Tenkei Aikido Dojo

In modern language we use the term martial arts for a number of disciplines that are based to some degree or another on various Samurai methods of war and personal combat. There are differences in the interpretation of the term martial art depending upon whether the art is Budo or Bujutsu. Although Aikido has its technical base in the Daito ryu Aiki ju jutsu of Takeda Sokaku, it is most decidedly a Do art in it’s philosophy, application and execution of technique. Spiritual, moral, and physical edification are esteemed as higher priorities than absolute combat function. This very much reflects Ueshiba Sensei’s personal philosophy as well as the prevailing political and social climate of Japan following World War ll.

Misconceptions about the martial arts are overwhelming. Popular notions of Bushido (The Way of the samurai) and Budo (Japanese martial arts) are no exception. Although the samurai were not the only originators of martial arts in Japan, they were the most significant. By tracing the development of Bushido and Budo, a better understanding of the Japanese people can be reached–the centuries of military rule has had significant effects on the Japanese, especially with a warrior class as large and influential as Japan’s. More important, by studying the development of Japanese martial arts, a better insight on the nature of conflict can be gained.

To avoid these same exaggerations, the term Bushido in this paper refers to the loose collection of Pre-Meiji samurai ideals, not to be confused with the Bushido in Nitobe’s work, or Bushido used in other contexts by other authors. Many authors have cited the Tokugawa period as the birth of Bushido, but this can be misleading. Although Bushido first appeared in print during the Tokugawa era (by Yamaga Soko in 1685), during the strict Tokugawa regime, many laws and codes were passed, including those covering the samurai class, such as the Buke- Shohatto (Laws of the Military House, 1615). Although these laws were influenced by the rich martial ethos of Japan’s past, it was also influenced by the political agenda of the Tokugawa shoguns. To say that Bushido, or the “Way of the Warrior”, is confined to a collection of Tokugawan laws and military regulations is just as misleading as saying Bushido is confined by the definitions in Nitobe’s work. Both may represent the martial ethos of their time, but they do not accurately reflect the attitudes of the samurai before them. Although samurai ideals and samurai “codes” varied according to time and geography, approaching Bushido as a loose collection of warrior ideals and codes of conduct that began with the rise of the samurai class and ended with the Meiji Restoration (the official end of Japan’s feudal age and, therefore, the end of the historic samurai) serves as a way to separate the martial ethos of the samurai from the political ideology of the Meiji Period–and the misconceptions that persist in popular culture today.

Budo– Bu meaning “martial” and do meaning “Way”–is a more appropriate term for the Japanese martial arts than Bushido, since Bushido can be translated as “The Way of the Samurai.” A practitioner of the Japanese martial arts can be considered a samurai only in the figurative sense; the purpose of Budo is different from Bushido (But the spirit of Bushido is certainly prevalent in Budo) Generally speaking, Bushido was the combined whole of the samurai lifestyle, a code of conduct geared toward developing military administrators, professional armies, and elite soldiers. Budo, on the other hand, is the application of samurai knowledge as a way to improve one’s life, and the life of others. If Bushido is the “Way” of the samurai, then Budo is the “Way” of the modern Japanese martial artist.

The relation of Bushido to Budo is analogous to the development of acupuncture: during centuries of warfare, the Chinese collected massive amounts of data on the effects of puncture wounds on various parts of the body. Some of these turned out to beneficial. This information was put to use alleviate pain and promote health and healing. The same knowledge, however, can be used in lethal striking techniques. Similarly, Bushido, and the military sciences developed by the samurai, can be used for propaganda and violence, but it can also be put to positive use in Budo Benefits of Budonot only include psychological well-being, physical health, and self-improvement, but also the intellectual growth and spiritual enrichment of the Budo practitioner. Exactly how, why and when Budo was developed is a complicated issue which requires a historical examination of conflict in Japan.

The nature of Japanese martial arts has changed drastically, especially during the Tokugawa, Meiji, and Modern (Post World War II) eras. Since World War II, the Japanese martial arts have spread, further complicating the perception of Bushido and Budo However, Westerners have taken a great interest in the martial arts, and Budo can no longer be considered confined to just the Japanese. The development of a particular martial art, Aikido, is used here to show the development of Budo and to demonstrate the psychology of a martial art. Aikido was chosen because the author is familiar with this style, and also because its founder is considered one of the last major disciples of the samurai arts. This does not imply that Aikido is the only modern Budo, nor does it imply that it is “better” than other styles. “Better” is a relative term, just as Bushido and Budo are.

With the advent of the Tokugawa bakufu (=shogunate) in 1603, Japan entered a long period of peace under the iron hand of a succession of military dictatorships. This is known as the Edo period and it spanned more than two-and-a-half centuries before finally drawing to a close with the Meiji Restoration in 1868. Without the stimulus of war to serve as a focal point, the bushi class, which now owed loyalty directly to the Tokugawa shogun, became restless and was forced to seek new outlets for its energies. It was under these historical circumstances that many of the combat-oriented bujutsu (=martial arts) gave rise to the so-called budo (=martial ways) forms conceived as vehicles for the attainment of self-mastery in an age of peace. Regarding these new disciplines, martial arts historian Donn F. Draeger comments:

Though they stemmed from the technical basis of bujutsu, the classical budo were not designed to serve the warrior in combat. Certain, but not all, of the bujutsu were modified for budo training by recasting them in a metaphysical mold. Whereas the bujutsu emphasized form to be used for bringing about an effective combative result, the budo stressed form to be used as a means for gaining an understanding of the self, of being, and of nature, and for gaining self-perfection.

The defeat of Japan left the Founder of Aikido in a state of disillusionment and caused him to withdraw within himself. “I myself taught martial arts to be used for the purpose of killing others to soldiers during the war. I became deeply troubled after the conflict ended.” He retreated to Iwama where he rejected almost entirely the early form of Aikido and launched himself upon a search for a new path. This period led to a profound and permanent change in his thinking. The Founder of Aikido surely understood that the main difference, in a military and philosophical sense, between the highly skilled sword-wielding samurai and the crew of a B-29 bomber armed with an atomic warhead was one of degree and that their social functions and justifications were the same. Moreover, O-Sensei was conscious of the historical misuse of martial arts in feudal Japan:

If we look back over time, we see how the martial arts have been abused. During the Sengoku period (1482-1558) local lords used the martial arts as a fighting tool to serve their own private interests and to satisfy their greed.

Even the later budo of the Edo period, despite their increased emphasis on spiritual goals, were often very much concerned with fighting and strong inter-school rivalry replete with contests and dueling existed in the absence of actual warfare. It was likewise clear that these classical bujutsu and budo forms were social anachronisms in the 20th century, and that the highly conservative, elitist attitudes of many schools doomed them to slow but certain extinction. It was based upon an acknowledgement of these inherent dangers and limitations that O-Sensei sought to redefine the role of martial arts and their relationship to the individual and modern society. How could martial arts be preserved and maintain their vitality, yet be denied their historical function? Was there no way to harness their powerful potential while redirecting them towards permanently peaceful, pro-life ends without in the process destroying their very essence?

O-Sensei’s solution to this dilemma was multi-dimensional in nature. He not only continued to refine the rich technical heritage which stood at the base of Aikido techniques, creating the concept of “Takemusu Aiki” to embody the spontaneous execution of technique of the highest level but also completely redefined the notion of “martial arts.” O-Sensei’s new definition represented a clear departure from traditional views: “True budo is the loving protection of all beings with a spirit of reconciliation.” The Founder also urged viewing martial arts in terms of nonopposition: “You are mistaken if you think that budo means to have opponents and enemies and to be strong and fell them. There are neither opponents nor enemies for true budo.” Further, it was incumbent on one not only to defend himself but also to endeavor to protect the attacker from injury. What this amounted to was a complete rejection of a “world-in-conflict” model in favor of a “never fighting, always victorious” psychology where life is a value to be honored and protected.

The qualities of loyalty and service, so noble in concept, yet so readily abused in reality, prominent in the traditional martial arts are still relevant in the context of Aikido. However, in Aikido, “loyalty” and “service” are instead rendered to the ideals of personal and social betterment, not to superiors or governments, where the individual never forfeits his decision-making responsibility. In summary, then, O-Sensei conceived of Aikido both as a “Way” to promote individual growth and as a means of propagating a model of social harmony. The socio-ethical implications of such a humanistic philosophy attached to a viable martial art form practiced by significant numbers of persons are far-reaching.

O sensei said:

“Aikido is non-resistance. As it is non-resistant, it is always victorious.

Those who do not agree with this cannot be in harmony with the universe. Their budo is that of destruction. It is not constructive budo.

There is no enemy for Ueshiba of Aikido. You are mistaken if you think that budo means to have opponents and enemies and to be strong and fell them. There are neither opponents nor enemies for true budo. True budo is to be one with the universe; that is to be united with the Center of the universe.

True budo is a work of love. It is a work of giving life to all beings, and not killing or struggling with each other. Love is the guardian deity of everything. Nothing can exist without it. Aikido is the realization of love.

Without budo a nation goes to ruin, because budo is the life of loving protection and is the source of the activities of science.

I want considerate people to listen to the voice of Aikido. It is not for correcting others; it is for correcting your own mind. This is Aikido. This is the mission of Aikido and should be your mission.”