View Full Version : Ki/qi & kokyu/jin
01-08-2007, 04:00 PM
is an interesting read.
Despite what some theorists claim about ki/qi and kokyu/jin being equal, one reads that:
Regarding the relationship between ki and ch'i : They are similar but they're applied differently. The concept of ki is, of course, not limited to Aikido, and many martial art and philosophical systems use the term to express the notion of "universal energy" or "life force." There are many points in common between Aikido and the Chinese martial arts but the respective approach is different, and we should not consider them identical. They should be appreciated as two separate and independent systems.
01-08-2007, 07:04 PM
Despite what some theorists claim about ki/qi and kokyu/jin being equal, one reads that:Oh, Justin.... you just want so desperately for me to be wrong. You just chase me and chase me and just look for anything you can find to support your enormous need for vendetta! Tsk, tsk.
OK.... O-Sensei looked at Ki as deriving from the Japanese Kami and the Universe... but that view of the universe was borrowed from the Chinese. O-Sensei's demo's of Ki were borrowed from the Chinese. Instead of just being negative constantly, why don't you explain how the Ki and Kokyu of O-Sensei was functionally different from the Qi and Jin? Oh, but wait.... you've never provided a single explanation of anything... you just insinuate, right?
And while you're at it... once again I know this is a waste of time to ask for the attribution... give us the quote about kokyu and jin being equal please (whoops... don't scuttle back under your rock before you do it, please).
01-08-2007, 11:53 PM
While I don't want to get involved in the debate of whether ki/chi is different or the same, I believe there is great value to be gained by looking at both sides of the coin. This will lead to a greater understanding than that which would be gained if you looked at just one.
01-09-2007, 07:55 AM
While I don't want to get involved in the debate of whether ki/chi is different or the same, I believe there is great value to be gained by looking at both sides of the coin. This will lead to a greater understanding than that which would be gained if you looked at just one.Well, it's not really much of a debate. For instance, Koichi Tohei's explanations about Ki could be said to be arguably different from the mainstream "explanation" of qi in China. It's the "explanations" that will vary from place to place, but the functional mechanics do not change. If Tohei stands "immoveably" while someone pushes on his forearm, despite his "explanation" of Ki being different from qi, the functional mechanics (when done correctly and purely) are exactly the same.
Ueshiba argued for the Kami to be the source of ki powers. Tohei argues for the "Ki of the Universe". Some people argue that the qi/ki is mystical or mechanical or "the connective tissue" or whatever, but if you meet enough of these people it's quite easy to see that they're talking about the same thing. I'd be embarrassed to go up to some of the experts I know and try to sell them on the idea that ki and qi, etc., were actually different things.... it would just show them that I didn't know anything, in truth.
01-09-2007, 08:54 AM
Always an interesting discussion.
From someone who knows nothing -
I study both Tai Chi (seriously 3 years, started 8 years ago) and Aikido (5 years).
My experience with Aikido is different for one teacher (very aerobically oriented) compared to the head instructor (Sensei) who is more oriented toward relaxation. Sorry, I don't do well with words .. you'd have to experience for yourself if that's not enough.
But every (or most) Tai Chi class is oriented toward relaxation and feeling chi (however you want to define that for yourself) of yourself and partner.
So while O'Sensei's (or other very high level MA) experience with ki/qi/kokyu/jin (or practice) may be the same whether practicing Aikido or Tai Chi, mine is not. And what is most important to me? ... I guess it would have to be my own experience. In Daoism, I've never seen where it says there is an absolute truth (e.g. ki/qi same as kokyu/jin) as compared to .. instead, I mostly see that this study is a personal journey. Does winning an argument, mean that it is true?
My readings of O'Sensei, Bok Nam Park (Bagua practitioner), and Cheng Man Ching (Tai Chi) are very different. They may or may not experience the same thing, but they seem to be getting there in different ways.
Frankly, I don't care to prove scientifically (or if it is proven) that they are the same. Everyone learns differently, and I won't begrudge someone who can learn to calm the mind or "feel chi" through a method different that mine.
My own useless opinion.
01-09-2007, 09:06 AM
My own useless opinion.Well, I've never seen anyone deflate the motivation for others to debate a point so quickly. ;)
"Both views should be viewed and considered" is not always a true statement, Eric. Quite often, one view is more right and one is more wrong. Functionally, the mechanics for how to do the physical phenomena of ki/qi are straightforward, even if the speech and discussions comes from different perspectives. If someone wants to posit that Ki is different from Qi, they need to say why... not just find posts that agree with their position. If all we can do is post quotes back and forth at each other, we're not qualified to debate a topic.... much less pick a fight over it.
01-09-2007, 09:37 AM
Wyatt, I'm rolling (Tombstone).
Yeah, I started (I know nothing) and ended with that deflation.
I'm not debating the rightness or wrongness of it. It would be like my talking about brain surgery (and I'm not a doctor or surgeon). I guess what I was trying to do is encourage someone, that they don't have to know the right answers, only to practice. This is unusual for me, because my education is engineering and I like to know and understand the right answer. However, with this, I realize that it is better for me to just practice.
I mostly read about these things to see different methods and then I can determine which way is best for me.
Maybe we're just talking about different things here..
01-09-2007, 11:14 AM
Walter, where was I talking about you?
Instead of just being negative constantly, why don't you explain how the Ki and Kokyu of O-Sensei was functionally different from the Qi and Jin?
So you feel that posting a direct quote from the Ueshibas on the topic is being negative.
vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2012 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited