Aikido and Internal Arts

Originally posted by StickyHands
im sure younger generation would love it if they knew what it can do.

No, they are too impatient. Why spend 5 years learning to use internal arts to kick some one’s butt, when you can break bricks in 6 mos? The returns of IMA take longer to see, and we don’t like to wait even five minutes to get a burger and fries.

A thought to ponder: Have you ever tried to hit a spinning target? your hand bounces off and little of the force is transfered to the target. It also can throw your balance off if you’re not ready for it. Very easy to grab that arm once the oponant is off balance.:wink: Aikido/Aiki Jujutsu/whatever other variation of the style, IS internal to some degree. We are trained to take the hits we can’t avoid and turn them into something useful, like leverage or use the momentum to strengthen our next attack.

I haven’t studied Kung Fu nearly as long as Ninjitsu, but I do see alot of similarities in the way the two styles deal with punches/kicks/locks. The theories and training differ, but the outcome is the same.

Originally posted by StickyHands
Which other thead, what’s the link? I know what your saying, that’s the most obvious thing redeemable. But I rather be a fool and ask stupid question now than 10 years from now and wonder, oh sh1t, i should have studied this art or that, or something is wrong with my teacher, even though I am doing my best. Reading things that Kumkuat said makes u wonder. Just a few years ago, I used to think Karate was the best, hands down.

Who’s to say it wasn’t the best for you at that time? The only wasted effort is one you got nothing from.

“the uchi-deshi at honbu, particularly Chiba, started giving me a raft of **** that I was being disloyal to O-sensei by studying with Wang, …”

  • Typical! Sad.

“According to sources within Chen TJQ there are 5 levels of skill within the system.”

Yep, it’s four guardian warrior side of lineage thingy. Aside from quality of taijiquan,

The level one is begginer student
The level two is intermediate student
The level three is advance student and begginer master/instructor
The level four is intermediate master
The level five is advance master

There supposed to be only 10 people in the world which are level five.

As of aikido not training in roots, you are wrong. They have completely different conceptual approach. They emphasise floating and raising tantien. If you raise taintien, you make your body uplight and strangely, I notice that you lower body sink into the ground at the same time. Aikido approach certainly emphasise mobility side of this but it’s totally the same thing in high level. In Ki style of aikido, they have standard exercise called ki exercise where your and your partner test the stability of each aikido posture by applying pressure.

If you read taijiquan classic, it say you sink ki to tantien, then you raise shen. Since I practice both aikido and taijiquan, I think aikido is on shen side first. It’s the same thing with different roads.

I would somewhat say that aikido is not as deep as CIMA because it’s curriculum are designed to be taught to mass in class room format. This doesn’t mean CIMA are better. In fact aikido produce far more competent fighter (especially because it is taught widely to Japanese police) than CIMA. How many Chinese internal martial arts practioners are there? Plus how many tai chi practioners know taijiquan is a martial art?

Btw, you don’t show your back when performing aikido techinque. It’s actually your side, not to mention that this is only training routine. If one apply techniqe for real, you often dont even turn but you utilise small intrenalised circle.

Let me add another thing. Concept of being double weighted. Another major Chinese Internal/external martial art concept not at all emphasised by aikido.

In ki aikido, they have an exercise known as ki exercise where one hold one of aikido stadard postures and one’s partner push to test the stability of posutre. Before I get pushed, I’m totally double weighted 50/50, but when my partner push from side, that push is redirected to either one of my leg so I become signle weighted. The floating and relaxation is the key in this exercise. More I float (raise tantien) and more I relax (expecially my empty leg but in practice one relax both legs), I can absorb more and more of the push.

I don’t know what is the source of the claim that jujitu originated from Chinese Internal martial arts. I also read story claime by few Kung Fu practioners that aikido’s internal aspect originate from Morihei’s trip to Manchuria, compeletely ignorant of the fact that Morihei have mastered aikijujitu already at that time.

If aikido/jujitu originated from Chinese IMA, can anyone answer me why Japanese empty hand martial arts (karate originated from Kung Fu so it doesn’t count) only practice single technique kata. Even in weapong arts which has Kung fu like kata, the form is relatively short and most style has only one form and the rest of training are concentrated on technique drilling (suburi).

Why two main concept of chinese martial arts, rooting and not being double weighted totally absent in aikido. If I talk about rooting or double weight I often get “Huh???” from aikido practioners. Aikido take completely opposite concept which in practice do the same thing.

Good to hear answers from Aikidokai and not aikido-ignorant people like me;)

“I don’t know what is the source of the claim that jujitu originated from Chinese Internal martial arts. I also read story claime by few Kung Fu practioners that aikido’s internal aspect originate from Morihei’s trip to Manchuria, compeletely ignorant of the fact that Morihei have mastered aikijujitu already at that time.”

It seems to be this China statement is done for warmth and fuzzles (from CMA´s of course) :slight_smile:
This has been discussed to a great degree and probably at least many a aikido practitioner recognizes this possibility but while it´s entirely possible in theory,it still remains as a non-falsifiable hypothesis at best.

Its my experience that in China they don’t talk about Japanese martial arts at all. That someone has made the claim that Ju Jitsu comes from China is not surprising. Lots of people say lots of unfounded things. To presume that this is a standard way of thinking is stretch, however. Anyone who knows their history will see the relation between the old Kumi-uchi armour grappling methods and old Aikijitsu. Jujitsu is simply the police version intended for restraint.

When Ueshiba was in the occupying army of northern China I don’t think its fair to say he had “mastered” Akijitsu. He was certainly a practitioner and was known for his skill, yet he was still a relatively young man by master standards of the time.

I have touched lots of Aikidoka and I don’t see them being able to open and close their joints very well. When you can quickly change from elongating through a joint to drawing a limb in longitudinally, then the large circles and foot work of Aikido can easily be taken away. Everytime I touch a new Aikidoka they try “dai” or leading and with Baguazhang I find it easy to get past their spiral and reverse it or to steal the lead away. After a while they become more cautious, but the first touch is always the same.

Aikido and Chinese Nei Jia

Although these arts are not the same, they have a number of similarities. I trained in Aikido for 5 years or so, followed by the same amount in various internal CMAs.

Aikido in practice uses lots of joint locks and throws. People need to realize that you don’t just walk up to someone and put on a joint lock. That is utterly impossible if they resist with any effort.

In Aikido if your opponent has an opening you attack. If they don’t block or avoid it you knock them down. If they do block it you apply a lock or throw. This is the same simple strategy used by almost all martial arts.

In practice Aikido always assumes that your opponent will counter your first assault, so the bulk of practice is done on throws and locks.

Repeat: You only throw someone after the attack has been countered.

Aikido uses two primary attacks.

Shomenuchi: This is the equivalent in IMA to Pi Chuan in Xingyi. You knock him out by advancing into his space and cutting his structure down like chopping wood with an axe. It is powered by the forward step, not the arm’s strength. It’s a more vertical strike.

Tsuki: This is the equivalent in IMA to Beng Chuan. You knock him out by advancing into his space and punching his torso, neck or face right on like a battering ram. Again, it is powered by the forward step, not the arm strength. It is more of a horizontal strike.

Although there are others, these are the primary attacks of Aikido, which by conincidence are exactly the same as Xing Yi’s two most feared and effective attacks.

From my perspective, these are the core of Aikido, just as much as Xing Yi. All the joint locking and throwing only happens if the opponent withstands your attack.

These two attacks are less common in other JMA, thus the rise of the idea that O-Sensei may have learned them during his many years of travel in Northern China during WWI and WWII.

After one year of either Xing Yi or Aikido the practictioner should be the equal of any external martial artist trained the same amount of time. It shouldn’t take a “Looooong time” to learn IMA or Aikido for fighting.

If however, the Aikidoists Shomenuchi and Tsuki are not understood and heavily trained, then of course he will get his ass kicked. Same goes for the Xing Yi man who doesn’t train Pi Chuan & Beng Chuan obsessivly.

The only real difference I see between the two arts is that O-Sensei didn’t leave behind a solo training method, he cut out the forms, but kept the applications. The Aikido people don’t have a good way to train their attacks daily, so they get into faking it in the dojo just to get on to the throws and locks. If Aikidoists got back to mastering their core attacks, they would be dominating the UFC by now! Ok, maybe that’s a bit much.

Once you have those two attacks built into your body, you have a basis to get into the fun stuff. Until then you are merely faking it.

-JessO

IMO, Aikido does qualify as an internal art because of the stress placed on yeilding, relaxtion, sensitivity, flutuation between mobility and immobility, and visulization of ki (chi).

Remember that aikido has two sides. We are all familiar with the throws, locks, atemi, etc. However, ukemi (lit. “receiving”) is just as valuable if not more so. This is how aikidoka “invest in loss” in many cases. It is at the core of transmission without verbal instruction. In order to do the kind of ukemi that makes people say “oh man that looks so fake” requires the practitioner to acheive a true statue of “mushin” or “no-mind”. This is very difficult and a worth while persuit, since it expresses total adaptablity and harmony.

Aikido also focuses on breath, rhythm, using the mind to control the ki through the body, and practice can (if the practitioner is motivated and aware) allow one to experience their own humanity and experiment with their ethics.

Aikido is about self, other, and the discovery of one’s relationship to the world. That is not to say that martial efficacy is not a major concern. It is. However, it is only a small part of an art that can open many physical, psychological, and spiritual doors.

"Repeat: You only throw someone after the attack has been countered. "

They are also used to stop an ambush. I.e. if they come up behind you with a side head lock. You grab the locking arm to prevent strangulation, then flip them over your head. Actually, this is a good example of why you don’t start with a lock/throw.

Becca- yeah, that’s what I think too.

Perhaps it is better said as: you throw after the initial attack, whether they attack you or you attack them. Preferably the latter. Many pictures of O-sensei show him on the offensive, using Atemi to motivate the uki to counter, and using the counter as the “fuel” for his throw.

I just wish Aikidoists would realize that shomenuchi and tsuki are two precious jewels that they have. I recommend any Aikidoists to go look up some Xing Yi person and ask to feel Pi Chuan and Beng Chuan. After that their Aikido would never be the same.

Once you have those two moves the rest becomes so much more interesting.

-Jess O

I think it might be more accurate to say that locks and throws are only used to counter strikes from an oponant. My master taught that they are to be fight-enders. That if Jinjitsu Kai is executed properly, a skirmish would last no more than 3-5 exchanges.

And yes, rooting is important. It is used as a starting point. Since you probably won’t know what form an attack will take, it makes no sence to commit to a defensive posture that may not be right. We train to assume all defensive postures from a basic rooted stance, similar to hoarse but with a definate grapling feel to it.

This is the problem right there, the two foremost attacks you mentioned, forget about that, most Aikido senseis stray away from teaching any “atemi” at all. Instead, some encourage you to take Karate. I found that obscure. Since the originally, O’Sensei did incorporate atemi found in Daito Ryu Aiki-jujutsu. But most didn’t. And some of the KI Aikido schools, pretty much mostly, all they practice is harnessing the ki and health benefits, less on martial stuff. So what branch or style of Aikido are you guys in? Btw, I dont recall Aikido being part of Ninjutsu/Ninjitsu. They are “suppose to be” two different arts. (Jujutsu did derive from some Chinese Chin Na elements, other stuff were countering samurai swords). To deny this is blunder, as most Karate came from Kung Fu. Even some parts of Kung Fu came from India, so it cycles back and forth.

Originally posted by StickyHands
This is the problem right there, the two foremost attacks you mentioned, forget about that, most Aikido senseis stray away from teaching any “atemi” at all. Instead, some encourage you to take Karate. I found that obscure. Since the originally, O’Sensei did incorporate atemi found in Daito Ryu Aiki-jujutsu. But most didn’t. And some of the KI Aikido schools, pretty much mostly, all they practice is harnessing the ki and health benefits, less on martial stuff. So what branch or style of Aikido are you guys in? Btw, I dont recall Aikido being part of Ninjutsu/Ninjitsu. They are “suppose to be” two different arts. (Jujutsu did derive from some Chinese Chin Na elements, other stuff were countering samurai swords). To deny this is blunder, as most Karate came from Kung Fu. Even some parts of Kung Fu came from India, so it cycles back and forth.

I think either Morihei Ueshiba or Gozo Shioda was quoted as saying combat aikido is 80% atemi 20% aikido techniques or something like that. When I mentioned this in an aikido forum, a high grade corrected me stating that atemi at highlevel mean any move to break opponent’s balance not just strike. Btw, I do ki aikido, the one said to produced the best and the worst of aikidoka.

No one said aikido being part of Ninjutu. Aikido is part of jujitu. Theory that Jujitu originated from Chinese Kung Fu is bit on speculation side to say the least. Karate did come from Kung Fu. There are historical record of number of Karate school founder travelling to China to learn Kung Fu style (such as Five Ancestor). And Karate used to be called, Tang hand instead of Empty hand. And Karate is not strictly speaking a Japanese martial arts. Japan conqured Okinawa few century ago. Karate was used to fight against Japanese invaders.

Not so in case of Jujitu. Aside from lack of any record shwoing founder of jujitu learning from any Kung Fu master, it’s approach, training method are different. And as I stated, why standing posture and long form which is the cornerstone of Kung Fu absent in Jujitu. Why in aikido, the concept of rooting and being-single-weight absent and instead they use completely opposite concept of floating. To be short, if Jujitu originated from Kung Fu, why Jujitu is not at all like Kung Fu? Lastly, Altaic groups, i.e. Japanese, Korean, Manchurian, Mongolian, Turkish and so on has very long history of wrestling since they were horse riding tibes. This doesn’t seems to be the case with Chinese which also belong to separate linguistic groups from Altaic.

If you notice, a lot of the locks in Jujutsu and in Chin Na (I didnt say basic kung fu fighting), have quite complimentary simliarities. Thats is not to say Jujutsu came completely from Chin Na, because again, it was constructed by Samurai warlords. As for Aikido not being Ninjutsu, I was referring to Becca. She practices Aikido, but then sometimes she also refers it to as Ninjutsu Kai.

Btw, what you mean by the best and the worst of Aikidoka?

Originally posted by StickyHands
As for Aikido not being Ninjutsu, I was referring to Becca. She practices Aikido, but then sometimes she also refers it to as Ninjutsu Kai.

No. You got the flow wrong. Ninjitsu Kai came form Aiki Jutitsu. Ninjitsu Kai has only been around for about 25 yrs. Bare with me for a few, and I will tell you what I know of it:

First off, I do not practice Aikido. I practice style based on it. Where the “Nitjitsu” came from, I have no earthly clue; my style does not resemble true Ninjitsu at all. How I came to this conclution is odd, though.

A little over a year ago, I had my second child, and faced the grueling task of getting back in shape afterward. I had used Ninjitsu Kai after my first, and discided to take that route again. I had not studied under a master for several years at this point, so I started looking for a traditional Ninjitsu school to train at. There are a few schools in Denver that teach it, but after visiting them, I realized: A) What I knew was NOT Ninjitsu, and B) I didn’t like the aproach true Ninjitsu took.

I mentioned this to a friend at work. He suggested I visit the school he studied at, White Dragon Fist Style Kung Fu. I did and found that White Dragon Fist, or Pai Lum, was exactly what I was interested in, and since I was convinced my old master had been a fraud, I figured I had nothing to loose in starting a new style.

After a few months, I started noticing some similarities in what I was learning and what I already knew. I talked this over with my Sifu, and he suggested I go cyber to investigate Ninjitsu Kai. He didn’t know any Japanese styles that were internal, but what I was discribing definantly sounded internal, and what I showed him was not Chinese. So I started haunting MMA forums, looking for something that mite help me either figure out what was up with Ninjitsu Kai or, better yet, help me find my old master.

A few weeks ago, I hit pay dirt in a Bullshido thread. While I did not find my master, I did find people describing my style. But they were calling in Aiki Jujitsu. After a long series of PMs, I found someone who had herd of him. (his name is Jim Zerbst) He was the typical disallusioned student. He didn’t like the so called restricions of his teacher, thought he could do it better…Blah blah blah. A fraud, just as I’d suspected. But what he taught was definantly based on Aiki Jujitsu.

They guy I found this out from didn’t remember who Jim said his teacher had been and had no idea where he was, though. Right now I’m looking into Aikido schools in my area to see just how close Ninjitsu Kai is to Aikido or Aiki Jujitsu. I don’t know yet wether I’d start studying it or not. I like Pai Lum, and I don’t know how my Sifu would feel about me studying them at the same time.

I don’t supose any of this sounds familiar to any of you, does it? I studied under Jim Zerbst in Kialua, HI from 1994-1997. I think he was retired Air Force. That’s about all know about him

Thanx for barring with me.

Becca

That clarifies it :slight_smile: Because real ninjutsu/taijutsu I knew of is a lot different.

Originally posted by StickyHands
[B]If you notice, a lot of the locks in Jujutsu and in Chin Na (I didnt say basic kung fu fighting), have quite complimentary simliarities. Thats is not to say Jujutsu came completely from Chin Na, because again, it was constructed by Samurai warlords. As for Aikido not being Ninjutsu, I was referring to Becca. She practices Aikido, but then sometimes she also refers it to as Ninjutsu Kai.

Btw, what you mean by the best and the worst of Aikidoka? [/B]

I C, got ya. :slight_smile: If you read ancient European manual of fighting, you would be amazed as to how similar the technique listed there in term of jujitu. When armour comes into equation, you have very little strike and lot of ChinNa. Similarity techniques, in my view is the least important aspect, while training method (such as stance and long Forms) or fundamental concept (rooting and single weight) are more important, in my opinion.

On the other hand, Japanese traditional medicine are refered in Japanese as Kanpo (Shino Method) and no doubt is Chinese origin. I’m quite sure that Japanese obtained knowledge of meridiean and such from Chinese (well Korean to be exact as they brought most of Chinese culture to Japan).

Real skill only comes with real commitment

I would definitly put my money on a trained Taiji expert, but there are not so many out there. On a general level if you want to learn how to defend yourself in a fight in the street I would go for Aikido, because it is learned more quickly because of the hard on technique. Taijiquan on the other hand needs years of training before one starts “feeling” what you are trying to learn. Some people never “feel” it and just does forms, and that way, even though they look great, can’t fight.

A true master who has been trained the traditional way (Like in Chen village - they train elbows and knees, full speed fighting) has a big advantage of not using any strength to pull of a through, break or push but has the reflex to back that vast level of skill.

Aikido(a very effective system) still uses physical technique and makes use of an apponants strength. A true Taiji master would not use strength to do an attack.

No one will really know what the outcome will be because a true master or sensei will never comprimise his apponents honour, even though he might win in a challenge.

By the way, how many people cross train in taijiquan and jujitu related arts (judo, aikido and other jujitu ryu)?