Sports » Martial Arts » If there are no martial arts that are non-violent?

If there are no martial arts that are non-violent?

why do a number of aikidoka and aikido resources promote it as a nonviolent art?

Of course anything can be used to injure another person. a glass of water spilt deliberately on a slippery surface can cause a slip and fall injury. so yes aikido can be used in a violent manner to injure a person.

However ueshiba said nonviolence is the true practice of Aikido.

If ueshiba looks on nonviolence as true aikido how is this so if there are no arts that are nonviolent?

is violence actually in the intent of use rather than in the art of aikido itself?

Non-violence, defined as engaging in combat without letting any harm come to anyone, is aikido’s ideology and should not be applied to all other arts. Aikido’s founder spent his life trying to convert aikijutsu with this goal and it isn’t something that just applies to all other arts. Other arts’ non-violence tactics are limited to pre combative phase of the engagement.
Personally I love the idea of non-violent martial art, but I think aikijutsu is unfortunate template for this idea. Let’s ignore the ‘is it functional as a self defense’ and ‘are the training methods good enough’ arguments for now and suppose aikido techniques work perfectly. Aikido’s movements are based upon inflicting pain against a joint and having a person move in a way to minimize that pain which traps them in an demobilizing position or throw them to put distance between the martial artist and the attacker.
Let’s start with that pain against the joint. There are bound to be attackers who will try to ignore the pain because they realize falling would put them in a the demobilized position. When this happens aikidoka has two choices, abandon current technique and hope that the attacker will just flow with the next one(this might lead to never ending chain reactions) or just break the joint which the stress is being applied to(which breaks the non-violence rule). This way the art becomes ineffective or violent. Also throwing a person using joint pain, while safe for a practiced martial artist is dangerous for a person without any experience. A violent art is still an effective martial art, but it strays from the original spirit the founder was looking for.
I think wrestling with its ability to take a person down with more control over the attacker’s weight and direction and the pinning and choking techniques are actually much better fit template for this non-violence martial art. You can pin a person which doesn’t hurt them and controls them from causing farther violence, and you can choke them if you need more definite fight stopper. The choke will put them to sleep and you can walk away and let him wake in his good time.
Sorry for the rant.

I think partially it is how you define violence and the other part is how you practice your martial art.
To me any attack is an attempt to victimize in some way and I think that in itself is violent.
Aikido came from Aikijutsu and as an Aikijutsu practitioner I have to say that Aikijutsu is very violent. Aikido took a different turn and unfortunately with it became corrupted. Have you ever seen Aikidoka practice nonviolent Aikido? With all due respect to the art but there are practitioners who believe that and can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. Look at Taiji. It took the same route and most people now don't even believe that it is a martial art anymore let alone it being effective but it too is violent if practiced correctly.
As to the "love people" aspect that Ueshiba taught, guess what, all martial art teach that in the sense that you should not fight with anger, out of revenge or any other negative emotion for that matter in your heart. If you let emotions control your actions, especially negative emotions, then you will make mistakes because your emotions are in control. Emotions also make you tense up. If there is tension in a martial art you give your opponent something to counter and use against you. This is a concept that took me 15 years of training to understand (and now train it so I can use it) and no beginner martial art teaches that as it is not easy to grasp. It is very difficult to stay calm and relaxed when reacting to something that comes in on you like a freight train. The brain naturally will want to counter with the same force as the incoming object and it is not needed. It also wants to panic and thinks 'oh my gosh this is going to hurt' or 'I am going to get hit'. So conditioning your mind with not wanting to do any harm and accepting the fact that your opponent is just there even though he has bad things in mind you simply accept him without any fear then that attitude lets you react correctly. Japanese martial art teaches 'mushin' (no mind) but that is even harder. So replacing negative emotions with positive emotions is easier, anger and hate with love.
I had a Chinese martial arts teacher who knew nothing of Aikido but taught the same concept. If you are the attacker you never felt a threat as my teacher would move in, say "I love you" and the next thing was you were sitting on the floor. There was never any force and by the time you realized my teacher's intentions it was too late.
Now granted that towards the end Ueshiba went overboard and his philosophy took on a religious turn. While he was a great martial artist himself I think that part led many astray too and gave a false security that you can get out of a violent situation by being nice. Unless you get to his level of skill to where you can take on an opponent who keeps getting up over and over and put him on the floor without fail until the opponent gives up I would have to say for the average Aikidoka this is more risk than they are capable of dealing with but this skill level should always be the goal. So the alternative to that if you need to learn self defense before you reach 60 years of age is make sure your opponent does not get up and come at you again just in case your opponent didn't get the idea the first time you put him down.
This is why I believe that martial art and religion should never mix. It didn't pan out for Taiji and Aikido doesn't seem to fare any better.
People often misrepresent something either because they themselves do not understand or for selling purposes because they know there is a market out there and if you tell people often enough it is what they want then they believe it. Martial art is no different.

Edit: I actually think this is an excellent question for a change.

To feel secure in the ability to defend yourself does not insure that you will use your skill to attack others. Martial arts is a tool, like a pen... with a pen you can write beautiful words just as you are able to write offensive words.

Liondancer nailed it. Ueshiba was a great jujutsu/aikijutsu practitioner who, as he aged, really went more and more to the religious side of things. His skill was immense, and I personally know several aikido practitioners who are very stout and capable martial artists, but if someone practices aikido and thinks that he/she won't have to injure an attacker they are fooling themselves. Those throws are easy to roll out of with mats and experienced partners, but an attacker is going to land on his shoulder or head and be hurt. Those submissions that you practice and joint manipulations, done on a resisting opponent, have a good chance of causing severe damage.

Personally, I find that a loving and positive attitude helps me be more fluid in practice and function more in the mushin realm. If you never look for a fight and do all that you can to avoid one where not appropriate, then your mind is clear to execute without hesitation when you give it the green light because you aren't second guessing and having to limit yourself. You just sit back and let your practice express itself. When sparring I rarely can remember what techniques I've used when asked because the mind is out to lunch. Accepting that there is a place and time for violence, when coupled with an active effort to avoid unnecessary violence and ignore one's ego, allows for decisive and focused effort when called for.

Well first of all I think its important to understand that in the Japanese language words and statements sometimes have a double meaning. Referring to Aikido for instance as a "gentle art" but yet it contains some of the most devastating wrist locks of any art that I have ever experienced. The other thing about Aikido is it really stresses reaching out and intercepting your attacker before he can anticipate and react and then blending your technique and the leverage of it with his motion to re-direct his attack and this is done before he is in the most powerful phase of that attacking motion as much as possible. So while you are meeting the force of his attack you really are not meeting it in quite the same way as a lot of other martial arts teach and stress. Meeting it the way other arts stress it is more violent and requires more in the way of physical application while Aikido instead stresses a minimum of that.

The above along with the philosophy of being non violent and non aggressive and instead waiting for your opponent's attack and you then reacting and countering it before and as he exposes himself and his attack and opens himself up to it being countered is why Aikido is thought of by many as nonviolent or on a different level than most other arts. Having also been around some Aikido stylists I can also tell you that the relaxed, non aggressive approach that this also all helps to create in their classes and what they are learning and teaching is also very much non aggressive and also the people that seem attracted to that art.

Aikido is violent.

I agree that a martial art is a tool but it isn't a physical object tool, you can pick up a sword and not be violent with it, hell, you can use it as a shovel but can you do that with fighting techniques? You can LEARN fighting techniques and not be violent but as soon as you start USING fighting techniques you're being violent. Martial arts are a skill set with a philosophy and that's where things get confusing, more than a little complicated and highly questionable but some things remain constant.

Aikido is not an aggressive art but it is a violent one because if your aggressor doesn't learn from being tossed to the ground then you have to make sure they stay there and that means using violent measures to inflict pain or worse. The police try to use the claim of non-violence to cover their a$$es in court but the fact is no matter how much force they attacked you with and how little effort you used to redirect it when you redirect a person into a wall on purpose you're being violent. The difference between Aikido and its Jujitsu ancestors is philosphy, there are no techniques in Aikido that don't exist in the Jujitsu styles it was created from, there are techniques and tactics used in Jujitsu that don't exist in Aikido because they run contrary to its non aggressive philosophy.
You can't be aggressive using Aikido but you can be violent.

good question. violent or not that depend on what you want. a knife if used by rober would be violent but if a knife used by doctor or cheaf? is a knife false? not that depend on user. if you bullied by someone or multiple, or you look someone is bulliying with someone can you use advise to help it? "hai dont do it, god will anger to you" you can do it to bad people? sometime we must fight to beat them if it need. hai buddy martial arts nou jut taught us about fight, but it taught me about philosophy, culture, spirit, discipline, healing etc but i think most important martial arts taought me how to respect one other.

Martial arts can be ways, that are not leading to more violence but the opposite, in the sense that a descent practitioner may use them...For example what is the difference between someone that can handle himself/herself before training with the same person that can handle himself/herself while or after training...?

The difference is that with training, he/she does not need to get necessarily in a combat mood to get the job done, so he/she can do it with out any type of excessive force, which sometimes is not even force...

Personal examples....

Prior to training.....Attacker tries to strike at me, I strike first and then I push him over a table to drop him down..Then I strike a few times, while avoiding his kicks, while he is on the floor. (Not excessive use of force but enough striking)

While training....Two guys trying to take a shopping bag from me while walking in the night..They come from behind, I just add a bit of relax type of strength in my grip, let them try for a few seconds and then start laughing..Both of them, walking away really fast with out looking back...The bag stayed in my hand they left unharmed. They were open for strikes at the back of their heads at all times..Prior to training what do you think I would have done?

So martial arts, not only are not violent if they are used in that manner, but the exact opposite...They are the additional edge, that aids descent practitioners to protect themselves, while many times not even using force..

I know that the context which many train lucks completely the necessary wisdom....I also know that some are psychos, some others have other issues..But that is not the fault of martial arts, that is the fault of other things...A martial art can be a way of diminishing violence and not the opposite.

From these and similar things is that I judge some times. If someone appears to glorify all kind of villains and murderers, then he/she has not business in martial arts, since a martial art is something positive and not the opposite.:)

When aiming to manifest, many individuals focus excessive on the outside type rather than the internal condition. Exactly what' important is our internal experience: whether we choose to experience love or worry. When we commit to our internal experience of love we start to draw in more love. Numerous individuals approach Manifestation from a place of "How can I get something to feel much better?" Rather, the focus should be: "How can I feel better and for that reason be an energetic match for attracting more success into my life?"- and this is simply a part of exactly what you are be getting with this guide https://tr.im/3ICJC , Manifestation Miracle works making your life better without the fixation of tomorrow day.
Your objectives develop your reality. There is no need to beat yourself up: merely recognizing how your low-level ideas negatively impact your life is the very first effective step towards altering your experiences. Start this process you will accept the honesty worrying your low-level ideas, energy and feelings of disbelief block you from getting exactly what you prefer. As soon as you get clear about the blocks, you can start to clean them approximately clear area for positive manifestations happen.

No, Aikido is NOT violent. Fights are violent. People are violent. Martial arts are not, they are only recipes that the practitioner chooses to use. Martial arts is like a recipe to a chef, or a paintbrush to an artist. Recipes have no taste, and paintbrushes produce no beauty. Were I to try to make a bouillabaisse, it would not come out very well. But if a world-class chef made it, it would be much better than mine - even though we use the same recipe. Were I to make a painting, it would not look as beautiful as one done by an artist - even though we use the same paintbrush, paint, canvass, and subject.

And so it is the same with martial arts: two people can use martial arts in very different ways, with very different results, given the same circumstances - even though they may be practitioners of the same style and equal in skill.

What makes Aikido philosophically non-violent is based on the principle that there are no aggressive strategies in Aikido. It doesn't mean that an Aikido-ka cannot use an aggressive technique or strategy (a gun, for example), but when this happens, the Aikido-ka is not using Aikido. The other supporting principle is that Aikido uses the opponent's own energy and momentum against him, so, any injuries to the opponent is done only at his own fault and his own actions.

Some take this a step further, in that they teach Aikido as a science of movement and balance, and control therein. In other words, it does not concern about emotions, points, alleys and bars, weapons, or laws. It concerns only about body mechanics, and trains under circumstances where the attacker is most efficient and most aggressive and has complete intent to strike you.

So Aikido can be applied in violent situations, but it does not use violence to neutralize those situations: it is the Aikido-ka who will use Aikido - and other tools, like weapons, guns, and aggressive strategies - to neutralize a situation.

EDIT2: Aikido = violent?

http://aikikai.or.jp/eng/
(click the "What is Aikido" link, top left)

http://www.iwama-aikido.com/about_aikido...

These are links to the most popular styles of Aikido.

Can someone one please point out where in the articles there is something about violence inside Aikido?

If the doshu say violence isn't part of Aikido (and rather, that the opposite is true), I'm wondering where anyone else got their information source from.