Онда се могу сматрати срећним што су ти мајстори (при том су у питању људи који имају великог искуства управо са обукама полиције и службеника разних обезбеђења) дозволили себи да искрено причају (са адекватним образложењем) о употребљивости Аикидоа....
I ja se smatram srećnim što nikada nisam trenirao sa ovim likom, sudeći po onoj demonstraciji gore, dosta je nazadovao u tehničkom smislu umesto da je napredovao, što bi trebao biti nonsens jer se sa godinama treninga postaje bolji jelte. Međutim kao što je vidljivo kada se izgubi ta ideološka nitna zbog koje se ušlo u nešto onda je očigledno da stvari krenu brzo da se raspadaju.
Е сад друга ствар је када интернет мајстори убеђују неког колике су могућности акидисте а тај неко је имао заједничке тренинге са аикидистима где је имао прилике да проради различите вежбе са носиоцима разних звања па и мајсторских (и то људи који су и пре аикидоа тренирали и такмичили се у борилачким спортовима). Лично поштујем људе који Аикидо тренирају из љубави према јапанској култури, који желе да осете тај неки дух самурајских времена али су истовремено и свесни разлике у односу на та нека времена и оног што данас вежбају.
Koja crna samurajska vremena

, Aikido nema veze sa samurajima. I Daito ryu se smatra Gendai budo-om odnosno modernom Meiđi veštinom i što je najbitnije
post-samurajskom veštinom. Da ne pominjem da se tehnički gledano sve veštine post-Muromači perioda ne smatraju "pravim" samurajskim veštinama.
Još malo razrešavanja miskoncepcija o ovim pitanjima:
https://aikidojournal.com/2018/03/21/ellis-amdur-the-rise-of-traditional-japanese-martial-arts/
One of the first myths is that the really classical Japanese martial arts, the so-called ryuha koryu, were warfare arts. This is not correct.
If people have this idea that, back in the day, the ryu were basically the training of young warriors to go to war just as we send our young fighters to basic training today to prepare for battle, that’s incorrect. There were so-called heiho, or heijutsu, the military tactical schools where soldiers would train in formation, and they would train officers how to train their conscripts. In the period of time when the ryuha were developed, it did occasionally happen that warriors fought one-on-one in front of their own troops, but unlike earlier periods, when that happened, the survivor was criticized by his own officers for not acting in a military fashion and for being a romantic idiot.
Soldiers fought in huge formations, and so they would train to be most effective in these large formations. For example, a group of ashigaru, or low-ranking warriors, would stand in a river up to their waist, and each one of them would have a spear. They would line up, and they would just be doing suburi, where they would beat the water with the spear over and over again. It was power training. It was training in unison, and like a lot of military drills, the idea is to mechanize the human mind so that everybody functions by collective order as opposed to individual decision making.
Now, in that process, you want your conscripts’ behavior to be mechanized, but an intelligent military force is also going to want its officers, at a certain level, to be creative and adaptable. Out of this requirement, ryu began to develop in an organic way; first, because of a fascination with individual combat and how one can be effective in it, and second, to create the kind of warrior who leads others. You could almost think of it as a socializing process for the warrior class.
Most of the fighters in Japan were not members of the bushi, or samurai class. They were farmers. They were from other castes who were drafted. They were brought onto the battlefield.
Can you talk about the role of the sword in Japanese martial arts?
If most wars in the 1400’s and 1500’s were fought with
spears and firearms, why was the sword still primary in the earliest ryu for the most part? It was a symbolic weapon, symbolic in the sense that it was a symbol of one’s role in society, of ruling others. It developed a particular kind of adaptability on an individual basis. It could be extrapolated, and of course you could use your sword, your spear, or whatever in combat when it came up, but it had a much different function, even in the earliest ryu. The best research on this has been done by historians Karl Friday and William Bodiford, and they’re practitioners of Kashima Shinryu, a koryu martial art. There’s a lot of wonderful history which is upending all this sort of conventional wisdom about the ryu.
The Shimabara Rebellion in 1637-38 was actually the last battle the classical Japanese warrior fought, where the samurai did a terrible job. After that, you had hundreds of years of a totalitarian peace. Contrary to belief, firearms were not banned, but they were sequestered. Each castle had their own firearms. There were over 2,000 farmer revolts in this period. Usually, the farmers, with their rakes and their hoes and all of that, were beating the samurai, and then the samurai would retreat to the castle, get their firearms, and shoot and kill the farmers, and then they put away the firearms again.