# Aggression in aikido



## theletch1

I'm pressed for time so I'll get this one started and flesh it out as we go.  What role, if any, do ya'll feel aggression has in aikido.  I know, I know, it's the art of harmony.  I don't ever expect to reach the spiritual level of Ueshiba or Morita so I don't suspect that I'll ever be able to completely achieve mushin in a combat situation.  Therefore it is MHO that a certain level of aggression is needed for me to use technique without freezing.  The first step is, after all, entering.  Moving into an attacker requires a certain level of bravado if not outright aggression.

Agree?  Disagree?  Discuss! and feel free to bring friends from other arts 'cause the more input the better.


----------



## buddah_belly

Here's a little story from my experience (which is limited at best):

One fun night during randori I had a particularly resistant uke.  She grabbed my wrist and cranked it hard (as if she forgot I was nage).  It flippin' hurt bad.  I teared up it hurt so bad.  I stood there a moment, caught my breath, wiped the tears from my eyes, and boom I was ready to go.  The other uke looked at me with trepidation and then attacked.  From then until the end of randori I was throwing people around like ragdolls.  No hesitation.  It was crazy.  Afterwards, Brett (good uke) said I had a fire in my eyes that he'd never seen before.  I was a little freaked out about the whole think because it seemed anger motivated but Sensei and I had a long talk about it and he's view was that it was "a pure expression of ki"...not to get all mystical but his take on it was that by my stopping to breathe and clear my head of everything, my aikido rocked because it just happened.  

Was my experience motivated out of anger...possibly.  It worked though.


----------



## amir

Aikido (and any other serious M.A. I have heard about) works best if you are cool and keep your control. 

Entering should not be an agressive act, it should be done with calm resolve, leaving your raging emotions as a source of energy while you surf on the flow and use it for your energy, just like you use the aggressors power.


Can such calm be reached "for real"?  I don't know, have not been there for a long time. It sure is not easy, but neither Aikido nor Aiki were the skill of the average person. 


Amir


----------



## charyuop

I don't know what you mean with aggression. Too many times there is a very thin line, IMHO, dividing aggression and intent.
As Uke I try to give 100% intent on my attacks and to do that I have to set my mind that I really want to hit you (actually for Sensei I wanna "kill" you coz a simple hit you wouldn't be enough hee hee he's too good). Grabbing a wrist is not just plain grab and squeeze, it is more like grab with the intention of attacking the center and crush Nage into imself so that you create an opening to punch with the other hand. Is there aggressiveness in doing that? I think there is.
As Nage your main job is connect to Uke and move relating to Uke, with Uke or moving Uke keeping that connection. Even there tho I think there must be a strong intent. If as Nage you get grabbed and you want to throw an Atemi to open a technique, you can't simply put your hand in front of Uke's face and still concentrate on the grab part. Your whole intent is through Uke's center, that Atemi has the intent to enter into Uke and not just say "hey look at my hand". Even in this case I see aggression being part of the intent.
BUT...if I start doing iriminage, for example, and at a certain point I feel resistance from Uke, IMHO in that case the line between intent and aggression becomes thicker.

That is just my point of view, maybe wrong maybe not, but that is the way I feel MY Aikido.


----------



## morph4me

> I don't know what you mean with aggression. Too many times there is a very thin line, IMHO, dividing aggression and intent.



I think this is correct, the term aggression may be a little strong, I think intent is a better choice. To me, aggression brings to mind the idea of tension, which is detrimental to flow and makes Aiki more difficult.  Intent, on the other hand, brings to mind a calm resolve to accomplish a goal, which seems to me much more in line with what Aikido is supposed to be.


----------



## theletch1

Yep, intent is very much better suited for what I had in mind.  Instead of aggression think more along the lines of intent without the slightest hesitation.


----------



## Yari

Agression got me thinking.... but intent is completly different. Intent should be pratice with 100% intent, but also 90 % and 80 % .... down to 1 % intent.

And the intent should be learn to read and understood, so you don't do a 100% technique on a 1% intent.

/yari


----------



## charyuop

And I must admit that a 100% intent is not so easy to do. It was right last week that Sensei told me that during my attack in doing Ikkyo he didn't feel my intent all the way through. He told me that feel the intent up to a certain point, but when Ikkyo starts taking effect on my arm he said I just let go and my intent disappear.
I think intent is something that need practicing just like a technique or Ukemi, since it is not something we have inside us.
There was a Sensei who wrote a message on a message board once. He said he feel the real intent in his students when they are called out on the mat coz he has to demonstrate a technique, because the student doesn't know what it is gonna happen. But when the student knows what is gonna happen, the Sensei said the intent tends to fade away and the student, not intentionally, tends to flow with the technique losing the intent of the attack.


----------



## Xue Sheng

This is an interesting topic and I can not really discuss it much form the POV form Aikido since I do not nor have I ever trained Aikido I am a CMA guy (Mainly Taiji) so take this for what it is worth but it would seem to me that aggression should be part of any martial art. 

Not necessarily from the POV of the person that is applying the techniques and philosophies of Aikido but for the POV of how to deal with an aggressive attacker. Attacks are aggressive outside of the dojo so some exposure to aggression should be part of the training otherwise how will you handle it once confronted with it? How will you stay calm and non-aggressive and have any percentage of intent if you have never faced it to know how to react?


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Xue Sheng said:


> This is an interesting topic and I can not really discuss it much form the POV form Aikido since I do not nor have I ever trained Aikido I am a CMA guy (Mainly Taiji) so take this for what it is worth but it would seem to me that aggression should be part of any martial art.
> 
> Not necessarily from the POV of the person that is applying the techniques and philosophies of Aikido but for the POV of how to deal with an aggressive attacker. Attacks are aggressive outside of the dojo so some exposure to aggression should be part of the training otherwise how will you handle it once confronted with it? How will you stay calm and non-aggressive and have any percentage of intent if you have never faced it to know how to react?


 
Anger Management!

I think Xue has a really good point to look at.  When practicing it is obviously advantages at times to work with someone who has some *anger, aggression* going.  That way in the real world you won't be surprised by it.  Oh and yes this type of training can be dangerous because the lines can blur quickly. (it is not always safe)  However it can be really, really rewarding. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Intent is the key! 

As to intent.  Well intent should be a part of all training and your intentions will definately reflect in how you train.  I have *serious intentions* when training or teaching sometimes that manifests as scary to my fellow practitioner's, students.  This in turn helps them to grow.  Just some food for thought!


----------



## Xue Sheng

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Anger Management!
> 
> I think Xue has a really good point to look at. When practicing it is obviously advantages at times to work with someone who has some *anger, aggression* going. That way in the real world you won't be surprised by it. Oh and yes this type of training can be dangerous because the lines can blur quickly. (it is not always safe) However it can be really, really rewarding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intent is the key!
> 
> As to intent. Well intent should be a part of all training and your intentions will definately reflect in how you train. I have *serious intentions* when training or teaching sometimes that manifests as scary to my fellow practitioner's, students. This in turn helps them to grow. Just some food for thought!


 
Not necessarily training with angry people but someone that is willing to be aggressive for the purposes of training, and yes intent is very important.

I have worked with people in Taiji doing push hands, which can be very non-aggressive, by attacking. It is part of taiji actually and part of push hands training, if nothing is happening and you see no opening or advantage attack and see how they react. Step outside of the drill, if you will, and surprise them. If you are in a real world application and find yourself having to redirect or absorb an attack if you have never been attacked you are lost. And if you have never attacked you are again lost because after redirect or absorb there is attack. Throw them off balance and attack. 

You don't necessarily need to be angry just aggressive. Usually the person tenses up and has no idea what to do, unless of course I am training with my Sifu who stays relaxed and usually uses my attacker to his advantage and throws me around like a rag doll. 

My point is that if you stay within the drill and stay within the parameters of setup for training of necessary speed and power you never are surprised by your opponent and when dealing with aggression outside of whatever school you train in you are going to hesitate so you really need to know how to deal with surprise. 

If the attacker or opponent comes at you with a calm mind and non-aggressive approach, that is great for them but not necessarily great for you in the face of a real live attacker who is, at least in part, depending on surprise and aggression to defeat you. If you can stay calm in the face of that then you are doing much better than if you tense up, hesitate or stop to think. 

But I do fully agree that if you are not careful the lines can blur rather quickly, someone gets angry and then things change and they can forget this is training not fighting.


----------



## morph4me

I think there might be some confusion in regards to the OP, Jeff you can clear this up. I read the OP as a question about aggression in the defender not the attacker. I just basically assumed ( I know, I shouldn't assume :duh that in order to attack, aggression was a given.

I like aggresive attackers, it give me more to work with :EG:, but I prefer to defend with intent, and stay as calm and relaxed as possible.


----------



## theletch1

Not really confusion so much as a slight divergence of the topic.  The OP was, indeed, on the part of the defender.  BUT...the point that Xue and Brian were making about defending against an aggressive attacker fits well into what I had in mind.  Defending with intent is one thing in the dojo when you know that your training partner isn't there to hurt you.  Defending with intent on the street when someone truly is coming at you to hurt you is another all together.  I really feel that attempting to do irimi (entering, blending) with the same "intensity of intent" that you use in the dojo is a little on the dangerous side unless you've trained as Brian was discussing...with someone who is very aggressive.  It's a very grey idea that I've had bouncing in my head.  It's sorta how much heart do you put into the defense or are you entering with the intent to do whatever needs to be done without hesitation or thought to how much damage you could do to your attacker.  Am I making sense here or is it another case of too many diesel fumes again this week?:boing2:

Brian and Xue, I started another thread in this sub dealing with sparring in aikido (the karate/tkd type) and tried it out this weekend with the one partner I trust the most...my wife.  The aggression that you see in that situation is so much more than what I've ever seen in traditional randori that it got me thinking about the "aggression" of the defender in this situation.  You two have really helped me flesh out what I had in mind here.  Thanks.


----------



## morph4me

I actually think that training with intent in the dojo is what you should be doing anyway, the attacker supplies the energy and determines the level of defense. The intent of the defend should always be the same, the level of aggression of the attacker changes.

As charyuop said  





> He said he feel the real intent in his students when they are called out on the mat coz he has to demonstrate a technique, because the student doesn't know what it is gonna happen. But when the student knows what is gonna happen, the Sensei said the intent tends to fade away and the student, not intentionally, tends to flow with the technique losing the intent of the attack.


 
That's because the attacker knew what was going to happen and didn't want it to happen too hard :EG:


----------



## theletch1

morph4me said:


> I actually think that training with intent in the dojo is what you should be doing anyway, the attacker supplies the energy and determines the level of defense. The intent of the defend should always be the same, the level of aggression of the attacker changes.
> 
> *That's because the attacker knew what was going to happen and didn't want it to happen too hard* :EG:


Been there, done that.  I was McCraw Sensei's uke wed. nite, zigged when I should have zagged.  Thursday the lady at the front desk of the gym asked me if I'd been in an accident!  My nose is black and blue.  What a blast.  I need a good punch in the face now and then to remind me that I can take a punch in the face.

I like the reminder of matching uke's intent/level of aggression.  If we translate that to the mental side of the altercation as well as the physical side then I'm closer to getting to the meat of what I'm talking about.


----------



## jks9199

theletch1 said:


> Been there, done that.  I was McCraw Sensei's uke wed. nite, zigged when I should have zagged.  Thursday the lady at the front desk of the gym asked me if I'd been in an accident!  My nose is black and blue.  What a blast.  I need a good punch in the face now and then to remind me that I can take a punch in the face.
> 
> I like the reminder of matching uke's intent/level of aggression.  If we translate that to the mental side of the altercation as well as the physical side then I'm closer to getting to the meat of what I'm talking about.


Both sides of this issue are important.

When you're practicing as a defender -- and if you're actually defending yourself -- you need to be in control of your emotions.  That way, you can use any anger you feel appropriately to focus and direct your responses.  The Star Wars "dark side of the force" view that any anger is bad is too simplistic; you can channel anger into an effective response, so long as you remain in control and aren't simply along for the ride.

When you're practicing as an attacker, you need to put some real intent, aggression or "oomph" to use a technical term into the attack.  Otherwise, your partner isn't going to have a real experience, and won't build good reactions.  Not only do the ranges have to be reasonable -- but their has to be that undercurrent, or it won't work well.  That's the sort of thing that separates some of the adrenal stress training from a lot of the padded suit stuff...  It's not easy to learn to turn on and off, but once you do, your training will really leap ahead.


----------



## buddah_belly

jks9199 said:


> The Star Wars "dark side of the force" view that any anger is bad is too simplistic; you can channel anger into an effective response, so long as you remain in control and aren't simply along for the ride.


 

The night my little experience happened, Sensei jokingly said, "Wow you really tapped in to the dark side of the force tonight"...he was trying to be funny but it upset me more because I really struggled with the fear that what I had done had been out of anger when in fact it had been properly channeled into an "effective response".


----------



## kaizasosei

aggression could be defined as a purely mental stance or one could deem certain behavior or physical actions to be aggressive.
  aggression can be a form of energy like being happy, worrying or being sad or scared.   
usually, when people think of aggression, we think of the negative aspect.  indeed, an aggressively unforgiving attitude is not a sign of the highest realms of aiki, however, live blades have been known to kill people.  likewise, aikido ist can take the entire balance of an opponent.
 aggression could also be seen as part of the energy of the human being that needs to be chanelled in a certain way. 

too much aggression will cause the movements to be too commited and extreme losing sight of the opponents energy. at that point, one may miss ones mark and end up pushing thin air.  
 all people have aiki and  different people have different  understandings irrespective of having any experience with the formal art of aikido.

from a human point of view, any ma actions that are not justified are not perfect. it is sometimes not easy justifying just WHY one person has to be throwing another around in the first place, or why? someone has to destroy another persons body with ma moves...

one must remember always, that aikido and combat is not the same thing.  combat is simple strike that is effective.  aikido is the art of moving in all things. actually, raw physical combat is not a high level of aikido in my opinion.   

j


----------



## theletch1

kaizasosei said:


> one must remember always, that aikido and combat is not the same thing. combat is simple strike that is effective. aikido is the art of moving in all things. actually, raw physical combat is not a high level of aikido in my opinion.
> 
> j


I agree to a great deal with this statement.  Raw, physical combat is, indeed, a lower form of aikido as the precepts of aikido make it an art primarily for spiritual development.  If you find yourself in an altercation (physical) then all of your aikido has already failed you.  I say this when teaching kids all the time.  The ugly truth of the matter is that we live in a dangerous world and may well find ourselves in a position to use the raw and physical side of aikido to defend ourselves.  Combat, however, is much more than a simple strike that is effective.  Were it truly that simple there wouldn't be a myriad of different arts devoted to combat.  While it is a great thing to eschew combat for the sake of spirituality it is a bit naive to believe that combat is anything less than life or death and should be given the same attention as the development of the spirit.  My concern is that the development of the spirit will subdue the human trait of aggression to the point that when concentrated intent is needed in a SD situation it just isn't there. Yes, I know that my ultimate goal should be spiritual enlightenment but I am honest enough with myself to know that that just isn't going to happen for many many years if ever.  In the mean time I must concentrate on perfecting the physical and in that perfection hope to find a key to the spiritual.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Please excuse the intusion form the cma guy again :asian:

Spirituality in the martial arts, any martial art, is a tough topic for me. My stand is always that it is intrinsic, not overt and if you want spirituality go to church not a martial arts school. But with that said I can also see from my meager exposure to aikido and my reading of some of Ueshiba that spirituality is a big thing in aikido. But again I do not feel it is overt or in any way separate form the honest training of aikido and that honest training is teaching you to fight. But I have also said one of the things about TMA that make it different for Sports MA is that you train to fight and hope to never have to use it also a bit of a spiritual way of thinking in my opinion

But I sometime think that many are focusing so much (to much) on the path of spirituality that they forget to enjoy life, they forget they are training a martial art and I do not think that is what Ueshiba was talking about in anything he wrote. Again I could be wrong, I am a CMA guy not an aikido practitioner. And since I feel spirituality is intrinsic to many martial arts then good hard, honest and correct training of that martial art is also part of that spiritual journey.

My taiji sifu has been training taiji and only taiji for over 50 years he has never once discussed spirituality with me, but then I have never asked nor do I intend to. He has also not discussed it with anyone else in class even when they did ask. He tells them to focus on training, breathing the forms and that is as far as he has ever taken it. He has discussed proper application and proper push hands and let me tell you when you get just one of those applications right (the taji way) it is a bit of an epiphany, or at least it is to me. I would think that in aikido it would be much the same. 

Also my sifu has said he has never in his life ever felt threatened and he was teaching Taiji, a Chinese martial art, in Thailand in the fifties. This means he was likely challenged more than once and he came to the US in the early 60s too, He has always trusted in his skill and training and to me that frees you up for a lot of other stuff including the pursuit of spirituality if that is what you want. For that matter feeling comfortable and safe in your own skin in and of itself would seem to me be a very large part of spirituality.

So I guess this is a long way to say that if you truly train your art, not just go through the motions, you are also working on spirituality as well.

I see this in taiji all the time this focus on spirituality and enlightenment and a complete aversion to all things martial art and or a complete removal from things martial art and then in some cases a complete disgust with taiji because they have trained it for a few weeks, months, years and they are still not enlightened. And yet they are not training the entire art they are actually training a very small part of it and from what I have seen, read and heard of aikido I think if you are not real careful you can go the same route as taiji is sadly going and loose the martial aspect all together and I for one would be very sad if that were to happen. And here is the kicker, lose the martial aspect (the agression) and you loose the art and the spirituallity that comes with it.

Just as a side note: My taijiquan sifu pretty much does not care about any other martial art outside of taiji save one, Aikido. He is fascinated with Morihei Ueshiba but beyond that he does not care about any other martial art other than taiji.


----------



## kaizasosei

i also heard this said sometimes.  i don't think aikido can ever completely lose  its martial aspect.  i think mostly because so much of life itself is very martial.  
the phenomenon of aiki or aikijutsu could be seen as a kind of spirituality as well as something like bodybuilding and training of economic movements.
this is not a sideeffect of some sort, it is part of the entire subject of aiki and the study of the self.
if anything is a sideeffect, then it would be the combat or rather the violence and destruction that lies latent within the principles of the techniques. 





j


----------



## theletch1

kaizasosei said:


> i also heard this said sometimes. i don't think aikido can ever completely lose its martial aspect. i think mostly because so much of life itself is very martial.
> the phenomenon of aiki or aikijutsu could be seen as a kind of spirituality as well as something like bodybuilding and training of economic movements.
> this is not a sideeffect of some sort, it is part of the entire subject of aiki and the study of the self.
> if anything is a sideeffect, then it would be the combat or rather the violence and destruction that lies latent within the principles of the techniques.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> j


That's very much dependent upon the individual aikido-ka.  Some study with the spiritual aspects uppermost in mind and view the martial aspects as a path to the spiritual.  Others study with the efficient and effective use of the physical philosophy of aikido uppermost and find the spiritual along the way.  I know that I fall into the latter of the two.  I began the study of aikido after training in hard styles and with a VERY practical self defense mindset.  I have found that the spiritual side of the art has just happened as I've come to better understand how to make the techniques work.  That's one of the great things about the art.  You just can't make the techniques work.  You eventually have to surrender and allow them to work.  When you translate that to everyday life you begin to understand the spritual side of the art a little better.  It's very much like Xue was saying in his post.  The spiritual is intrinsic to the art.  If you stick with the art long enough the spiritual will find you.


----------



## tempus

Makes me wonder if I am missing something in my training.  I find no spirtuaility in the martial arts nor do I seek it.  I strive to perfect my technique and push my body past its limits, so if I am forced into a situation I may survive the alteraction by either standing over my attacker or being able to flee.

I hope that if I am ever in an alteraction I am agressive enough to use what is in my arsenal to survive or protect those around me.  Pure rage is bad, but to me agression can be a good thing since it allows one to push pass their limitations.

Just my 2 cents.

-Gary


----------



## theletch1

Gary, I know where you're coming from.  The mindset with which you approached your post was the impetus for my original post in this thread.  As for the spiritual aspect of the art, well, it's there *if you decide* to walk that part of the path.  For me the spiritual side of the path has more to do with following my own code of honor (bushido if you will) in daily life and trying not to clash with others but attempting to blend with them.  Not everyone wants or even needs full spiritual enlightenment for aikido or any other martial art to be effective.  Keep in mind that the above is the opinion of one single person and your mileage will vary.  There are others here that feel 180 degrees different than I do and that's great.  As you move toward the perfection of your technique you will gain self confidence and this changes the way you interact with others.  If you start to analyze how you deal with others I bet you'll start to see that you're getting more of the spiritual side than you think.  Having the confidence to change the way you deal with others will help build the aggression or concentrated intent that we've been dealing with throughout this thread.


----------



## Xue Sheng

tempus said:


> Makes me wonder if I am missing something in my training. I find no spirtuaility in the martial arts nor do I seek it. I strive to perfect my technique and push my body past its limits, so if I am forced into a situation I may survive the alteraction by either standing over my attacker or being able to flee.
> 
> I hope that if I am ever in an alteraction I am agressive enough to use what is in my arsenal to survive or protect those around me. Pure rage is bad, but to me agression can be a good thing since it allows one to push pass their limitations.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> -Gary


 
You are not missing anything if you are not looking for it. As Jeff said



theletch1 said:


> As for the spiritual aspect of the art, well, it's there *if you decide* to walk that part of the path.


 
I do Taiji and I have been training with my sifu for over 13 years and he has been doing Taiji for over 50 years and if you want to see a bunch of people looking for spirituality go to just about any Taiji class these days. But yet I do not generally talk about it at all in any class I have been in and I did not talk about it to my students even when I taught. And my sifu as far as his views on spirituality are concerned I honestly have no idea what they are. In East Asia they do not compartmentalize things like we do in the west, Taoism is part of Taiji and that is all you need to say, it is not a Taoist practice it does not mean you are a Taoist nor does is mean you have a clue as to anything as it concerns a Taoist ritual, it is just part of Taiji. And I would guess (and this is just a guess) It is much the same with Aikido and Shinto. Basically what is is and there is no real separation or difference.

But I also feel that if you do it long enough at some level it does affect you on a Spiritual level but again it may be so subtle that you may not even realize it.


----------



## charyuop

I admit that I am lucky. In my dojo not only spirituality, but also words like Ki/Chi are very seldom used. I think that if I had ended up into a dojo too much on spiritual side (let's say a Ki society-like style?) I would have probably quit Aikido almost immediately. I live my Aikido 100% the Martial way and with that I don't mean that I go out seeking for an occasion to fight someone. I live the martiality as in my knowledge that the tools Sensei is providing me (don't care if effective the Art or effective me or not effective neither one) are tools capable to take someone else's life. Even tho I am taught a way to get out of a (hopefully never happening) fight with the knowledge of how to do it without harming someone, at the same time there must be the awareness that a slight error (or accident) in using one of those tools might result in a fatal outcome.


----------



## kaizasosei

i think all people are spiritual.  just that some spirits are better than others.  and ultimately, it's about knowing oneself and others.

j


----------



## theletch1

kaizasosei said:


> i think all people are spiritual. just that some spirits are better than others. and ultimately, it's about knowing oneself and others.
> 
> j


I couldn't agree more.  Everyone is does indeed have a level of spirituality within them.  I think the biggest difference is how well each of us come to know ourselves and having done that how well we deal with what we see.  What has truly helped me develop the concentrated intent that we've been discussing in this thread is learning what I am willing to do to another human being to protect myself and others.  This is something many of us take for granted and in so doing set ourselves up for defeat when the stuff really hits the fan.  Or worse, we lose all control and truly damage someone far beyond what a spiritualy complete person would have done.


----------



## kaizasosei

that's why i think atemi has also spiritual aspects to it and is so important even without actual striking.  
it's a simple matter of strategy.  at a certain point, i think in wc one calls this critical distance, one sometimes must hit first or else forfeit ones security as well as ma effectivity-at least the logic of equality at the most complete dominace both mental and physical.

j


----------



## ejaazi

IMHO, you have to walk the middle path. You need to be aggresive, without using muscle. You need to be aggresive, but at the same time calm. Your body should be aggresive, but your mind and spirit should remain calm. This way, you can maintain control of yourself, which is a necessary aspect of being able to truly execute aikido techniques.


----------



## Yari

ejaazi said:


> IMHO, you have to walk the middle path. You need to be aggresive, without using muscle. You need to be aggresive, but at the same time calm. Your body should be aggresive, but your mind and spirit should remain calm. This way, you can maintain control of yourself, which is a necessary aspect of being able to truly execute aikido techniques.


 
Interesseting.... how can this bee done, specially: _to be aggresive, without using muscle_


Could you elaborate on this, please?

/yari


----------



## kaizasosei

you have to move really effectively according to the opponent and know how to attack weak spots of balance.  if you try to do shihonage by holding the wrist, it will not work  but by holding the hand, pressure is causes on the wrist and if the opponent resists, he finds he cannot because it is putting more pressure on wrist.  i used to often do shiho without using the hand.  but it is different, and i was either lucky or tacky that i even had success.  im grateful to some people of aikido for showing me this.  it's not just a technique, it's an example of a principle.  there are more, like the trick of tension and relaxation.  getting power from relaxation.  like if one side of a tug of war were to leg go, the other side falls-logic.  the coordination of left and right as well as the powerful implementation of whole body movements. 
  as far as attacking weak points of balance or atemi goes, this can only be  understood with lots of experience-but it's probably the most selfexplanitory.

j


----------



## ejaazi

Yari said:


> Interesseting.... how can this bee done, specially: _to be aggresive, without using muscle_
> 
> 
> Could you elaborate on this, please?
> 
> /yari


 

It means to be certain in your movements, but when don't let the attack make you "muscle up." When you "muscle up" you  tend to use force. Keep your center down and use your breath power and not muscle. Your aggression should be your state of mind as well as the personality that you are projecting. It is not something that should be shown in a physical aspect. Your mere presence is what should be perceived as aggressive by the person who is attacking you. The attacker will not perceive that if you try and use brute force.


----------



## Yari

ejaazi said:


> ... Your mere presence is what should be perceived as aggressive by the person who is attacking you. .....


 
Ok, This I can relate to, understand and agree too.

/yari


----------



## tempus

But could you not add muscle and force at the end of your technique.  Sort of like throwing a punch.  You are relaxed when throwing the punch, but you gain power as you turn your hips and just at the end you make the fist to drive all that power thru.

So in theory if I blend relaxed into a technique could I not take it up a noch at the end with strength and force if necessary?  Assuming that it is a technique that is torqing a body part or slamming a person and not a throw.  

Just throwing this out there.


----------



## kaizasosei

the more power the better. 
however, the more power you put, the harder it is to stop, reverse or control.  and that's meaning just physical power without going past reasonable limits because of desire to immediately exert physical force. 
putting in force and roughness without concentration is dangerous because if force is reversed to human/spiritual level, one will suddenly realize how little commitment the spirit has and how over commited the body is.  
i think all movements are aiki.  so, any effective momovement is in some way using aiki just as all universal bodies abide by certain rules.  that is sortof stretching the meaning a bit,

 i mean, simply put, it looks bad and probably isn't that great when techniques dont work.  if you force them, it also might not be the best.  -the ways of aikido are not about getting the person down, but they are the study of the ways of how to....and those ways work very effectively if studied and understood.  

also, there are in my opinion very deep meanings behind the techniques. the movements have the potential to disarm without injuring. that it a noble thing to be kind to even your enemy and requires much higher level of skill than simply breaking and killing them first chance you get only to finish off with a double eyegouge on their carcass.
 not only are the movements of aikido, the movements of the sword or spear fighting+mutodori, they are also ways of strengthening the body.  
if one practices aikido properly, ones physical power also increases.  hands become strong and controlled like the hands of a swordsman or weaponweilder, movements smooth, but most importantly, the physical health and spititual power comes from training the tanden.

ueshibasensei said that aikido is  a meant to be a way of creating harmony with our surroundings.

j


----------



## morph4me

tempus said:


> But could you not add muscle and force at the end of your technique. Sort of like throwing a punch. You are relaxed when throwing the punch, but you gain power as you turn your hips and just at the end you make the fist to drive all that power thru.
> 
> So in theory if I blend relaxed into a technique could I not take it up a noch at the end with strength and force if necessary? Assuming that it is a technique that is torqing a body part or slamming a person and not a throw.
> 
> Just throwing this out there.


 
You can, but it isn't necessary, and serves no real purpose. All it does is expends energy, it adds nothing to the technique.



kaizasosei said:


> the more power the better.
> however, the more power you put, the harder it is to stop, reverse or control. and that's meaning just physical power without going past reasonable limits because of desire to immediately exert physical force.
> putting in force and roughness without concentration is dangerous because if force is reversed to human/spiritual level, one will suddenly realize how little commitment the spirit has and how over commited the body is.
> i think all movements are aiki. so, any effective momovement is in some way using aiki just as all universal bodies abide by certain rules. i mean, simply put, it looks bad and probably isn't that great when techniques dont work. if you force them, it also might not be the best. -the ways of aikido are not about getting the person down, but they are the study of the ways of how to....and those ways work very effectively if studied and understood.


 
I agree, aikido is about control, anything that you do to to compromise that control, makes your aikido less effective.




kaizasosei said:


> also, there are in my opinion very deep meanings behind the techniques. the movements have the potential to disarm without injuring. that it a noble thing to be kind to even your enemy and requires much higher level of skill than simply breaking and killing them first chance you get only to finish off with a double eyegouge on their carcass.


 
Here's where I disagree. I am not that noble or gracious when someone is trying to hurt me, I'll do what's necessary to end the conflict with the least amount of harm to myself and my loved ones, if that means crippling or killing my attacker and taking the consequences, so be it. Since my attacker isn't worrying about being noble and caring about my well being, I see no reason to concerm myself about his.




kaizasosei said:


> ueshibasensei said that aikido is a meant to be a way of creating harmony with our surroundings.
> j


 
I believe that was a change from his earlier beliefs, and after he found religion.


----------



## kaizasosei

that's true.  if one had ultimate control, one wouldnt have to worry about anything.  however, we still have to control ourselves to some degree.
who can claim to have 100% control over every situation?  probably noone.  but we can train to become better and better with hard work and experience.

i don't know if ueshibasenseis aikido changed that much.  actually, there were aspects of his art that were more internal in the beginning i think.  becoming more physical with time.. however that shift was due to spiritual matters because there is so much resistance and fear in the world.
once very advanced, ueshibasensei could lead you around with his body and eyes alone, but you wouldnt want to fool around with him i think.

the greatest change really, i believe, was description of aiki and aikido.  ueshibasensei realized that many people were totally missing the point. -upon rethinking, perfect analysis many ideas of aikido were redefined to include the larger scheme of things and the undeniable bond between people.   see whilst people like ueshibasensei are the real deal that came up with these effective techniques, and then made them into and art.  but aikido doesnt stop once one leaves the dojo. it is part of every human interaction.  many people think aikido is just for the dojo. but aikido is for life.  the dojo is just the practice.

but even in practice someone can be injured or get insulted and want to fight another.  or worse yet, become insulted and not want to fight or better yet, make up.  ueshibasensei said (hope im not misquoting too badly)- something along the lines of.  ' ready yourself and then invite the enemy to attack.'- to me that sounds like someone in control.



j


----------



## theletch1

I'm reminded of the old saw "A criminal is looking for his next victim, not his next challenge".  Being able to be in self control and exhibit the "aggression" or "concentrated intent" that you feel and should manifest while in the dojo will most assuredly help your interaction with others.  The spiritual and the physical are, as so many have pointed out, intertwined in the martial arts and most of us really don't see the extent of it.  Being able to enter into an attackers movement with intent and effect a technique directly corelates to being able to move into a meeting with a client/boss/co-worker with confidence.

The divergences that many have taken in this thread regarding where O'Sensei was going, had gone with aikido is the reason for the myriad of sub-styles of aikido.  Those of us that study NGA don't trace our lineage back to Ueshiba but to Shioda Morita.  My understanding is that Morita Sensei never attempted to style-ize his flavor of aikido as a path to spiritual enlightenment but rather as practical self defense.  The spirituality was inherent and was to be found by each individual student.  That difference between Ueshiba and Morita is profound and the very reason that each of us chose the style that we did.  The differences in hombu styles are profound as well and that is why you'll find folks perfectly happy with Shodokan aikido and others happy with ki aikido.  Regardless of the path each of us should be able to develop that feeling of intent that will see us through an altercation.  I'm of the same mind as Morph in a self defense situation.  My intent is to do whatever is needed and not lose any sleep over it.  Others hold their attacker's safety in as high esteem as they hold their own safety and that is, indeed, a higher path.  I'm not there and really have no intention of actively trying to get there.


----------



## ejaazi

tempus said:


> But could you not add muscle and force at the end of your technique.


 
Not muscle, but power. When you muscle you tend to tense up your whole body. But when you use power, that comes from breathing and directing your energy to a certain point. When you throw a "power" punch, the power is directed to your fist and through your attacker, but the rest of your body is not tense. Hope this clears it up.


----------



## Yari

tempus said:


> But could you not add muscle and force at the end of your technique. Sort of like throwing a punch. You are relaxed when throwing the punch, but you gain power as you turn your hips and just at the end you make the fist to drive all that power thru.
> 
> So in theory if I blend relaxed into a technique could I not take it up a noch at the end with strength and force if necessary? Assuming that it is a technique that is torqing a body part or slamming a person and not a throw.
> 
> Just throwing this out there.


 
Yes you could, but in a sense you would be escalating the situation, by using more force than nesacerry. On another note one could argue that by using more force than nessecary your using up your amount of energy to keep going if there are more opponents.

In the end it really is a question of what you believe and how you want things to be.


/yari


----------



## Yari

morph4me said:


> I agree, aikido is about control, anything that you do to to compromise that control, makes your aikido less effective.


 
Not disagreeing, but thinking that you start off taken control of yourself, and then letting go, so you don't have any control, but let your natural self flow with it. thus your techniques will become even more effective ( in "harmony" with the attacker).

/Yari


----------



## morph4me

Yari said:


> Not disagreeing, but thinking that you start off taken control of yourself, and then letting go, so you don't have any control, but let your natural self flow with it. thus your techniques will become even more effective ( in "harmony" with the attacker).
> 
> /Yari


 
Absolutely, if you don't control yourself, you can't relax enough to assess the attack, feel Uke's energy, and respond approriately, which leads to the flow and harmony. I see that as contol, can you explain what you mean by letting go? It seems to me that if you let go of the control, you become tense and lose effectiveness, but I think it may be a matter of semantics, not a disagreement.


----------



## Yari

theletch1 said:


> ..... "A criminal is looking for his next victim, not his next challenge". ......


 
I like that..... But you have to remember that not all criminals are "normal" people. Some poeple are instutionalized (sp?), because they don't function in normal social standards: autiske, asebergers (sp?), and they aren't looking for either a victim or challenger. Not refuging your statement, just adding to it.

/Yari


----------



## kaizasosei

i wasn't trying to make any real big statements.  i still havent changed my mind about aiki, but i realize that the subject of spirituality is really complicated.  i can see if someone would want to separate for teaching purposes.  after all, everyone has to make up there own mind as to how they want to get things done.

also, im not always the saint i make myself out to be here.  there are no 100% garantees that i will not commit any violence.  in a really bad situation, of course i value myself more than the attacker-phyiscally speaking.  
but im thinking many attackers will back down if they sense your ability for violence.

j


----------



## Yari

morph4me said:


> Absolutely, if you don't control yourself, you can't relax enough to assess the attack, feel Uke's energy, and respond approriately, which leads to the flow and harmony. I see that as contol, can you explain what you mean by letting go? It seems to me that if you let go of the control, you become tense and lose effectiveness, but I think *it may be a matter of semantics, not a disagreement*.


 
I think so too. When I think control, I think that you have to use energy to keep something in bay, using energy becasue it's(you) are not doing it the right way. But if you are doing it correctly (after practicing for some years), you don't have to control yourself( you have to let go). 

It would be like driving with a fence on each side, controling your  movement. after doing it a while your can drive without hitting the fence at all. You then remove the fence (the control), and can now move freely with alwas using energy on the fence(watching for it). Of course now there is no fence, but you have complete freedom... its your choice.

/Yari


----------



## morph4me

kaizasosei said:


> i wasn't trying to make any real big statements. i still havent changed my mind about aiki, but i realize that the subject of spirituality is really complicated. i can see if someone would want to separate for teaching purposes. after all, everyone has to make up there own mind as to how they want to get things done.
> 
> also, im not always the saint i make myself out to be here. there are no 100% garantees that i will not commit any violence. in a really bad situation, of course i value myself more than the attacker-phyiscally speaking.
> but im thinking many attackers will back down if they sense your ability for violence.
> 
> j


 

You may be right,and that would be great outcome, or they may sense your ability for violence and figure they need an edge for when the decide to show you that your ability for violence is nothing when compared to their own. Each situation would have to be judged at the time it occurs.


----------



## morph4me

Yari said:


> I think so too. When I think control, I think that you have to use energy to keep something in bay, using energy becasue it's(you) are not doing it the right way. But if you are doing it correctly (after practicing for some years), you don't have to control yourself( you have to let go).
> 
> It would be like driving with a fence on each side, controling your movement. after doing it a while your can drive without hitting the fence at all. You then remove the fence (the control), and can now move freely with alwas using energy on the fence(watching for it). Of course now there is no fence, but you have complete freedom... its your choice.
> 
> /Yari


 
We were right, it is semantics . In your exampe I see that fact that when you remove the fence it's like staying in a lane , you have the freedom to move all over the road, but the control to stay in the same lane, and because it's your choice, you are still excersing control.


----------



## Yari

morph4me said:


> You may be right,and that would be great outcome, or they may sense your ability for violence and figure they need an edge for when the decide to show you that your ability for violence is nothing when compared to their own. Each situation would have to be judged at the time it occurs.


 
Yes, true. good thing to get that in the discussion: sometimes it's a questions of who's i longest, and the need to show off.

Good point you brought in!

/yari


----------



## BritishAikido@ntlworld.co

I have always believed and taught my students to have stong spirit in Aikido ( controlled aggression )... So many students now say that there is no punching or kicking in Aikido, that may well be the case today, not so in the 1950/60's when Kenshiro Abbe Sensei first introduced Aikido to Britain. Every class started with one hour of various forms of kicking and punching exercises. I recall in 1957 when Abbe Sensei was teaching he mentioned Ki, I had never heard of Ki, I asked Sensei " what is Ki ? " he replied  " I teach Ki in my technique, no need to speak of Ki, maybe in a few years we speak more. "  that was the end of that conversation.
Today many Aikido teachers have turned Ki into some mystical force and quasi religion, and sadly they believe much of what they spout themselves in the end.
Henry Ellis


----------



## Xue Sheng

BritishAikido@ntlworld.co said:


> I have always believed and taught my students to have stong spirit in Aikido ( controlled aggression )... So many students now say that there is no punching or kicking in Aikido, that may well be the case today, not so in the 1950/60's when Kenshiro Abbe Sensei first introduced Aikido to Britain. Every class started with one hour of various forms of kicking and punching exercises. I recall in 1957 when Abbe Sensei was teaching he mentioned Ki, I had never heard of Ki, I asked Sensei " what is Ki ? " he replied " I teach Ki in my technique, no need to speak of Ki, maybe in a few years we speak more. " that was the end of that conversation.
> Today many Aikido teachers have turned Ki into some mystical force and quasi religion, and sadly they believe much of what they spout themselves in the end.
> Henry Ellis



Man reading that was like breath of fresh air, thank you for that :asian:

I know I do not do Aikido and I am a taiji guy but this makes a lot of sense to me based on what I have read about Aikidos history and origins. Also I have seen and experienced much the same in Taiji.


----------



## Yari

BritishAikido@ntlworld.co said:


> ......
> Today many Aikido teachers have turned Ki into some mystical force and quasi religion, and sadly they believe much of what they spout themselves in the end.
> Henry Ellis


 
 I agree, and thank you for bringing this to the discussion. I think it very important to remember that alot of the thoughts and beliefs of old, are ways of understanding life.

It's like an interpertation of how "true" life is. A way of understanding. Like buying a map that describes life. The map then can show you alot about life; the ways/weres and such. The map is man made, and only a picture of life. And each person has his own indivdual aspect of life/map. When new information /wisdom is found, maps change. LIfe doesn't change, since it's the same, but maps change.

I think to many people think the map is life, thus confusing what is reality and what is thought(man made).

Maps are very usfuld, so it's not to say that we can't use them, because we need them to communicate, and understand. We should only take care and not belieive them to be the ultimate truth.

/yari


----------



## kaizasosei

really great way of explaining everything yarisan.  i really like the comparison with the map.   

just wanted to regress a bit to the question of aikido and aggression. 
i think that aggression in this case can be defined as a type of concentrated enegry.  it doesnt mean it is uncontrolled or concentrated in the wrong place.  it is in itself a kind of truth.

however, as for the actual need for this type of aggressive energy, i think if extremely controlled is very important for aikido.  
anything can be done aggresively.  i can pass someone the bread aggressively or ask someone to get out of the way aggressively.  even tell someone sorry aggressively.
however, when it comes to defensive situations. it's not just that ones body must force the other person or enemy down.  it's about assuming the right positions at the right time.  and on the level of mind or spirit or conciousness-whatever you call it- the enemy is working against you.  
of course inflexibilty can also work against.  like in stretching, one may find it hard to assume certain position because of inflexibilty in our own body. with the right spirit to guide the actions, man can assume the craziest positions like extreme yoga or various martial arts moves that are just the body being manipulated by the mind to achieve a certain position.
but that is not what i mean here.  

for example if you are standing in one place and someone comes so close to you that their 'energy'(kinetic-etheral/?) is sortof pushing you aside, then it may even require a form of aggressive energy just to remain standing in one place while still not being as unmoving or blind as a log. because the enemy is actually expecting that one move.   of course in aikido one can easily evade with tenkan techniques. but if someone enters your space, you need not necessarily move(unless theyre armed to the teeth-or your boss)- 
because often those that push people around are often most vulnerable to getting pushed around(bounced back) when put on the spot.
this type of aggression can if applied correctly stop violence effectively.
but then again, it's aiki.  it's betweeen the people involved and cannot be easily catogorized.


j


----------



## kaizasosei

sorry 2.

i know as i wrote above 'enemy' does not sound very harmonious.  picked it up from chinese ma.  don't think it actually makes a big difference in writing...
partner, attacker, enemy, antagonist, uke, tori.....


----------



## Yari

Just an input: Come to think about agreession, and control. Agression coming from angrey, and in worst case this could turn to rage. So what is this underlying feeling? 

The next I thought of was that no many how angry or worse it was a way of showing that you are lossing your control. Not of your anger, but of the oppisite? Letting anger show/be are part of you is letting "peace" lose, and letting 'lost control ¨get the hearsay about the next move.

So maybe we are not talking about controlling anger but trying to channel the underlying feeling (which I havnt found a good description on yet), too something more "positive".

What do you say?

/Yari


----------



## kaizasosei

> *Re: Aggression in aikido*
> Just an input: Come to think about agreession, and control. Agression coming from angrey, and in worst case this could turn to rage. So what is this underlying feeling?
> 
> The next I thought of was that no many how angry or worse it was a way of showing that you are lossing your control. Not of your anger, but of the oppisite? Letting anger show/be are part of you is letting "peace" lose, and letting 'lost control ¨get the hearsay about the next move.
> 
> So maybe we are not talking about controlling anger but trying to channel the underlying feeling (which I havnt found a good description on yet), too something more "positive".



i agree that being angry and enraged will hamper ones concentration in mind and body.  also, there is no reason in aikido to be angry.  at the most, it would be a biological sideeffect.  however, even if you don't mean to be offensive, certain actions will be perceived as aggressive by the other.  even if you are simply returning the aggressors aggression.
see, an aikidoka gets tossed a hundred times by the sensei, but in real life would not be happy about getting tossed.  so what is the big difference?
 perhaps if they had resisted their masters(if not simply get smashed), they would have caused disharmony.  or maybe by relaxing self, understanding and loving the enemy, they could have better ability to put aikido into use effectively and constructively.

when refered to aggression earlier, i meant the focus needed to have and unyeilding spirit.  not necessarily actual anger or hatred.  -because in my experience when i really dislike someones ways, most of the time, we part ways. -im not scared to fight really.  but i get naturally get agitated when people act tough and i know that they are not.  that is a reason to part ways and has little to do with learning together or the study of aikido-because aikido is not about fighting.  and if i piss you off too much, or viceversa, then i am causing a fight.  people always will have issues and problems....it's part of being human.  however if the problems drag on for a long period of time or  if the problems are coming from confused rankholders with pride issues, they are very difficult to harmoniously solve.


j


----------

