Pause for Thought:

Jujutsu is commonly recognized as an art involving some form of effective close quarters combat and also often contained instruction in small weapons usage and atemi. There were, and are, many schools of jujutsu. Of course, modern Judo came from Jujutsu. What these schools held, and hold, in common was some efficient and/or rational form of combative manipulation. Often this involved knowledge of anatomy, basic physics and combat related psychology. Knowledge of twisting, locking, tearing, breaking, setting, nerve centers and manipulation of mass and/or inertia was common. Principles of simple machines such as the wedge, lever and wheel were also known. These areas fall easily into the realm of Jujutsu. And, as is common practice in many martial arts, these schools had, and have, dojo rules and moral, if not spiritual, teachings.

Ju jutsu knowledge and skills are commonly demonstrated within Daito Ryu, and it was known to many as Daito Ryu Ju jutsu. As this is so, it should come as no surprise that Daito Ryu Ju jutsu can still be recognized within modern Aikido.

Of course, Daito Ryu was also known as Daito Ryu Aiki Ju jutsu. Indeed, Aiki no Jutsu (the art/skill of Aiki) was part of Daito Ryu study. Ueshiba Morihei initially taught Daito Ryu (Ju jutusu and Aiki Ju jutsu), which also came to be known by other names including simply Aiki Ju jutsu, Aiki Budo and finally, Aikido. Indeed, for a period of time most practitioners of Aiki arts called what they practiced “Aikido” regardless of allegiance or affiliation. Beyond Ju skills, Aiki skills were seen as a separate and defining characteristic of these arts. The importance of this difference was formally recognized when the Butokukai’s governing body deemed it both necessary and appropriate that the art Ueshiba Morihei was teaching be placed under a separate category with the title “Aikido,” rather than under the pre-existing category of “Ju jutsu/Judo”.

It was due to the fact that skills of Ju-jutsu and Aiki no jutsu were seen as different from each other that Aiki Jujutsu could exist as the combination of Ju-jutsu knowledge, skill, and attributes and Aiki no Jutsu knowledge, skill, and attributes.

It follows then that an art that possesses and demonstrates the knowledge and skills commonly associated with jujutsu can be properly said to be a ju art or a derivative thereof. We know and have listed knowledge and skills commonly associated and demonstrated by Ju jutsu arts. There are many respected historical schools of jujutsu, and even more modern derivatives. Perhaps the most widely practiced and famous of these is Judo. All of these schools, historical and modern, have Ju in common.

Similarly, an art that possesses and demonstrates the knowledge and skills commonly associated with Aiki can properly said to be an Aiki art or a derivative thereof. We know and can list the knowledge and skills commonly associated with Aiki, and regularly demonstrated by Aiki arts . . .

Wait. Can we?

Is it common knowledge what the teachings and skills specific to Aiki are? Is this knowledge and skill regularly demonstrated within Aiki arts? More specifically, is it clear to all how the knowledge, skill, and demonstration of Aiki differs from that of Ju?

It seems the answer to these questions are, “No!”

Unlike Ju, the definition of Aiki, especially one that is distinct from Ju, isn’t as easily ascertained nor is it commonly recognized. Sure, Aiki is spoken of and written about but there sure doesn’t seem to be the basic unity of understanding found within Ju jutsu arts.

Recently in an online conversation involving many students from different lineages of Daito Ryu the question, “What is Aiki?” was asked.

One would think that arts that claim to teach Aiki, such as Daito Ryu, and Aikido, ought to be able to easily define Aiki. There was much discussion, some conflagration, but no conclusion. Such a result isn’t unique to Daito Ryu though. It seems there is no universally acknowledged definition of Aiki within the Aikido community as well. In fact, Aiki seems to be more a point of controversy than consensus, especially within arts claiming to teach “Aiki!”

Wow! Really? How can arts that claim to be Aiki arts NOT be able to define the very term that defines the art??? Can one teach Aiki while not knowing what Aiki is? Some argue that Aiki is “in the eye of the beholder.” If definition of no-definition were to be accepted then anything could be claimed to be Aiki, thereby rendering the term meaningless.

When practitioners of Ju based arts look at supposed Aiki based arts, they certainly can recognize that which appears to be Ju based and held in common. I remember that Jim Onchi Judo 9th dan (https://www.usjf.com/blog/jim-onchi-tribute) once said, “Aikido is just Judo!” I think there are, and were, many within the Jujutsu and Judo community that would have agreed with Jim and probably thought that the Aikido they saw was pretty poorly executed Ju jutsu/Judo as well. In the 60’s Jon Bluming Judo 9th Dan ( http://www.jonbluming.nl/index.php?lang=en ) visited

Allen Beebe and Jon Bluming

the Aikido Hombu dojo (I think it was Don Draeger’s idea), saw a demonstration, and asked for a match. Mr. Bluming was turned down and he left the Hombu in disgust. Practitioners of Ju based arts can see a commonality with Ju jutsu, but do they see what Aiki is? Do they recognize it as unique and worthy of distinction?

When high level jujutsu, judo, sumo, kenjutsu and kendoka, etc. engaged Takeda and Ueshiba when they are actively teaching, they recognized that there was something significantly different going on . . . and anyone that does even a cursory study of jujutsu, judo, sumo, kenjutsu and kendo, etc. quickly discovers that it wasn’t the techniques that set these men apart. (Go ahead, if you haven’t already and take a look at historical ju-jutsu, ken-jutsu, etc. you will see that there is more commonality than difference there.)

It was that “something” that couldn’t be understood and/or explained via outward technical form that impressed and convinced their well trained and seasoned martial arts peers. Takeda and Ueshiba called the “something” that set them apart, “Aiki.”

What sets Aiki arts apart today? Or, could it be that most are practicing Daito Ryu ju jutsu, or something that used to be Daito Ryu ju jutsu, whilst calling their art “Aiki.”

I suggest that if we do a survey of what impressed others about Takeda and Ueshiba beyond observable technique, we can begin to clarify what Aiki is, or at least was.

We will take a look at this in my next written blog!

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!

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!

Liked it? Take a second to support Allen Dean Beebe on Patreon!