True Internal Strength

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[DH]

I love working with the Military Combatives program as I constantly get beginners that have no clue and they want to fight me. I lose sometimes cause you get in patterns of habit in arts, we all assume certain things. A guy on the street doesn't understand your "rules". So, it is fun to work with folks with no training at all too get an honest perspective of force, pressure.
Good point, Kevin.
While not the best test- they are a great test. They move unpredictably, get pissed off easily, take throws in strange and unexpected ways and are just in general fun to play with. Last time I had my nose broken was by a guy who punched- in the weirdest sense of the word I ever saw. My fault -not his, as we were just play sparring and he didn't have any sense of distance.

The other stuff about testing and goals
Humility, aggressiveness, the wrestlers (well known and documented) confidence factor, and a fighters well developed mindset and goals can get confusing.
In MA, goals are not always the same; some guys are content to learn an arts methods, or play with some internal work, go to the dojo to catch some air time and they're happy. There may not even be a well thought out end goal, nore does there need to be.

For those so inclined to the martial side of things, the only way to get there is to test it and use it and refine it. And really the only way to successfully do that and learn those lessons is by by sparring/ fighting many styles and approaches to combatives with weapons and without.
a) The arts are not enough
b) Internals/ aiki is not a panacea for everything

There are levels and weaknesses that can and do exist in many areas. They get amplified under pressure. So it is with some people's "dabbling" in internals to use in their martial arts. Research alone is not going to cut it. The ability to put it out there on the ground and have it count, will only come from many hours of failure and success and determination and then putting it out there on the ground to -be- tested.
And not everyone is interested in that either-though some are.

There is a Taiji guy who was "offered a position" to represent and he turned it down. He wanted to continue to go out and test and refine and loved playing with all manner of Japanese and modern combative guys in public. He didn't care at all who it was. It was just another chance to learn to him. Here was a traditionalist with a wrestlers mindset.
Cheers
Dan

[Budd]

Nice, Dan.

What's your thought on the progression of the conditioning/solo training with resistance drills and then into live sparring? I know it's something I've been struggling with as I want to get back into playing with my BJJ and MMA friends some more, but have been trying to spend chunks of time just building up a base/frame/whatever of moving correctly with the IS conditioning work I've been doing.

But obviously, I want to be getting back to work things out with less constraints, etc. You've mentioned before getting some insights just putting it out there with wrestlers/judoka . . do you think a certain level of conditioning is required at first, or is it useful to just work in parallell with the base IS development?

Thanks/Budd

Good point, Kevin.
While not the best test- they are a great test. They move unpredictably, get pissed off easily, take throws in strange and unexpected ways and are just in general fun to play with. Last time I had my nose broken was by a guy who punched- in the weirdest sense of the word I ever saw. My fault -not his, as we were just play sparring and he didn't have any sense of distance.

Humility, aggressiveness, the wrestlers (well known and documented) confidence, and a fighters well developed mindset and goals can get confusing.
Goals are not always the same; some guys are content to learn an arts methods, play with some internal work, go to the dojo to catch some air time and they're happy. For those so inclined to the martial side of things, the only way to get there is to test it and use it and refine it. And really the only way to successfully do that and learn those lessons is by by sparring/ fighting many styles and approaches to combatives with weapons and without.
a) The arts are not enough
b) Internals/ aiki is not a panacea for everything

There are levels and weaknesses that can and do exist in many areas. They are just amplified under pressure, so it is with some people's "dabbling" in internals. Research alone is not going to cut it. The ability to put it out there on the ground have it count, will only come from many hours of failure and success and determination and then putting it out there on the ground to -be- tested.

There is a Taiji guy who was "offered a position" to represent and he turned it down. He wanted to continue to go out and test and refine and loved playing with all manner of Japanese and modern combative guys in public. He didn't care at all who it was. It was just another chance to learn to him. Here was a traditionalist with a wrestlers mindset.
Cheers
Dan

[Mike Sigman]

I think now we're getting into some interesting discussions. Using good ki/kokyu skills is using good ki/kokyu skills, regardless of how someone opts to use them. The 'pure' user shouldn't be implied as "not a fighter" anymore than a fighter should be automatically considered "not very pure". All that happens with that sort of discussion is we go back to the "I kicked your butt so therefore my ki skills are better than yours"... if you want to see the outcome of that sort of reasoning, so look at some of the "push hands" contests at some Taiji tournaments nowadays: the worry about "winning" simply stopped a lot of people from ever developing any ki/kokyu/qi/jin skills. Same thing happened with all the focus on "doing Aikido technique" ... full skills got lost.

I don't particularly care one way or another what someone does with their skills (martial, hobby, etc.), but, as I've said many times, there are many levels and gradations of those skills. If the topic is "internal skillz" then what someone opts to do with them is secondary to the how and what is actually being developed. Results do count, ultimately, but I know from experience that 'kick butt' results usually indicate that someone worried more about winning than the full range of skills and the full range of skillz, done the way Ueshiba did them, is going to be the standard first and the 'kick butt' part is going to be second.

YMMV

Mike Sigman

[rob_liberti]

I'd really like to read your description of "the full range of skillz" if you are willing to write about that. -Rob

[Cady Goldfield]

I think now we're getting into some interesting discussions. Using good ki/kokyu skills is using good ki/kokyu skills, regardless of how someone opts to use them. The 'pure' user shouldn't be implied as "not a fighter" anymore than a fighter should be automatically considered "not very pure". All that happens with that sort of discussion is we go back to the "I kicked your butt so therefore my ki skills are better than yours"... if you want to see the outcome of that sort of reasoning, so look at some of the "push hands" contests at some Taiji tournaments nowadays: the worry about "winning" simply stopped a lot of people from ever developing any ki/kokyu/qi/jin skills. Same thing happened with all the focus on "doing Aikido technique" ... full skills got lost.

I don't particularly care one way or another what someone does with their skills (martial, hobby, etc.), but, as I've said many times, there are many levels and gradations of those skills. If the topic is "internal skillz" then what someone opts to do with them is secondary to the how and what is actually being developed. Results do count, ultimately, but I know from experience that 'kick butt' results usually indicate that someone worried more about winning than the full range of skills and the full range of skillz, done the way Ueshiba did them, is going to be the standard first and the 'kick butt' part is going to be second.


I don't think it's all going to devolve into the equivalent of competitive push-hands competions. Of course when such information is released to a wider public, eventually you're going to see corruptions and lesser applications of it. It's not a perfect world. Look what happened to television. ;) But I'd rather see Pandora's box opened and let the chips fall where they may. There are enough serious martial artists making deep studies of the science and art of fighting, who recognize the value of internal methods and want as much of the package as they can acquire. They're not going to lose the forest in the trees.

They know that to be authentic, the fighting must be effective, so they must fight to hone and refine their combatives. So, you'll see discussions like the above exchanges about hands-on sparring. But they are also seriously training their bodies in the internal methods because to neglect the internal training is to sacrifice authenticity. This is not people getting swept up in competition for competition's sake, or technique for technique's sake.

I'd feel comfortable putting the future of these skills in their hands, and in the hands of aikidoka. Enough will pass it along to keep it viable, instead of becoming moribund as it is in some closed, secretive systems.

[Buck]

Boy has this thread really gone off topic. Didn't Rob want to close it?

Recap: The thread starts off about true internal strength (I know I started it) and goes into talk about perspectives of Chinese Martial Arts concept of internal strength.

CMA internal strength concept respectfully that have been discussed already to great lengths, and details over and over by most or many of the same people. I am sure they are tried of repeating themselves and as they have noted.

It is a wonderful thing that some here are discovering something new and different through Chinese martial arts that they didn't know of before and seeing it as the keystone they are missing. And on-line lessons are great. I am really glad for them that they have that opportunity to have things pointed out and explained in a way they can comprehend. And that it gives them a sense of achievement - when speaking of the Chinese concept of internal martial arts. But, this thread didn't start out that way. It was to explore and discuss something that is the core to all martial arts and something universal to other areas of people and their lives. What that is, is true internal strength (not to be confused with the CMA concept that would be disrespectful not to point that out to the CMA). As this thread was "highjacked", I think is the term, which happens in the nature of discussions, I just wanted to note that at this time. :)

[eyrie]

Chinese Martial Arts concept of internal strength.... some here are discovering something new and different through Chinese martial arts that they didn't know of before and seeing it as the keystone they are missing.... to explore and discuss something that is the core to all martial arts and something universal to other areas of people and their lives. What that is, is true internal strength (not to be confused with the CMA concept that would be disrespectful not to point that out to the CMA) So... HOW is the concept of "internal strength" in CMA different to that in JMA and other Asian MA?

Are you saying "internal strength" in non-CMA are different? Or are you still defining "internal strength" as something completely different? When you really mean "inner strength"???

I'm confused... :freaky: :D

[Mike Sigman]

Recap: The thread starts off about true internal strength (I know I started it) and goes into talk about perspectives of Chinese Martial Arts concept of internal strength.

CMA internal strength concept respectfully that have been discussed already to great lengths,... You don't seem to understand that "qi" is "ki" and that the reason O-Sensei quoted from traditional Chinese concepts is because he used the same concepts in Aikido. I.e., all this talk where you insist that your understanding of "internal strength" is a valid one has not been supported by anything other than your own assertions. I think everyone has patiently watched your comments, on yet another arduous thread, hoping that you'd perhaps see for yourself that blind and naive insistence is not that same thing as reasoned debate.

PLONK.

Mike Sigman

[Buck]

You don't seem to understand that "qi" is "ki" and that the reason O-Sensei quoted from traditional Chinese concepts is because he used the same concepts in Aikido. I.e., all this talk where you insist that your understanding of "internal strength" is a valid one has not been supported by anything other than your own assertions. I think everyone has patiently watched your comments, on yet another arduous thread, hoping that you'd perhaps see for yourself that blind and naive insistence is not that same thing as reasoned debate.

PLONK.

Mike Sigman

I know I am breaking my own rule. But Mike, I am confused. I guess you didn't understand me noting the fact this thread has gone way OFT. You told me that there is no reason for going over old ground these things and you ain't going to discuss them- am paraphrasing that. So I am respecting that but now you're wanting to discuss all that you don't want to discuss. That is where I am confused. BTW. :confused:

I am confused as I said, and let me run this by you for clarification.

1. You are saying O'Sensei learned and incorporated CMA into Aikido. Hmmm...is there any quotes or documentation from O'Sensei, I can read that states that clearly. In that way it will save us time here, allowing us to focus on the discussion at hand.

2. You seem to be confusing true internal strength with Chinese concept of internal strength. I made that demarcation very clear early on in this read. And re-said it as well in the thread. I know you have a magazine titled Internal Strength too and this may be a branding issue for you.

3. Debating is something you do as demonstrated in your comments to me, worthy of noting. But I think you are confusing my observations of the concept of true internal strength with the CMA IS you practice, and thinking I am debating that. Allow this assurance if can help you in anyway that CMA IS isn't what I am discussing I will be glad to do so. For instance, true internal strength is a function of the soul, the mind, our true internal strength to overcome difficulties, frustrations, and stuff. To develop discipline and stuff that all are in us that will enhance our practice and give us the strength for success.

4. I also think there might be a possibility you could be responding to the wrong person. I use to get all the Mary's mixed up here. There are more than several. Boy was that an OPPS! when I respond to the wrong person about a different thread :o .

Overall, I wanted to have it on record as they say, to say in the nomenclature of these kind of things, been "highjack." After I say that I feel I should say "Arrrrrg" Like, shiver me timber's the thread has been highjacked. ARRRRRG. :D

I don't know why you use PLONK as it a wine. You know what I mean?

[Buck]

So... HOW is the concept of "internal strength" in CMA different to that in JMA and other Asian MA?

Are you saying "internal strength" in non-CMA are different? Or are you still defining "internal strength" as something completely different? When you really mean "inner strength"???

I'm confused... :freaky: :D

Go back and read through the thread. I defined it as clear as possible.

But what I didn't expound on is the ''inner strength" you bring up. ''Inner strength" that is a synonym if you want. But we are talking martial arts and I felt that "internal" had a more precise meaning. Inner is too broad, I felt.

What did Shakepeare say about a rose! :)

[eyrie]

As usual, Buck, you've missed the point. ;)

The point is, as Mike has already pointed out, your posts are nothing more than your personal assertions of what you believe "internal strength" (as used generally within the context of MA!!!) to be. That you have vaguely attempted to "more clearly and precisely" define the term, as it relates to MA in general, is nothing more than mere embellishment to support your untenable position.

And now, you're simply dodging the issue and direct questions, by claiming that one SYNONYM is more precise than another!?. :confused:

Frankly, I'm not surprised... I expect nothing less than that, from "middle management". :D

[thisisnotreal]

670

[Tim Fong]

I know I am breaking my own rule. But Mike, I am confused. I guess you didn't understand me noting the fact this thread has gone way OFT. You told me that there is no reason for going over old ground these things and you ain't going to discuss them- am paraphrasing that. So I am respecting that but now you're wanting to discuss all that you don't want to discuss. That is where I am confused. BTW. :confused:

I am confused as I said, and let me run this by you for clarification.

1. You are saying O'Sensei learned and incorporated CMA into Aikido. Hmmm...is there any quotes or documentation from O'Sensei, I can read that states that clearly. In that way it will save us time here, allowing us to focus on the discussion at hand.

2. You seem to be confusing true internal strength with Chinese concept of internal strength. I made that demarcation very clear early on in this read. And re-said it as well in the thread. I know you have a magazine titled Internal Strength too and this may be a branding issue for you.

3. Debating is something you do as demonstrated in your comments to me, worthy of noting. But I think you are confusing my observations of the concept of true internal strength with the CMA IS you practice, and thinking I am debating that. Allow this assurance if can help you in anyway that CMA IS isn't what I am discussing I will be glad to do so. For instance, true internal strength is a function of the soul, the mind, our true internal strength to overcome difficulties, frustrations, and stuff. To develop discipline and stuff that all are in us that will enhance our practice and give us the strength for success.

4. I also think there might be a possibility you could be responding to the wrong person. I use to get all the Mary's mixed up here. There are more than several. Boy was that an OPPS! when I respond to the wrong person about a different thread :o .

Overall, I wanted to have it on record as they say, to say in the nomenclature of these kind of things, been "highjack." After I say that I feel I should say "Arrrrrg" Like, shiver me timber's the thread has been highjacked. ARRRRRG. :D

I don't know why you use PLONK as it a wine. You know what I mean?

How's it going , Samurai Jack?

[Lorel Latorilla]

Go back and read through the thread. I defined it as clear as possible.

But what I didn't expound on is the ''inner strength" you bring up. ''Inner strength" that is a synonym if you want. But we are talking martial arts and I felt that "internal" had a more precise meaning. Inner is too broad, I felt.

What did Shakepeare say about a rose! :)

Hi Troll, I mean Phil, can you teach me true inner strength,oops i mean, internal strength?

[eyrie]

How's it going , Samurai Jack? Now, now Tim... there are some Genndy Tartakovsky fans here. :D

[thisisnotreal]

Now, now Tim... there are some Tarkovsky fans here. :D
Yeah, so what of it? Solaris was brilliant, man.

[Buck]

As usual, Buck, you've missed the point. ;)

The point is, as Mike has already pointed out, your posts are nothing more than your personal assertions of what you believe "internal strength" (as used generally within the context of MA!!!) to be. That you have vaguely attempted to "more clearly and precisely" define the term, as it relates to MA in general, is nothing more than mere embellishment to support your untenable position.

And now, you're simply dodging the issue and direct questions, by claiming that one SYNONYM is more precise than another!?. :confused:

Frankly, I'm not surprised... I expect nothing less than that, from "middle management". :D

I sse what I get for braking my rule of not responding to those who have no interesting in carrying on a conversation. It doesn't bother me but it does muck up and reflect upon the quality of the board. I now found out what PLONK means.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Go back and read through the thread. I defined it as clear as possible.

But what I didn't expound on is the ''inner strength" you bring up. ''Inner strength" that is a synonym if you want. But we are talking martial arts and I felt that "internal" had a more precise meaning. Inner is too broad, I felt.

What did Shakepeare say about a rose! :)

Buck it'd be alright if you actually stuck to your own rules. If you go back and read the thread I actually went to bat for you on like the second or third post stating that you and Rob Liberti were actually defining "Internal Strength" in two different ways. I am good with your definition in that respect.

However here is were you run into problems and deviate from your path of "True Internal Strength" by taking swipes at others.

". I am a person who recognizes his skill...." (referring to O'Sensei's skills)

for which you have been asked many times to provide references for on what leads you to recognize his skills. A fair question since you are the one that made the bold statement.

"The Chinese use of Internal body strength has been a fad. Those who feel developing "body skill" to raise the level of their martial art where or are lacking it, and hence seek it. I am not sure exactly what defines "body skill" as you mean it. We don't have to discuss it. I would rather not in this thread. If you precisely define it and give visual example that can be solidly discuss I would be glad too in another thread."

So you throw out there that you believe Chinese stuff to be a Fad. That is like throwing fuel on the fire...then in the same paragraph you state that you'd rather not discuss it. Then why bring it up? This is passive/agressive behavior at it's finest.

"My use of internal strength is pretty clear and very common to many disciplines. I was to keep my views and ideas apart from O'Sensei. I don't want also to sound as if I am interpreting him with what I say. It is all me, my views, not O'Sensei's"

Really? Above you stated that you were someone that understood what he meant..now you are saying these are yours, not his? Not only a flip/flop...but also indirectly you imply you know what his views are on the subject since they are your views not his? Confusing but lots of room for implications here.

"Sorry. I am not one of those people. I happen to like Aikido. And I happen to value what true internal strength is about and how I can apply that, without being dependent on anyone or any martial art fad (for the word police, "in thing" ) that comes along."

Another swipe at the other side of the fence calling it a FAD. Again, if the thread really were about your "True Internal Strength" then why do you keep taking shots at others?

"Aikido is working for me just fine. If I need something for my Aikido, I will look at the arts O'Sensei studied careful, and figure it out from there if, I feel the need. That is how I roll"

Again, the question comes to mind, which all of us really want to know...HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT O'SENSEI studied? HOW DO YOU TRAIN? WITH WHOM DO YOU GET THE INTERPRETATION THROUGH? those are important questions, we would really like to know how you "roll".

So, if I may sum this up.....

1. You make a thread called TRUE INTERNAL SKILLS in which you define as being something to do with character and the mental inner strength...which is good.

2. You call what others on the list are discussing as Internal Skills as being a FAD.

3. You make the rules up for this thread which states, I can say what I want, take shots at you whenever I want to, but if you take them back at me, you are bullying me.

4. People ask you direct questions and you don't reply to them, other than to call them "confrontational" or they don't get it, or they are being a bully, or this doesn't have anything to do with what you are talking about.

And you wonder why folks are getting frustrated, calling you a troll, and giving you the PLONK?

Really? you are for real?

[Marc Abrams]

And you wonder why folks are getting frustrated, calling you a troll, and giving you the PLONK?

Really? you are for real?

Kevin:

We have just received vital information from that section of the zoo that you refer to. The information is that if you are making those statements, the obvious is obvious and PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, stop feeding the animals in that section!

Marc Abrams

[Lorel Latorilla]

I've actually received an infraction warning for calling Buck a troll. I guess the "BUCK" stops there for me. Har har har.

[Upyu]

Kevin:

We have just received vital information from that section of the zoo that you refer to. The information is that if you are making those statements, the obvious is obvious and PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, stop feeding the animals in that section!

Marc Abrams

I gots some peanuts if anyone's game :D

[C. David Henderson]

Now that I have come to the end of my discussion on true internal strength something that I felt has great benefits to me, and hopefully for others. ****

What were the rest of us talking about, again?

[DH]

Nice, Dan.

What's your thought on the progression of the conditioning/solo training with resistance drills and then into live sparring? I know it's something I've been struggling with as I want to get back into playing with my BJJ and MMA friends some more, but have been trying to spend chunks of time just building up a base/frame/whatever of moving correctly with the IS conditioning work I've been doing.

But obviously, I want to be getting back to work things out with less constraints, etc. You've mentioned before getting some insights just putting it out there with wrestlers/judoka . . do you think a certain level of conditioning is required at first, or is it useful to just work in parallell with the base IS development?

Thanks/Budd
Hello Bud
Due to some family issues I don't have time to respond (I'm waiting for a download from a computer crash right now so I have some time)
I view MMA type researchers in a different light than the average martial artists-always have and always will. Those that choose to pursue internals for aiki with an MMA mindset; such as research into classical weapons, jujutsu, judo, and MMA, will be among the best MA people in the world. Some criticize that or are just not interested. That's fine by me, less competition. and it reveals their own fixed and limited abilities and views.

Worthy of note is that Sagawa pointed out that very mindset and criticized it. Stating that he researched all manner of modern arts; wrestling, judo, aikido, kendo, as well as the old ones so he would know better how to deal with them and defeat them.
Sagawa...with an MMA mindset!
I find that near and dear to my own way of thinking and oddly enough-very odd if you know why-found that to be my path as well.

My methods continue to offer advice and training tips that continue to prove out in real world application, whether it be aikido, Koryu weapons, DR, judo or MMA.- since I have been doing that very thing for most of my adult life. Personally I have always found it is the ones most vocal agains it to be the ones less capable of delivering in the flesh. Which has never hampered them from being so vocal (albeit it ill equipped) to offer advice outside of the narrow scope they have chosen to operate in their training.

I don't want to contribute to this ridiculous thread anymore so I will resign myself to answering this in my seminar thread in the NON AIKIDO MARTIAL TRADTIONS section.;) But to offer an overview and comparing the viability of aikido aiki in comparison to the broader question of MMA:
I addressed many of your questions at the seminar, with hands-on demonstrations. Oddly enough I covered internal training aspects for Aikido, which are now being used by 4 -5th dans and Shihan in aikido. So it was patently obvious that the methods are in fact spot on for aikido. But interestingly- at the same seminar I used those exact same methods in demonstrations of actual use in mild sparring with jujutsu, karate, ICMA, MMA, and aikido people; using a body method for aiki that remained consistent throughout. How and why that could be I will discuss later

Internal power, Aikido and martial arts
Some people talk about "True Internal Power" - others can do. I intend to continue to prove out the reality of "IT" for actual use in the martial arts in a manner that proves to be inescapably viable in any field. I do not mind in the least that it continues to be inescapably obvious and "in your face" to those that want to continue to call this-the foundational power of the aiki arts "Aiki" for Gods sake!! - a fad.
Any credence or credibility they may have on the net is immediately removed- in person.

I would continue to be cautious of people who continue to allude to knowing the "complete skills" or the comeplete Aikido of Ueshiba- if they cannot deliver across the board. And that means with weapons and without. Ueshiba always did. How can anyone dare to claim to know what he knew if they can't deliver under pressure? We had to deal with the old M.A.B.S.-we need to be careful of the new I.M.A.B.S. Knowing a few tricks and moves is not a complete set of anything. Everything is not all the same. It's a broad field.
Talk to you soon
Dan

[Kevin Leavitt]

Kevin:

We have just received vital information from that section of the zoo that you refer to. The information is that if you are making those statements, the obvious is obvious and PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, stop feeding the animals in that section!

Marc Abrams

Sorry You are correct. I lack internal strength. That and I was alway taught to put two rounds into the problem. What can I say?

[Marc Abrams]

Sorry You are correct. I lack internal strength. That and I was alway taught to put two rounds into the problem. What can I say?

Kevin:

Do you really think that the double tap method would be effective in this matter? Please do not let me stand in your way of empirically testing that idea :D !

Regards,

Marc Abrams

[C. David Henderson]

Cyber-bullets are rarely made of silver, alas.

[Budd]

Hello Bud
Due to some family issues I don't have time to respond (I'm waiting for a download from a computer crash right now so I have some time)

Dan, very sorry to hear that, still, and continued best wishes and sympathies for you and yours

[Tim Fong]

Now, now Tim... there are some Genndy Tartakovsky fans here. :D

Well, I was actually alluding to a now-banned poster over at E-budo:
http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36149&page=5

[gdandscompserv]

Dan,
It's people like you that give MMA a good name!:cool:
Sorry to hear about your family issues. I hope all is well.
Ricky

[Buck]

Why is it so wrong to believe O'Sensei knew his stuff and knew what he was doing. I have confidence in Aikido, why is that wrong.

There are some on this thread remind me of the story characters like the piped piper or Pinocchio when a Donkey and the experience in The city of Catchfools.

I think Aikido provides us with an opportunity for developing true internal strengthI am sorry, don't feel that way, but am sticking with O'Sensei and Aikido. And that seems to bother a group of people, who stick with others outside of Aikido. I didn't know those who, like myself, that stick with Aikido are targeted to ridicule and stuff like that, by those who believe otherwise. I don't understand the big deal. Especially, when gun violence is mentioned by a poster.

Maybe sticking with O'Sensei isn't a bad idea.

[rob_liberti]

Maybe sticking with O'Sensei isn't a bad idea.

I think training like O-sensei did is a wonderful idea. (And Buck, he wasn't Irish.)

Rob

[Buck]

Buck it'd be alright if you actually stuck to your own rules. If you go back and read the thread I actually went to bat for you on like the second or third post stating that you and Rob Liberti were actually defining "Internal Strength" in two different ways. I am good with your definition in that respect.

However here is were you run into problems and deviate from your path of "True Internal Strength" by taking swipes at others.

". I am a person who recognizes his skill...." (referring to O'Sensei's skills)

for which you have been asked many times to provide references for on what leads you to recognize his skills. A fair question since you are the one that made the bold statement.

"The Chinese use of Internal body strength has been a fad. Those who feel developing "body skill" to raise the level of their martial art where or are lacking it, and hence seek it. I am not sure exactly what defines "body skill" as you mean it. We don't have to discuss it. I would rather not in this thread. If you precisely define it and give visual example that can be solidly discuss I would be glad too in another thread."

So you throw out there that you believe Chinese stuff to be a Fad. That is like throwing fuel on the fire...then in the same paragraph you state that you'd rather not discuss it. Then why bring it up? This is passive/agressive behavior at it's finest.

"My use of internal strength is pretty clear and very common to many disciplines. I was to keep my views and ideas apart from O'Sensei. I don't want also to sound as if I am interpreting him with what I say. It is all me, my views, not O'Sensei's"

Really? Above you stated that you were someone that understood what he meant..now you are saying these are yours, not his? Not only a flip/flop...but also indirectly you imply you know what his views are on the subject since they are your views not his? Confusing but lots of room for implications here.

"Sorry. I am not one of those people. I happen to like Aikido. And I happen to value what true internal strength is about and how I can apply that, without being dependent on anyone or any martial art fad (for the word police, "in thing" ) that comes along."

Another swipe at the other side of the fence calling it a FAD. Again, if the thread really were about your "True Internal Strength" then why do you keep taking shots at others?

"Aikido is working for me just fine. If I need something for my Aikido, I will look at the arts O'Sensei studied careful, and figure it out from there if, I feel the need. That is how I roll"

Again, the question comes to mind, which all of us really want to know...HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT O'SENSEI studied? HOW DO YOU TRAIN? WITH WHOM DO YOU GET THE INTERPRETATION THROUGH? those are important questions, we would really like to know how you "roll".

So, if I may sum this up.....

1. You make a thread called TRUE INTERNAL SKILLS in which you define as being something to do with character and the mental inner strength...which is good.

2. You call what others on the list are discussing as Internal Skills as being a FAD.

3. You make the rules up for this thread which states, I can say what I want, take shots at you whenever I want to, but if you take them back at me, you are bullying me.

4. People ask you direct questions and you don't reply to them, other than to call them "confrontational" or they don't get it, or they are being a bully, or this doesn't have anything to do with what you are talking about.

And you wonder why folks are getting frustrated, calling you a troll, and giving you the PLONK?

Really? you are for real?

1. True.

2. True, can't help if people run around with their emotions on their sleeve and jump to conclusions, or made it into a elementary school insult session because they feel threatened:confused: . What I do tend to see is they are not confident in their beliefs or what they feel they need to defend. i.e. see #4.

3. Obviously, not. That is really, really obviously not the case, and such highjacking and twisting of the thread isn't don't by me. But rather by those who feel threatened and insult instead of making this into a productive discussion, because flaming is all they can contribute to the thread.

4. Not true. But rather a fallacy tactic to discredit my thread and shift it to the what some feel they have claim IS as their phrase.

In fact the whole post is a sad, outdated and disappointing attempt to twist my words and thoughts into something I didn't say or mean, because some feel threatened fearing my thoughts that see to shakes and challenges their faith in their ways and their belief system.

I am sorry if that has happen, but it wasn't intentional. Remember this is an Aikido forum. I like so many others believe in our Aikido teachers and O'Sensei, and I can't apologize for that. :)

[Buck]

Internal power, Aikido and martial arts
Some people talk about "True Internal Power" - others can do. I intend to continue to prove out the reality of "IT" for actual use in the martial arts in a manner that proves to be inescapably viable in any field. I do not mind in the least that it continues to be inescapably obvious and "in your face" to those that want to continue to call this-the foundational power of the aiki arts "Aiki" for Gods sake!! - a fad.
Any credence or credibility they may have on the net is immediately removed- in person.

I would continue to be cautious of people who continue to allude to knowing the "complete skills" or the comeplete Aikido of Ueshiba- if they cannot deliver across the board. And that means with weapons and without. Ueshiba always did. How can anyone dare to claim to know what he knew if they can't deliver under pressure? We had to deal with the old M.A.B.S.-we need to be careful of the new I.M.A.B.S. Knowing a few tricks and moves is not a complete set of anything. Everything is not all the same. It's a broad field.
Talk to you soon
Dan

I would too caution people the same that allude to any complete power of Aikido (aside from certain teachers) that is my logic. I think that is not a responsible or realistic attitude to take. I feel the journey is greater than reaching the goal.

I agree knowing a few tricks and moves isn't complete and like I said often is fad. In that case is it is detrimental to the learning experience because people stop developing their skill. They think it is all they need to know. It isn't the magic bullet, it isn't the secret. And when people who believe it is and then told it isn't, they get really defensive and insecure as their beliefs have been threatened.

In so many other threads I told of my personal quest to find out what O'Sensei really was teaching. I wasn't alive when O'Sensei was, so I got my Aikido through those who did train with him and they naturally shaped Aikido to them. My personal quest is like reading the original manuscript of a great work without it being edited, stuff like that. Being edited is find, but it is very thrilling to be able to read the original. I also want to see O'Sensei through my eyes and not someone else's eyes.

Am not naive to think that I will be able to do this completely without some influence of others.

But, I do think Dan has a point.

[HL1978]

I would too caution people the same that allude to any complete power of Aikido (aside from certain teachers) that is my logic. I think that is not a responsible or realistic attitude to take. I feel the journey is greater than reaching the goal.

I agree knowing a few tricks and moves isn't complete and like I said often is fad. In that case is it is detrimental to the learning experience because people stop developing their skill. They think it is all they need to know. It isn't the magic bullet, it isn't the secret. And when people who believe it is and then told it isn't, they get really defensive and insecure as their beliefs have been threatened.

In so many other threads I told of my personal quest to find out what O'Sensei really was teaching. I wasn't alive when O'Sensei was, so I got my Aikido through those who did train with him and they naturally shaped Aikido to them. My personal quest is like reading the original manuscript of a great work without it being edited, stuff like that. Being edited is find, but it is very thrilling to be able to read the original. I also want to see O'Sensei through my eyes and not someone else's eyes.

Am not naive to think that I will be able to do this completely without some influence of others.

But, I do think Dan has a point.

A couple of points. Pop internal strength into google and you get 45% of the results related to martial arts, 45% related to some sort of stock trading system, and the rest of various anecdotes of confidence building. This leads me to believe that the term itself is much more often used in the manner discussed in the non-aikido traditions forum.

Internal strength as a skill is great until you meet someone who is just as strong or stronger than you. Then you have to know how to use technique and timing if you hope to beat the other guy. You only get people tossed through the air in dramatic fashion when there is a dramatic difference in understanding between two people, otherwise the technique begins to look like something completely different. As these skills become more and more common, technique will play far more of a role among those who can replicate these skills.

I have studied a number of different martial arts and they have all had some sort of "internal strength" development exercise, so it is hard to call this sort of thing a fad particularly when these are generally foundational exercises..

[lbb]

Why is it so wrong to believe O'Sensei knew his stuff and knew what he was doing. I have confidence in Aikido, why is that wrong.

What's wrong is making intellectually dishonest, strawman statements like this, that strongly imply that the person to whom you are responding holds an absurd position that is, in fact, your creation. This isn't rocket science, Buck, and it's been pointed out to you over and over again, yet you keep doing it. I can only conclude that this is a deliberate action on your part, a dishonest debating tactic that you consciously choose to engage in whenever your "arguments" have been refuted. I understand your reluctance to let go of cherished beliefs -- we all have that -- but you've taken it to the point of insulting other people.

[Marc Abrams]

The author of this thread has started and responded to threads in a manner that has clearly resulted in a particular label. If that is the case, why do people keep on responding to him. The author has been asked many times, by many different people to honestly identify himself, where and with whom he studies. He has been asked to back up his assertions. The author has yet to respond to people's legitimate queries in an honest manner. This pattern begs the question:

WHY DO PEOPLE CONTINUE TO RESPOND TO ANYTHING HE WRITES?

Until such time that this poster can establish himself as a real person, with a real training background, with some developing ideas that can be substantiated in any manner or form (beyond the results of an internet search). I would simply re-iterate, PLEASE, PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND, SO THAT HE EITHER FADES AWAY OR ANSWERS SOME REAL QUESTIONS IN AN HONEST MANNER.

Marc Abrams

[Kevin Leavitt]

I'm with Marc on this now. The only alternative is for us to have negative conversations, or to have Jun go around and constantly shut down our threads, which at this point, this thread definitely needs to be shut down.

[C. David Henderson]

Well, as we all know, Pinocchio solved the puzzle of TIS when he became a real boy -- brave and strong, and true. That would be enough, for me, to give a go at having a discussion.

'Course, first he had to overcome that problem involving his nose...

[Marc Abrams]

Well, as we all know, Pinocchio solved the puzzle of TIS when he became a real boy -- brave and strong, and true. That would be enough, for me, to give a go at having a discussion.

'Course, first he had to overcome that problem involving his nose...

David:

I can respect your patience and cordial nature. I think that I speak for many when I simply request that you communicate with any perceived Pinocchio's through PM and thereby relieving the other people of the issues that emerge when people try to have reasonable discourses with "straw ponies."

Regards,

Marc Abrams

ps.- I will be in Albuquerque for the Imaizumi Sensei seminar 9/18-9/20. I hope you can make it down. First round is on me!

[akiy]

Thread closed due to lack of positively constructive posts.

-- Jun