How appliable is aikido for self-defense?

[Gerry Seymour]

I like how you have it explained to you that Japanese is -to non-fluent at least- a conceptual language. That is a succinct way to see it..

While Ai-ki has many independent connotations of its own, Ai-Ki-Do with particular reference to the martial art which take its name from that term is well enough specified to make certain inferences, yes? no?

You suggest peace is not necessarily inherent in the term.. I understand that you might.. I suggest it might be inferred from our specification of Aikido the martial art..

1. Aikido is a way of harmony with the universal energy or however one chooses to define Ki -and that is a protracted argument perhaps..

So if peace is not as you suggest inherent in Ai-ki-do then it ought to be demonstrably possible to follow such a way of harmony of any universal spirit by a means of aggression or destruction or a way other than non-violently and through peace??

2. Morehei Ueshiba embraced peace. Latterly -and as part of his design for his Aikido- if not formerly. This is plain from any number of his oral recorded teachings and calligraphy. Further, Ueshiba is the designer of the essence of a martial art named Aikido from which, I would suggest, the great majority of modern Aikido practitioners trace their lineage.

So if peace is not, as you say, inherent in Aikido as practiced by majority Aikidoka then you would recommend that what was disseminated by Ueshiba ought to be ignored in ones daily practice and ones daily life?

Respectfully if peace is not as you say inherent in Aikido then how is the central meta- and NON-physical core of Aikido to be interpreted and practiced? Or ought it to be ignored also or sidelined?

As example, Ueshiba said, "A mind to serve for the peace of all peoples of the world is needed in Aikido, and not the mind of one who practices only to be strong and conquer an opponent. Therefore to compete in techniques, winning or losing is not true Budo. True Budo knows no defeat. Never defeated means never fighting."

Understandably perhaps, you have little time for these things if you are NGA.. Then again, non-adoption or actual eschewing of non-physical Aikido is certainly not exclusively NGA.. Personally I believe many sensei are embarrassed to touch it.. certainly in my own ambit it was the majority of them.. This alas means Aikido as ANY kind of a Way is almost alien to practice.. It become merely muscular repetition of technique..

Of course ultimately, Aikido is just a word. If any person choose to practice a martial art that is named Aikido and it teach to them brutal limb destruction severally and simultaneously without any deference to any variously translated "Way" or recourse to any variously translated "path of Harmonisation of universal spirit" or "bringing together", then heh I am certainly not their mother to scold them for it..

Indeed, Ueshiba did not originally seem to place much philosophy within Aikido. That was added later, and seemingly became the more important part of his path. He, himself, pursued Aikido without the "peace" aspect until his religious pursuits altered his course. That original path is not closed off to others simply because Ueshiba chose a different one.

There are, in my opinion, two significant divisions in how one could follow Aikido. One could follow O-sensei's philosophy and the techniques as a method of pursuing that philosophy. Alternatively, one could follow the techniques absent the philosophy. Neither is an invalid approach.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

would aikido then be correctly described as a non violent peaceful endeavor?

could it then be described as art for the pacifist?
PACIFISM
"A pacifist is a person who is opposed to war and violence. Pacifists believe that we should not kill or harm other people. "

how do you use aikido to physically defend yourself if you are a pacifist? how do you use aikido in a physical way without hurting someone? this seems to be a major contradiction. to believe that you can use a kotegashi or iriminage on someone trying to rape or kill you and you will not injure them in some way is naive at best.
if aikido is truly a non violent philosophy then it would be incorrect to call it a martial art.
the term martial itself implies " of ,relating to,or suited for war or warrior"
Definition of MARTIAL

if we assume this to be self evident then back to the OP's post

then aikido is not good for self defense and at its core is in contradiction and polar opposite of using a physical means to defend yourself.

i guess we can just put our hands in the air and make the bad guys fall down.

This is the issue many express with Aikido as it is taught in many schools. To be able to perform those techniques effectively without harming someone would take a LOT of skill. This has led many (even within the art) to refer to Aikido as a 20-year art, meaning it only becomes truly effective after a lot of experience. This is not a flaw in the art, it's a flaw in the approach...assuming one is studying/teaching it with an intention of it being used for self-defense.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I really dislike you for posting this video Hoshin LOL.

I personally prefer the tenshin method of aikido or the aikido that has the roots of pre world war aikido since they are the harder styles of aikido. This is the stuff that's not my cup of tea and to top it off its O Sensei doing it. But I guess everyone has the rite to practice the art the way they want to.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

I agree which is why I posted my earlier posts. Like I said Ive trained with other schools students that thought they could lock or throw and couldn't apply it on me. One even asked why I didn't fall down and I was like well you didn't apply the lock proper so I'm just giving you good realistic feedback.

Unfortunately O Sensei got very esoteric in his later years which made aikido change as a martial arts. Hence why I enjoy the aikido styles that has the roots of pre war Sensei's or tenshin method of aikido because it seems like they are the arts that can handle an assailant allot more effectively in a real life situation.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

I think part of the issue is that what Ueshiba did in his later years required a LOT of skill. People trying to do that from the beginning miss out on all of the highly effective material that is part of Aikido, but doesn't fit the "peace before defense" mindset I've seen in some schools.

To all: Please note that I'm actually a fan of Ueshiba's art. Since my focus is self-defense, I'm only a fan of the flowy stuff in an aesthetic sense. I personally prefer the more combative approach found in schools that focus on self-defense (most common in Shioda's lineage).

 

[hoshin1600]

Old habits die hard for me. its been a long time since I trained with Fumio Toyota. I no longer have a dog in this fight about aikido. I incorporate aiki into what I do but it's not aikido. I shouldn't care what anyone thinks about aikido. Maybe it's not my place anymore to try and defend it.
Some people will watch the joe Rogan clip and think joe just doesn't understand others will think the aikido guy is delusional, I see in between the lines,,,but what do I know,,I'm just a Combatives guy now.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

I think part of the issue is that what Ueshiba did in his later years required a LOT of skill. People trying to do that from the beginning miss out on all of the highly effective material that is part of Aikido, but doesn't fit the "peace before defense" mindset I've seen in some schools.

To all: Please note that I'm actually a fan of Ueshiba's art. Since my focus is self-defense, I'm only a fan of the flowy stuff in an aesthetic sense. I personally prefer the more combative approach found in schools that focus on self-defense (most common in Shioda's lineage).

I understand where you going with the skill comments but the no touch stuff is where I just draw the line on trying to be open minded at. Sadly since it comes from O Sensei theres other aikido people that do the no touch stuff which is where allot of the aikido bashing originates from.

But I don't have a rite to tell people how they should train so good for them getting off their couch and doing something other then watching TV.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

Old habits die hard for me. its been a long time since I trained with Fumio Toyota. I no longer have a dog in this fight about aikido. I incorporate aiki into what I do but it's not aikido. I shouldn't care what anyone thinks about aikido. Maybe it's not my place anymore to try and defend it.
Some people will watch the joe Rogan clip and think joe just doesn't understand others will think the aikido guy is delusional, I see in between the lines,,,but what do I know,,I'm just a Combatives guy now.

I originaly went in to aikido thinking it would be a good side art for my other styles but my Sensei has actually got me hooked on it and I enjoy the subtle nuances it has to offer me in developing my personal style.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I understand where you going with the skill comments but the no touch stuff is where I just draw the line on trying to be open minded at. Sadly since it comes from O Sensei theres other aikido people that do the no touch stuff which is where allot of the aikido bashing originates from.

But I don't have a rite to tell people how they should train so good for them getting off their couch and doing something other then watching TV.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

I didn't look at the video, but I think I know the stuff you're referring to. I've actually seen several videos of Ueshiba doing "no-touch" techniques. Some of it is just an over-pursuing uke (which is unlikely unless the defender has a gun in his hand or something else the attacker REALLY wants), and the technique is otherwise solid. Others are, from all I can tell, complete bunk. Mind you, I've experienced what I'd call a "no-touch" throw that was surprisingly effective; it was actually just a throw where the hands were used to trigger a reflex to off-balance the uke. It took a very skilled person to make it work, as the timing was extraordinarily precise.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

I didn't look at the video, but I think I know the stuff you're referring to. I've actually seen several videos of Ueshiba doing "no-touch" techniques. Some of it is just an over-pursuing uke (which is unlikely unless the defender has a gun in his hand or something else the attacker REALLY wants), and the technique is otherwise solid. Others are, from all I can tell, complete bunk. Mind you, I've experienced what I'd call a "no-touch" throw that was surprisingly effective; it was actually just a throw where the hands were used to trigger a reflex to off-balance the uke. It took a very skilled person to make it work, as the timing was extraordinarily precise.

Was it like a no touch kokionagi? I could see how Ukis trained response would get tricked in to rolling if they thought they were being thrown by that throw?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Was it like a no touch kokionagi? I could see how Ukis trained response would get tricked in to rolling if they thought they were being thrown by that throw?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

I'm not familiar with the Japanese names of the techniques. It was performed by Don Angier of Yanagi-ryu. It was based on a pair of principles (one I've forgotten, the other was called "the wall"). Essentially, it used the reflex of moving your head back to avoid getting hit in the face (think of how you'd move if you were walking along and turned your head to see you're about to walk into a horizontal pole) plus the balance problem of not being able to squat quickly without leaning forward. It was not a big throw. In fact, it was such a subtle off-balancing that it was actually kind of embarassing. I ended up just far enough back on my heels that I couldn't maintain balance and had to fall down. I could feel it coming, but couldn't stop it.

 

[drop bear]

I understand where you going with the skill comments but the no touch stuff is where I just draw the line on trying to be open minded at. Sadly since it comes from O Sensei theres other aikido people that do the no touch stuff which is where allot of the aikido bashing originates from.

But I don't have a rite to tell people how they should train so good for them getting off their couch and doing something other then watching TV.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

Not as much. That is the obvious bashing.

Single level defence is the hidden issue.

So you punch and I block and flip you. At no point do you learn to not fall over. At no point do I learn how to deal with you not falling over. And so on.

You start to wonder why after however many years the students have been training they can't make their instructor sweat for his success.

Some drilling is ok. Some partially resisted is ok. Too much will make you crap.

 

[Jenna]

would aikido then be correctly described as a non violent peaceful endeavor?

could it then be described as art for the pacifist?
PACIFISM
"A pacifist is a person who is opposed to war and violence. Pacifists believe that we should not kill or harm other people. "

how do you use aikido to physically defend yourself if you are a pacifist? how do you use aikido in a physical way without hurting someone? this seems to be a major contradiction. to believe that you can use a kotegashi or iriminage on someone trying to rape or kill you and you will not injure them in some way is naive at best.
if aikido is truly a non violent philosophy then it would be incorrect to call it a martial art.
the term martial itself implies " of ,relating to,or suited for war or warrior"
Definition of MARTIAL

if we assume this to be self evident then back to the OP's post

then aikido is not good for self defense and at its core is in contradiction and polar opposite of using a physical means to defend yourself.

i guess we can just put our hands in the air and make the bad guys fall down.

Actually I think your definition of Aikido is absolutely apropos. I would nuance your description not as pacifism, though I think that is perfectly ok.. I would say Aikido is -as a martial art- non-violent activism. I can certainly understand your point concerning the sense of contradictory terminology in a martial art that is also somehow claiming to be a non-violent art. However, non-violent activism is not dissimilar from pacifism.

I can give you a personal example which may perhaps elucidate the point.. I work currently in refugee camp in northern Greece.. There are several mixed cultures here.. There is much stress.. people are fraught and often angry with how they are treated.. there is a tendency for folk, particularly the young men to be verbally aggressive and but sometime it is also physical.. They regard women often as subordinate.. So my response to a shoulder shove is a nikkyo or gokkyo depending upon their and my placements.. I have many choices in any of these techniques.. I can put him on his face and shame him before all present.. I can destroy his elbow or wrist so he might not repeat this.. Still.. who am I to make these judgements like this? He is who he is because of how his life has gone.. I have not lived that life to know.. His anger is misdirected.. I understand this. Still.. I wish to keep my self safe.. In order to do that I do not wish to be handled.. in order to achieve that however I have choices.. Yet I need only make a small intervention, the nikkyo is done discreetly my hands upon his hand and his wrist such that he will understand that any pain is conditional only upon his own resistance even if he do not quite know what is going on. I do not try to make him angrier by hurting him, just to arrest his anger on me in a physical sense.

It is not for me to teach him lessons he will not forget.. He may try the same with other people.. I do not know. All I know is I have defended my self IN THAT INSTANCE and I have not harmed him, certainly not to the extent to which my Aikido COULD harm him.

I do not know if you would read this or anybody would give a flying xxxx and but I will say it anyway.. You have said "to believe that you can use a kotegashi or iriminage on someone trying to rape or kill you and you will not injure them in some way is naive at best."

Well I have like may others been victim of sexual assault attempts.. I had many years of abuse from my father.. I have never been raped. It is only because I have my Aikido.. ironically a place my father sent me to.. I have no desire to kill damage or even hurt the men who executed these crimes.. that is not my call to make.. I have defended my self on several occasions using only what force is needed to stop what they are trying to do.. I do not want to hurt them because having done just that in my youth I know it is a wound that I also must live with. MA is NOT what is seem in movies.. It is simply not possible to damage a person and expect 1. that they will forget all about it and change their ways or 2. that in having damaged them I will go about my life without further thought.. that is what is naive my friend and not believing it is possible to use Aikido in a non-violent manner. If that fact does not suit you, I understand.. it is not for every person.

Good luck to you.

 

[kehcorpz]

Hi folks.

Aikido is out of the race. I heard that for self defense it's not really helpful and that the stuff doesn't work in real life.

Also the injury risk seems to high to me.

Atm I am considering krav maga. But I'm not sure if this is really interesting enough for me. I need something which also
looks cool and interesting. Otherwise it would just bore me like boxing. Boxing is so boring I'd never want to learn it.

 

[Kickboxer101]

Hi folks.

Aikido is out of the race. I heard that for self defense it's not really helpful and that the stuff doesn't work in real life.

Also the injury risk seems to high to me.

Atm I am considering krav maga. But I'm not sure if this is really interesting enough for me. I need something which also
looks cool and interesting. Otherwise it would just bore me like boxing. Boxing is so boring I'd never want to learn it.

This is the slowest race I've ever seen. Lets be honest you don't want to learn anything if you did you would've started by now. You joined here in may it's now nearly September and you've done nothing

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

Hi folks.

Aikido is out of the race. I heard that for self defense it's not really helpful and that the stuff doesn't work in real life.

Also the injury risk seems to high to me.

Yep not worth your time.

It just didn't allow me to safely detain someone till the cops could arrest him preventing possible legal issues I would have acquired if I had used my other training.

All that kept going thru my head when making the citizens arrest was my Sensei's phrase give what you get that he uses in our randori.


Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[Xue Sheng]

Hi folks.

Aikido is out of the race. I heard that for self defense it's not really helpful and that the stuff doesn't work in real life.

Also the injury risk seems to high to me.

Atm I am considering krav maga. But I'm not sure if this is really interesting enough for me. I need something which also
looks cool and interesting. Otherwise it would just bore me like boxing. Boxing is so boring I'd never want to learn it.

Then don't train anything, it is all boring if you train it right, nice taking to you....

 

[Hanzou]

Not as much. That is the obvious bashing.

Single level defence is the hidden issue.

So you punch and I block and flip you. At no point do you learn to not fall over. At no point do I learn how to deal with you not falling over. And so on.

You start to wonder why after however many years the students have been training they can't make their instructor sweat for his success.

Some drilling is ok. Some partially resisted is ok. Too much will make you crap.

I await the day I see any of that being used in the way you describe. I just want to see someone go full blast on an Aikidoka and see what they do to defend themselves.

It's incredible that after all these years, you still never see that.

 

[Xue Sheng]

 

[JP3]

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

Q1: "Is aikido more about competitions and not really focused on real self-defense?"

A1: Shodokan, or Tomiki-ryu, aikido has competitions, yes. However, even that sub-set of aikido is divided into a competitive line, and a non-competitive line. By "line" here I mean certain teachers or sets of teachers who favor, or do not favor, competition as "the thing." I don't do competition aikido, but I did do competitive judo, and there are pros and cons to both approaches, IMO. But that's a whole different box to describe.

Q2: "And how long does it take to learn enough aikido stuff so that you could defend yourself?"

A2: Depending on how you're attacked, we have a police training system that can provide you with basic self-defense fundamentals in as little as one weekend, over a period of 8 hours (I know, I know you old guys... look up the Merritt-Stevens self defense system, primarily for cops, in good shape, and highly motivated to learn and learn quickly for a very limited type of attack). Problem is, the word "attack" is sort of... broad, wouldn't you say? Even O-Sensei himself would have an perhaps unsurmountable issue if approached and triangulated by a couple handgun carrying attackers. All arts take as long as they take, and reading about them on the internet isn't training, so you are actually losing time when you could be learning. Go get on a mat. ANY mat, and start doing "something." Best advice I can give you.

Q3: "Does aikido also offer solutions for ground fighting?"

A3: Certain... solutions, yes. But the best solution I was ever offered in aikido class to solve this problem was being offered a chance to go to judo class, and through that, BJJ.

Q4: "Also, how hard is aikido on the body? Are you likely to hurt yourself when you're being thrown over
someone's shoulder? Since I'm rather fragile I don't know if I could even withstand such a training. "

A4: I think you are thinking about judo throws, with the over the shoulder description. However, most of the initial training in aikido is teaching you how to walk poroperly, and then fall properly. These two skills are proven to be about 20 more times likely to save your life than knowing how to fight (simple falls kill LOTS of people every year). You don't progress to being thrown with the big air falls until you've got that skill to do so. You might be surprised at how you do...again, once you've started.

Q5 (sorta): "I think aikido looks pretty interesting but I don't know if it's good for self-defense."

A5: Self-defense skill, and skill in a martial art can, but don't have to, move along side-by-side. You've got to be considering both, while you are training, to get them to do that, however... it doesn't just happen.

 

[Hanzou]

I'm judging a fighting style on its ability to fight...

.....or lack thereof?

 

[drop bear]

I await the day I see any of that being used in the way you describe. I just want to see someone go full blast on an Aikidoka and see what they do to defend themselves.

It's incredible that after all these years, you still never see that.

In martial arts it is almost the moment you stop loosing you stop progressing.
I think the higher up in akido you go the less anyone is willing to make you loose.

They dont understand that it is a gift to be toweled up by someone better.