 21:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok Nate, you won! Do you really believe there is any substancial diference between refering to the founder as "Teacher of teachers", "great teacher" or "master", rather then a mere play on words? As I said before, to reduce this discussion to the meaning of words or correct translations is not the point and rather insulting. I suggest that you review your Aikido contacts and go straight to the source. Do not ask practitioners, ask the masters (or teachers if you like), read the founder's books, ask the Honbu dojo. Their opinion and the founder's is what matters. Spiritual awakening through martial methods is not a side. It is the core focus. Fighting is but a reflex. This should be clear to all who read the main article. I hate to repeat myself but it is necessary to do so here. During the Tokugawa period, from around 1600 to 1867, Japan saw a period of relative peace, if compared to previous eras of their history. And although buddhism had reached Japan much earlier than that, it was during this period that it flourished, reaching every corner of the country. You must search deeper on the choice of the word DO. This is a word that reflects the buddhist concept of making holy one's activities, of transforming every action as a path to purity, virtue and enlightement (from sanskrit Dharma) So, let's study a few examples: Sado, the way of tea cerimony. It implies that the ceremony should be used as a means to attain spirituality. Shodo, the path of caligraphy. The same happened with some martial arts, when the word jutsu was changed to DO. Kenjutsu became KenDO, Kyujustu became KyuDO, Jujutsu became JuDO, Daito ryu Aikijujutsu became Aikido, and specially, in this case, Bujutsu (war methods) became BuDO (martial path), and this implies a profound change in their focus, once you have these practices reaching for spiritual awakening. These people wanted these ancient traditions of their country to be absorbed with spirituality, they wanted it to be a way to achieve that which is the core of Buddhism. Of course you can find all these schools in Japan, be it in the form of jutsu or Do. But the main difference will reside in their focus, what they are striving for. O-Sensei, as Kano Sensei, openly chose the word DO precisely to express that the core focus of his art was, I insist, spiritual awakening. It doesn't really matters how the majority of practitioners see the art. The goal and means to attain it are there, available to those who want to really dive in the teachings of Aikido and of Ueshiba Morihei, the great saint of modern japan. Some of O-Sensei's words will sufice to put and end to this discussion, and to quicken your understanding of the core focus or the art, which, I humbly suggest, should be openly stated in the main article, since this noble website seeks the acuracy of an encyclopedia. In Ueshiba'a own words: "The Way of the Warrior has been misunderstood. It is not a means to kill and destroy others. Those who seek to compete and better one another are making a terrible mistake. To smash, injure, or destroy is the worst thing a human being can do. The real Way of a Warrior is to prevent such slaughter - it is the Art of Peace, the power of love"; "Loyalty and devotion lead to bravery. Bravery leads to the spirit of self-sacrifice. The spirit of self-sacrifice creates trust in the power of love" (here he is openly expressing that the final goal is to reach Love). This next one is very clear: "Budo is not a means of felling the opponent by force or by lethal weapons. Neither is it intended to lead the world to destruction by arms and other illegitimate means. True Budo calls for bringing the inner energy of the universe in order, protecting the peace of the world , as well as preserving, everything in nature in its right form". This next one couldn't be any clearer: "Aikido does not rely on weapons or brute force to succeed; instead we put ourselves in tune with the universe, maintain peace in our own realms, nurture life, and prevent death and destruction. The true meaning of the term "samurai" is one who serves and adheres to the power of love". I quoted this one before, but I think it is worth to reinforce: "Even though our path is completely different from the warrior arts of the past, it is not necessary to abandon totally the old ways. Absorb venerable traditions into this Art by clothing them with fresh garments (that is, with a different focus), and building on the classic styles to create better forms". Here, again, the core focus of the art is revealed: "The Way of a Warrior cannot be encompassed by words or in letters: grasp the essence and move on toward realization!". These next two quotes express buddhist ideas and terms on the goal of life: "A true warrior is always armed with three things: the radiant sword of pacification; the mirror of bravery, wisdom, and friendship; and the precious jewel of enlightenment"; "The totally awakened warrior (like he affirmed to be) can freely utilize all elements contained in heaven and earth. The true warrior learns how to correctly perceive the activity of the universe and how to transform martial techniques into vehicles of purity, goodness, and beauty. A warrior's mind and body must be permeated with enlightened wisdom and deep calm"...I mean, it could go on and on, but I'm sure that what the focus of Aikido is has been cleared. I resume my participation on this dicussion to this. I sincearly hope this was enough to convince you on what the core of Aikido is. The main page must declare it openly for the sake of credibility of this honorable virtual encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.11.108.65 (talk) 13:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Being so, unffortunately I will not recomend wikipedia as a reliable source on Aikido, since the informations on the article here are based on the views of practitioners, not on the views of authorities on the matter, such as the Honbu dojo, the living masters and the teachings of the founder. Allow me to coment on your topics: 1) "Ueshiba has been dead for almost 30 years, and the manner in which aikido is practiced by the majority of practitioners has changed substantially from how he was teaching aikido at the end of his life." This is partially true, since there are dojos in Japan that teach Aikido exactly as intended by the founder. 2) "The article accurately reflects the manner in which the vast majority of aikido practitioners are practicing aikido today, both physically and philosophically". The article should reflect the manner in which the founder practiced, both physically and philosophically, in order to remain true to the art. If a musician today does not know how to play the symphony of Mozart, his inability should not be the foundation on which musicians should stand - they should, of course, search extensively to play as close as possible as the original composition. Similarly, what Aikido is, how it should be practiced and its goal were well defined by the founder of the art. What I'm saying is that most people are practicing a diluted form of the art since its internationalization - this should be understood, adapting it to western taste, but the real teachings are still to be found on the hands of a few masters. Furthermore "Fighting is but a reflex" is also the opinion of the son of the founder, the late doshu Kissomaru Ueshiba, as expressed on his book: Learning to defend yourself its just a colateral effect, it represents only a mere 5% of what the art can offer". Who else is needed to hear besides the founder of the art and his son? The matter is not being taken seriously. I gave you solid arguments and the view of masters I collected through the years, not the opinion of practitioners neither mine, with the sole purpose of enhancing the quality of this site, yet these were taken lightly. It is sad that this website, at least on what concerns Aikido, is rather naive and can not be taken seriously, since an article on such a fine tradition of the east in given in the hands, with all due respect, of amateurs. What I'm saying is very simple. Adding a more solid text on the spiritual side of Aikido, to prevent the kind of coment above, which gave rise to this whole discussion. In Japan, Aikido is serious business, and that means austere physical and spiritual training with a supreme goal, not a Tuesday-Thursday hobby like it is done in the west. What Aikido is and should be, leave it to the founder of the art to define, not a handful of pracitioners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.11.108.65 (talk) 14:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
It is obvious you should ask the Honbu Dojo established by Morihei Ueshiba, which is responsible for more then 80% of the Aikidoka in the world, and which represent the teachings of Aikido as taught by the founder, and to whom the vast majority of his direct disciples are associated. Other organizations have other founders, and what they think of their organizations is up to them. I'm sure these other organizations have their reasons to practise in the way they believe it should be, for, in terms of physical techniques Aikikai is not the greatest. But I'm clearly discussing Ueshiba's Aikido and the way he taught, if you weren't able to notice that up to now. Ueshiba's Aikido and how he taught is what is to be discussed and remembered, all others are surely to be forgotten, since none of these other so-called founders of other so-called styles never came close to genious of Ueshiba Morihei. They were mere teachers, while Morihei was an enlightened being, a saint. I repeat, the emperor hymself gave him the title of O-Sensei. What other master, in the long history of Japan, had the same title? None. And this is what really expresses the the diference between him and the others. Nevertheless, I agree with you when you say "using "do" in names of martial arts was a postwar trend, basically implying that the purpose is no longer for use in actual warfare"...that's exactly was it is, but why chose a buddhist term? And I'm sure you'll find a whole lot of buddhist philosophy behind kendo, if you really dig it. But in O-Sensei teachings you don't have to dig. Shinto and buddhism are right there, in your face, from class number one to the end. He didn't want his art to be practised, as you said, in actual warfare. He dispised it. And you're right again when you say "Kisshōmaru, as head of Aikikai, can (could) only really speak for that organization and style. He had no authority over other groups" That's it! He was the authority to speak of Morihei Ueshiba's Aikido, and to be quite frank here, that's the only Aikido there is. All the other have some kind of identification previous to the word Aikido, such as Yoshinkan Aikido, Shin-shin toitsu Aikido, and so on. These are not being discussed here. It amazes me your inability to recognize the greatness of Ueshiba, whose teachings are timeless, comparable to the teachings of all great religions. All so-called styles have wristlocks and throws, some tougher, some smoother, derived from Daito. But theses were used, according to the founder, merely to purify the body and to enhance one's awareness of spirit within and without, merging and getting aquainted with it. Denying this is an open display of ignorance of Ueshiba Morihei O-Sensei's Aikido. I will refrain from further discussion, since, as an aikidoka, I'm not competing with none of you. I gave you solid arguments and the view of masters I collected through the years, not the opinion of practitioners neither mine, with the sole purpose of enhancing the quality of this site. It is not suprising to notice the rise of opinions such as the one stated by the fellow in the topic above this - of Aikido being a week art, that was not tested, and whose phylosophy is lesser then those of Kant and Confucious - as long as there are week reprentatives of the art, like the ones you've serched to write the article, and with poor texts like the one in the main page. The ancient methods of the samurai battlefields, the great spirit of O-Sensei, the Shinto deities and Lord Buddha are being mocked by ignorant people, and wikipedia is not contributing on its task of erradicating the darkness on the thoughts of such people. This being said, I withdraw myself definitely from this discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.186.180.178 (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad this discussion came to a fine conclusion my dear friend, and to see that you have a broad understanding of such a fine art. And even though most people may not (or do not want to) see it, you must admit that Ueshiba taught, above all else, about love, and so did the Christ. The comparison is inevitable since the core of their teachings is one and the same, and so it hapends with any other relevant master of mankind. What is the opinion of others concerning my Aikido, if people will take it seriously or not, really does not bother me. Thank you for being so patient with me Mr. Bradford! I sincearly hope that you and all aikidoka may discover the light of the love within, which is always shinning, and that you may forever identify yourselves with that love, for it is the greatest thing the human experience can offer, the greatest miracle in the universe - Love! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.73.11.115 (talk) 16:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
By the way, just out of curiosity, and to add some humor to this talk, "pools of sorrow waves of joy" is part of a song by the Beatles, entlitled "Across the Universe"...c´mon felows, even the Beatles knew that All you need is Love! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.21.141.200 (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I have been reading the 'Pools of sorrow' epistle and thinking about Dō.
Bradford made a good comment about how Ueshiba came to his understanding through a lifetime of experience. Each of us has their own lifetime of experience and comes to some understanding. I have thought of Dō not as a bible text of words but rather as a set of experiences planned by a master. I expect the experience of training to bring me some understanding. I do not accept his words ( because I probably cannot understand them) but I accept his training. I do not expect to arrive in exactly the same place as O sensei but I expect to develop as he would wish.
I think it is great that Bradford would develop an article about the origin, development and philosophy of Aikido but I think it should be a separate article in order to keep proportion in this article.
My karate sensei always said "Stop talking and do more repetitions." jmcw (talk) 09:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.