This text is also available in: Deutsch

Aiki changes according to the situation, but what most of my pupils are doing is not fundamentally aiki technique because it does not work in real fighting. When we really fight we clash first. Aiki must stand this first clash of the enemy.

-Takuma Hisa, Aikido 8th Dan / Daito-ryu Aiki-jujutsu Menkyo Kaiden

https://www.aikidosangenkai.org/blog/takuma-hisa-kannagara-no-budo-daito-ryu-aiki-budo-hiden-1940/

This quote is used as a teaser by Chris Li for his excellent article at the link above.  Some might wish to ignore what Takuma Hisa has to say because he doesn’t do “their Aikido” or “their Daito Ryu.”  This would be a mistake in my opinion.  After all, he became an Aikido 8th Dan under Ueshiba Morihei (when Ueshiba was still teaching actively) and a Menkyo Kaiden directly under Takeda Sokaku as well.  Kannagara no Budo Daito Ryu Aiki Budo Hiden contains a glimpse into what both Takeda and Ueshiba called Daito Ryu and Aikido at that time.  The movie that Hisa and Ueshiba made a few years earlier also spoke of Kannagara no Budo and Aiki Budo  It has been claimed that Ueshiba changed his art after the war.  I think it obvious upon comparison that Aikido and even Daito Ryu changed after the war. But there is no evidence supporting the claim that Takeda and/or Ueshiba changed much.  Takuma Hisa claimed that what Takeda and Ueshiba were doing was the same.

I think the above quote is quite interesting.  Takuma Hisa says that “Aiki changes according to the situation” This makes sense when one considers that Aiki requires constant change.  What Takuma Hisa doesn’t say is interesting as well.  He doesn’t say, “Waza changes according to the situation.”  He may well have thought that waza should change according to the situation, but that isn’t the issue he is addressing here.  Here he is taking about Aiki.

Takuma Hisa goes on to say, “ . . . but what most of my pupils are doing is not fundamentally aiki technique because it does not work in real fighting.”  Here he is stating that true Aiki technique works in real fighting, what his students are doing “does not work in real fighting,” therefore it fundamentally cannot be Aiki.  It may look like Aiki waza.  It may be called “Aiki waza.”  But it fundamentally cannot be Aiki waza if there is no Aiki happening.  Again, Takuma Hisa isn’t talking about a specific technique.  He does not claim that there is a specific technique that changes and applies to all situations.  He is stating that fundamentally Aiki changes and works, and in his opinion should work in all situations.

This makes perfect sense.  If there was one technique that worked in all situations it would make sense that Takuma Hisa’s curriculum would consist of THE one technique.  But it doesn’t.  His compendium of techniques is huge.  

He states that, “When we really fight, we clash first.”  The Ueshiba’s Aikido 8th dan and Takeda’s Menkyo Kaiden is saying, “When we really fight, we clash first.”  He didn’t say, “When we really fight, I get off the line of attack” or “When we really fight, we follow decorum first, then you attack in a preconceived manner, and then I apply an appropriate technique.”

Clash is defined as “meet and come into violent conflict.” 

But wait!  There is no conflict in Aiki!  

That is true.  But nobody said there is no meeting.  When two forces come together orthogonally, regardless they do not conflict with eachother.  But they do meet.  

There is a catch though.  The spinning wheel of a locomotive is going to be able to “not resist” a far greater force than a spinning marshmallow.  

This is where we begin to understand Takuma Hisa’s statement about Aiki.  

He says, “Aiki must stand this first clash of the enemy.”  In other words, regardless of technique, if the axle, wheel, and tire generating Aiki cannot withstand the “the clash of the enemy” there will fundamentally not be any Aiki.  If I had a car on a lift, started the engine and put it into gear, if I lowered the lift my car would take off.  If I had a car with marshmallow axles, wheels and tires on a lift, started the engine and put it into gear, if I lowered the lift my care would crush the tires, wheels, axles and go nowhere.  

Want to meet strong forces with no conflict?  One’s body must be up to the task.  One needs an Aiki body.

One may develop the ability to Aiki, but the amount that a person can fundamentally Aiki is dependent upon the strength of one’s axle, wheel and tires.  (I’m not even going to get into the engine here.) This explains why masters of Aiki continually worked on strengthening themselves in a manner that was conducive to producing Aiki.  Ueshiba referred to this as Kokyu Ryoku no Yosei Ho. Kokyu Ryoku isn’t Aiki per say But the strength of one’s Aiki is dependent upon the strength of one’s Kokyu Ryoku. Of course everyone, including the masters, have their limits. 

Did I mention Kokyu Ryoku and Aiki aren’t martial techniques?  Kokyu Ryoku and Aiki aren’t martial techniques!  

So there we go.  We need to develop Kokyu Ryoku if we are going to be able to Aiki.  We need to develop the ability to Aiki. And if we plan to use our Kokyu Ryoku and Aiki in combat, we need to develop technical and tactical ability in the type of combat we expect to engage in.  Easy peezy!

 

True Aiki is free for all to read, but it is not free.  As little as $1 can help to cover expenses and possibly add features to True Aiki.

Thank You!

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Please consider becoming a patron of Allen Dean Beebe's True Aiki.  Your ongoing support will best assure the continuance and growth of True Aiki.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR GENEROUS SUPPORT!become_a_patron_button

 

Liked it? Take a second to support Allen Dean Beebe on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!
Categories: Relating to Aiki

10 Comments

Fred Veer · September 3, 2018 at 7:30 am

Hi Allen,

good blog.

A lot to think about there.

Are the TDD then Shirata sensei’s embodiment of the kokyo ryoko?

fred

    admin · September 3, 2018 at 4:13 pm

    Hi Fred,

    Shirata Sensei taught a compendium of Kokyu Ryoku no Yosei Ho (which also contained Aiki.) The 13 tandokudosa was part of his contribution to that compendium. There is more than just the 13 tandokudosa, some of which he contributed, some that seemingly came for Ueshiba, and some that obviously came from Takeda.

    Of course along with this, there are exercises that Dan created, and also exercises that I have created. I try not to mix them up. I think, at least for history’s sake, to give credit where credit is due. So, for example if I’ll say, “Shirata sensei taught me this.” Or in the case of Dan’s exercises I encourage people to learn them directly from Dan. As for my exercises and ideas I introduce them as such. Hopefully this keeps people from getting confused. In almost every seminar someone asks, “Is this what Dan meant by . . .” I always refer them to Dan. My understanding is my understanding. Why not go to the source? Of course in the case of Shirata, Ueshiba, Takeda, etc. one can no longer go “to the source.”

    I’m getting off topic I know, but I recommend “going to the source” whenever possible. The sources are not immortal but their teaching can be.

    Hoping you are well, busy, and happy,

    Allen

fred veer · September 4, 2018 at 6:52 am

Hi Allen,

I am well, very busy as the academic year is starting and happy.

Maybe in a future blog you could elaborate on the above and explain the exercises of takeda, ueshiba, shirate and yourself in sequence so that us less informed people can see the development of these.

A big question, but I think an important one.

Fred

Robin Schaechter · September 5, 2018 at 11:21 pm

Hello Mr Beebe

I’ve got to proceed my comment by saying that I don’t practice Aikido or Diato ryu, am not familiar with Takuma Hisa, don’t read Japanese and am certainly not able to manifest Aiki in the way he describes. However…

The quote you begin this article with suggests an alternative interpretation to me.

A number of writers on conflict, most notably Rory Miler and Marc MacYoung, draw a distinction between social and asocial violence. The former being primarily concerned with display and disputes over status and the latter being predatory behaviour. My understanding is that those involved in social violence are often aware of the build up to physical conflict. In contrast, predatory violence is generally carried out in such a way as to ensure the ‘victim’ is unaware or surprised by the escalation to physical conflict.

Could Hisa be commenting on the depth to which connection (Kokyu Ryoku?) and Aiki are integrated into an individual? I have heard teachers of IP make distinctions between being able to manifest connection in solo practice, co-operative paired practice, semi co-operative work and free sparing. I would argue that co-operative, semi co-operative and sparing practice fall into the category of social violence. It seems logical to me that the varying levels of psychological stress and adrenaline response provoked by different conflicts affects a practitioners ability to put their training, connection/Aiki included, to use. The manipulation or surprise that is the hallmark of asocial violence then adds an additional level of challenge, potentially preventing an individual that is capable of using Aiki in free sparing from dealing with a surprise attack. When he says “Aiki must stand this first clash of the enemy” was Hisa saying that only individuals able to instinctively manifest Aiki in the most extreme of situations are truly practicing Aiki?

If this is the case, it is a contentious point. It also brings up questions about how this material is taught and the affect this has on how it is manifested. Again Miller, amongst others, focuses on intellectual learning, learning through play and operant conditioning as teaching methodologies for skills to be used in conflict situations.

I’m particularly interested in the extent to which we can, or want to be ‘on’ continuously and/or whether we want to be able to switch ‘on’ at will. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on this as a person with far more experience of this material then myself.

I also hasten to add that I wholeheartedly agree with the points you make in your article! I’m just interested in the other potential interpretations.

All the best and happy training.

Robin Schaechter

Damien · September 6, 2018 at 6:24 pm

“but what most of my pupils are doing is not fundamentally aiki technique because it does not work in real fighting” – Didn’t he mean that aiki techniques in reality don’t work in real fighting because aiki can’t stand the first clash?

    Robin Schaechter · September 6, 2018 at 7:03 pm

    If you accept the translation above as definitive, then I can see 2 ways of interpreting Hisas’ statement.

    1) What my students practice would work in a fight, but Aiki doesn’t…so what they do is not Aiki.

    2) What my students practice would not work in a fight, but real Aiki does…so what they do is not Aiki.

    Given that the quote ends with Hisa saying “Aiki MUST stand this first clash of the enemy” my money is on the second reading!

    admin · September 6, 2018 at 10:01 pm

    Hi Damien,

    Thank you for your question. Of course what Takuma Hisa truly meant is a mute point because he isn’t around to clarify his meaning. However, for the reasons that Robin lists in reply to your post, I am inclined to interpret Takuma Hisa’s words the second way as well. The first way of interpreting Takuma Hisa’s words would have him pretty much throwing Daito Ryu “under the bus” as a viable martial art. That would be a highly irregular thing for a Menkyo Kaiden of an art to do to their art. Criticizing one’s own students would be pretty normal thing to do. For example, in Japan parents would never publicly praise their children. Regardless of their true feelings, it is far more likely that they would criticize their children in public. Anyway, that’s what I think for what it is worth!

    Thank you for your thoughtful and engaged response!
    Allen

      Damien · September 7, 2018 at 3:23 pm

      “The first way of interpreting Takuma Hisa’s words would have him pretty much throwing Daito Ryu “under the bus” as a viable martial art.”

      Honestly, he somewhat throws it under either way. If his students aren’t doing something that’s not useful that means that a huge chunk of the art makes no sense to do in the first place. Then he says:

      “When we really fight we clash first. Aiki must stand this first clash of the enemy.” – He inclined and highlighted, but yet didn’t directly said if aiki doesn’t stand that clash it doesn’t work.

      It’s a weird statement with two ways of interpretation for some reason. I think I know why, still he could have been clearer about it.

        Damien · September 8, 2018 at 2:10 pm

        *If his students aren’t doing something that’s useful

Aiki, Social Violence, and Predatory Violence – TRUE AIKI · December 30, 2020 at 1:40 am

[…] reader Robin Scheachter. posted a really great question in response to my blog https://trueaiki.com/ooooooo-what-takuma-hisa-said/  and I thought the subject worthy of its own post so here it is.  Robin […]

Leave a Reply