4. What Are the Elements of Strength in Aikido (self-defence ability)?

First what defines strength in Aikido?

In the end it depends on how useful it is for your self-defence in a fighting encounter. Frankly speaking, it is difficult to judge objectively. However I think a highly experienced Aikidoka (generally speaking one with more than thirty or forty years of experience) could judge the level of the self-defence efficiency correctly if they were impartial in their views.

In this case an experienced Aikidoka has to try to judge fairly whether or not:

1. One exhibits enough breath power
2. One's techniques have sharpness
3. One's techniques are rational and free of strain
4. One's movements harmonize with the attack of one's opponent
5. There is any cooperation or collusion

Of course, in a fighting encounter anything we can imagine might happen. For instance, the opponent might have a knife or something of that sort; there may be the friends of the opponent nearby. It is not surprising that any unexpected situation may occur. We must know those various conditions and try to evaluate a person's level of the self-defence ability.

Well, the 2nd Doshu, Kisshomaru sensei, refrained from talking about the practicality of using Aikido techniques in a fighting encounter. He often declared his philosophy of Aikido as follows: "Aikido is a special kind of martial arts that overcomes strength and weakness. We must harmonize with our opponents before contending them. This is the discipline of Aikido."

He also said as often as possible: "Strength is better than weakness, however we have to advance to one-step higher level than usual. Everyone should harmonize with his/her opponent regardless of his/her strength or weakness. Harmonization is Aikido."

Simply put, he had emphasized the mental side of Aikido above all else although he admitted that we need strength. In other words the 2nd Doshu made much of the mental side of O-sensei's Aikido and in his ideal philosophy Aikido became a way of mental training for human beings.

Therefore he arranged O-sensei's techniques into a much easier and much more popular form which anyone could practice, that is Ki-no-nagare (Flowing practice) which is but a part of O-sensei's Aikido. And he declares himself that his new Aikido is "Spiritual Martial Art" or "Philosophical Martial Art" that has never existed once.

I think this wonderful and when I think of this I have a sense of peace for a while. Therefore I will assert his concept is surely right in a sense and never wrong.

However I still dare to say that the origin of Budo itself is not only a theoretical and spiritual thing. It also requires a more practical and technical aspect at its core.

I am not saying that Aikikai style makes light of the strength in Aikido in its practical techniques.

The 2nd Doshu often explained in his books or at the annual All Japan Aikido Demonstration "Aikido looks very round and soft in its superficial movement but it must have a severe core at the center of the movement." He insisted that Aikido is useful enough as a martial art by keeping the severe central core and moving circularly. I agree with his words entirely.

However when we question how we can acquire practical techniques, it is regrettable that Aikikai style doesn't answer this concretely as regards to detailed methods.

It is clear that the forms of the basic techniques are showed roughly outlined at the first ( Kihan Aikido(Japanese version)— Best Aikido(English version)) ( Refer to Chapt. 2 Chronological table (Note 3)). But Aikikai stylists are apt to speak only in general principles saying things like "Focus your mind on your one point below the navel", "Pour forth your Ki while relaxed", "Move your body circularly" or "Enter into the side line of the opponent avoiding his/her attack" at the practical and flowing stage of their Ki-no-nagare.

This will surely cause them to overlook the precise and detailed forms of their techniques. In Ki-no-nagare (Flowing practice) they move, harmonizing with their partner's movement from the beginning so the forms (Katachi) are formalized rather roughly, not elaborated upon and practitioners must devise and discover for themselves the details of them by the practical research of every individual. This occurs because the flow in Ki-no-nagare of techniques is given the highest priority over other practices.

If I can draw on my own experience, the more serious the trainees are, the more seriously they try to research the detailed forms of the techniques. For example, what direction should we enter from? How should we control the opponent effectively and so on? I also used to do this but for general public like me it was very difficult to find the correct forms.

I would like to say that the leaders should teach the detailed forms and the correct order of each technique with a reasonable explanation to their beginners at the first stage of Aikido training as is done in Iwama style. (The weapons techniques are useful for this.)

Why don't they do so? The main reason is that Aikikai style is Ki-no-nagare (Flowing practice) that was extracted from and thus is only a part of O-sensei's Aikido.

This approach doesn't, at the beginning stage, result in the acquisition of very precise and detailed forms and order of each basic technique. This fact will lead to a sense of anxiety regarding Aikido's strength (self-defence ability) at the later stage (after ten and twenty years) when one would begins to worry about scenarios in which the opponent doesn't move as expected.

On the other hand, at the first stage of Iwama style Aikidoka (Tori) moves after being firmly grabbed or struck by their partner (Uke). This is Katai-keiko (Solid practice). The detailed forms and order of the techniques are formal and strict and Tori has to learn them correctly through severe practice. The detailed forms are structured to make any resistance of Uke non-effective. Then any Tori can do the techniques confidently as long as they practice the appropriate forms and order.

The exchange is so severe in Iwama style that people can't move unless they do know the appropriate detailed forms of each technique. We can call it "a rational severity" but once people acquire the skill, they will be very pleased that they can move under any situation. However the leaders must moderate his power adjusting to the physical condition of Uke like beginners or women.

If a third party looks at this situation, the practice in Iwama style looks like people severely "training" the rationale and effective principles of Aikido. On the contrary, the training in Aikikai style looks like people "confirming" to the rationale of each other's understanding of Aikido principles.

In brief, Aikikai style emphasizes the concept of Harmonization even in the practical training that is that Tori and Uke harmonize their movements with each other in Ki-no-nagare as the central approach to executing the practical techniques. Regrettably, this has resulted in making their techniques rough and in preventing Aikidoka from having an effective method of acquiring strength (self-defence ability) in Aikido and in having anxiety about the practicality of the techniques in their later stage.

In conclusion, strength (self-defence ability/efficiency) in Aikido depends basically on the detailed forms (Katachi) and the order (Junjo) of each technique and not approximate ones. The level of the precision of Katachi and Junjo are the fundamental elements that determine the strength (self-defence ability) of Aikido.

(Note) Absolute Strength:

It is the opposite of relative strength, which is dependent of the opponent. It means that great strength with which one can control the opponent unconditionally. In other words it is such as strength as making a situation that we have already won. As a matter of fact we cannot realize such strength (O-sensei almost reached almost this) but we can at least aim at such strength as our goal.