Talk:Aikido/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Muscle Isolation

Good Day!

Would anyone be able to clarify the second sentence? What I take from it is that muscles are not isolated as they can be in weight training, but instead the focus is upon compound movements and overall fitness/ power etc. <?> This paragraph is rather confusing, but could likely be easily fixed. Additionally does this contrast with other martial arts?

"Certain anaerobic fitness activities, such as weight training, emphasize contracting movements. In aikido, specific muscles or muscle groups are not isolated and worked to improve tone, mass, and power." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocket citadel (talk • contribs) 07:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Training

There is another aspect of training that was not covered but there IS a wikipedia article about it because it is also a kenjitsu practice, the name escapes me at the moment. Its practicing weapons work on your own... shi-something or su-something...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.40.237 (talk • contribs)

I believe you are referring to suburi, but I'm not certain how universal the use of that term is in an aikido context, especially where a significant number of aikido schools don't practice kenjutsu at all, and many others draw their kenjutsu practice from various sources either in addition to or instead of the kenjutsu that Ueshiba taught. If you have a good reference, though, we might be able to work it in somewhere. Bradford44 (talk) 12:04, July 29, 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'll look for a citation but I'd appreciate if it was suggested with a "citation needed" or something. I use the wikipedia aikido page to look up the japanese words involved and Im sure others do the same :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.18.19.178 (talk) 01:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ki kanji parts

I believe that the ki kanji is not the combination of a lid and rice, but steam/vapor and rice - boiling rice, if you like, indeed a central life force in China and Japan. 81.216.206.7 (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

That is also what I heard from a Japanese language instructor, that it is steam over boiling rice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.18.19.178 (talk) 01:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

This is also clearly stated in the Wikipedia text on qi. I believe that the aikido text needs to be changed on this issue, but that also calls for a change of the following sentence, which seems to make conclusions from another interpretation of the kanji etymology. Stefan Stenudd 81.216.206.7 (talk) 15:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Taninzugake

I allowed myself to enter the terms mostly used for multiple attackers: taninzudori and taninzugake. To my knowledge, the latter is more established than the former. See for example Aikikai Hombu Dojo grading rules (3rd dan): http://www.aikikai.or.jp/eng/gradingsystem.htm So, maybe only the latter term would suffice in the text? Also used are futaridori/futarigake (for two attackers), and (more rarely) sannindori (for three attackers). Stefan Stenudd 81.216.206.7 (talk) 15:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Weapons

There are some additions and changes I would like to see in the chapter about weapons in aikido. It is reasonable to mention that defense against sword attacks is called tachidori, and defense against jo attacks is jodori. Also, tantodori, defense against knife attacks should be mentioned here. These things are part of the aikido curriculum in most (but not all) aikido styles and organizations. See for example Aikikai Hombu Dojo grading rules (2nd dan and up): http://www.aikikai.or.jp/eng/gradingsystem.htm Furthermore, to my knowledge the terms aiki-ken and aiki-jo are neither of Morihiro Saito's invention, nor exclusive to students of his type of aikido. The paragraph about these terms gives that impression. Also, I would prefer that the terms are written aikiken and aikijo, but that might just be me :) There may also be reason to mention Shoji Nishio's extensive weapons training, and inclusion of it in his style of aikido - to balance the impression given by the existing text that such things would be additions in the Iwama line of aikido only. Stefan Stenudd 81.216.206.7 (talk) 15:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that within the Iwama Ryu and Iwama style tradition, weapons training is usually referred to as bukiwaza. Stefan Stenudd 81.216.206.7 (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Even though it might not be the most common name the knife "tanto" is also known as "tanken" and therefore you might also stumble into the concept of "tankendori". Aikidoka66 (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

When aikido "got" its name

I have temporarily pulled the following text from the article, which was just added by Aikidoka66:

According to [[Morihiro Saito]] Aikido got it's official name in 1941.<ref name="AIHA">{{cite book
| last = Saito
| first = Morihiro
| title = Aikido: Its Heart and Apperance
| publisher = Minato Research & Publishing CO.; LTD
| year = 1984
| pages = 12
| location = Tokyo, Japan
| isbn = 0-8740-345-1
}}</ref>

I think this is a great addition, but it needs a little more context in order to fit in with the article. I don't have access to the source cited, so if someone could clear up what it means for aikido to "get" an official name, or could repeat the line from the book that Saito uses, I think this sentence could be revised slightly and go right back in the article. For example, did aikido 'get' its name in 1941 because that's just when Saito remembers Ueshiba began to use the term, or does Saito recall a specific day in 1941 when Ueshiba showed up for training with a great big "AIKIDO" sign that he hung up outside the dojo? Right now however, the sentence doesn't really have any useful meaning, and I can't support its inclusion as-is. Bradford44 (talk) 14:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I might have been a little fast in writing that...:) In Saitos book it is just stated that it was used in 1941 and it is not conneted with any specific event. I consulted another source(Aikido the way of harmony by John Stevens under the directions of Shirata Rinjiro) and it states 1942 as the year when aikido, as a name, was used officially for the first time. So my contribution wasn't the best... :) Aikidoka66 (talk) 20:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

In Kisshomaru Ueshiba Doshu's book "The Spirit of Aikido", Kodansha, 1988, ISBN 9780870118500 he states on page 100 that the term "aikido" was officially appended to the art in February 1942. Prior to this, it had been referred to primarily as aiki-bujutsu, but the Doshu states that the Founder wanted to distinguish his art from other "martial" styles given the political climate in Japan at the time.Yunshui (talk) 10:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

capitalization of aikido

Can someone give reference to the reason that aikido is not capitalized in this article? Thanks. User5802 (talk) 02:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found it here. User5802 (talk) 02:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Roots on Tokugawa era

I think it would be nice to add on the historical part of the main text, that the roots of Aikido are to be found on the 16th century, during the first years of the Tokugawa period. People should know of its noble roots, to present the idea that Aikido does not belong to the tradition of "rural" martial arts. The "school of mistical circles", was a secret art, known only to the high class of warriors, responsible for the protection of the field lords inside their palaces (the secrecy was, of course, due). It was not an art intented to be used on open batlefields, and it remained a secret of this "elite force" until the end of the Tokugawa period, in 1860 (some good 300 years!), while other arts have been openly taught in Japan since then . It was only then that this art was opened to the general public, and taught to anyone, for the high class of warriors, seeing the end of their reign, feared for its desapearance. Even tough Aikido is a popular international art nowadays, it is still seen as noble art in Japan. -- Preceeding was added by User:200.189.112.21

If there are are sources (books or well researched articles) for the information you're talking about, maybe we can find a way to add a mention. Feel free to list those source(s) here if you know of one/some. And please remember to sign your posts to talk pages with four tildes. —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 14:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure Mrand. I collected these informations mainly on a book entitled "secrets of the samurai", by Oscar Ratti and Adele Westbrook. But the bibliographical research of this book is quite big. I'm sure the research on these informations could go way deeper.

Paul - December 4th. 11:30 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.112.21 (talk) 13:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Here on the discussion page, feel free to propose some text that could be included , along with a proper reference (title, author, publisher, page number, ISBN, etc). —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 16:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure Mrand, here are the text and reference:

"The Schools of Aikijutsu. (...) It is recorded that more than 700 years ago there existed to the north of Mount Fuji a school of Budo - the ancient martial arts. This school specialized in the teaching of so-called Aiki-jutsu which was kept secret and disclosed to only a few disciples, for the most part nobles of ancient lineage.

This art had originated from Ken-Jutsu or swordsmanship, and little by little it had become an art of combat superior to Ju-Jutsu. (Harrison, 79) (Secrets of the Samurai, page 355). (...) The central idea of Aiki, was that of using the cordinated power of ki (intrinsic or inner energy) in harmony (ai) with the various requirements and circumstances of combat, that is, with the opponent's strategy, his weapons, his personality and so forth.

(...) Among these ancient schools, one of the most renowned was the Daito ryu. According to a modern bujutsu expert, Mr. Tomiki of the Kodokan, the manuscript of instruction of certain secret martial arts (den-sho), compiled during feudal era, refer to the aikijutsu practiced by this school dating back to the Kamakura period. The school itself was reportedly founded by Minamoto Yoshimitsu (1120), better known in various Japanese epics as Yoshitsune, and the art was practiced by the warriors of the Minamoto clan for several centuries before being inherited by the Takeda family (part of the military Aizu clan).

The legitimate teacher of the art derived from aikijutsu, according to the Japanese system of hierarchical transmition by blood, adoption, or affiliation, was Master Ueshiba Morihei, the founder of Aikido. The specific doctrine of aikido, however, links the beginning of this particular school of aikijutsu (that is, the Daito ryu) to the sixth son of Emperor Seiwa, Prince Sadasumi, who lived in the ninth century. How the concept of ai was actually embodied in the ancient techniques of aikijutsu practiced by the Daito school, we have no way of knowing today.

The fluid beauty and impressive efficiency of the method, however, are evident in the modern interpretation of the techniques practiced in schools of aikido. If one watches these techniques being preformed in combat against one or several opponents, with weapons or without, it is not difficult to understand why, in early times (as Harrison put it), aikijutsu "had become an art of combat superior to Ju-Jutsu". Master Ueshiba Morihei was virtually the last representative of those schools of aikijutsu, which, through him, have filtered down from feudal ages of Japan to the twentieth century.

(Secrets of the samurai -martial arts of feudal japan - pages 356-358/Oscar RATTI - Adele WESTBROOK, publisher: Tuttle company. First edition 1973)".

Actually I made a mistake when I said that the roots were on the Tokugawa period. The correct would be "roots on Kamakura/Bakufu era, starting in 1185! The roots are 800, not 300 years old! Perhaps some of these informations could be included in the main page, to enrich the "history" section. I hope my contribution is worth! Paul - December 13th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.21.136.218 (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Most of that stuff is relevant primarily to Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, which has its own article, and it is covered over there. Our article already mentions that Aikido was derived / developed from DRA, so we don't really need to re-hash the history of DRA in our article.

Quite a bit of problematic assertions in the material you have posted above, however. There are basically two main problems that I have with what you've posted:

1) The link between Aikido and Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu is so overstated that it seems like the authors believe that they are the same thing.

2) It is debateable whether DRA is 800 years old or if that was simply the kind of marketing ploy common in the 1800s.

I apologize for not being able to document my counter-assertions as you have. My understanding has been informed by blog posts on www.aikidojournal.com by Ellis Amdur, Peter Goldsbury, and others, and by John Steven's biography of O Sensei.

Basically, my picture is that there was this amazing guy named Sokaku Takeda, of samurai birth, who trained diligently in a number of different schools of fighting techniques. He earned a name for himself and decided to start his own ryu. As was not uncommon in those days, or these days for that matter, he claimed that it was a secret, ancient art. He took on Ueshiba as a student, and Ueshiba opened his own school in a very short time - like 5 years or so. The two had a rather well-known falling out and Ueshiba changed the name of what he was teaching at his dojo to "aikibudo." Ueshiba became a famous martial artist in his own right, had a number of formative person experiences, and got more and more spiritual as he got older. Aikido as we know it today in its many forms was actually developed by Ueshiba's students.

Anyway, while you've done a better job than I have in documenting what you want to add to the article, the source seems a bit questionable.Transentient (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC).

Dear friend, I agree with what you've written here. My only real sugestion is that perhaps the main article should mention the noble origin of Aikido, coming from samurai families as you said yourself, all the way till it reached Master Ueshiba, instead of the rural or farmer roots of most popular "empy-handed" martial arts (since for the whole of Tokugawa period, by comand of Iyeasu Tokuagawa himself, weapons were prohibited in the whole of the japanese peninsula, exept, of course, for the noble warrior class). In my view it's simply a historical sugestion. The roots of Aikido are to be found on Kenjutsu - a "full-handed" art, the samurai art par excellence!! I think this is relevant mostly because people who are not acquainted with aikido oftenly ask why the practitioners wear those "black skirts!!" The direct answer lies on the fact that the Hakama (the black skirts) was, for a long period of time, the traditional clothing of the noble class in Japan, and all martial arts related to the noble class still wears them today, such as Kenjutsu, Iaido, Kyudo and so forth, while most popular japanese martial arts wear solely the Gi. Since this is an encyclopedical site, the informations should be clear enough to the point that people with no knowledge whatsoever of this art may have their questions answered (and believe me, as foolish as it may seem, the "hakama" question is quite often asked. Those who teach or practice any of these many arts which wear hakama know what I talking about!). Besides, just for the record, I only mentioned on single book as reference, but the bibliography on this book is quite vast, covering many other aspects on japanese martial arts history and philosophy, not only of aikido, but of most martial arts linked directly or not to samurai history. Paul - December 18th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.4.9.136 (talk) 13:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Paul, I respect your take on the nature of the art, but you seem to have kind of an agenda to have your point of view reflected in our article. Wikipedia is not he place for original research and we strive to keep the point of view of our article neutral. We don't need to explain the development of Japanese warrior culture for 300 years before Aikido was created in order to have an excellent article on Aikido. There are already articles on Tokugawa, the Edo period, and hakama. So first point is, that information may be relevant but it doesn't belong in our article.

Secondly, you may not find consensus around here with your basic gist.

1) The characterization of Aikido as a "samurai art" is not factually true, since there were no samurai after 1868, which was before Aikido actually existed. Most people who practice it certainly feel there is a kind of spiritual sucession, but the realities of what samurai tradition and spirit actually were are complex and there is a heavily negative side that not all of us choose to claim succession from.

2) The concept that Aikido is "derived from sword arts" is a subject of lively debate among English-speaking luminaries.

3) The ban on weapons you mention was a little different than you characterize it. For example, it was common for merchants to send one of their sons to train in the various fighting arts, in the hopes that they might merit a job as a retainer and thus move up in the world.

4) Aikido has a very good claim to being a rural, farm-oriented martial art, due to O Sensei's interest in agriculture and the fact that Abe and Iwama are the most important sites in the the man's spiritual development. I don't think that's exactly what you mean; the fact of the matter is that ALL indigenous japanese fighting arts are samurai arts, with the possible exception of Sumo.

5) Hakama are simply traditional clothing; western practitioners of budo have been known to fetishize them but they are ultimately just pants. But that's an issue best left up to the hakama article.

I recommend you go to www.aikidjournal.com, www.aikiweb.com, and www.e-budo.com. Search for articles and forum posts by the following people: Ellis Amdur, Peter Goldsbury, and Meik Skoss, just for starters. Get your hands on Ellis Amdur's two books, _Dueling with O Sensei_ and _Old School._ Also read John Steven's biography of O Sensei. I am certain you will find all of this material to be extremely interesting and enlightening! 64.214.53.2 (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Those are great reading suggestions. As an aside, Westbrook and Ratti's books (such as Secrets of the Samurai, and Aikido and the Dynamic Sphere, which is actually cited many times in the article) are great also, but you have to understand that they have specific philosophical agenda, and are 30+ years old. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be required reading for all aikidoka, they should, but a wider perspective is a must if you want to present a neutral and encyclopedic view of aikido. Despite what you might read, very little is truly known. Everything else is ultimately speculation with many theories of variable validity, as Transentient has already very elegantly explained, and which following the above reading suggestions will reveal. Bradford44 (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear friends, all I did was suggest something. If these are not welcome, fine, but please don't take it as some kind of an agenda to have my point of view reflected in the article. That is certainly not the case. I was simply following what Mrand once asked above: " Here on the discussion page, feel free to propose some text that could be included , along with a proper reference". As far as I can see, that's all I did. My intention was never to discuss these matters as if in a forum, as you are doing here. Besides, if I wanted my opinion to be expressed, I wouldn't have bothered in transcripting parts of a book. I could debate all the points you mentioned above, but I'm sure it won't take us anywhere, since this is not the purpose of this site. But if you guys think the main article is good - great! Keep it up. And, of course, this is (or at least tries to be) an encyclopedia. Anyone looking for deeper sources of information would certainly read a book - not a page. Thank you all for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.112.21 (talk) 11:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Pushing vs Pulling

"In aikido pushing or extending movements are much more common than pulling or contracting movements. This distinction can be applied to general fitness goals for the aikido practitioner.[2]

Certain anaerobic fitness activities, such as weight training, emphasize contracting movements."

Whoever wrote the above doesnèt know anything about basic biomechanics. Every human movement is the result of muscle contractions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.171.217.37 (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Each muscle can only be contracted but the composite movement of several muscles can be either pushing or pulling. jmcw (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Translation of "KI":

It shouldn't be translated as "spirit", and, rather then using "life energy", just "energy" would be more appropriate!

Spirit - is more "KOKORO" or "SHIN" KI - used in many forms. Ellectricity, has KI. To catch cold, has KI. So "energy" is more appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.29.179.46 (talk) 17:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

---

Worldwide dissemination

I think it would be apropriate do mention that, in the years that followed the death of the founder Morihei Ueshiba, much discussion was made concerning the future of the art. Kisshomaru Ueshiba, son of the founder, expressed his fear for the disappearence of the art in his book Aikido no Kokoro (The spirit of Aikido). Much work was done, specially in the 70's, in order to find a way to preserve the art for the future. The first answer found was in creating a pattern, so that dojos throughout the world could follow, the so-called "Honbu-style". Yet, it was during these years that the now famous movie star and Aikido master Steven Seagal was in Japan, trainning with high-ranking students of the founder. The idea of puting Aikido in the big screen, believe me, was not his. Seagal sensei was closely associated with many high ranking disciples of the founder, and according to sources I cannot reveal, it was their idea to put Aikido in the movies, in an atempt to widely reveal Aikido to the world, and idea that Seagal sensei accepted, since they all thought Aikido would die after the main disciples of the founder passed away. I think it must be made clear that although there were many Aikido masters in the world and in the west, it was only in the 80's that Aikido became really popular, due to Steven Seagal's movie "Above the Law". Millions of people saw that Aikido scene, and I'm sure that more than 80% of the people that started practicing in the years following the 80's, did it because of that scene. People with little understanding of Aikido might criticize Seagal sensei (people tend to confuse his roles with his real life), but it is surely not the opinion of high ranking masters of the art, such as Isoyama sensei and Abe sensei (both direct students of the founder and very respected masters). Actually, Abe sensei even stated once that Seagal's Aikido was "the best he had ever seen". So, with all due respect to all the masters who came to the west to teach Aikido, the real exposer of Aikido to world is, beyond any doubt, Steven Seagal Sensei, a 7th degree Shihan. It seems to me that there is some kind of personal agenda in not including his name whatsover in the whole page. This is a veryfiable fact. Seagal sensei is not just another western who knows some Aikido. He is responsible for the Aikido-boom. Aikido is as known as karate and judo today mostly because of his contribution. Before that, very very few people knew about the art, and it would probably fade away with time, as the previous doshu feared.

If you could find a reputable source that discusses the impact/influence of Segal, or the comments regarding Abe, then we could draft up a couple of sentences and see what the consensus is. —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 16:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I had started down this road a few years ago during the FAC as there were a very good number of people who came to both of my dojos wanting to learn what they had seen in his movies, even after he made a fool of himself. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of source material on Seagal was concerning his personality, outlandish statements, etc. I'll go through the pre-1989 archives and see what I can find.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 19:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Mrand, here is the interview with Grand Master Seiseki Abe, which I consider a reputable source. He is one of the few still living direct student and close friend of O'Sensei, 10th dan, Aikido and calligraphy master. This interview was issued on the magazine Martial Arts Legends/STEVEN SEAGAL, #4, page 94. Hope it helps!

Grand Master Seiseki Abe: "I met Steven Seagal in 1973 when he first opened his dojo in Osaka. We met through a student who trained in both of our dojos. My first impression when I looked at him was, looking directly into his eyes, that he was a true martial artist. His Aikido technique was very fast and strong, and he demonstrated the way of Aiki. He and I talked about O'Sensei, and Steven wanted to understand O'Sensei's teaching and philosophy. He had a tremendous thirst for martial arts knowledge, and a very sincere attitude. We developed a close relationship which has lasted for more than 20 years. I taught him caligraphy in his dojo. Every year, Steven invited the top Aikido masters to his dojo. By 1973, he was already a great Aikidoist with a large dojo following. He did not have one single teacher in Aikido. He trained with all the top masters in Japan through seminars at his dojo. Steven was a seeker of each master's knowledge. I promoted him to Godan (5th degree) and Rokudan (6th degree) because his Aikido is the best I've ever seen, and because of his humility and character. I feel he is a true martial artist and a caring warm-hearted person. His movies are splendid to watch. Steven is now in a position to reach a large number of people with his teachings and films. I number him among my best friends. I have a room in which O'Sensei would stay whenever he came to Osaka. Since his passing, I've maintained this room as a memory of O'Sensei. The only people I allow in this room are people about whom I care, and people whom I trust. Steven Seagal is one of the few people I allowed in this room."

Honestly, the opinion of such high ranking masters shouldn't be taken for granted. Seagal is, indeed, a great disseminator of this art to the world, if not the greatest. He definetely deserves the credit, and I suggest this be mentioned in the main article, in the international dissemination section. How about something like: "(...) Designated "Official Delegate for Europe and Africa" by Morihei Ueshiba, Masamichi Noro arrived in France in September 1961. Yet, it was not until the mid 80's that the art came out of secluded dojos and became known worldwide, when it was shown in Hollywood theatres for the first time, in the film entitled Above the Law, stared by 7th degree Aikido master Steven Seagal, who had been previsouly living and training in Japan with the top masters in the art, for over 15 years. After that, it was Aikido's turn to boom throughout the world, becoming as popular as judo and karate, with dojos sprouting in every corner of the world" - Just a suggestion anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.30.139.149 (talk) 14:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

No comments on that huh? It really weakens the credit of this website, when true and verifiable informations such as this are simply ignored. What's the point on making all these rules about "neutrality" and "veriable facts" when clear and straightforward informations are openly taken for granted? This site is far, far from being a source of thuthful information, much less an encyclopedia. You guys talk about personal agenda. Well, it is quite clear that you, the editors of this page, do not want include these informations stated above. You do not want to recognize the importance and greatness of Steven Seagal Sensei (Take Shigemichi Shihan, Aiki-kai 7th Dan) on the international dissemination of the art. Why is it so? What other reason besides some sort personal issue? Whether you mention it or not, this is a fact. You will just have to live with it. It is unbelievable to see the kind of misinformation and jealousy people have about the brilliant past of Seagal Sensei in Aikido in Japan, and you are helping on perpetuating this sort of ignorance, instead of educating people (which is the least expected from an "encyclopedia"). It amazes me that now, more 15 days having passed since I included these informations above, as requested by one of the editors (Mrand), not a single comment was made on the issue. And you guys still dream on having some kind of credibility. No wonder wikipedia is becoming a joke on the internet, when editors like you are in charge of this site. Perhaps one day a true encyclopedia will rise on the web. I kinda know your thinking. It must be something like: "Well, the guys is right, but let's just leave it on the discussion page. There's no need no put these information on the main page. I really don't like Seagal, nor his movies. I don't want his name on MY page. Besides, his Aikido is not that good after all". Well, let the truth be said. Will all due respect to all the Sensei mentioned on the main page, none of them had the same worldwide impact on the spreading of Aikido to the world. None came even close. Abe Sensei and Isoyama Sensei agree on that. I've spoken to them personally. I'm not talking about technical level, styles or anything. I'm simply stating that no Aikido master in the whole history of the art had the same influence on bringing people to Aikido dojos in every corner of the world as did Take Shigemichi Steven Seagal Shihan. You keep on with your discussions and arguments. You say you want to improve the main page, but it seems that your pride is blinding you all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.96.4.164 (talk) 18:08, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

The fact that we take a measured approach to an article that has already reached "featured" status is not a sign of weakness - and that completely ignores the fact that this work is done by volunteers in their spare time with much else to do. Lastly, you would not be correct that I or any of the other editors were thinking the thing you attribute to us. So if we can put those issues aside, we can discuss the matter at hand, the couple of sentences that you proposed. The main problem here is that we need a source that basically comes to the conclusion that you are proposing (that after Above the Law, "it was aikido's turn to boom throughout the world, becoming as popular as judo and karate, with dojos sprouting in every corner of the world"). These types of conclusions must come from reputable and verifiable external source - in other words, conclusions such as this must be published elsewhere (per Wikipedia:No_original_research). Are you aware of anyone of authority saying this? Thank you. —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 20:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

The exact demographical statystics on the number of practitioners before and after "Above the Law" is something not even the Hombu dojo has got. You're kinda asking too much. Nevertheless, it is clearly stated on Kisshomaru Ueshiba's Aikido no kokoro that there was great concern on the future of the art after the passing of the founder and its main instructors, since Aikido was still an unknown art throughout the world, with very small dojos in France and the U.S. Its also clear that, with such statement, the late Doshu was affirming, in other words, that the international dissemination of the art had not been succesfull till then. Otherwise he wouldn't have expressed such concern. I will not waste my time pasting whole sections of a book as I've done in the past since, I know from previous experience it will only raise more discussion. You would have to ask the Hombu dojo for this kind of information. That's the only authority with such kind of information, that is, IF they have it. But this is a verifiable fact. It seems that if the disappearence of the art was a "great concern", there's propably a good chance that there were a very small number of practitioners, don't you think? A small number of practitioners in the end of the 70's? That's not the same reality of the late 80's, I wonder why. All of a sudden Aikido dojos appeared everywhere, NOT because of the contribution of previous Shihans who went to other countries, again, with all due respect. If there is an authority on this, it is no one else then the founder's son, the late Kisshomaru Ueshiba Sensei. He stated this concern on his book. Therefore it is obvious that the number of practitioners was small. Let's rethink the senteces then. Perhaps you could add something like: "In the mid 80's Aikido was shown for the firts time to broad audiences, reaching thousands of people, when it was shown in the Hollywood blockbuster "Above the law", stared by 7th degree Aikido master Steven Seagal. There's no reason not to mention this. This is a major part of Aikido history in the west, not some personal issue or an incident. All I'm sugesting is that something should be mentioned on the international dissemination section, since Seagal's contribution is real. I'm sure many people reach the Aikido page on Wikipedia expecting to see something about Seagal, since it was through his movies they heard about the art. Go ahead and ask other professionals in the area.His contribution to the worldwide dissemination of Aikido is true and real, and this must be mentioned. Otherwise you will be excluding and important part of the history of the art. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.186.180.178 (talk) 23:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but I don't see anyone denying his contribution to Aikido's dissemination. What I DO see is a particular concern that the specific wording of that text may enter conclusions into the article that are not directly contributed by the source stated. This may need a rewrite at best, but it's certainly not an attempt to stifle legitimate evidence; please try to remember that many people here are volunteering their free time, and - as such - not every piece of evidence gets reviewed in a timely manner. Orethrius (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, since when is discussion a bad thing?

I will not waste my time pasting whole sections of a book as I've done in the past since, I know from previous experience it will only raise more discussion. --200.186.180.178 (talk) 23:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

*scratches his head in confusion* Orethrius (talk) 22:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, discussions are always very good if they lead to a positive conclusion. But if we keep on going round and round, then it is just a waste of time. Sometimes we have to cut through and go straight to the point. Let us not loose the focus here. We shouldn't discuss this matter eternally. It is a simple suggestion as asked above. To me, it is quite clear. The style of the text, who writes it or who gets the credit is the least important thing here. You writte it the way you think it is better. My only concern is that the right information is transmited to readers. I know you're not denying it, but you're surely omitting it. This kind of relevant information is a very serious thing. As I stated before, you are excluding a very important part of the history of the art in the west. Steven Seagal is, beyond any doubt and by far the greatest disseminator of Aikido in the West, and this must be included, I insist, in the International Dissemination Section. No need for further discussion on that. It is a simple, veryfiable fact. There is a legal term known as "notorius facts". That means that those facts which are known by everyone do not need to be proved. All professionals in the Aikido world recognize and are aware of the very important role of Seagal in the west, including high ranking masters, direct disciples of the founder of the art. So, what else do you wish do discuss? We don't need a written document made by the grandson of the founder of the art to confirm it! Write the text as you please, but do not ommit this information any further. I appreciate your need of time to go through these matters. But there's nothing else to be discussed here. We need a veridict and you're the judges here! Justice be made to Take Shigemichi Steven Seagal Sensei, 7th degree black-belt in Aikido, a direct disciple of Abe Sensei (10th degree) and Isoyama Sensei (8th degree), among many other masters. The first western ever to have credentials to teach and run an Aikido dojo in Japanese soil in the long history of Japanese martial arts, as well as the first and only Aikido master to show Aikido to very broad audiences by putting it in the movies, reaching thousands and thousands of spectators, bringing thousands and thousands to Aikido dojos in every corner of this planet. If it wasn't for him, Aikido would probably remain and unknown art in the West. This is Aikido history fellows! It is undeniable. These are not the words of a fan. I'm not talking about his movies and Hollywood carrer. These are the words of an Aikidoka who has practiced with Seagal Sensei in the past, as well as with Abe and Isoyama sensei. I had these talks with all of them. We're talking Aikido history and its dissemination here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.112.21 (talk) 13:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you happen to have the ISBN of the book? --Nate1481 13:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Kishomaru Sensei's book? Unfortunatelly not...But I looked for it, couldn't find it. It is there, somewhere in the beginning of the book. Kishomaru sensei states their concern on the dissapearence of the art during the 10 years that followed the passing of Morihei Ueshiba. It's not a big book. You can go through it in a couple of days. Aikido no kokoro (The spirit of Aikido - Ueshiba Kishomaru)

Anonymous IP contributor, I choose to believe that you have the best interests of the subject at heart, and please believe that others are also interested in expanding the content of this article. However, there are a number of issues affecting changes to this article that - well-intentioned though they may be - simply won't be included until they are resolved.

First and foremost, there is the matter of WP:V. I don't normally like to beat people over the head with it - it seems to be abused quite enough as it is - but the simplest of arguments falls flat without credible evidence. Statistics (pertaining to the subject somehow), books (I'm sure the local library has MILLIONS of them), and even certain periodicals are all credible evidence. Right now, you're telling us what a certain book says, but nobody has any way of verifying this for themselves. This is completely contrary both to the nature of academic work and to one's own freedom to form a relevant opinion (one might argue they're one in the same).

Secondly, WP:NOR comes into play. It's well and good to speak your piece on the matter, as I am now doing. It's NOT okay to throw in completely unverifiable "facts" unearthed in "countless hours of research" that cannot provide a single verifiable source (ISBN, etc). Please do not mistake this for "putting words in your mouth"; I wish solely to characterize what you are now doing. Most people mean well enough, but it seems that the goal of Wikipedia is NOT "truth" but "verifiability". After all, there is something to be said for the notion that one man's fact is another's fiction. Furthermore, few people realize that ANY publication made in the United States can be viewed at the Library of Congress - or found at numerous shops - with little more than the ISBN, so the inclusion of what "Martial Arts Legends says" could even be possible with the ISBN.

Finally, the simple matters of WP:BLP and the Good Article criteria make for an uphill battle to include anything regarding Steven Seagal in this article. Do I believe that he's done a lot for the state of Aikido in the world? Absolutely, it even has a passing mention in his main article. Beyond that, I can't prove ANY of my notions without resorting to evidence that is anecdotal, at best. I could believe that strawberries make or break a fruit salad, but without somebody backing up that notion with actual research and taste-tests, I wouldn't venture to include that information in the Wikipedia (regardless of concerns whether that's even worthy of discussion in an encyclopedia).

In closing, I don't believe you wish any harm to the article or - indeed - the project itself; in fact, I believe you want to make a BETTER encyclopedia by including as much information as possible. The main issue here is locating a copy of that publication so that such information could be included in the encyclopedia without destabilizing the article in the process. Orethrius (talk) 03:33, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Additionally (and somewhat unfortunately), your last post seems to have backslid a tad.

"Steven Seagal is, beyond any doubt and by far the greatest disseminator of Aikido in the West, and this must be included, I insist, in the International Dissemination Section. No need for further discussion on that. It is a simple, veryfiable fact."

"Verifiable" is not a matter of opinion. The information either is or is not verifible, and your inability to credit that information to a source other than yourself - well-intentioned or not - no doubt has some editors ill at ease.

"There is a legal term known as "notorius facts". That means that those facts which are known by everyone do not need to be proved."

Unfortunately, Wikipedia is neither a courtroom nor a proving ground for your legal aspirations.

"All professionals in the Aikido world recognize and are aware of the very important role of Seagal in the west, including high ranking masters, direct disciples of the founder of the art."

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that such statements would be reverted upon proper sourcing. Until you provide ways to verify the information you're now stating, it inherently cannot be held that it is indeed verifiable. Orethrius (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Unffortunately I do not have the means to prove my statements. As you said before, I'm simply trying to make the main page better. The only and simple thing I'm saying is that not mentioning Seagal's name whatsoever in the whole page is indeed a mistake. It makes the main text incomplete. How on earth could I prove or show you any form of verifiable document? You, as editors of this page should do the search. Not me. You go and read Kishomaru Ueshiba's book. It is your task, not mine, to try and make the page better. At least give me the benefit of doubt. Read the book, enquire the Honbu dojo in Japan, ask other professionals. Every Aikido practitioner in the whole world knows Steven Seagal, but I'm sure most of them do not know most of the names listed of the main article. It is a simple, historical fact. Aikido is known in the west today, and is as popular as karate and judo, mainly due to Seagal's first hollywood movie "Above the law". Ask the honbu dojo in Japan what was the aproximate number of Aikidokas or dojos by 1980, and by 1990. I'm sure the number of practitioners enhanced 1.000%, but how to prove that?. So, as I said before, there is no way of proving it, yet it is a well known fact in the Aikido world. Not mentioning it in the main article, I repeat, is a mistake and it weakens the text. I withdraw myself from this discussion, for, as I said before, we're only going round and round. And if the courtrooms in the whole world have made "notorious facts" a legal technique, there is probably a good reason for that. I wonder why an encyclopedia cannot use the same logic. An encyclopedia is not a laboratory either - you simply cannot have everything proved. Can you prove that chocolate is sweet? You can show me a million of papers, all verified and proved in the coldness of experiments, but I'll never know it to be sweet unless I eat it. I must experiment it myself. So, the editors of this page are the ones responsible for the information in it, and you are not doing you job fellows. You are omiting a very relevant piece of information. Do the research yourselves and you will know it to be true. Do you truly believe that only verifiable facts are stated in this site? The text is missing important information about the dissemination and history of Aikido in the west. Even Daito-ryu is now a known art, because people started to search more and more about Aikido's roots. Daito almost dissapeared too, and it is still living today thanks to Aikido. The fact that it is not possible to prove with numbers or documents does not make it untrue. A thousand years ago nobody could prove gravity, or that the earth was round, yet gravity was there, the earth was going round regardless of proof. So, you see, your demand for every piece of information to be proved is going to keep you apart from true, not verifiable informations. And we all know that the world is packed with that. When you affirm in your text, "Today there are aikido dojo available throughout the world", I really wish to know how it happened, why, who was mainly responsible for that, since the art almost disapeared. Did it happened through any of those names you mentioned in that section of the page? Who did it? Can you prove it? Are these verifiable information? You simply skip from 1961 to the present era. That's a huge historical gap and not academical at all. You must read Kishomaru's book and realize what I'm saying. The son of the founder of the art himself affirmed in a written text that he feared for the diappearence of the art. That's verifiable, and you are the ones who must go after the text. How can we go from almost disapearence to aikido dojo available throughout the world, in such a short time? How did it hapeened? Who was mainly responsible for that? Just as a final piece of information - All Aikidokas know that after the 5th degree black-belt in Aikido, you get your ranks for merit, for what you do for the spreading of the art, not for your technical level anymore. Very few people earn high degrees early in life. Seagal held a 6th degree when he was only 35, and after "Above the Law", Abe Sensei told me that Kishomaru Ueshiba, the son of the founder of the art, wanted to personally promote Seagal do 7th degree. Go ahead and see if there is or were any Akido master with such a high degree on their 40's, so early in life. I'm sure Kishomaru sensei agreed on the very important role Seagal sensei played in the spreading of Aikido to the world. The same magazine mentioned before has a picture of them both on the day of this promotion. Seagal sensei is very respected in between the high circles of Aikido in Japan, but aparently, that's not enough fot wikipedia know-it-all editors. Thank you for reading me. Sorry to have bothered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.30.157.139 (talk) 22:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Acutally, I have another suggestion. You don't really have to mention Seagal's name if you don't want to. But what you could add in the International Dissemination section is something like: "Till the late 70's, Aikido was not a very popular martial such as Karate and Judo, but in the mid 80's Aikido was shown for the first time to broad audiences, when it appeared in a Hollywood motion picture. Now there are aikido dojo available throughout the world." That's more impartial and verifiable, isn't it? The Aikido class scene in the very beginning of Seagal's "Above the Law" was seen by millions of people around the globe. That's an historical fact. Why not mention it? I believe this way you'll be adding verifiable and truthful information, and still maintain the quality of the main text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.112.21 (talk) 19:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I must admit that the guy's gotta point: I quote "When you affirm in your text, "Today there are aikido dojo available throughout the world", I really wish to know how it happened, why, who was mainly responsible for that, since the art almost disapeared. Did it happened through any of those names you mentioned in that section of the page? Who did it? Can you prove it? Are these verifiable information? You simply skip from 1961 to the present era. That's a huge historical gap and not academical at all. How can we go from almost disapearence to aikido dojo available throughout the world, in such a short time?" These infos' gotta be clarified. Ron. 04:25, 24th July 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.31.192.198 (talk) 19:25, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

“ Aikido now finds itself moving around the world along side judo and karate-do as one of the modern international Japanese martial arts. ... I feel that this success is the result of a number of factors but the most important element must certainly be the philosophy of aikido: a humanistic world view of the highest order, which along with the beauty and interest of the aikido movements, has captured the interest of intelligent people the world over. ”

1985 by Kisshomaru Ueshiba published by Hozansah Publications Ltd. ISBN 0-87040 -629-9 page 8

There is no mention of Seagal in this book. I enjoy his movies. jmcw (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

In "The Spirit of Aikido", Kisshomaru Ueshiba does indeed briefly mention his concerns for aikido following his father's death. However, he actually devotes the bulk of the book to explaining why he thinks aikido has been so successful internationally - several chapters are devoted solely to this theme. According to the text, he believes the principle factors in aikido's dissemination are its embodiment of Japanese etiquette, its appeal to women and children, the hard work of O-sensei's immediate disciples and the philosophical aspect of the art. Nowhere does he make any mention of cinema or any other media form as a key factor, and he centainly does not mention "Above The Law"!Yunshui (talk) 10:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this post. Would you be so kind as to post the section of the book in which Kisshomaru sensei expresses his fear for the diappearence of the art, and talks that were conducted to find an answer to this problem? This is certainly relevant for this discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.11.20.86 (talk) 16:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, a simple review of the pertinent policies doesn't seem to get my point across, so I'll leave a humble plea: PLEASE DON'T DO THIS. I can see what's coming a mile off, and it's not pretty; regardless of your or my feelings on Mr. Seagal's contributions to the state of Aikido, if it is not DIRECTLY mentioned in some text or video or audio transcript somewhere, please DO NOT include it. Considering the references in Mr. Seagal's article, I should think that citing this idea should not be so difficult (were I not lazy, I'd do it myself ;) ). As it stands, the article has reached Featured status due to a high expectation for verifiable references; if your point is included - even for a second - as part of the article's actual text sans citation, it contributes to the instability of the article. The edit will be reverted under the guise of WP:NOR, edit warring will undoubtedly occur, and the article will lose Featured status on the grounds of instability. So, again, PLEASE don't add the text UNLESS YOU CAN DIRECTLY VERIFY IT. I've seen far too many Good Articles fall apart to believe that the same thing cannot happen here. Orethrius (talk) 08:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry Orethrius, but this discussion is not over. These facts MUST be clarified, if you want your main text to have some credibility. Today there are aikido dojo available throughout the world. You MUST explain how it happened, why and who was mainly responsible for that, since the art almost disapeared. Did it happened through any of those names you mentioned in that section of the page? Who did it? Can you prove it? Are these verifiable information? YOU SIMPLY SKIP FROM 1961 TO THE PRESENT ERA, AND THAT'S A HUGE HISTORICAL GAP, AND NOT ACADEMICAL AT ALL. You MUST explain how Aikido went from almost disapearence to aikido dojo available throughout the world You have the responsibility of proving these statements. They MUST be verifiable, as the rules of this website demand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.138.175.193 (talk) 21:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Howdy Ron, No one has said the discussion is over. What everyone is unified in saying is that we need a written, audio, or video quote from an authoritative source that says that aikido nearly disappeared. We also need a written, audio, or video quote from an authoritative source which says why it did not disappear. Above, you wrote

“ "Till the late 70's, Aikido was not a very popular martial such as Karate and Judo, but in the mid 80's Aikido was shown for the first time to broad audiences, when it appeared in a Hollywood motion picture. Now there are aikido dojo available throughout the world." That's more impartial and verifiable, isn't it? ”

If that, or anything else, can be verified from an authoritative source, yes. No one here is anti-Segal. We simply needs valid sources for these types of statements. All we need are the complete sentences (with context), along with the title, author, and page number of the source. —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 19:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Mrand, I thank you for clarifying my central point. I'm not against adding Seagal's information to the article, but I can see what will happen to it if it's not well-sourced. I guess I *CAN* be faulted for trying to give someone a friendly warning. :( Orethrius (talk) 00:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

As it stands, *I* don't have to do *jack*. Nada. Nothing. But then, *I'm* not the one looking to insert completely subjective "facts" into an article without citing them *at all*. It doesn't matter how academic that looks, or sounds, or anything else. It's not like I'm going to block any revisions you make, but the simple fact is this: without citations, ambiguous additions to a Featured Article WILL be reverted. Bring some kind of verification to the table, and I can almost guarantee that the information regarding Mr. Seagal will be added and/or remain intact. As it stands now, the article is well-referenced; even beginning to assert that *every* statement needs a dozen references is patently ludicrous. Tell you what: if you're so intent on having everything cited multiple times, why not be bold and research it yourself? As I hold a regular day job, I really have neither the time nor the inclination to do others' research on every topic I happen to find of fleeting interest.

Just so we understand one another: I've been here since 2005. I've watched articles live and die with far better citations. I *WILL NOT* do your work for you, but I *WILL* tell you what the likely outcome will be if you also refuse to provide citations. It's your own fault if you choose to ignore me on this matter, and it is my firm belief that I have nothing further to say to you. Orethrius (talk) 00:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

That's what I meant folks, from the very start. You can't have everything proved. How on earth can I find an audio/video tape of someone stating all of what has been discussed so far? I ask you the same thing. Do you have an audio/video proving all of your statements? All I'm saying is that you guys are ommiting some important aspects on the history of Aikido's worldwide dissemination, and not recognizing it is rather foolish. Because there is no document confirming it does not mean it is untrue, or that it didn't hapenned. As I said before, you don't have to mention Seagal's name. But I see no reason to not state, for example, that Aikido was shown on Hollywood screens. Didn't that happened? Didn't thousands of people all over the world watched it? Someone's gotta clear up the missing link between 1961 to the present day. Right now your text is covering, on the international dissemination section, a short period, ranging from 1951 to 1961, and that's, forgive me, a bit poor. A flaw on your text. Much happened after that. Who can answer this question? HOW did Aikido become a popular martial art in the west? It was NOT popular till 1961, and it REMAINED not popular till the mid 80's. You cannot believe your "worlwide dissemination" section to be complete without answering this. You guys were the ones asking for everything to proved and reach "academical" level. I agree, it does not need to be neither academical, nor should everything be proved. C´mon friends! Didn't Aikido became popular in the west mainly because of Seagal's movies? All I'm saying is that perhaps you could add something about Aikido hitting the big screens, since this IS part of Aikido history in the west, and one of the main reasons for the dissemination of the art in the west. I repeat, you don't have to mention Seagal's name whatsoever, but Aikido on the screens through his movies is a fact. And c'mon, let's face it. Isn't it a cool fact? Isn't it a very occidental fact? Aikido on the movies? It's just great that Aikido got known MAINLY through the cinema. If you guys are not willing to face this truth, what else can I say. But you are, indeed, ommiting a very important and relevant part of the history of the art on the west, wether you like or not. Will you now tell me it DIDN'T happened? Sorry, but there's a gap on your text! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.7.150.78 (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

How about an 'Aikido in Popular Culture' section with Above The Law at the top? (I wouldn't recommend other Segal movies; they don't mention Aikido specifically like Above The Law does) Let the reader come to their own conclusion about it's importance to the popularization of Aikido... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.65.73.201 (talk) 17:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, that's a good idea. But you know, these editors here are too proud to recognize their text is missing information. You've read the whole discussion. They simple ignore the fact that the text has a huge historical gap, and is also missing information concerning the spreading of the art in the west. Yes, Above the Law had way more influence on bringing people to Aikido dojos than all other masters mentioned on the main text together. It was beyond any doubt the firts time Aikido and Ueshiba Morihei were shown to broad audiences. That's a simple historical fact, that all the great masters of Aikido's high inner circle recognize. No wonder the SON OF THE FOUNDER OF THE ART promoted Seagal to 7th degree, when he was only 40 years-old, due to his unprecedent contribution on the worlwide dissemination of Aikido, taking it away from the shadows of disappearence. 10th degree Master, Seiseki Abe Shihan, DIRECT DISCIPLE OF THE FOUNDER, stated that Seagal's Aikido was "the best he had ever seen". But hey, wikipedia editors want a wrtitten text from them, or perhaps a video tape...yeah, right. "Aikido in Popular culture" seems like a great topic and I say it should be added. But due to the inflexible way things are done here, due to the rigid, cold scientific-encyclopedic wannabe demands of this website, I doubt very much this will be even taken into consideration.

Allow me to try one last time to explain this: No one is asking for audio or video. To be completely honest, our standards are not that high - but we do require *SOMETHING* the substantiate claims such as this. We are not ignoring "the fact that the text has a huge historical gap". If this is indeed a fact, surely someone, somewhere, has documented this. For example, did attendance shoot up at major dojos, and did the number of dojo's increase noticeably? Wikipedia can't publish conclusions from original research from you or me, but if some other reliable source has made that observation, we can cite it. Wikipedia is just like a newspaper... we must have sources! Without that, it's just a collection of rumors and such. BTW, "in popular culture" sections are strongly discouraged by the wikipedia organization in general, and in fact, I suspect you would be hard pressed to find many featured articles with such a section. Instead, they want such information to be embedded into the article. And if it can't be embedded, 99 times out of 100, it is superfluous. —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 20:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The international dissemination section covers a small period ranging from 1951 to 1961. What hapenned then? What happened in the next almost 50 years (1961-2009)? That is a huge historical gap, and it is clearly missing information. Attendance did shoot up astronomically at major dojos, and the number of dojos did increase very very much. Aikido was very little known till the late 70's. Today there are Aikido dojos even in countries like Monaco, Iran and India! There is no doubt Aikido is almost as popular as Karate and Judo mainly due to Seagal's films. The thing is - how to prove that? Who could possibly have that on a written statement? But allow me to reinforce it. The fact that there is no document on that, does not mean it is not true. But hey, someone has put a picture of Seagal on the main article (wasn't me!!). Hey...since you guys put a picture of him, why not go ahead and add something, right by the end of the international dissemination section, like: "From the 80's on, Aikido saw an increase in its popularity, after it was seen on Hollywood films".

New Comment: Interesting discussion. I remember when "Above the Law" came out -- a lot of people at the aikido dojo I trained at went to see it, and were profoundly unimpressed. I have a hard time believing that the movie was the reason aikido didn't die out, since what happens in the movie is so different (philosophically, physically, morally) from aikido as I know it. But that's just one person's opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.173.102 (talk) 05:21, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your take on the matter. As you said, it's just your opinion, and one that seems to be contrary to the opinion of the vast majority, including that of great Aikido masters. Most people who saw Above the Law were very, very impressed. Most people had never ever seen Aikido before, and it is undeniable that there was an Aikido boom after that. It is true, as well, that some japanese Aikido masters who were in America before Seagal were jealous of Seagal's prestige within Aikido's high inner circle, and of his fame as a hollywood star. And let me disagree even further. Although his movies are violent (remember that Daito is a very violent art, and Aikido, if aplied as a means of self defense, is very violent as well, very deadly, just as all samurai fights were), philosophically it is not diferent at all. Basically the plots are always a good guy who wants to fight injustice, the hero against the bad guy, good over evil. Isn't that yin-yang? Physically it is precisely the same (perhaps not at your dojo), but yes, all aikido moves are there, and very well executed I must say. And morally, again, it is violent, but the idea is that there will be someone willing to do right. In my view, his stories are a modern adaptation of samurai novels, which Seagal himself admited to have read a lot, and so did the founder of Aikido, Morihei Ueshiba. Abe Seiseki Shihan, on an interview in the same magazine mentioned on the beginning of this discussion, said that he not only watched, but he really enjoyed Seagal's films. Morihei Ueshiba also used to take his son to enjoy samurai novels on the cinema. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.112.20 (talk) 11:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Lol, I like "the opinion of the vast majority" and "Most people who saw Above the Law were very, very impressed." Battling opinions, backed up by our appeals to the respective hordes of people who agree with us. But when you say "Aikido, if aplied as a means of self defense, is very violent as well," I respectfully disagree completely. This description is true of daito-ryu aikijutsu, as far as I know; and I'm sure many aikidoka, probably including some sensei, would agree that it describes aikido also. But it directly contradicts many of O-sensei's statements about the art, and I've never trained in a dojo that presented aikido as a violent art. As the article on this page shows, one essential element of aikido is the goal of being in harmony with one's opponent, in order to avoid harming him (or her) -- the opposite of violence. 'Above the Law' is certainly similar to samurai films, and I'm sure is enjoyable for many people, including some aikidoka; but it's not congruent with that concept of aikido. 131.252.192.140 (talk) 23:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, being in harmony with your opponent is the goal of Aikido. Specially your true opponent, yourself. But you must agree that being in harmony with someone striking you to death is not possible in a real situation. It happends on mats only, with your aikido-friend. He strikes, cooperates with your technique, and falls. You know it all right? Besides, a real, deadly strike would never happend inside a dojo or in a championship. These are all artificial situations that try to create something similiar to what would happend in real life. O-Sensei (the founder of Aikido, and a master o Daito-ryu) once said: "Aikido works as a mirror, being God the judge. If someone strikes to train with you, he will be trained. If someone strikes to injure you, he will be injured. If someone strikes you to kill you, he will be killed." So, no, I don't agree with you. You just can't be kind and noble against someone trying to kill you. You would have to have a spiritual status such as that of Jesus or Gandhi to do that. Can you do it? For the every day martial artist like you and me, that is simply not real. Real life involves loads of emotions and energies that can never be reproduced on the mats. Be kind to your killer, and be ready for your next birth my friend. Another great philosopher from India once said: "God made the hero and the villain, so that you don't become the villain. If you become the villain, your throat has got to be cut." So, you see, there's no Mr. nice guy against someone trying to rape your child, or trying to kill your mother. Put yourself in these situations and see how much "in harmony" you can get with your opponent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.189.112.20 (talk) 11:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

This really isn't the place for the old, well-worn debate on how violent Aikido is. This talkpage is about improving the article. As for Seagal, unless somebody can find some citable references (and it's not like Aikido lacks coverage; there are entire long-running magazines devoted to it) then all claims about how many aikidoka were impressed or disappointed in it are just anecdotes. Vehemence does not score points on Wikipedia; citations do. — Gwalla | Talk 23:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Well my friend, it seems you didn't read the whole discussion. There's an entire magazine quote on the upper part of this duscussion, which was simply ignored by the editors. So, this discussion is not going any further. I must admit that I was impressed to see that the editors at least put a picture of Seagal on the main page. To me, that's more than enough. I'm sure only a handful of people know the masters mentioned on the "international dissemination" section. Had they put a picture of any of them, it wouldn't help the text much. But, as discussed before, many people do indeed seek the aikido page because of Seagal. There's no doubt on that. His picture on the main page speaks eloquently for itself. And just to put and end to the "how violent aikido is" discussion, here goes a quote of Seagal himself, on the Merv Griffin show, a few years prior to his debut on Above the Law: "Aikido is the most lethal, deadly and effective martial art in the world in my opinion, but its philosophy is that of harmony, and the turning of a potentialy violent situation into one of harmony." (Remember that these are the words of a 7th degree black-belt in Aikido, a direct disciple of some of the founder's greatest students, and the first non-japanese ever to run an aikido dojo inside japanese soil, in Japan's long long martial arts history). So, if your teacher cannot show you these things, perhaps you shoud look for another school, perhaps you're just doing gymnastics. Besides, the founder used to affirm that the high spiritual experiences that he had gone through were due to his intense discipline on the hardships of austere martial arts trainning and meditation, and mainly because of the fear of death that should be overcome. If you do not fear your sensei when he calls you for randori, something is not right. Many students of the founder feared facing him on the mat, cause no one was playing there. It was the real deal. In other words, to go through the same enlightening experinces that Aikido offers, one must overcome the fear of death, the fear of loosing one's individuality. It is the end of your real (and perhaps only) opponent, yourself! If you're not experiencing these shifts of consciouness, if you're not having direct experiences of your inner energetic body (KI), then perhaps you should look for another teacher. Overcoming the fear of death is also a demand on other spiritual disciplines of the east. Prince Sidharta Gautama, the Buddha, once told one of his disciples: "Most come to bridge of the river of death. They run up and down the banks of the river. Very few cross the bridge." I end this talk with a quote from Morihei Ueshiba, founder of the martial art of Aikido: "Martial arts are martial arts. Aikido is not a dance!" (Bugei wa bugei desu. Aikido wa odori jya nai!). Thank you all for such a nice discussion.

The magazine quote only shows that Abe-sensei had a lot of respect for Seagal, and that he thought that Seagal was in a position to make Aikido much more popular. It doesn't address whether dojo membership surged after Above The Law, or what the majority of aikidoka thought of the movie. Also, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't disparage the training and teachers of people you've never met. — Gwalla | Talk 19:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

In a position to make Aikido much more popular...C'mon, you're using the words yourself! That's exaclty what Seagal did. Abe sensei did recognize it, but you guys cannot. What to say? Also, I never mentioned any dojo or sensei in particular. All I'm saying is that there are different types of dojos nowadays. Some (very few) are truly martial, spiritual and authentic. When you walk into this type of rare dojo, you feel as if you're entering a shrine. Others (most of them) have become westernized, teaching just gymnastics for those who pay, the place feels like a club. The deep spiritual practices that require austerity is something most dojos do not teach. People just don't want to know about that. To these, Aikido is just another tuesday-thursday thing. Please forgive me if my criticism is too harsh, but that's how it goes Gwalla-san. Unffortunately, all things that reach these capitalistic shores become products. You pay, buy your gi, pay some more, do your tests, pay some more, get your certificate, pay some more, buy you hakama...it's a comercial relationship. It has happened with Judo, Karate, Kung-fu, Yoga (damn' is Yoga comercial! Such a fine ancient spiritual path!) Very few really have the guts to undergo the type of strict japanese discipline Seagal went through. Very few experiment the ancient master-disciple relationship, which is to see your sensei as a guide, a mentor, a spiritual teacher, a guru so to speak. Someone you'd never question or doubt. That's one of the reasons why this Seagal fella' is so goddamn' good in Aikido. Thank god Aikido got known through him, an authentic aikidoka, recognized by the great Aikido masters. Too bad if people don't like his films (and to tell you the truth, I don't think they're good either). But his career as an Aikido master is flawless. It's just a matter of being able to separate the real man from his Hollywood carrer. Yes, sad but true, dojos are more and more westernized and comercial. Even in Japan things are becoming "americanized". And that makes things even more strange doesn't it? You have an american master who can teach as well as (if not better) than any japanese master, and on the other hand you have japanese teachers who are only in it for the money. Oh boy, the 20th and 21st century are really changing stuff huh? As the founder of Aikido once said, when asked by a very young student, as to what were the etiquette rules in his dojo, O-Sensei answered: "Times are changing". All the best to you all. "Keep polishing, people of the way!"

"In a position to" does not mean "did". It means he thinks he could. That's an assertion of potential, not accomplishment. If you want to support your argument that he actually was responsible for a boom in Aikido, you need something stronger than a maybe. — Gwalla | Talk 18:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, right. Steven Seagal did not acomplish that. Maybe it was some other sensei who did it. I just can't remember his name now. Maybe it was some of those well known sensei mentioned on the main page. I think I'll turn my research on that direction. Perhaps you guys can help me finding the sensei who really spread Aikido in the west. You guys are right! How foolish have I been. Thank you for opening my eyes! Thank you for posting such wise, clear and strong arguments. Please, oh wise man of Wikipedia, help me to find the sensei who was responsible for the spreading of Aikido. He surely deserves a whole page dedicated to him. I'll be glad to help on the text.

I didn't say that he didn't. I said that to put that in the article, you need to back it up. When replying to me, please respond to what I've written and not what you assume I'm implying. Thank you. — Gwalla | Talk 18:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not assuming anything Gwalla-san. As I wrote before, having a picture of Seagal Sensei on the International Dissemination section is more than enough. It shows that you guys recognize his importance on the spreading of the art. Nothing else is needed. I would, on the other hand, question the picture chosen. Perhaps a picture of Seagal Sensei wearing Aikido clothing would be more apropriate? There are many pictures on the net, during the 70's in Japan, and after that in america. Also, how about adding on the picture text, something like: Actor Steven Seagal, a 7TH DEGREE AIKIDO MASTER, used Aikido in several films, PLAYING AN IMPORTANT ROLE ON THE DISSEMINATION OF THE ART (C'mon, the play on words here in inevitable and kinda cool isn't it?)

Theory of physical injuring

The exact approach on the safeguarding of the attacker to permanent injury is not precisely described. Perhaps the info from this book page may be implemented —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.215.3 (talk) 14:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)