I feel-think the same, i also knew him in the saku seminar and caused a great impact in me not only for his practise but for the good person he is.

I think you don't really know aikido - even if I agree with you it is not built for self defense...

@@quidam3810 Curious. Is aikido in your opinion built for self cultivation without self defense? If not,please expand on your understanding of what aikido is within the martial arts. Thanks 🙏

@@onedirection3510 (my short answer : copy paste of persoal comments ;-) ). Aikido is a budo. Martial art is a translation that inevitably betrays the meaning of budo. That's a cultural difference... DO, to japanese, means "the way" . Are considered "do" things as diverse as making tea, making bouquet or karate-do, ju-do, kyu-do, aiki-do. What these things have in common is that they are means of personal travel towards perfection. They're all as valuable to japanese people. Now, concerning aikido, It precisely means : "ai" = harmony and "ki" = energy. Roughly, Ueshiba invented aikido using older forms of budo and decided to use it to help people harmonize with one another using what was initially samouraï fighting techniques. Then, budo is generally translated as "martial art" in English, but the meaning of martial art and budo are not strictly equivalent. Then, the cultural difference between Japan and the western world is so great that most people don't know what i just explained, including good technical teachers of aikido. They see that martial techniques are used, it is called martial art so they think it's meant for fighting and with the usual modesty of martial teachers, consider themselves the best on earth in the best discipline for fighting. But obviously, that's delusional. An aikido practitioner does not stand a chance in an MMA cage. And an MMA practitioner does not take much risk when trying aikido for the 1st time. In the first case, because aikido is not MMA, is anti-competition and uses techniques so diverse and peculiar that only a handful would have sense in a real fight. the second, because aikido takes (or should) take you as you are and helps you better yourself, not kill someone else or injure or whatever. But an MMA practitioner starting aikido would be just a beginner, with poor skills at aikido and some potentially useful side-knowledge. I personally love that kind of aikido : Https://m.kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nd10bJxhz5nZmIE.html It is a budo that requires impressive skills and tremendous work to be practiced at this level. Aikido harmonize people practicing aikido, develops very specific skills that can be useful beyond fighting (balance, how to fall, how to control someone in a gentle way if it makes sense in the situation). Indeed, aikido techniques could be dangerous if improperly applied and go beyond what aikido is supposedly designed for.

@@quidam3810 Thank you sir for such an in-depth reply. I can tell you could and would like to go on much more at length to this reply. I would enjoy a very very long conversation about this topic as well. One of my main issues by way of observation as I have encountered many or perhaps too many seemingly stoic Akidoists who all seem to want to be the “O Sensei” of their dojo. The irony is they will talk about how aikido is not fighting and you don’t want to possess the appearance of someone who would be quite the tiger if provoked. I feel like why not just be open about it because if you are studying something that has to do with fighting there is nothing wrong with discussing that aspect of it. I too appreciate Tissier Sensei’s skills. Nonetheless and by comparison , my sense of “real aikido” is best expressed in this video. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e9B-laSEvsW0YXU.html. I can only assume by observation that Chiba Sensei would teach that although aikido is a road to self cultivation, it is also very much a fighting art. Thanks!

@@onedirection3510 video is beautiful great aikido, even though i think i would miss some of my usual habits ;-). Thanks for your answer too :-) i don't think for a minute Tissier sensei would disagree that aikido is martial and has no sense without martiality. His aikido is extremely martial even if spectacular in demonstrations. However, martiality is used for a different purpose in aikido from any other martial art, I think, and the way it is practiced, without competition, without real attacks, means that if one practices only aikido, there will necessarily be huge gaps in a real fight situation. And no hope of victory in a mma or whatever kind of competition of the sort. And i think that's normal. For Tissier's school (to which i belong) aikido techniques are always susceptible to be transformed in a more aggressive version and what's of utmost importance is adaptation to what uke is doing in a martial sense, even if to a peaceful end. I think aikido tries to tie both ends of "martial" and "art" in a very unique way, but many aikido practitioners - including senseis - think it is the "ultimate" martial art in the sense it can defeat anything, which, to me, is laughable. I know aikido practitioners who also practice various sorts of other martial art : they would never defend such a position (including my own sensei). What they say is that you might be in a situation where aikido can be used but you also might not be and then boxing or other strategy is the best. But aikido has no meaning if use attacks with no intention or efficiency...