Aikido people doing Daito Ryu

Some of our Aikido class has started training in Daito Ryu jujutsu with a local teacher and some "seminar" instructors, and the resulting combination isn't very good. You would think differently, since one of the base arts of Aikido is DRJJ.

Maybe what's irritating about this, is that we give these people instructions in Aikido, and they tend to ignore or do something different from what we tell them. They get the same instruction in Daito Ryu, and you'd think they discovered fire. Now, before you start thinking it's "different teachers", it isn't... it's from the same guys... which makes it twice as irritating.

I asked one of them last night... "Is AIKIDO English different from Daito Ryu English?" Apparently so, because they follow the DRJJ instructions to the letter, but wander all over the place with Aikido instructions.

We were doing some kokyu nage techniques last night, and the students were having trouble. I told them no less than five times to "take a step as you execute the technique"... no results. They were asking about a DRJJ technique similar to the kokyu technique, and I said the same thing... no problem... took a big step, and the technique worked flawlessly.

I think what we're dealing with is "selective hearing"... and I would be interested to know how you might solve the problem. I already know what I'll do, but I'll save it to the end of the discussion because I'm curious how others would deal with it.

Why would you allow people in your dojo who are not there to learn what you are teaching? Tell them to go train Daito-ryu if they like it so much.

It seems to be a problem with perception that some people have about martial arts. For instance, a front kick in Kyokushin karate to some people will seem more effective than a front kick from TKD, even though they may be taught in exactly the same way. Why is this? IMHO, it is because some people have an ideal of what a certain martial art is in their head. Rather than actually looking at what a martial art is, or how it is being taught to them, they revert back to the picture they have tin their head of what a martial art "is".

It's a problem many people have generally in my experience (not just with MA). They base their ideas on their perception of something, not what actually occurred. By this I mean they read something, see something, hear something, form a perspective on it, and use that as a base to use rational from, rather than actually looking at something as it is.

To further explain, you could say if a person watches a UFC match, and sees a UFC fighter in the cage beating someone up, they might think "MMA is a good system of fighting." They go to their local school to learn MMA. Now, their local school happens to be terrible, with a bad instructor who doesn't know what he is doing. But that person, rather than observing the instructor is bad, still reverts back to their perception of MMA being a good system "as it looked good on TV". They have their blinkers on. Now, I am not saying MMA isn’t a good system, rather, I am saying you cannot base your opinion on a flawed perception.

I think this could be what is happening here Wristwriter... Daito Ryu is perceived by a lot of folks, rightly or wrongly, as the Uber Samurai art, a deadly art used by the most noble and ferocious warrior’s humanity ever knew etc....

Aikido, wrongly IMO, has a rep for being "softer". It is a means of self-improvement, not a deadly samurai art that makes you nigh on untouchable etc...




What it seems is that some of these students are using their own perceptions of Daito Ryu and Aikido (i.e. what they believe them to be) rather than judging what is actually being taught.

A Pencak Silat Guru I know teaches Indonesia Pencak Silat, but has some Malaysian Silat thrown in too. He doesn't see the point in telling beginners if a technique or juru is Indonesian or Malaysian... he just shows them.

My advice would be to try this. Don't tell them it's Aikido or Daito Ryu... just give them instruction and tell them to do it. If you take the labels of the jars, they will be forced to judge something on how it actually is, not on their "perceptions (i.e. 'Mega destruction Daito Ryu technique! vs. 'Softly softly not much use Aikido technique)"

This is an interesting topic wristwister, and a difficult problem to solve. Personally, not knowing the people involved or they're training prior, I can't really comment on how I would solve this.

I will say this though, I'm very unconvinced that someone practicing Aikido and DRAJJ at the same time will excel, or even perform adquetly, at either one. I think the reason why some teachers even say it's possible is marketing. They know they're student base is found in Aikidoka's and that many of them would be disinclined to abandon they're current art for DRAJJ.

I've found that my past Aikido experiance has hindered me more than helped in my current DRAJJ. However, it has helped me in Systema (the other art I study). Go figure. The other day I was practicing with a friend of mine who's in the Yoshinkan and I decided to try a few techniques. Old ones, that I learnt long ago, and thought I'd memorized. To make a long story short, I couldn't pull them off at all.

Aside for historical/ research reasons, I wouldn't advise Aikidoka's to take up the study of DRAJJ in order to 'make their Aikido better'. If you try such a thing, I don't think you'll be doing Aikido anymore. Two diffirent arts.

Chris

What I think is more interesting is that people want to study the "basis arts" of an art before or during their study of the art itself. Unlike myself, I want to learn an art, have some competency in it, and then understand the basis of it... not try to learn everything at the same time which might have divergent points of view. Most arts were developed from the point of view of their founders, and they usually split off from the "master style" because they had a focus on one aspect of the art or a different view of how it should be done. In karate styles, every village in Okinawa had its own style, and that doesn't make any of them "the" answer... just different. They were all doing the same thing, just different ways with different focus.

It isn't a matter of students not wanting to come into our dojo and learn what we're teaching, it's a matter of them not understanding that you have to learn something as a base art before trying to explore how it works and why. I've said many times that "basics are basics" even if they're slightly different in the styles, but the basic principle on which they're founded is the same whether you're doing Yoshinkan, Hombu, Shin Shin Toitsu, or whatever... ikkyo is still ikkyo... nikkyo is still nikkyo... even if you get there different ways. There is always more to learn, even beyond what your particular master teacher knows.

That being said, I certainly don't encourage anybody to simply take off and go dojo hopping instead of staying and practicing what they're being taught at their school, but it doesn't hurt to see other styles, teachers, and environments of training. You might just find an answer to something that is missing at your school and bring it back... not necessarily a technique, but a method of teaching a technique, or a variation of it, etc. or simply a change in the type of exercises you perform during warm ups. Hopefully, those aren't "secrets" that need to be guarded closely.

Trust me, I completely understand people not wanting to simply open up and teach something that is going to strip your dojo of it's students, but there is also a spirit of openness that should exist between people training in the same arts. If it's only limited to seminars, then so be it, but over the years, I've learned a lot from short term visits to other schools who were open to visitors coming in and training with them. Teaching is an exchange of information, and shouldn't all flow one way.

Personally, I learn something from everyone I train with... even if it's only their name. In arts where the "feel" of the technique is what makes it work, it's hard to discourage someone from trying as many different combinations as they can, including different people. It can only make both of you better.

I certainly don't encourage anybody to simply take off and go dojo hopping instead of staying and practicing what they're being taught at their school,

grumble

Quote:

---

It seems to be a problem with perception that some people have about martial arts. . . because some people have an ideal of what a certain martial art is in their head. Rather than actually looking at what a martial art is, or how it is being taught to them, they revert back to the picture they have tin their head of what a martial art "is". . .

Daito Ryu is perceived by a lot of folks, rightly or wrongly, as the Uber Samurai art, a deadly art used by the most noble and ferocious warrior’s humanity ever knew etc....

Aikido, wrongly IMO, has a rep for being "softer". It is a means of self-improvement, not a deadly samurai art that makes you nigh on untouchable etc...

What it seems is that some of these students are using their own perceptions of Daito Ryu and Aikido (i.e. what they believe them to be) rather than judging what is actually being taught.

---

Very good comments. I agree that this is a problem, and it doesn't help that certain martial arts forums (not this one) are full of people who think exactly this way.

Quote:

---

My advice would be to try this. Don't tell them it's Aikido or Daito Ryu... just give them instruction and tell them to do it.

---

I'm not sure that this is a good idea. I think they need to know the distinction. IMO, if they have a problem learning and practicing Aikido in the Aikido class, they need to go somewhere else.
James Huss