The meaning of Aikido

[Aikidog]

I have been doing some reading on the net, Trying to find out the true meaning of “Aikido” and how this colours our view of what Aikido is. Ofcourse when I talk about “Aikido” I am refering to the actual name, “Aikido”.

The usual explanation given on countless websites is that “Aikido” means the “way of harmony”. This in turn in is translated to mean the way of harmony with your opponent, ie, to harmonize with your attacker and to control him without harming him. Does it mean to move in “harmony” with your opponent, to make sure that both of you are at peace no matter who is attacking? I think a lot of people subscribe to this ideal. Some posters on this forum are of the opinion that Aikido is an art where you can deflect an attack without so much as messing up your opponants hair. That “Aikido” the way of harmony, is just that. A way of harmony, peace and love.


The thing is “Aikido” does not specifically mean “the way of harmony”. Aido would be the “the way of harmony”. What about the “Ki”? The “Ki” the nebulous “life energy” of the attacker? Now to look at it closely, what does that mean?


Seeing that the “Aiki” term pre-dates Aikido, (Aikijujitsu) and that the art Aikido is derived from is only harmonious when trained in the dojo, perhaps this explanation is not really all that accurate.

Considering that “Aiki” really means “harmony with / of ki energy” perhaps a better explanation is that Aikido “The way of harmony with ki energy” is really “The way of harmony with (your opponents) ki energy”. Looking at it like this. Going from an art that actively tries to limit damage to ones opponent, the art now becomes a martial art that has techniques based on the principle of dynamic movement along with the attacker. So instead of static defence, the Aikidoka moves along with the attackers energy, using his momentum and strength against him. I feel that this is a more accurate description on which to base Aikido, as opposed to the other view being, “the way of harmony, peace and love”.

In conclusion, I will say that I do understand that in his later years, O-sensei did teach those very same things to his students and these philosophies are the basis for Aikikai aikido instruction and I respect that. What I am trying to say is that this should not be taken as the definitive meaning of Aikido. When a novice asks what is Aikido? He should be given the latter description and not the former.

[Peter Rehse]

There was an article recently posted on the Aikido Journal frontpage written by F. Shishida that might be worth a quick read.

http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=626

It contains a summary of what Aiki was and why the term is problamatic today.

Prof. Shishida recently sent me an expanded article based on Admiral Takeshita's diary but we'll have to wait a bit before I can share parts of that. A lot of the Aiki insights are talked about there.

[Aikidog]

Excellant article. Thanks Peter. Whats your opinion on my initial statement?

[Peter Rehse]

Basically I think to understand the philosophy of aikido you first have to understand the physical. Trying to put the cart before the donkey you get a whole mess of interpretations often based on your own culture. You end up with people swearing that Ueshiba M. was a pacifist whereas his own son swears he was not.

There was another thread on budoseek recently about the difference between Ju and Aiki - also worth a read.

I prefer Aiki used in the old way (kenjutsu) which reflects a very high level of sensitivity to your opponent and your ability to take control of it. Aikido is performed at a distance beyond grappling range with a very similar mindset to kenjutsu.

There is somewhat a contradiction between that interpretation and when someone says "apply aiki". Here the definition given by a Yoshinkan instructor visiting my dojo was as good as any. "Apply all your energy at one place at one point in time." It really isn't a contradiction since when you do dominate your opponent that is what you must do.

The point being that if you find yourself talking to someone about what Aikido was - say it has a philosophy derived from physical characteristics. Then describe the physical. You can't control where their imagination will run with it.

[Itten]

Hello Aikidog,
trying to find the meaning of Aikido may be an interesting yet pointless exercise. As Prof. Shishida's article shows, there are many opinions, and each school and teacher will have their official "meaning". Aikido means whatever it means to the practitioner and the higher the level the more credence we may choose to give their definition, but it cannot be "The Meaning of Aikido".You make certain statements about Aiki which the article also mentions, but if Prof. Goldsbury is lurking anywhere he may be persuaded to add his research on the actual time frame of this supposedly "ancient" concept, and what the original kanji may mean in the martial context.
Ki can be taken to mean energy as you say, but energy coupled with intent is the basis of martial power. Not opposing but redirecting, controlling and making use of your "opponents" power may be the most efficient and effective means of combat. When you add in the ingredients of maai and sen, then the meaning of pre-emptive strategy and action blurs the philosophy of a purely "defensive" art as Aikido is often suggested to be, and control may begin before any attack can be launched.
Further the two principal movements espoused by Aikido, namely Irimi and Tenkan, can be seen to be technical details, but may also represent a deeper dichotomy of practice which has come up many times before. To evade the attacker by turning and controlling is fundamentally different then the cutting action of irimi, which enters the opponents centre and cuts them down physically and mentally.
Prof. Goldsbury recently stated that the term kuzushi, which in judo and Aikido is often translated as "unbalancing", actually means to tear the "house" down. Thus even tenkan can be practiced in the spirit of irimi.
What do you want "your" Aikido to mean?

[don]

http://www.aikiweb.com/language/

You'll find some of PAG's stuff here, IIRC.


There was an article recently posted on the Aikido Journal frontpage written by F. Shishida that might be worth a quick read....Prof. Shishida recently sent me an expanded article based on Admiral Takeshita's diary but we'll have to wait a bit before I can share parts of that. A lot of the Aiki insights are talked about there.Oh, man. I've been hoping that'd be translated. Any plans in that regard which you can comment on, here or by PM?

[Peter Rehse]

No idea about direct translation - and as I said we have to wait a bit for the article.

[Bugeisha]

Basically I think to understand the philosophy of aikido you first have to understand the physical. Trying to put the cart before the donkey you get a whole mess of interpretations often based on your own culture. You end up with people swearing that Ueshiba M. was a pacifist whereas his own son swears he was not.

There was another thread on budoseek recently about the difference between Ju and Aiki - also worth a read.

I prefer Aiki used in the old way (kenjutsu) which reflects a very high level of sensitivity to your opponent and your ability to take control of it. Aikido is performed at a distance beyond grappling range with a very similar mindset to kenjutsu.

There is somewhat a contradiction between that interpretation and when someone says "apply aiki". Here the definition given by a Yoshinkan instructor visiting my dojo was as good as any. "Apply all your energy at one place at one point in time." It really isn't a contradiction since when you do dominate your opponent that is what you must do.

The point being that if you find yourself talking to someone about what Aikido was - say it has a philosophy derived from physical characteristics. Then describe the physical. You can't control where their imagination will run with it.

Great post, Peter!

[Aikidog]

What do you want "your" Aikido to mean?

I don't want "my" Aikido to mean anything really. I would just like a definitive explanation as to what Aikido really means. IMHO, I don't believe that everything is a "point of view"...

Imagine for instance I trained a few years in Shotokan and Wado Ryu Karate, and then came out with my own brand of Karate. With my new brand of Karate, I give my students the explanation that Karate means way of the empty hand. Which in turn denotes the peaceful intentions of the Karateka. I therefore go and teach my students how to punch people without really hurting them, training them to "push" their opponents, instead of socking them in the chin. Now I could say that this is "my" interpretation, but I think I would be wrong. You can't come up with something just for the sake of it. There is a truth to what "Karate" really means.

The term "Aiki" came from somewhere and I'd like to know what that term really meant at the time.

[Aikitech]

The term "Aiki" came from somewhere and I'd like to know what that term really meant at the time.
This is an interesting statement since there is some evidence indicates that the earlier definitions of Aiki (found in old schools of Kenjutsu - Japanese fencing) has very little if anything in common with the more modern definition used in Ueshiba's Aikido.

The book "Aikido:Tradition and the Competitive Edge" of which the aforementioned F. Shishida is co-author along with T. Nariyama, Technical Director of Shodokan says the following about the meaning of "Aiki" on page 17:


The word Aiki is found in Edo era books on Kenjutsu. For example, Kenjutsu Hiden Hitori Shugyo (Secret Sword Techniques, Training Alone) written by Sen-en in 1800 reads, "A situation in which two people stand facing each other is aiki." Sun-Tse (a Chinese war strategist) said that "good fighters avoid men with sharp spirits." Ittoryu Heiho Toho Kigenko (A Study on the Origin of Itto-ryu's Freestyle Practice) written by Zesuke Nakanishi in 1822 reads, "When facing the enemy, this gets to the point of aiki, waiting and seeing how one beats the other." Both books use aiki as a disagreeable term i.e., a confrontation of strong wills.

The author goes on further to relate the traditional sense of Aiki from a Jujutsu/Aikijutsu perspective:


Aiki no Jutsu (Technicques of Aiki) by Bukotsu, published in Tokyo in 1892, is the oldest book about aiki. The author wrote that tekijin dokushin no jutsu (techniques of reading an opponent's mind) and kiai (yelling) are the most important parts of aiki. The former teaches the control of an opponent before an actual fight; that is, reading his thoughts at the same time that they spring to his mind, or using go no sen, which is avoiding his thoughts of beating you.

So when asking about where the term Aiki came from it depends on which interpretation of aiki we are referring to (i.e. from the p.o.v. of Kenjutsu or Jujutsu or something else entirely like Japanese medicine). We also need to have an appreciation for the contextual expression of the Japanese language where words may not be as directly translatable into English. The characters "ai" and "ki" have translations to many different english words. The definition one may use depends upon the context. This may be a reason for the difference in definition between the Kenjutsu and Jujutsu expressions given above as well.

Just my 5 cents. Hope this helps.

Gambatte.
:bow:

[Aikidog]

Thanks Larry. That was helpful actually. :)

[swchiro]

In response to Itten above,

Excellant thought out anwser, it does not get clearer than that...SW