Aikido Bukou Forums / General Discussion / Philosophy

The Sword That Gives Life/The Sword That Takes Life

Tristan — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:53:00 GMT

I've been giving more thought to the nature of life, and aikido. I think most aikidoka are well exposed to the yin side of aikido in our practice, that is that you take extreme care not to protect both yourself and uke. Every so often, mention is made to those times when this concern must be adjusted to fit a more dire circumstance. It is sometimes referred to as 'appropriate response' to a life threatening situation or some similar danger. To put it in more blunt terms, you put the hurt on someone to stop them and protect yourself or others.

I'm sure one could think their way into a padded room on this topic, that is how to accurately judge the level of 'appropriate' with response. Samurai killed first and questioned their actions later. Well, they really didn't second guess themselves at all - they just killed first. Modern people, especially midwesterners typically find that *any* response is too much, shunning confrontation of any kind. I've seen people go so far out of their way to provide the benefit of the doubt that they have left myself in harm's way doing so. I've been guilty of this myself.

In the real world, this is usually not a matter of violence. Instead, I've noticed that it is calling people when they do something inappropriate, hurtful, mean, irresponsible or just stupid. It is commonplace to sit by when evil deeds are being done, and finding any reason to avoid injecting virtue or sensibility into the world. I am coming to believe this is an imbalance and disharmonious, and am disappointed in myself when I don't call people on it.

While I believe there are far more effective ways of dealing with issues than violence, I also believe that care must be taken not to slip down the path of pacifism believing that it is OK to let anything happen. There is a time and a place to deal with things and those opportunities should not be squandered. True shodo o seizu, I think.

What Are... Soft Eyes?

jgapen — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 21:25:06 GMT

In the principle of mind-body unification, in the context of extending ki, I have heard and read about having "Soft Eyes." What does this mean? It is baffling to me, I have never heard the term till Johnson Sensei mentioned it a while back and I later on reviewed the principles of Aikido.

I have found the following examples:

Soft eyes are what drive the outside-in dynamic of strategic acumen. If you have soft eyes, you have the ability to be alert for events and trends in the larger business environment and to discriminate between those that are high-impact and those that are not.

When you glare or scowl at something or someone you cut off Ki.

Can anyone give an example in the context of Aikido?

Thanks.

Two buddhist monks walk down a street....

abzmt — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 10:06:26 GMT

Ok I know there are plenty of jokes that could finish that, But here is something that got me thinking. Plus I've read everything thats been posted like 5 times.

Two Buddhist monks walk down a street. Suddenly they find themselves standing in front of a large puddle of water, which covers the whole street. There is a woman standing in front of it, and she can't pass the puddle because of the the clothes she is wearing. The older monk picks her up and carries her across the puddle, puts her down, wishes her a nice day and walks on. Afterwards the two monks walk for a while until the younger monk turns to the older one and says to him: "Why did you pick up that woman? We are not supposed to touch women!" The older monk turns around to the younger one and says "It is true, I picked up the woman and touched her. But I put her down behind the puddle - you are still carrying her."

I don't recall where I heard this. Maybe one of you posted it somewhere, but i like it. It make me think.

Another of my favorites is by the Dalai Lama (I think) It goes a little something like this..

The past is done. You can not change what is finished.

The future is unknown. You can not do anything about what is unknown.

This moment, right now, is a gift, embrace it. That's why its called the present.

Opposites?

Tristan — Fri, 19 May 2006 10:48:27 GMT

I heard something interesting and wanted to share because it helped me put aikido as a martial art into perspective.

We have always been taught that WWII was a clash of idealogies. The extreme right (fascism) collided with the extreme left (communism). We are taught that these two forces are opposites. However, when two forces are identified by the same qualities and use the same means, they are not truly opposites at all - they are the same. Both ideologies believed in centralized control, exploitation, military dictatorship, and concentration camps. They are really identical in mindset, only differing in minor details.

The mindset which believes that violence, wars, or conflict is an option (much less an obvious one) is the true opposite to the mindset that violence, wars and conflict are never an option because violence does not solve anything.

The light bulb came on to me because this describes the unique nature of aikido among the other martial arts. It is the one that embraces peace and understanding rather than the adminstering of greater or more efficient violence.

I also believe that this common belief that "Violence can only be overcome by greater violence" is a fundamental one to all combat and fighting. I've read that it is for this reason that O'sensei was adamantly against competitions of aikido because they lead to embracing this belief.

It makes sense to me, then, why people have trouble understanding the philosophy of aikido. Further, this lack of proper mindset is an impediment to learning aikido. If you are lured by the idea of embracing conflict or using force, your technique will be poor (at best), and more that likely it won't work at all. If your mindset is wrong, your technique will suffer and you won't learn. Aikido is not combat nor is it fighting.

Although my ears have heard these things many times in the dojo, it finally made it through my thick skull.

Wu Wei

Tristan — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 10:32:16 GMT

I was curious to learn more about this after Phil introduced this earlier this week. Here are a few links on it for anyone interested in a bit of reading:
http://www.jadedragon.com/archives/june98/tao.html
http://www.taopage.org/nondoing.html
http://www.thetao.info/tao/weiwuwei.htm

Irimi/tenkan relationship

Tristan — Thu, 26 Jan 2006 07:00:34 GMT

It's been quiet on here for a while, so here goes:

Last night at class, we got into a discussion about tenkan and irimi and their characteristics. This made me think about something said a while ago, "Tenkan begins and ends with irimi, and irimi begins and ends with tenkan". For the last few months, I've been contemplating this statement in an attempt to understand it.

After having this in the back of my mind while practicing, I can see how the first part is applicable. When you prepare to move tenkan, you must move irimi to ensure you have the proper distance and orientation to acheive the proper blend. After kuzushi, you move irimi once again to apply waza.

I'm still working on the second part, irimi beginning and ending with tenkan. That one has me a bit baffled. Any useful thoughts or observations you are interested in sharing?

Shodo o seizu off the mat

Tristan — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:26:21 GMT

I witnessed a most interesting application of shodo o seizu this last weekend. Let me see if I can explain it without boring you with too much backstory.

Two people that I know have quite a long history with one another, one being a close friend and the other merely someone I have met and crossed paths with a number of times over the years. The important point is that the two never got along, and even came to loathe one another due to incidents that happened years ago.

I kinda ribbed my friend for creating the other person as a nemesis of sorts, kinda like the Joker was to Batman. Much energy was put forth on both sides to hold onto and feed animocity. I've always felt that in doing such things, you grant a great deal of control over yourself to others.

The point of this post comes from what I saw as the remarkable bit of shodo o seizu. These two had crossed paths once again in that they both (quite accidentally) stayed as guests under the same roof. It was plainly obvious, to me at least, there was tension between the two. At a point during the weekend, the acquaintance crossed the no-man's-land and approached my friend saying "I know we have a bad history, but I'm not the same person I was years ago and you probably are not either. Perhaps we should let the past go and get acquainted again." Apparently, this was done in a sincere manner and not received as a manipulative move. My friend was completely taken aback by this approach, so much so that I almost laughed out loud when I was told of it. It occurred to me immediately that control was immediately taken and kept by this 'giving in' approach.

The whole thing seemed very aiki to me: irimi turning into tenkan.

Beliefs

dangerwit — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:09:41 GMT

I learned something interesting about myself tonight while watching TV. So interesting, in fact, I'm not talking about it.

It did instigate a question that I wonder about. Do your morals/ethics/beliefs change to fit your mood? I'm thinking, for instance, you don't like it when someone cuts you off on the road. But when you do it, you think, "Ahhhh tough luck buddy, I'M in a hurry." I don't think that's "bad", it happens a lot I think.

How about more moral: someone opposes the death penalty, and then a loved one is murdered. Now the death penalty doesn't seem so bad to that person... or, we don't relish the thought of killing someone, but then, in a movie, when the REALLY bad guy gets it, we feel vindicated and temporarily relieved of that constraint.

So, does that kind of situation (apply to your favorite belief/theory/etc) warrant a re-examination of those ideas you have? Do you change to suit your mood, or do you stick to your original conviction? What are the costs of following either option? And, are ANY ideas you have set in concrete? Do you get my question?

(Understand I'm not stereotyping you all; I'm just using examples above. Don't discuss your specific convictions here unless absolutely necessary; they are yours alone to keep.)

*Phil

uke for sensei

abzmt — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 08:17:16 GMT

ok I noticed this the other night. When sensei is demonstrating a technique for the class and you are his/her uke should your focus be on learning what they are showing or on being uke? I'm asking because I find myself being distracted trying to learn and fail to give realistic intent/energy to sensei which in turn doesn't help the class see it done properly.

ok I think I just answered my own question. anyone have any comments?

Adam

Who's your master, baby?

dangerwit — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 22:56:12 GMT

No no, not a bad joke. Something to ponder (from a story I read a while back):

A zen priest used to wake up alone in the morning, and ask aloud, "Is your master up?" He would answer to himself, "Yes, he is up."

What do you make of that? (Nidan and above need not reply)

*Phil

Aikido saturation point

Tristan — Tue, 01 Nov 2005 07:57:29 GMT

When I started aikido last fall, I got to talking to a friend of mine about it. I told him how often I was attending classes and he was a bit surprised. He told me that he had another friend that also studied aikido for a period (at another dojo), attending four times a week or so.

He told me that after a while, his friend encountered a saturation point and hit burn-out. We didn't go into details, but he said his friend just couldn't maintain the pace for an extended period. This is totally understandable and happens frequently. I've seen it in other martial arts as well as with physical training, sports, and just about anything that involves learning. This burn-out gets more pronounced when you add physical reinforcement to what is being learned.

Even if you only train twice a week, make sure you're not overextending yourself. Any type of training takes emotional commitment, or you will get little out of it. That emotional commitment is difficult to maintain. The difficulty can (and probably will) increase over time, so keep your eye on it. Once burn-out starts to happen, your training can go from an enjoyable experience to an agonizing labor. You may very well get to feeling like you aren't learning anything and you are getting frustrated. The end result of which will be one of two things: You will not want to show up anymore, or you will bring your frustrations out on the mat which shows disrespect to the dojo, senseis and fellow students.

We are fortunate to have a dojo environment(s) that are positive and encouraging. Never think that is only due to others, although they do influence it. It has to do with you and the spirit you bring in. You may think you are only a minor component to classes, but that isn't the case. Your presence adds to the spirit of the dojo, and to a greater degree than you think.

What gave me the urge to bring this up? I suppose so that I could offer up some information that might help those who have chosen to study aikido, and maybe save themselves hitting a wall of frustration. I don't want anyone to suffer by this problem. Burn-out sneaks up on you every time unless you watching out for it. Most people don't realize what is happening until they are very unhappy and are trying to figure out why. In some cases, they incorrectly assess that they have hit a plateau (another training obstacle). I believe plateauing and burn-out are different problems, although they can be very similar in nature.

Have any of you ever experienced the saturation point, or burn-out?

Tenkan vs. Irimi in everyday life

Tristan — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:19:48 GMT

When it comes to applying aiki in daily life, it is easy to think of handling sticky situations with a tenkan type of approach: get out of the way of the incoming energy, blend with it and guide it to where you would like to go. Thusly, protecting yourself and taking gentle control of the situation.

Tenkan is only half of the picture, irimi is just as prominent. I view the intercepting irimi to be just as powerful as tenkan, but I associate it with a much more aggressive demeanor. The theory, after all, is to intercept an attack just as it starts to take form. This means you must be on your toes. In social situations, one would have to be extremely perceptive to recognize an 'attack' as it forms. A few people have an uncanny ability to perceive attitudes that gives them insights of what is about to happen, but many do not. The other danger I see with irimi-style problem solving would be anticipation, which we know is bad.

In the past, my initiative has helped me solve problems early before they became big. Upon reflection, that must be the heart of irimi.

Would O'Sensei smile?

Onikoroshi — Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:26:12 GMT

What do you think O'Sensei would think of the divisions within Aikido? The inherent politics, and egos that keep this art from being a unified front to "reconcile the world".

Since it is many of his uchideshi that pervade these philosophies and attitudes, what do you think his response would be? I've often said that the best and worst thing to happen to aikido is the dying off of the "old guard".

Deification is the devil!

Onikoroshi — Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:58:22 GMT

I have seen this more than once.

You have an instructor, who is very good and instills loyalty. This loyalty turns to putting the person on a pedastal. The pedastal soon becomes mount Olympus and the instructor is now deified. Only to have the instructor (in a very human fashion) screw up and show his "mortalness". And many a student are devastated.

I.E.

O'Sensei is deified by many. In Ellis Amdur's book "Duelling with O'Sensei", Ellis explains his political ties (less than complimentary), as well as, the fact that O'Sensei could devote his life to Budo because he was from a privileged family. His deification, although, in good shintoist fashion came after he passed away.

Takashi Kushida (co-founder of the Yoshinkan and founder of the AYANA) He broke away from Shioda's organization and founded an organization that is designed around technical and physical isolation (they will not train with anyone outside their group, nor let anyone with aikido or other martial art experience train with them for fear of pollution). He did nothing to stop the deification process and has a nice cult to boot.

Koichi Tohei Sensei is revered to point of deification, and he either doesn't see it, or thinks it his due.

What do you think about this process? Put yourself in the shoes of an indoctrinated student. How would it effect you to have your "aikido god" fall before your eyes?