Deluxe Martial Arts Forums - View Single Post

Brokenmace · 08-31-2002, 02:33 PM

Hi, Bri Thai. Thanks for the response. We probably agree on more than you think.

Here's the thing that concerns me, though. A lot of people, especially on this board, seem to think a person trains for the martial arts for the sole purpose of survival and/or ring bouts. Either reason is an excellent reason, but not the only reason. Remember, the founder of Aikido was a traditionalist in many ways. In the Fifties he was already an old man. He was raised on the Budo (traditional warrior ethics), was trained in traditional Aikijutsu, and was a fair swordsman. He never intended his art to be what it may seem you want it to be. His primary weapon was a sword. His art was designed with the realization that any life-and-death situation would be resolved with a weapon (which he apparently carried around everywhere). Aikido has its place. If you are train in Bugei, your aim is not to kill with your hands, but to kill with your sword. My original post in this thread was simply to point out that the basic motions of Aikido were essentially human motions, and with proper thought could be an adjunct to any other art.

All arts were designed in a time and culture for which they were suited. A real, traditional Aikidoka would use a sword if death were warranted. That is why most Aikido moves are based on sword strokes. Aikido, like Japanese Jujutsu, was an add-on to Kenjutsu (Bugei), and thus was treated like a modern soldier treats a knife. It is the tool of the policeman.

As to your point about it taking years to learn, I've already state that the originals were Bugei practitioners, and thus were taught from childhood to be warriors, not simply competitors or even survivalists. They were learning to live and die for a Shogunate.

Could an Aikidoist beat Muay Thai practitioner of the same physical ability? That doesn't depend on the art, as I've stated elsewhere on this board. It is entirely up to the cercumstances of one's training. An advanced student from my brother's old school might have done quite well. They trained against kickboxing and grappling, and used resistance. Another student from another school might have done worse. This reflects more on student and instructor than the art practiced.

And, finally, about my instructors. Well, they aren't just stories, because as you may know S.W.A.T. team members aren't just that, they are also regular cops with regular cop duties. He's been in more than one bar room altercation and has had to restrain many unwilling suspects over his fifteen years of experience. Tell me that's not a likely story, and I'd like to sell you some swampland.

Besides, even on a S.W.A.T. call, not every situation can be solved with an MP-5 or a Glock.

Sorry for being so long-winded

Respect

08-31-2002, 02:33 PM	#17 (permalink)
Brokenmace Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 259 Groans: 0 Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts	Hi, Bri Thai. Thanks for the response. We probably agree on more than you think. Here's the thing that concerns me, though. A lot of people, especially on this board, seem to think a person trains for the martial arts for the sole purpose of survival and/or ring bouts. Either reason is an excellent reason, but not the only reason. Remember, the founder of Aikido was a traditionalist in many ways. In the Fifties he was already an old man. He was raised on the Budo (traditional warrior ethics), was trained in traditional Aikijutsu, and was a fair swordsman. He never intended his art to be what it may seem you want it to be. His primary weapon was a sword. His art was designed with the realization that any life-and-death situation would be resolved with a weapon (which he apparently carried around everywhere). Aikido has its place. If you are train in Bugei, your aim is not to kill with your hands, but to kill with your sword. My original post in this thread was simply to point out that the basic motions of Aikido were essentially human motions, and with proper thought could be an adjunct to any other art. All arts were designed in a time and culture for which they were suited. A real, traditional Aikidoka would use a sword if death were warranted. That is why most Aikido moves are based on sword strokes. Aikido, like Japanese Jujutsu, was an add-on to Kenjutsu (Bugei), and thus was treated like a modern soldier treats a knife. It is the tool of the policeman. As to your point about it taking years to learn, I've already state that the originals were Bugei practitioners, and thus were taught from childhood to be warriors, not simply competitors or even survivalists. They were learning to live and die for a Shogunate. Could an Aikidoist beat Muay Thai practitioner of the same physical ability? That doesn't depend on the art, as I've stated elsewhere on this board. It is entirely up to the cercumstances of one's training. An advanced student from my brother's old school might have done quite well. They trained against kickboxing and grappling, and used resistance. Another student from another school might have done worse. This reflects more on student and instructor than the art practiced. And, finally, about my instructors. Well, they aren't just stories, because as you may know S.W.A.T. team members aren't just that, they are also regular cops with regular cop duties. He's been in more than one bar room altercation and has had to restrain many unwilling suspects over his fifteen years of experience. Tell me that's not a likely story, and I'd like to sell you some swampland. Besides, even on a S.W.A.T. call, not every situation can be solved with an MP-5 or a Glock. Sorry for being so long-winded Respect __________________ A broken mace is still a weapon.