departures from “traditional” aikido

Introduction

Influences

Peri Mackintosh and the participants of konjiki aikido dojo developed freeform aikido out of traditional aikido under the influence of gestalt psychotherapy ,the thought of Martin Buber and zen.

Freeform aikido has evolved out of “traditional” aikido practice. For those readers who have some previous experience of traditional aikido and are interested in freeform aikido I offer this as some kind of oreintation to how are practice may differ from traditional approaches.

Below I highlight some aspects of traditional aikido and how I understand their development or counterpointing in the practice of freeform aikido. This posting is a work in progress!

With its primary intention to feel-at-one achieved by the process of kimusubi - uniting intention, aikido seemed to me to parallel other approaches to growth or wholenesss though meeting or encounter. This phenomenon had been explored Martin Buber in his ideas on I-Thou and has been further explicated in Gestalt Psychotherapy. I would also recommend the writings of Lawrence Novick who I must thank for his astute articulation of ki-musubi and take musu aiki.

Dissolving uke/tore roles

Traditional aikido works with an alternating role of uke and tore. Tore being someone who “executes a technique”, - uke the person who offers an approach or attack, and then receives the technique.

Freeform aikido seeks to dissolve this formulation. In freeform aikido participant endeavour to engage with each other with an openness to possibility and reciprocally. At any moment they maybe extending or receiving the intention of the other and enter the engagement with a sense of willingness to move and be moved by the meeting. The emphasis is on sharing initiative rather than alternating in a formal fashion. This again harks back to O’Sensei’s claim that aikido was formless.

Both particpants in a pairing attempt to establish ki-musubi with the other in order to lead them out of balance.

Grading

Freeform does not include an element of “grading” as does traditional aikido. This is for a number of reasons.When attending traditional aikido training seminars I began to realise that the quality of practice and satisfaction I experienced had no relation to the “grade” of the participant I practiced with. For example I remember a very deep and rewarding practice with someone who had only practiced for 3 months. Whereas practicing with a high-grade black belt was particularly unrewarding. For me what was important was the openness to person-to-person contact. This seems to have nothing to do with grading or even length of practice experience.

In freeform aikido we understand the practice very much evolving out of the relationship of the participants and is not owned or generated by any individual.

I also noticed how in groups there was what I felt an unpleasant skewing of relationships when a “teacher” figure can hand out marks, grades or ranking. Importantly it seemed as though the “students” own authority and faith in their own experience and competence dwindled coupled with an elevation of the “teacher “figure. There also then developed concomitant “pleasing teacher” behaviours and manoeuvres and the polarity of “rebelliousness” against the “teacher”. All this I found unhelpful in the context of adults practicing aikido together.

I see freeform aikido practice as essentially a spiritual one. As O’Sensei wrote

” The Art of Peace has no form - it is the study of the spirit.” (The Art of Peace).

In this way I would go along with the quaker viewpoint that

“The spirituality is immediately accessible and has no authority to consult or to grant validation”. Michael L. Birkel

 

To me it becomes inappropriate to apply any criteria of grading.

It seems important to me that the dojo provide a haven from the tide of assessment, grading and hierarchy that besets our daily lives.

Sensei or facilitator

Following from this in freeform aikido there is less emphasis on Sensei-student hierarchy of knowledge with the sensei knowing and handing down the knowledge. Practice is co-ordinated by a facilitator who offers various “experiments” for the participants to try and discover what they will. The vacillator and other participants and shoulder-to-shoulder in their discoveries in their work together.

I came across this the following quote regarding teaching and learning on the website of the New York Institute for Gestalt Therapy.

Learning thus does not emanate from the top down in a fixed hierarchy, but emerges as figures of interest in a field of excitement and support.

I like it and think it reflects my aspirations for our learning process…

What I love about this way of working is how the material is generated by the contact. There really is no need for reference to another authority.

“hara” and the between

In traditional aikido a primary focus of attention has been on the individuals hara or belly. This is held as a unitary centre of gravity and motion.

In freeform aikido a primary focus is the the contact, the connection or the “between” of the participants. Also within the individual if it is useful to think in terms of “centres”, I think it becomes useful to experience multiple or or evolving “centres” of gravity, motion and intention. This I believe has also been elucidated in the ideas of Skinner Release Technique. (My thanks to Florence Peake for this insight).

tradition and the “new”

Freeform aikido departs from an approached focused on tradition that is founded on that what is “handed down”. Freeform aikido values an attitude of exploration, experimentation, discovery and creativity. Our practice attempts to remain faithful to lived experience, holding our assumptions and expectations lightly with an openness to what emerges.