The one thing I really like about his writing is that he asks difficult questions about Aikido and it's purpose. I want this article, for me at least, to be the start of an intellectual reflection about why Aikido techniques are the way they are and particularly ukemi, why it is done and whether what is done is fit for purpose.
Shite Happens:
Shite, like Shitachi (in Japanese swordsmanship) is the receiver. The one who accepts and learners from uke and uchitachi respectively.
Shite waza are the techniques performed by the receiver, the throws and locks that make up the compendium of the Aikido curriculum (with largely transcends ryuha (style)). But why is that curriculum the way it is? To understand that I must first try (with my very limited knowledge), to look at the world in which these shite waza were developed.
Long before Ueshiba Sensei, the amazing world of the Japanese koryu dominated Japan. These systems contained a wide range of techniques, many different approaches to survival in a brutal world of battlefield combat, assassination and self sacrifice. The techniques of Aikido, like Judo and Kendo are the modern face of this world. However, if you search and probe, these schools still exist and allow us, just like a person seeking to understand their family tree, we can find many of the answers about the 'why' of what we do now.
Firstly, many Japanese combative systems were developed for the battlefield which is why we find relatively few percussive elements with the bare hands. Simply put, hitting a man with bamboo and leather armour with flesh and bone is likely to reveal only one loser, additionally, kicking techniques are not likely to be a priority to the well armed Samurai.
What are their priorities likely to be (this did vary depending on the period of pre Tokugawa history)?
- The Kyu (bow)
- Steel (tamahegane) based weapons: Yari (spear) and Naginata (halberd)
- Katana (and its many variations)
- Kodachi and secondary weapons should your primary one be lost or broken
- Unarmed techniques suitable against a man in armour
Many see the first port of call when looking at the Hoplology of Aikido as Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, but Daito Ryu is only one generation older than Aikido and doesn't really offer us much insight, plus it was developed during a time of relative peace in Japan, and certainly far for the world of the Samurai.
I want to mention at this stage that in this article I won't be covering any weapons history.
According to what I understand Ellis Amdur's work is pointing to, there are a number of combative systems that are shadows in Aikido's past:
- Inagamu Shinmyo-ryu
- Yoshin-ryu
- Tenjin Shinyo-ryu (I read this somewhere, but I can't remember where! AHH!)
- Yagyu Shingan-ryu
The first three were studied by those before Ueshiba Sensei (and form part of the creation of Daito-ryu) and the fourth was studied directly by him.
What is the difference between Jujutsu and Aikido? In short, nothing, if we put the 'peace and love' part of the Ueshiba's legend in a box and name it 'wishful thinking' and the whole but 'Aikido doesn't contain dangerous techniques' in a box and name is 'worrying ignorance', combatively there is little difference between many Koryu Jujutsu and Aikido. It is a method of defeating an armed/unarmed opponent that is possibly in armour by throwing and locking them.
However, just like in Judo, Aikido techniques are based on battlefield combat, thus, many of the techniques are designed to work in and against armour.
Tenjin Shinyo-ryu
Yagyu Shingan-ryu
When I watch these methods of jujtusu, I don't see them as that alien to me. Of course I don't understand the ins and outs, the secret of these amazing systems, but I see some of the commonality with what I do week in and week out on the mat.
These systems are clearly part of our combative heritage as Aikidoka, and before we add our own modern interpretations, we must consider whether it would fit in with an older, austere and more intensity efficient world.
