# Akido or Tai Jutsu?



## bobster_ice (May 12, 2006)

In your opinion, which art do you think would be the best for self defence?

All replies welcome!!

Bobby.


----------



## green meanie (May 12, 2006)

What's Tai Jutsu?


----------



## Jenna (May 12, 2006)

bobster_ice said:
			
		

> In your opinion, which art do you think would be the best for self defence?
> 
> All replies welcome!!
> 
> Bobby.


Hey there my fine young Northern Irish friend 

Well, grasshopper, the answer is not in the art. The answer is in you the practitioner of the art.

But ya know what, that's not a very big or clever answer now is it? Being an aikidoka, I am bound to say Aikido where EVERYBODY stays alive and all the other arts where you stay alive and everybody else dies. Of course that's a little cheeky maybe but shoot me I'm bulletproof anyway.
The core tenet of Aikido is harmony. Ai=harmony, ki=the great universal energy and the do=the way of. In Aikido I will aim to neutralise you as my attacker in such a way that you cannot enter my space to move or strike me. I will however endeavour not to harm you in so doing. I will use circularity, rotational momentum and centrifugal forces - that you've probably studied in your science classes - to spin you away. I will also upset your balance subtly using your own reaction to my impetus and use this to move you away or to drop you to the ground. Unfortunately, you will find when you attack me you will develop quite an affinity with the ground and fairly soon will realise that the ground is your inevitable home! If however you do not grasp this message as my attacker I may decide to manipulate your wrists, arms, shoulders and head in such a fashion to leave you no option but to concede. Of course I'm being tongue in cheek but it's all true really 

And I would be surprised if you heard any different from a practitioner of ANY other art. In fact, I would agree with anyone telling me that their art was good for SD because as I said at the beginning grasshopper, the answer is not in the art. The answer is in you the practitioner of the art.

You be good (and what're you still doing up anyway. What is it over there midnight, right? No school tommorow I s'pose yay )
Jenna


----------



## bobster_ice (May 12, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Hey there my fine young Northern Irish friend
> 
> Well, grasshopper, the answer is not in the art. The answer is in you the practitioner of the art.
> 
> ...


 
Yeah, no school(thank god). Only another year left an im outta of hell(also known as school


----------



## bobster_ice (May 12, 2006)

green meanie said:
			
		

> What's Tai Jutsu?


 
Tai jutsu/Tai jitsu(whatever you like to call it) is pretty much like akido in self defense wise but tai jutsu practioners have different beliefs than akido practioners.


----------



## Robert Lee (May 12, 2006)

bobster_ice said:
			
		

> Tai jutsu/Tai jitsu(whatever you like to call it) is pretty much like akido in self defense wise but tai jutsu practioners have different beliefs than akido practioners.


 I was of the thought that it was in direct relation to ninjutsu.  But rather then call it ninjutsu it is called tia jutsu


----------



## bobster_ice (May 13, 2006)

It is, in ninjutsu you learn tai jutsu, it is the self defence art of us ninjutsu practioners.


----------



## Robert Lee (May 13, 2006)

Then you would know it is not like Aikido And there is several weapon aspects to it also. My understanding is tai jutsu has been the added name for ninjutsu to allow it not only to evolve but not confine it. When you look at aikido it depending on the branch evolves more from aikijutsu. That may be closer to some of the tia jutsu application training. But still some what different. Is your training down from Hatsumi/ from Hatsumi. I know a local Tai jutsu instructor here That has trained and is ranked under Hatsumi He is a very humble person  you would not ever know he does any M/A as he keeps it quite and  trains students in a private group.


----------



## Henderson (May 13, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Well, grasshopper, the answer is not in the art. The answer is in you the practitioner of the art.


 
Well said.....once again!


----------



## bobster_ice (May 13, 2006)

Robert Lee said:
			
		

> Then you would know it is not like Aikido And there is several weapon aspects to it also. My understanding is tai jutsu has been the added name for ninjutsu to allow it not only to evolve but not confine it. When you look at aikido it depending on the branch evolves more from aikijutsu. That may be closer to some of the tia jutsu application training. But still some what different. Is your training down from Hatsumi/ from Hatsumi. I know a local Tai jutsu instructor here That has trained and is ranked under Hatsumi He is a very humble person you would not ever know he does any M/A as he keeps it quite and trains students in a private group.


 
It is when it comes to throwing and locks etc.


----------



## ginshun (May 15, 2006)

Taijutsu and Aikido are not very similar at all as I have been taught them.  There are some similar movements and joint locks, but I think this is probably true when comparing almost any two arts.  Granted, I am not exactly what you'd call an expert in either of them.  I have been in taijutsu for a little over a year and a half and I only tried Aikido for a few months.

I can only go from personal experience, but I think taijutsu is much better suited towards self defence, both in philosophy in practice.  The very essence of taijutsu is self preservation, at pretty much any cost.  What happens to the attacker happens, I dont think that aikido has the same philosophy.


----------



## Jenna (May 15, 2006)

ginshun said:
			
		

> I can only go from personal experience, but I think taijutsu is much better suited towards self defence, both in philosophy in practice. The very essence of taijutsu is self preservation, at pretty much any cost. What happens to the attacker happens, I dont think that aikido has the same philosophy.


Hey ginshun-san 

Well you're correct on this point. The intention of the aikidoka is not to destroy the attacker, though it's a lofty aim and certainly difficult to attain when someone wants you dead but still. It is what it is. It's about going with the flow instead of trying to create equal and opposite reactions to strikes which is particularly good if you are not built like a brick $h1thouse. Of course if you ARE built like that then so much the better, ha! 

But my point would be that this very harmonious balance that the aikidoka attempts to maintain places Aikido well for self-defence in the real world - the real world with CONSEQUENCES that is and not like some daft martial arts film - because where NO ONE is damaged or dead the legal repercussions for the aikidoka - and the potential for post-fight escalation by the attacker are MINIMISED. I'm not saying other arts aren't suited to self defence because I'd be even more silly than I look for suggesting that. Nope, I'm saying that Aikido by it's virtues places it well for self defence where the practitioner doesn't live his or her life on a HK film set.

OK, I sound like I'm getting all shouty but I'm not really - just gobbing into the spitoon like everybody else round here, LOL. For a this-art-vs-that-art question my usual advice is simply to take 'em both for a thorough test drive and see which fits best.

Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna


----------



## ginshun (May 16, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Hey ginshun-san
> 
> Well you're correct on this point. The intention of the aikidoka is not to destroy the attacker, though it's a lofty aim and certainly difficult to attain when someone wants you dead but still. It is what it is. It's about going with the flow instead of trying to create equal and opposite reactions to strikes which is particularly good if you are not built like a brick $h1thouse. Of course if you ARE built like that then so much the better, ha!
> 
> ...



I do understand your point, and in my taijutsu class we talk a lot about justification and using appropriate force for the given situation.  You should be able to justify yourself morally and legally before you do something to anyone. That being said, I still think that taijutsu is more suited to self defence than aikido is.  There is so much subtley to aikido techniques that I just think you would need to devote  A LOT of time to it before you are going to be able to use in a real situation.  Taijutsu has the same subtlety, but I think it also has techniques that are more "immediate" for lack of a better way to explain it. Maybe it is just less nice.  IMO I don't need to care about the wellfare of anyone that is trying to hurt me, and if they happen to get broken so be it.  Hope that makes at least a little bit of sense.  I know this oversimplifies both arts, but I am not writing a book here.

I am not trying to take anything away from aikido or claiming that taijutsu is the be all and end all in SD, just giving my slightly biased opinion.  

I am going to shut up now before I piss off anybody from either side.


----------



## Jenna (May 16, 2006)

ginshun said:
			
		

> I do understand your point, and in my taijutsu class we talk a lot about justification and using appropriate force for the given situation. You should be able to justify yourself morally and legally before you do something to anyone. That being said, I still think that taijutsu is more suited to self defence than aikido is. There is so much subtley to aikido techniques that I just think you would need to devote A LOT of time to it before you are going to be able to use in a real situation. Taijutsu has the same subtlety, but I think it also has techniques that are more "immediate" for lack of a better way to explain it. Maybe it is just less nice. IMO I don't need to care about the wellfare of anyone that is trying to hurt me, and if they happen to get broken so be it. Hope that makes at least a little bit of sense. I know this oversimplifies both arts, but I am not writing a book here.
> 
> I am not trying to take anything away from aikido or claiming that taijutsu is the be all and end all in SD, just giving my slightly biased opinion.
> 
> I am going to shut up now before I piss off anybody from either side.


Hey ginshun san 

You could be right about the time factor in Aikido. There is without doubt a noteable period after commencing stufy BEFORE techs and combinations and the subtleties of distance and movement knit together. But is largely true of all arts, yes? I am sure you were no proficient killer when you first began?? 

Ya know, I like how you look at it and yeah when it comes to SD firstly ANY art is better than no art at all and secondly the art should "fit" the practitioner and what they want to do. If I want my Aikido to allow me to pull opponents heads off and peer down their neckhole then I'm sure that could be done. If you wanted your Taijutsu to be more flowing through and less destructive to your opponent then you could do that by adapting your techs. And while there's no harm in the original question, these art-vs-art arguments are sometimes circular I am sure you will agree 

But it's all good. What you say makes sense to me - and when ARE you writing the book btw and what sort of book will it be?? Ha! LOL 

Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna


----------



## ginshun (May 16, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Hey ginshun san
> 
> You could be right about the time factor in Aikido. There is without doubt a noteable period after commencing stufy BEFORE techs and combinations and the subtleties of distance and movement knit together. But is largely true of all arts, yes? I am sure you were no proficient killer when you first began??
> 
> ...



I am sure that you are right that there is a time factor involved in all of the MA, I think my only point is that (in my experience anyway) that the time factor is going to be a lot longer with aikido than with many other arts.  And its not that other arts are simple, I think that be it aikido or taijutsu or **insert your MA here** you are still going to be learning new things about it, regardless of how long you are in them.  At least I hope so.

And I think your also right that anyone can adapt there techniques to be less destructive, there again is the idea of using techniques that are appropriate to the situation.  If your trying to subdue a drunken buddy who is hitting on your sister, gouging his eyes out probably isn't the best way to go about it.  Then again, I personally am not going to be worrirng about harming the other guy if I get jumped by a stranger in a dark alley somewhere.  In taijutsu we practice things both ways.

As far as the book goes, I'll let you know.  I plan on writing it somewhere between taking the girlfriend out for her birtday, picky the kid up from school, mowing the lawn and martial arts training.

You can expect it circa...never.


----------



## CuongNhuka (May 20, 2006)

hasn't this been posted about a trillion times? and every time haven't i complained? do i need to post my 'I hate to do this, but...' thread? seriously people?


----------



## bobster_ice (May 21, 2006)

Hmm...Maybe you do.


----------



## ginshun (May 22, 2006)

CuongNhuka said:
			
		

> hasn't this been posted about a trillion times? and every time haven't i complained? do i need to post my 'I hate to do this, but...' thread? seriously people?



Thats the way to make a positive contribution.  Nicely done.


----------



## Jenna (May 22, 2006)

ginshun said:
			
		

> Thats the way to make a positive contribution. Nicely done.


Hey ginshun-san  I gotta agree with ya. 

Now where did I put my jo I feel a slappy fit coming on, LOL 

Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna


----------



## ginshun (May 25, 2006)

Jenna said:
			
		

> Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
> Jenna



That opens up all kinds of possibilites, but I should probably just shut up before my pervy mind gets me in trouble.


----------



## CuongNhuka (May 25, 2006)

bobster_ice said:
			
		

> Hmm...Maybe you do.


 
then i will. and the sarcasim is unnessicary to those that were. questions like this say that one style is better then the other. which is not true. to imply that one is to demot all styles. 

now were is that thread....


----------



## bobster_ice (May 28, 2006)

Sorry for the sarcasm.



			
				CuongNhuka said:
			
		

> questions like this say that one style is better then the other. which is not true. to imply that one is to demot all styles.
> 
> now were is that thread....


 
Yes, I already know that, that is why I said in my question, in "your opinion" which do you think is best.


----------



## CuongNhuka (May 29, 2006)

I didn't mean you, I thought you were being serious. Both have there good and bad points, so it depends on:
A-the specicfics of what it is you are looking for;
B-your body type;
C-the quality of the school;
D-the price of the school and the commute; and
E-the community of the school.

These are what you should truely judge which school you go to. While oppions of those you trust are good, but it shouldn't decide were you go. Now if a freind whom you trust says "I used to train at school X, and there sensei acted grossly inapprotialy", then you shouldn't go to school X. Do reseach on the school and the students, take an intro class or two, meditate and decide were you think you should go.

John, by the way, how did that turn out?


----------

