PDA

View Full Version : The metaphor of fascia?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Voitokas
10-08-2009, 05:03 PM
People seem to refer to "fascia" a lot when trying to describe the mechanics of aikido. I know what fascia is anatomically, but I can't quite figure out what people mean by it in this context, or if everyone means the same thing. I am assuming it is being used metaphorically, like "breath" or "fire"? So it's probably something that's difficult to hang a tag on - but if someone could give it a shot...

Thanks!:)

Demetrio Cereijo
10-08-2009, 05:14 PM
I am assuming it is being used metaphorically, like "breath" or "fire"?

Wrong assumption.

Voitokas
10-08-2009, 05:38 PM
Wrong assumption.

Perhaps you don't use it metaphorically, but I assumed that because it seemed like people were talking about fascia as if it could move independently, like muscle. I could see how fascia is proprioceptive, but it seemed like some people were using the word to refer to something actively contractile...

Anyone else?

Demetrio Cereijo
10-08-2009, 05:42 PM
Active fascial contractility: Fascia may be able to contract in a smooth muscle-like manner and thereby influence musculoskeletal dynamics (http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/ymehy/article/PIIS0306987705001489/abstract)

Voitokas
10-08-2009, 06:29 PM
Neat! So is the theory (as applied here) that we can train our fascia to a greater tonus, and thereby increase inter- and extra-muscular force transmission?

Demetrio Cereijo
10-08-2009, 07:09 PM
It seems fascial tissue plays some kind of role in the IT that HTBF, something like this kind of sport clothes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB798YQRGXQ&hl=es

But sure there are more things involved, I don't know, I don't have IT... maybe the guys who have IT could explain what the role (if any) fascia plays in this issue.

Voitokas
10-08-2009, 07:46 PM
Those clothes are pretty impressive; I wish I could find something like that for my brain! :rolleyes:

Thanks for all the links, Demetrio!

Buck
10-08-2009, 08:26 PM
Yea, all us Aikidoka should throw out their gi's and use that suit. Then we would all have aiki. But we won't tell the MMA guys... it will be surprise. :D

dps
10-08-2009, 08:49 PM
This is a little more in depth explanation of what the fascia is and how it relates to body structure.

http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/galleries/show/id/162?page=1
http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/tensegrity

And these are discussions on related topics of biotensigrity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajowL0T4bM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNPgqS3EfRw&feature=related

David

Buck
10-08-2009, 09:32 PM
Active fascial contractility: Fascia may be able to contract in a smooth muscle-like manner and thereby influence musculoskeletal dynamics (http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/ymehy/article/PIIS0306987705001489/abstract)

It appears a group of several people in the fields of Rolfing and Message Therapy who are trying to get their facia theories and research, in the the fields of Rolfing and Message therapy, attention and validated it in the scientific and medical communities.

A leading researcher is Robert Schleip who is a Ph.D in research and a Rolfering. Another major proponent of facia in the group is Nadine Currie Jackson RMT, BPE, Grad Student (MSc.) has owned and sold two successful massage therapy businesses and is starting on her third. Thomas W. Findley, M.D., Ph.D. Director for Research. Northern NJ Pain & Rehabilitation. They where a part the Fascia Congress and Findley gives an interesting interview regarding the Fascia Congress and the theory of Fasica's role in the human body.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8rKSmIk2FI&feature=related

Here is Schleip's interview which many might already know of, but if not it is worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y01_bpLMpqU

I would want to know how the facia plays a direct role in the application of Aikido technique that is said to improve Aikido technique/aiki/chi/ki/IT/IS? I would like to read any research on the connection between the improvement of Aikido as the result of the fasica. It would be great to include how that works physically in conjuction with Aikido technique. :)

Buck
10-08-2009, 10:02 PM
I am wondering and guessing that the role facia is to play directly with Aikido borrows heavily or models heavily from Tensegrity -a term used by Carlos Castaneda (the controversial author and founder of an equally controversial system of exercise, Tensegrity) to describe his new age movement thing. Modeled on the idea of architectural Tensegrity, Yoga, Tai Chi, and other Asian martial arts, it combine tension and relaxation of the muscles, joints and ligaments that is suppose to yields a stronger, more flexible, and more "aware" physical body. 'Tensegrity' is said to be the flow of energy (sounds like idea of chi to me) between people practicing Tensegrity exercises together.

From what I read here and from other posts of people that post here about facia and it relationship to improving Aikido technique is heavily modeled on "Tensegrity." Knowing this does give better insight to this discussion and all the other discussions on facia and the improvement of Aikido technique.

dps
10-08-2009, 10:34 PM
This is a little more in depth explanation of what the fascia is and how it relates to body structure.

http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/galleries/show/id/162?page=1
http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/tensegrity

And these are discussions on related topics of biotensigrity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajowL0T4bM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNPgqS3EfRw&feature=related

David

One more about biotensigrity;

http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/tensegrity/explained

As far as Carlos Castaneda, I read all of his books. I would recommend doing research on him and the validity of his work.

David

Buck
10-11-2009, 09:00 PM
I am really interested on the technical and scientific mechanics, and explanation of how the facia plays a role in the improvement of Aikido techniques.

What I find and read on this matter has no relation to what I just asked concerning Aikido. I find allot of information on Tensegrity and how that relates to message and related fields. In term of martial arts I find allot of similar information seen in the quote here:

Iron Shirt or Iron Vest trains the fascia of the body in order to thicken it and strengthen it.

Combined with learning to become sung and filling with energy and breath you can create a drum like effect that causes people to be rebounded off you.

The only thing I can think of that has any grounding in science and the martial arts is if the facia has a huge role in performance, modern sports science would have found it and exploited it.

The fields that are currently exploiting facia is message therapy, Rolfing, pain, and alike fields.

I am hoping someone can come up with something grounded in science that can show how the facia functions to improve Aikido other than doing what it is already doing.

C. David Henderson
10-12-2009, 02:40 PM
As far as Carlos Castaneda, I read all of his books. I would recommend doing research on him and the validity of his work.

David

David's caution is well-taken. Castaneda's work, passed off as a Ph.D. thesis at UCLA, is now widely considered to have been a hoax.

FWIW, Buckminster Fuller invented the term "tensegrity," which a lot of people have since used (in addition to Carlos).

Therapy modalities based on fascia work, e.g., rolfing, typically capitalize on the plasticity of fascial tissue to change shape under pressure and/or as a conditioned response to carefully performed exercise.

As I understand it, these therapy modalities aim to change the relative tension in different fascial lines so the body forms a stable structure that is maximally aligned with gravity and able to move efficiently. Because the concept of the body is rather like that of a bicycle wheel -- a structure that maintains its stability through balanced tension -- "tensegrity" has been used as a concept in explaining how these techniques are supposed to work.

These same hallmarks of stability and efficiency often appear considered at least necessary if not sufficient conditions for effective martial movement.

This is in addition to/a corollary of the role of fascia in transmitting or routing forces through the body, or in mediating kinesthetic awareness.

Its my recollection that some have suggested on this forum a rough correlation between the fascial lines illustrated in AnatomyTrains and pathways in the body used in internal MA; but that's just my recollection.

I'd wait for someone who really understands internal training methods to draw further connections or correlations.

Regards,
cdh

Janet Rosen
10-12-2009, 03:08 PM
Its my recollection that some have suggested on this forum a rough correlation between the fascial lines illustrated in AnatomyTrains and pathways in the body used in internal MA; but that's just my recollection.
I can't speak to that but can say that the first time a body worker worked along the fascia it seemed to me a lot of it was close to the outlines of TCM meridians. Since I'm not an expert on either I cannot say how closely.

Buck
10-12-2009, 11:36 PM
Castaneda's work, passed off as a Ph.D. thesis at UCLA, is now widely considered to have been a hoax. You get what you pay for at that public university. I am not surprised.

USC! :D


These same hallmarks of stability and efficiency often appear considered at least necessary if not sufficient conditions for effective martial movement.

This also holds true for all movement, from breathing to things like sports as well. I contemplate that if the fascia, primarily the deep fascia, varies from person to person. Some people have a thicker fasica then others, some has a stronger one then others, and so on. Wouldn't this effect the ability of performance?


I'd wait for someone who really understands internal training methods to draw further connections or correlations.



I am looking for the connection in how the fasica works to improve martial arts in a significant measurable way. A way that is clearly and distinctly marked as the result of the fascia when it comes to improved technique.
And who would that be, I would love to talk to them. But better yet, I would want to talk to a medical sports doctor or researcher. If it can improve sports then it can have an effect on martial arts. In terms of Aikido, ideally, I would love to talk to a Aikidoka scientist or doctor who has studied fascia in relation to Aikido. :)

Voitokas
10-13-2009, 12:09 AM
In terms of Aikido, ideally, I would love to talk to a Aikidoka scientist or doctor who has studied fascia in relation to Aikido. :)
I don't think that that's really possible, unfortunately. Having taken Aikiweb's offline-time to review the peer-reviewed research literature that's out there, the experiments that have been done are either histological ("hey, let's dissect out some fascia and see what's tissue types we can find!") or mechanical ("let's exert force on these two ends and measure the stress forces and strength of the material"). How fascia might work in terms of performance is then posited theoretically: some very sound ("since histologically we find afferent sensory innervation, then it is a good bet that fascia is involved in proprioception"; "since fascia-invested muscle is this much stronger than muscle with damaged fascia, and since the math is valid, I bet that fascia with an increased tonus might increase strength output"), and some a little sketchier ("since fascia that has been diseased or damaged is capable of producing clumps of cells differentiated to smooth muscle instead of fibroblasts, maybe fascia can act like a muscle")...

Unless a few dozen high-level martial artists want to donate their bodies to science posthumously, or we can train transgenic super-fascia'd mice in aikido, I don't see any way that research can be done. So maybe in some sense it is a metaphor, like many of our less-understandable best-guess scientific paradigms are metaphors (gravity comes to mind, but I guess that even when I talk about light as a wave, I'm using the term a little metaphorically). But it's sort of necessary to have a name for things, and 'fascia' seems a good one, since it's not a bad guess and is sort of easy to visualise...:)

Buck
10-13-2009, 01:06 AM
Thanks, Jeremy for your good explanation.

Aside from that, my general common sense thoughts are that we know fascia works in the body, it has a purpose. But some have persuaded it with great interest and great zeal in the message therapy, Rolfing, Pain management ,and Holistic fields; it is important to find new valid discoveries and expand your field, and to get people to take notice. The issue is getting valid information and not what ever embellishment as fact, because some say little is known about the role of fascia.

For me it is about avoiding embellishment as truth vs. the facts as truth. I think there are things, like talent, that play a bigger role and have a greater impact in Aikido than how facisa works in martial arts. Look at O'Sensei, who had no idea facisa existed, muchless use it in his skill.

I am keeping an open mind. But, I have been around long enough to know when am hearing a fish story or not. As we all know the martial arts are flooded with fish stories, and story tellers. :)

Ron Tisdale
10-13-2009, 08:56 AM
Look at O'Sensei, who had no idea facisa existed, muchless use it in his skill.

How do you know he didn't use it? How do you know he didn't view it under some other name, as part of some other concept?

Any more than I can say he *did* use it. How would I know?

I think we should be carefull of categorical statements like this. Just my thoughts...
Best,
Ron

C. David Henderson
10-13-2009, 09:42 AM
Look at the Anatomy Trains site -- it includes sports related discussions and analysis of movement -- e.g., a film clip of a speed skater on roller blades using a double push technique. This may provide a starting place to see how this subject area relates to sports performance issues.

FWIW, I think it may be mistaken to be thinking about this subject just in terms of "thickness." To the extent therapeutic manipulation of fascia is concerned, the primary goal is to create balance, not create "more" fascial tissue or "thicker" tissue. This itself is intended to increase efficiency of movement.

As to martial efficacy, I think that question depends on whether you accept the working hypothesis on the table -- that "internal training" does systematically engage the fascia, and that the training effect of so doing is part of what is going on when someone training this way creates the so-called"suit," which we can "picture" at least as a tension-balanced structure like a bicycle wheel, (There's a metaphor.)

If you accept that hypothesis as a working hypothesis, then the underlying issue is simply one about whether you also accept the efficacy of internal training methods.

But I'm ultimately not sure its that important of a hypothesis to prove or disprove. It's akin (and related) to the unrelenting arguments over Erick's attempts at scientifically explaining Aikido movement and principles.

One potential critiques of any such explanation, even were it otherwise just right, flows from the fact that it is an analysis stated first and foremost in the language of scientific observation and not the language of practical performance.

Even were the fascia hypothesis correct, in other words, what does understanding it this way add of value to someone's training?

YMMV

cdh

Kevin Leavitt
10-13-2009, 10:30 AM
How do you know he didn't use it? How do you know he didn't view it under some other name, as part of some other concept?

Any more than I can say he *did* use it. How would I know?

I think we should be carefull of categorical statements like this. Just my thoughts...
Best,
Ron

Personally I don't care what O Sensei could or couldn't do, nor do I care to really understand the mechanics of what works. Call me a un-intellectual heathen....that is fine.

What I do care about is that some one can show me how they do what they do and can replicate it under the conditions that are defined, agreed upon, or that matter.

Personally, I think once you boil the parameters to this, it makes life alot easier and it helps me at least sift through all the BS and chafe.

O Sensei is dead. "Your instructor" (tm) is not a concern of mine either since he is in (insert here) another state, country, plane of exsistence.

All I can say is I try to approach each encounter I have with an open mind.

Develop trust around those that I have grown to know and respect.

Try to "Know myself, and to thine self be true".

and Ironically it seems that it all kinda begins to fall in place.

I find the constant whining about what "IT" is and is not interesting and ironic that the ones that talk about it the most are typically the ones that make excuses for the fact that they cannot (insert excuse here) a. find the time to train. b. don't think it is real. c. must understand it intellectually for fear of making a mistake of training the wrong way....etc. etc.

Yeah, I know, I too was in that camp for a while.....

Until I met up with the guys that I did not believe knew what they were talking about, then demonstrated it, and then proceeded to go one step further and show me how they did what they do.

Too cool. imagine that...it is that simple...really it is!

Same goes with the guys that say competition is bad....interesting that most of those guys have not competed ever and simply wax poetically about something that they themselves have no experience with.

The phrase "shut up and train" comes to mind more and more often to me these days as I find out that I know less today than I knew yesterday...even though I seem to be gaining more knowledge.

Funny how it works!

Cheer Ron!

Buck
10-13-2009, 11:17 PM
Look at the Anatomy Trains site -- it includes sports related discussions and analysis of movement -- e.g., a film clip of a speed skater on roller blades using a double push technique. This may provide a starting place to see how this subject area relates to sports performance issues.

FWIW, I think it may be mistaken to be thinking about this subject just in terms of "thickness." To the extent therapeutic manipulation of fascia is concerned, the primary goal is to create balance, not create "more" fascial tissue or "thicker" tissue. This itself is intended to increase efficiency of movement.

As to martial efficacy, I think that question depends on whether you accept the working hypothesis on the table -- that "internal training" does systematically engage the fascia, and that the training effect of so doing is part of what is going on when someone training this way creates the so-called"suit," which we can "picture" at least as a tension-balanced structure like a bicycle wheel, (There's a metaphor.)

If you accept that hypothesis as a working hypothesis, then the underlying issue is simply one about whether you also accept the efficacy of internal training methods.

But I'm ultimately not sure its that important of a hypothesis to prove or disprove. It's akin (and related) to the unrelenting arguments over Erick's attempts at scientifically explaining Aikido movement and principles.

One potential critiques of any such explanation, even were it otherwise just right, flows from the fact that it is an analysis stated first and foremost in the language of scientific observation and not the language of practical performance.

Even were the fascia hypothesis correct, in other words, what does understanding it this way add of value to someone's training?

YMMV

cdh

Dave, I had as similar conversation with a guy about the monothesis religions. I asked for scientific proof of God, he said about the same thing you just did. :)

Buck
10-13-2009, 11:30 PM
How do you know he didn't use it? How do you know he didn't view it under some other name, as part of some other concept?

Any more than I can say he *did* use it. How would I know?

I think we should be carefull of categorical statements like this. Just my thoughts...
Best,
Ron

Ron,

Can you provide me with something that says that the Japanese martial arts, including O'Sensei understood, muchless knew about, the fascia , and its existence. And understood it completely is role and function and used it consciously in technique? Is there any sword school that consciously notes the fascia and it's role and attributes it to improving technique? How about Sumo? Is there any well known and accomplished Japanese Sensei's then and now, who atribute to having an edge in combat because they are able to utilize the fascia in a distinct and controlled function?

I am really interested to hear what they say. :)

Buck
10-13-2009, 11:32 PM
Personally I don't care what O Sensei could or couldn't do, nor do I care to really understand the mechanics of what works. Call me a un-intellectual heathen....that is fine.

What I do care about is that some one can show me how they do what they do and can replicate it under the conditions that are defined, agreed upon, or that matter.

Personally, I think once you boil the parameters to this, it makes life alot easier and it helps me at least sift through all the BS and chafe.

O Sensei is dead. "Your instructor" (tm) is not a concern of mine either since he is in (insert here) another state, country, plane of exsistence.

All I can say is I try to approach each encounter I have with an open mind.

Develop trust around those that I have grown to know and respect.

Try to "Know myself, and to thine self be true".

and Ironically it seems that it all kinda begins to fall in place.

I find the constant whining about what "IT" is and is not interesting and ironic that the ones that talk about it the most are typically the ones that make excuses for the fact that they cannot (insert excuse here) a. find the time to train. b. don't think it is real. c. must understand it intellectually for fear of making a mistake of training the wrong way....etc. etc.

Yeah, I know, I too was in that camp for a while.....

Until I met up with the guys that I did not believe knew what they were talking about, then demonstrated it, and then proceeded to go one step further and show me how they did what they do.

Too cool. imagine that...it is that simple...really it is!

Same goes with the guys that say competition is bad....interesting that most of those guys have not competed ever and simply wax poetically about something that they themselves have no experience with.

The phrase "shut up and train" comes to mind more and more often to me these days as I find out that I know less today than I knew yesterday...even though I seem to be gaining more knowledge.

Funny how it works!

Cheer Ron!

Someone got up from the wrong side of the mat. :(

Ron Tisdale
10-14-2009, 09:39 AM
Hi Phil, didn't you read my entire 3 line post?

Any more than I can say he *did* use it. How would I know?

I think we should be carefull of categorical statements like this. Just my thoughts...

Anyhoo, it is interesting that part of the creation myth of Daito Ryu includes observing the bodies of cadavers, from the inside out. Just an interesting idea is all.

Kevin, I agree with your points...wasted on some readers I'm afraid.

Best,
Ron

David Orange
10-14-2009, 10:09 AM
Can you provide me with something that says that the Japanese martial arts, including O'Sensei understood, muchless knew about, the fascia , and its existence. And understood it completely is role and function and used it consciously in technique?

Many of the people promoting the idea of using the fascia in martial arts technique have received their information from koryu training. If you would get out from behind your keyboard and actually train with some of them, you would know the answer to your question and wouldn't be making such claims as that O Sensei did not use it. In short, it is definitely an element in daito ryu and Dan Harden explained it to a very deep level in his August seminar. He showed the particular sub-structures of the whole-body fascia and explained their significance as "support" lines as well as "energy paths" through the body. He also showed how those support lines become the major focus of technique instead of some combinations of muscular effort. Since it is a central factor in daito ryu, O Sensei learned directly from Sokaku Takeda and emerged as one of the most powerful adherents of that art, we have much reason to believe that he not only used it but developed it to an extremely fine level. When you see people pushing him while he stands in a parallel stance, unmoved, and people explain that he does this through the fascia instead of muscle, you should pick up on that and try to learn more, rather than dismissing it.

Next, even a little reading in Chinese martial arts (particularly tai chi) will soon introduce you to the idea that the fascia transmits the qi throughout the body. It is often referred to as "sinew strength" or "intrinsic strength" of the body as opposed to muscle strength and it is one of the most difficult concepts to grasp when one thinks only in terms of muscular execution of movements. The key is not so much learning to "contract" the fascia (which is analgous to muscle-use), but in understanding how it knits the various parts of the body together and in using that connectedness effortlessly instead of using great effort in muscular contraction. Fascia is used very differently than muscle, but the common impulse is to try to figure out how to use it like another type of muscle, which will only mislead one into deeper misunderstanding and possibly injury.

Further, the founder of aiki-jujutsu some hundreds of years ago, is known to have dissected dead bodies to learn how to improve the effectiveness of techniques. Most people will assume that merely to mean how better to apply ikkyo, nikkyo, etc., but those techniques can be deeply understood just by twisting lots of people's arms, no dissection required. More likely, he dissected bodies to understand the fascia chains of the body and how better to use them to maximize his own intrinsic strength in applying techniques. And, of course, in those days, he would have been far more concerned with sword technique than arm-twisting.

Last, Donn Draegger says that much of "aiki no in-yo ho" was derived through the same man's study of the Chinese I Ching, which also informed the Chinese arts of tai chi and bagua, especially.

These are things I have known for probably 30 years, but they never became clear until I recognized the nature of the fascia level as described in The Leather Man and actually got out and felt the power of Akuzawa and Dan Harden and studied their explanations. In other words, a "scientific" understanding of this subject won't do you much good without the physical experience of physically working with someone who has full control of it.

Is there any sword school that consciously notes the fascia and it's role and attributes it to improving technique? How about Sumo? Is there any well known and accomplished Japanese Sensei's then and now, who atribute to having an edge in combat because they are able to utilize the fascia in a distinct and controlled function?

The above comments answer those questions.

I am really interested to hear what they say. :)

Better, Buck: go out and meet them and get the whole story.

David

DH
10-14-2009, 11:48 AM
Hello David
Discussing Fascia and tendon use with you is particularly poignant-more on that later.

The first time I ran into the concept of Fascia and tendons in use was from a Daito ryu Sensei who was admonishing us to us to "relax through movement" and "not flex or use the shoulders but rather to stretch through" He called it "using the long muscles" Which of course, he being Japanese, was just more poorly explained, ill-described and practically useless Japanese teachers efforts at explaining anything. It was another student (a physical therapist) who finally got what was being talked about and told the teacher it s fascia and tendon he was describing.
Now, all of that means-nothing useful. What really mattered was "the feel" learning certain ways to do certain things in the body; how, where and why listening and intent done in prescribed manners that changed the body. As he put it "Danny this is body type" "Body aiki." And these solo exercises and paired training to connect burned it in.

Where this is poignant for your is that the only other time I have heard the term" long muscle use" was from whom?
Your teacher...in an Aikido Journal interview! Who was taught by...Ueshiba!

This is where Mr. Burgess's comment comes in.
Isn't it odd that the latest medical testing continues to confirm ancient Chinese medical understanding of the body; some Meridian theory, Acupuncture, the latest motion capture testing of the taiji guy where the scientist cannot explain the acceleration and power from the human body, and finally...at least for me...the remarkable book match of the movement and training models in Daito ryu body movement; turn from the waist, power up, power down, breath training and what connects to what, spiral energy to the fascia "anatomy trains theory"; now proved by the AMA. In this case we know what came first; the ancient knowledge. Western science is only confirming what those DR teachers and the Chinese inherently knew in how to train the body.
Really though it is only the first step. You can train fascia in tension or in "exercising" to your hearts content. You might get stronger and make a step toward IT but you won't ever really get there. There is much more to it than that. And DR teachers knew that as well. In / yo is (yin yang) not a just referred to as In... Yo. It is In Yo Ho (yin Yang method). The study of how to train the mind and body in sustained and trained opposition in movement is where you really start to get into the work. And it can get complex. It is also where the solo aspects, can really come to the fore in...actual fighting-meaning force on force.
Unlike some people who train Soft work, I actually enjoy fighting. And this type of training-overlaps into successfully confronting ICMA, Japanese arts and MMA quite well.

Does it matter to me whether the general readership gets IT as a concept? I could care less. I am not talking to or trying to convince the Eric Meads, Bucks, and Mr. Scaggs of anything. I am talking to those in Aikido with open minds who want to improve their training...AND...who will step-up and find out.

I think we are going to look back on these last few years, as the age when IP and Ki training were finally proved to the aiki community. The Ki wars that happened years ago didn't go far because it was so poorly represented. Those advocating it were hamstrung by less than stellar proponents in ki aikido. What they showed was just not THAT different or exceptional over normal aikido practice, and some were ki faeries largely incapable of anything really meaningful. Today we have men who are far more developed and able. These men-if challenged on the veracity of Ki or "IT" -will simply blow you away and leave you sitting on your ass looking up- and wondering how you got there..over and over and over. Then teach (those wiling to listen) how to do it.
At no time in the history of Aikido or Daito ryu has this information been so available. We can be better than the Japanese at this, hell some of us already are.
Cheers
Dan

Ron Tisdale
10-14-2009, 12:55 PM
What Dan and David said.

Much better than I ever could.

Best,
Ron

thisisnotreal
10-14-2009, 01:00 PM
wow

in lieu of substance...i'll just point to some pretty pictures. ;)

Superficial Back Line (http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/galleries/show/id/160?page=1)
Superficial Front Line (http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/galleries/show/id/193)
The Lateral Line (http://www.anatomytrains.com/explore/galleries/show/id/192)
The Spiral Line (http://www.sportskin.net/files/u1/Sports_Kinesiology_and_the_Spiral_Line.pdf)

Anyone got a picture of the deep front line? Deep back line?
Is that book worth its price?

C. David Henderson
10-14-2009, 01:43 PM
Josh, the deep front line is depicted at page 182 of http://www.anatomytrains.com/uploads/rich_media/AnatomyTrainsOverview.pdf.

They don't seem to have a "deep back line," however there is a "deep back arm line" and a "deep front arm line" depicted at page 180.

best,

cdh

David Orange
10-14-2009, 02:30 PM
What Dan and David said.

Much better than I ever could.


I'll bet you're doing it a lot better than I am by now, though. Dan tells me you were the first one to get to the barn after he started teaching openly.

Any insights from your time in so far?

David

David Orange
10-14-2009, 02:40 PM
wow

in lieu of substance...i'll just point to some pretty pictures. ;)

Wow, indeed! Nice job, Josh.

A+ for you!

Thanks.

David

David Orange
10-14-2009, 02:47 PM
Good on you, too, David!

I feel a bit weird to get so excited seeing illustrations like this, but this is fantastic stuff. Along with the general explanations already offered, these links should put to rest the idea that the function of the fascia in martial arts is questionable.

Actually, illustration 8.6 shows what I look like at Monday morning meetings!

Thanks!

David

Josh, the deep front line is depicted at page 182 of http://www.anatomytrains.com/uploads/rich_media/AnatomyTrainsOverview.pdf.

They don't seem to have a "deep back line," however there is a "deep back arm line" and a "deep front arm line" depicted at page 180.

best,

cdh

Kevin Leavitt
10-14-2009, 02:52 PM
Why would the body have anything that was not functional really. Okay, the appendix is vestigal maybe...or maybe not.

Again...I go back to...what difference does it make if we can empirically say how it is done, isn't it better to be able to demonstrate functionality or use?

Ron Tisdale
10-14-2009, 02:54 PM
I'll bet you're doing it a lot better than I am by now, though. Dan tells me you were the first one to get to the barn after he started teaching openly.

Any insights from your time in so far?

David

Insights?? Be prepared for the LONG HAUL. That's about it for insights from me! :blush: :eek: I'm still working on this as I can, but I've had too many crazy things going on here to be as dedicated as I'd like. But I'll keep slogging along....
Best,
Ron

David Orange
10-14-2009, 03:08 PM
Insights?? Be prepared for the LONG HAUL.

Sounds like excellent advice.

I'm still working on this as I can, but I've had too many crazy things going on here to be as dedicated as I'd like. But I'll keep slogging along....

Slogging?! You speed demon! I'm crawling!!!!

Envy.

David

David Orange
10-14-2009, 03:13 PM
Again...I go back to...what difference does it make if we can empirically say how it is done, isn't it better to be able to demonstrate functionality or use?

Yeah...but then you get back to the guy who can do it but can't really help anyone else get it. Except through imitation of movement,,,,which is what we've been relying on so far.

Well, of course, you can't help anyone else until you've helped yourself, but I think we need the clear understanding of "how" before we can really reach the goal (said by someone who, so far, can't even do the basics...).

Still, I think I need that mental understanding to keep me following the proper course because even if you are replicating the appearance of the exercises...maybe you'll miss something.

But that's why we have to keep going back to the guys who do understand...(tongues hanging out in exhaustion).

David

thisisnotreal
10-14-2009, 03:35 PM
Kevin - I agree with you...but am torn. The more ways there are to think about 'the problem' (at least in science) the better, in general.
Maybe it's like the 'finger pointing to the moon'. Not 'it' ..but.... somehow useful...

on a tangent:

Talking about the leaps from the terms 'breathwork/'long muscle' to the concept/knowledge of fascia (as justification and rationale)..to the concept of personal body knowledge of fascia; and modes to use and strengthen it...to 'techhology/bodywork' to develop it, to shenfa or body methods to use it in motion, to communication and open sharing of it? Each one of these is.. i think.. quite substantial.. and builds on the previous. who can say where it will go. i read somewhere that aiki is the way of the future. who knows?

Mike Sigman
10-14-2009, 04:27 PM
I think the "fascia" discussions are probably premature. No one is going to understand any of the mechanisms from these types of discussions, so the worry is more that people will waste time on tangents that lead nowhere when they should be devoting more time to good basics. It's probably important to note that, as I've said before, there are many variations, gradations, and levels to these skills and all the attendant body-mechanics. In terms of "fascia", for instance, look at some of the harder style development types seen in the early parts of this vid clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Q1WDGSUn44&feature=related

versus this type of development:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj0qSe9Ryps

The first vid, even though it contains "fascia" and jin examples in it, is what would actually be called an "external" martial art. The second video shows how development could be done in an "internal" martial art. Most of the discussions I've seen so far on this forum in re fascia are actually along the lines of "external martial arts". The real question is 'what did Ueshiba do... internal or external development of the qi/ki/jin/kokyu skills?'.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

DH
10-14-2009, 04:31 PM
Kevin - I agree with you...but am torn. The more ways there are to think about 'the problem' (at least in science) the better, in general.
Maybe it's like the 'finger pointing to the moon'. Not 'it' ..but.... somehow useful...

on a tangent:

Talking about the leaps from the terms 'breathwork/'long muscle' to the concept/knowledge of fascia (as justification and rationale)..to the concept of personal body knowledge of fascia; and modes to use and strengthen it...to 'techhology/bodywork' to develop it, to shenfa or body methods to use it in motion, to communication and open sharing of it? Each one of these is.. i think.. quite substantial.. and builds on the previous. who can say where it will go. i read somewhere that aiki is the way of the future. who knows?
Hello Josh
I think Kevin is more or less stating that the knowledge really doesn't help much. My oft repeated story is of some of the ICMA grand masters and some lineage holders who wrote on certain lists and forums and come across as "experts." When I touched hands with them, the fomer (while having good jujutsu-had no internal power). He pushed me and actually bounced himself off of me, the later- I think my wife could have handled him without breaking a sweat. Not all is as it appears on the net no matter how "knowledgable" someone sounds.
Again as I stated earlier, you can practice training the fascia in any number of ways and it isn't gong to get you very far-other than some rudimentary strength and connection. And some train it with "tension" and think they got "IT." Everyone needs to go meet as many men claiming to teach this stuff as possible and find someone with a method and track record that works and settle-in.
Cheers
Dan

Kevin Leavitt
10-14-2009, 08:26 PM
Yup, what Dan and Mike said are my points about understanding....the intellectual knowledge does no good. It don't matter if it is fascia or something else at play...what matters is that the people you work with can show you what they are doing, can replicate it under the conditions set, and then can show you the exercises/practices and lessons learned to do these things.

Having gotten with a few of these guys...and some folks in other systems that I hold in high regard...I noticed a common thread amongst all of them that is constantly repeated concerning the basic movements, breathing, and exercises. Some talk of fascia...some don't. Some talk about a suit (Mike) others do not, some do not even speak english!

So, when I look at the common denominator between all of them, and what I consider to be the important message...it involves doing certain types of exercises and movements over a long period of time with a certain degree of mentorship.

it really simply boils down to this I believe.

Having argued with both Mike and Dan over the past years, not really understanding what they meant...once I worked with Mike, Rob, and Ark...it became a lot clearer to me and it cleared up alot of the misunderstaning that I had.

Hence, why I don't argue much with them these days, and why I came into the camp of "go out and meet up with them before you do anything else".

Intellectuallizing this stuff and trying to nail it down mentally is something I think we learn in our education system in the west that says that brain power can solve any problem and once we can mentally or intellectually understand it then we can replicate it.

It just don't work that way with kinesthetic practices, no matter how hard we want to think, rationalize, or intellectualize it.

Voitokas
10-14-2009, 08:50 PM
Interesting discussion, all - thanks!

Mike, Kevin, Dan, Ron, etc: I wasn't so much curious because I wanted to know how to use fascia like that; working on the basic principles is still where I am in my practise and probably will be for the next decade or two! (I mostly, when I get to work a little with someone vastly better than I am, think "wow, I want to be able to do that!" and then try to work on it. So I may join the Internal Strength discussions when I'm sixty, but the internet will probably be obsolete by then...) I was mostly curious about the language: as a scientist and medical student, the interest was anatomical and clinical; as an aikidoka and former philosophy major, I always want to understand the language that my fellow aikidoka are using. Sometimes at seminars people will use terms that I'm not familiar with on the mat (never the teaching sensei, interestingly - usually sempai or presumed sempai from other dojos...), and I wasn't sure what the people in this forum really meant by "fascia".

I think that my original question has been answered: that people are using the word in many different ways! :D Back to practising...

Mike Sigman
10-14-2009, 08:58 PM
I think that my original question has been answered: that people are using the word in many different ways! :D Back to practising...That's very true. I made a post once on QiJin to the effect that "we're not all talking about the same things" (even though we're using the same terms). The use of the "fascia" idea came from posts on the old Neijia List back in the mid-1990's. Like the term "double-weighted", many people use the buzzword nowadays (and they all got it by themselves, to hear their telling) but, as will be seen in the future looking back, not too many people really know what it actually means. To quote Chen Xiaowang in regard to 'double-weighted'... "if it was as simple as people are talking about, we would never have made the distinction". Watch the stories change.... or, in other words, take all the experts with a grain of salt. Tell them to put it in writing. ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Upyu
10-14-2009, 08:58 PM
It just don't work that way with kinesthetic practices, no matter how hard we want to think, rationalize, or intellectualize it.

I agree, but I don't think the importance of careful observation, rationalization, and thinking skills can be understated either.
A lot of guys that "get it" (including people from both the CMA and JMA camps) have mentioned that you can't be an "idiot" if you want to obtain these skills. Perseverance and hard work sans the thinking will only land someone in a sea of mediocrity.

Couple of things from a book that's been quoted way to often and used as a tool to beat an animal:

1) Most people don't think enough (and intellectualizing is NOT the same as "thinking" in this case)
2) Most people don't train enough
3) Most people don't know how to combine 1 & 2

Get parts 1-3 down, and things kind of start to happen all on their own.

Kevin Leavitt
10-14-2009, 09:16 PM
Good points Rob.

Jeremy, also some good points concerning languaging skills.

Something I have found the Yoga community actually does much better than we in the MA community do, and I am finding out that it is a very important communication skill to have as a teacher.

David Orange
10-14-2009, 09:32 PM
Having gotten with a few of these guys...and some folks in other systems that I hold in high regard...I noticed a common thread amongst all of them that is constantly repeated concerning the basic movements, breathing, and exercises....it really simply boils down to this I believe.

Yeah. That really is true. And it also makes it clear just why breathing exercises are done and it explains how they function better than anything I've seen before.

Having argued with both Mike and Dan over the past years, not really understanding what they meant...once I worked with Mike, Rob, and Ark...it became a lot clearer to me and it cleared up alot of the misunderstaning that I had.

Hence, why I don't argue much with them these days, and why I came into the camp of "go out and meet up with them before you do anything else".

I guess a lot of people are limited by pure skepticism, but I think a lot are also like me: they just couldn't afford to go jaunting around to meet folks. But I'd say if you have the opportunity to go to any seminar, Dan, Mike, Ark and Rob are the ones to put the money on.

Intellectuallizing this stuff and trying to nail it down mentally is something I think we learn in our education system in the west that says that brain power can solve any problem and once we can mentally or intellectually understand it then we can replicate it.

It just don't work that way with kinesthetic practices, no matter how hard we want to think, rationalize, or intellectualize it.

Yes...but...they old-timers weren't dissecting corpses without a lot of intellectual intent. I think ultimately, you have to look as deeply as you can. But the exercises and developing the baseline skills are the first priorty and the intellectualization is more useful once you have those under control.

Best to you.

David

Kevin Leavitt
10-14-2009, 09:41 PM
Absolutely...David, I can see where for someone at Mike Sigman's level of training and knowledge that it is useful to look deeper. At my level though, it just isn't useful at this stage.

I suppose my point is more directed to the constant conversation and what it is and isn't that becomes a cyclic discussion that repeats itself with no advancement.

Not much point on discussing further past a certain point unless you are actually training.

I do agree that there are those out there that don't have access. My access is limited as well to a few times a year, that and I make a conscious point at this time to spend my time developing primarily my JJ skills and IS secondarily. That may change one day...and frankly I am hoping that they will merge and invert...but right now, I feel it is more important for me to spend time in this area of development most of the time.

Anyway, good discussion.

Rob Watson
10-14-2009, 10:05 PM
Why would the body have anything that was not functional really. Okay, the appendix is vestigal maybe...or maybe not.

Vestigal, atavistic or just not used for the right function, yet.Gall bladder, spleen, why 10 fingers instead of 8 or 12- same for toes, facial hair, arm pit hair, two sets of chromosomes when only one is required ... Not to mention just exactly what is the brain for and if I use it for watching porn does that mean that is what is was mean't to do as natural selection lead up to the development thereof.

There is a whole bunch more besides too. Just because the stuff is there does not mean it was a positive selection for a specific purpose. The classic example is feathers - they most certainly did not start out as being mean't for flight but were first used for thermal regulation of the body temperature. Once the feathers developed to an optima for thermal regulation another function was found for them and the majesty of winged flight was enabled - natural selection drove towards better thermal regulation but the danged birds just started flapping harder and found those feather helped with flying. This is exactly the example of exaptation I mentioned earlier (another thread) - a new function that was 'added' to an exisiting structure that was never the point in the first place. Eye balls have a similar history.

If aiki/IP/IS, etc is 'natural' then where are the examples of aiki/IP/IS, etc in the animal kingdom? Maybe aiki/IP/IS, etc one of those things that is co-opted for another purpose. If aiki/IP/IS, etc is does have to do with the fascia and the training is a form of fascia remodelling well certainly there are a great many critters (even non-mammalian) that have fascia.

If aiki/IP/IS, etc gives such an advantage then surely it makes good sense for other animals to use IT too .. survival of the fittest and all. At least let's make the leap and stretch the metaphor and make the selective pressure so great in MA that no aiki/IP/IS, etc = no MA and drive the muscle power dominated arts into extinction (unlike Dan's mention of the dinosaurs- which were driven out by a meteor leaving the meek shrews to take over) aiki/IP/IS, etc driven MA can drive out the old - be the meteors of the modern MA!

As to the question
Again...I go back to...what difference does it make if we can empirically say how it is done, isn't it better to be able to demonstrate functionality or use?

How many times has is been stated that IHBF, can't be described in words, you can tell who does not know IT by how they describe IT? Basically those who have been cast as the exemplars have said it is so and therefore the rest of us buy into it so that leaves hands on demo as the preferred mode. Just because it is strongly stated that IHBF does not mean that is so - certainly it is likely less efficient to give a written description/perscription to IT but the current lack is only in the abilities/capabilities of the 'vetted' group to do so. Certainly the art of the crafted word requires a certain talent that many lack - that is not a knock it just is so. One day the physicist wordsmith will write the definitive manual of IT, complete with diagrams, and they will be properly 'vetted' by those in the know then we can stop all this IHBF business and just get on with IT already.

Upyu
10-14-2009, 10:18 PM
If aiki/IP/IS, etc is 'natural' then where are the examples of aiki/IP/IS, etc in the animal kingdom? Maybe aiki/IP/IS, etc one of those things that is co-opted for another purpose. If aiki/IP/IS, etc is does have to do with the fascia and the training is a form of fascia remodelling well certainly there are a great many critters (even non-mammalian) that have fascia.

I know fascia is getting the lime light right now, but there're other mechanics that comprise IS, and a lot of these can be found in the animal kingdom as well. There's a reason that terms such as "dragon's back" or analogies related to snakes, birds etc are made.
Certain elements can be found in the animal kingdom as well...but you still need a foot in the door to recognize what's going on.

DH
10-14-2009, 10:23 PM
.....The use of the "fascia" idea came from posts on the old Neijia List back in the mid-1990's.

This is simply not true.
Whether it's intentional to bolster a proposed position or it's just expressing an ignorance of the Japanese arts; I'll leave it for others to decide.

Maybe its understandable; since no one person can be in all places at all times , that they extrapolate from insular experiences they WERE a part of- things that are simply isolated and not true.
IOW, they mistakenly asssume,...things that they heard or wrote were the only references in 'their" world- so it must be the only referrence in "all the world." :rolleyes:
One fellow goes on and one about "these things being taught throughout Asia"...then claims ownership of some of the common terms. Er...okay.
For our purposes:
1. Fascia and long muscle were being discussed in DR when I walked in the door in 1990, and it was discussed in interviews in Aikido Journal, Aikido Today,and even with the likes of Richard Kim in the 80's who noted from his training in DR (I think in fighting arts magazine in the 80's "that the training mehod affects tendon, fascia and bone density." That's just about a quote.
Mochizuki discussed it in AJ and even said in those days we called it "long muscle" (as did one of my DR teachers)-who was corrected and told we call it fascia.
There are at least three people who read here, and two teachers who knows this to be fact.

2. Double weighted is term that has been bandied about by Japanese Maers since the 80's; to include DR, Yanagi Ryu, and Aikido. Yanagi discusses triangulation as the method to resolve it. Dr discusses spiral energy and certain ways to balance across the body lines as ways to resolve it. Certain Koryu, address it and have methods to prevent and change it. There are threads debating it everywhere
3. The term 'listening" and listening skills are in DR as well.
4. The term Heavy hands and how to train for heavy hands is in -DR. including several breathing exercises to train the fascia to incorporate it and make it real in the waza.
It's also an old boxing term
5. Spiral energy and the use of it, has been hinted at and named in interviews in Aikido Journal as well is in Tokimune's writings from the 80's

Many of these terms exist on the E-budo server and the aikido list, There are any number of people here from DR, Yanagi ryu and aikido who were part of those discussions and debates pre and post crash who can attest to the use of those terms.

Like the term "double-weighted", many people use the buzzword nowadays (and they all got it by themselves, to hear their telling) but, as will be seen in the future looking back, not too many people really know what it actually means.
Were you everywhere in the Japanese arts at this time?
I was equally "surprised" to hear many of these terms being used in ICMA. Things like the Aiki sphere and how it is shown from a holding a ball to being "in the ball" is taught in two schools of Daito ryu I know of. Imagine my surprise to seeing it used in Taiji.
Unlike you I just couldn't bring myself to tell THEM they "stole" terms they had been using for years and tacitly insinuate everyone was "lying" about it. What incredible hubris.:rolleyes:

To quote Chen Xiaowang in regard to 'double-weighted'... "if it was as simple as people are talking about, we would never have made the distinction". Watch the stories change.... or, in other words, take all the experts with a grain of salt. Tell them to put it in writing. ;)
FWIW
Mike Sigman
To quote Don Angier "You can double weight them by bringing their weight to their triangulation point...front or back." I am not sure but I think that goes back to the 70's.
To quote Kiyama Shihan DR. "People don't understand this, so its easy to catch them this way and make kuzushi." He was talking about power on the same side foot and hand; and not Angiers triangulation model. I don't agree with Angier- as that method is easily cancelled out, but no matter.

We need to do better than this continuing to claim ownership of terms all while claiming the universal application of the ideas.
This reminds me of the "Fighting Spirit of Japan" references where I was the only one to have had a reason to note the references to the "aikijujutsu man", and the Judo references as they were what I was attempting to do at the time and discussed it back in the aikido list days. Only to be told someone else "first" introduced it ...much later-
I let it go.
Next came the same-side weighting shiko with hand drawn images and public hand outs and video with explanations, all while I kept explaining that Shiko needs to be done in cross-line body training on E-budo and here and personally by phone before a certian fella was going to meet another IS guys and that was all documented; as to who first introduced the idea on aikiweb! Only to be told by Sigman I was following behind and stealing the idea!!!! With someone else taking "ownership" and showing up with a brand new video, with new descriptions and the shiko that used to be explained by the same guy as same-side three axis training now being translated as...cross-line body work!. My exact term. Un-freakin-believable.
I let THAT one go. And never brought it up again till this crap.
Is this the way you guys want to play?
Is this all you got that you need this nonsense?
I mean really guys?....really?

Dan

Erick Mead
10-14-2009, 10:32 PM
If aiki/IP/IS, etc is 'natural' then where are the examples of aiki/IP/IS, etc in the animal kingdom? Cephalopoda. Squids. Octopi -- in other words, forget you have bones -- then remember it -- but do the same thing as if you didn't.

One day the physicist wordsmith will write the definitive manual of IT, complete with diagrams, and they will be properly 'vetted' by those in the know then we can stop all this IHBF business and just get on with IT already. :)

Buck
10-14-2009, 11:15 PM
Many of the people promoting .... Better, Buck: go out and meet them and get the whole story.

David

Could you please fill me in on who are these many people who got their information from koryu, am sorry I not sure who you are talking about, and what koryu?

And who is, when I get out from behind the keyboard, do train with, I am sorry again for asking details and not settling with generalities.

I didn't know Dan Harden was a medical doctor researching fascia and its role in martial arts, am not sure what art he is noted as being an expert. I am sorry, I lack that information.

You said, [Dan] also showed how those support lines become the major focus of technique instead of some combinations of muscular effort. Since it is a central factor in daito ryu, O Sensei learned directly from Sokaku Takeda and emerged as one of the most powerful adherents of that art, we have much reason to believe that he not only used it but developed it to an extremely fine level.....

I want to ask, is Dan an expert in daito ryu? Has he trained in that art, and what is his rank and teachers. I ask this because the answers would provide greater credibility to Dan's resume. But unfortunately is doesn't really provide scientific proof, or evidence of how the fascia works in improving technique. It shows that some people can't push Dan. It reminds me of an episode of that Kungfu show that the guy who played "Bill" in the movie "Kill Bill" where in a screen two punks tried to move him out of some guys office and couldn't. Or the Aikido demo of where you sit in seiza and then you tell another person to push and try to slide you back. As they try to push you, you stand up. The person trying to push you is amazed you can do that. Us Aikidoka know how that is done. It is all about the direction the force (push) is coming from and where it is placed (usually on the shoulders). The person who is pushing you is doing so from a disadvantaged position. Direction of force (push) is wrong, the pusher's posture is such that it counters a productive and strong force to get the result of pushing you back. Even more so if it is done on a textured flooring.

I don't see the proof of not being able to push someone equating to the validation of the fascia playing a role proposed function as you outlined in the martial arts, and stuff. Before science, it was believed the world was flat, by many intellectual learned and scholarly Europeans of the time, until it was proven wrong. Or the earth was the center of the universe and all the planets revolved around it, until that was proven wrong too. The shroud of Turin, it was proven to be fake by science.

All this came about because people didn't just accept what they where told, or filled in their own blanks when they experienced something they don't understand, like that of Faith Healers, or what Doctors deal with when they come across patients without any medical training doing self-diagnosis, and that stuff.

This is an interesting website, which I see strong modeling going on in what you are saying and all that stuff. http://www.healself.org/massage.html

The way fascia is being explained models tightly to the link I provided which leads me to ask for a scientific explanation instead. Though I am baffled that asking for a scientific explanation ( a real one ) is apostasy and heresy, and met with contempt and ridicule. What am I to think?

David Orange
10-14-2009, 11:15 PM
Absolutely...David, I can see where for someone at Mike Sigman's level of training and knowledge that it is useful to look deeper. At my level though, it just isn't useful at this stage.

It's really not useful for me, either, being at a lower level of development in IS skills than yourself, but it was only when I intellectually recognized the whole-body nature of the fascia/connective tissue that I began to give real credence to what Mike was saying. And then I got motivated to get into what he, Dan and Rob were talking about. So....yes and no. But I do have tons of work to do before more intellectualization will have much value.

I suppose my point is more directed to the constant conversation and what it is and isn't that becomes a cyclic discussion that repeats itself with no advancement.

Well, the same argument goes round and round, but every few cycles a few more people get a light bulb over their heads, and some little progress is made.

Not much point on discussing further past a certain point unless you are actually training.

Yes...though I don't think anyone knows what that point is. I think we all need different stimuli to spark our fuses and you never know what random comment will do that for someone.

I do agree that there are those out there that don't have access. My access is limited as well to a few times a year, that and I make a conscious point at this time to spend my time developing primarily my JJ skills and IS secondarily. That may change one day...and frankly I am hoping that they will merge and invert...but right now, I feel it is more important for me to spend time in this area of development most of the time.

It makes a lot of sense to me. I've paid attention to your progress over the past couple of years and I've seen how your thinking has gone and I wouldn't think of second guessing your focus on direct value. And with the experience you're getting, I have no doubt that you will be getting to the heart of IS in a few years.

I also agree with Mike that it is complex and that the fascia is not the end-all/be-all of the topic. Also, I know that mental "knowledge" of the subject can lead to a lot of bad usage if it isn't grounded in the physical skills, but the very idea of "using the fascia" of the body to "do" something is just so foreign to most externally trained martial artists that a good bit of hashing out can help break through some mental blindness and make those light bulbs go on.

QUOTE=Kevin Leavitt;242819]Anyway, good discussion.[/quote]

I think so. As long as people are still asking things like "Can you control the contraction of the fascia like muscle?" it should be continued. And I think we've seen a bit more substance in this thread than we usually manage to get on IS threads.

Thanks.

David

Buck
10-14-2009, 11:29 PM
I also want to say, its great that people support each other in what they believe, am not here to dismiss anyone's opinions, tell people what they believe is wrong, ridicule and mock them, hurt their feelings, insult them for what they believe, all I ask is for solid, reliable, main stream scientific explanation of how the facisa works to improve your martial arts technique, especially in Aikido.. And if that can't be done then simply say it.

David Orange
10-14-2009, 11:35 PM
If aiki/IP/IS, etc is 'natural' then where are the examples of aiki/IP/IS, etc in the animal kingdom? Maybe aiki/IP/IS, etc one of those things that is co-opted for another purpose. If aiki/IP/IS, etc is does have to do with the fascia and the training is a form of fascia remodelling well certainly there are a great many critters (even non-mammalian) that have fascia.

Well, it seems that this is where the intellect comes in. I do believe that all the internal power development began with India, thousands of years ago, maybe with yoga or maybe with a forerunner of yoga, and that the martial arts as such developed out of pure fighting without necessarily having that internal benefit, which only a few people in martial arts were able to grasp. But it depended first on mentally recognizing a potential in the body, mentally identifying its workings and then physically/mentally refining that potential into various forms. It's the same thing with my old idea that "external" aikido technique developed from child movement and Dan's assertion that IS is "natural" but not "just natural" and that children do not have the capacity to develop it purely from their innate instincts of movement.

If aiki/IP/IS, etc gives such an advantage then surely it makes good sense for other animals to use IT too .. survival of the fittest and all.[QUOTE=Robert M Watson Jr;242821]

Well, I think IS is really a distinguishing feature between animals and humans:nature must be refined by study, consideration and effort. Since animals cannot "consider" at that level, they cannot "refine" their nature further than nature has given it to them. An ape has the power of many men, but imagine if he could cultivate and refine that power through consideration and effort????

But his nature won't allow him to transcend his own nature, while human nature does have the potential to optimize natural power to a degree that seems perhaps supernatural.

[QUOTE=Robert M Watson Jr;242821]How many times has is been stated that IHBF, can't be described in words, you can tell who does not know IT by how they describe IT? Basically those who have been cast as the exemplars have said it is so and therefore the rest of us buy into it so that leaves hands on demo as the preferred mode.

I am convinced that unless you have felt someone who really understands IS, you cannot imagine that it could exist because it is outside the degree of power that can possibly be developed through sheer muscle. And while I'm not certain that one who "can do" IS can necessarily explain it very well, when people use certain types of description, it does make me doubt that they really know what they are talking about and thus doubt that they can "do" the stuff. And when a person is like that, even if you do understand IS, you may not know if the other guy understands it unless you feel what he does.

Just because it is strongly stated that IHBF does not mean that is so - certainly it is likely less efficient to give a written description/perscription to IT but the current lack is only in the abilities/capabilities of the 'vetted' group to do so. Certainly the art of the crafted word requires a certain talent that many lack - that is not a knock it just is so. One day the physicist wordsmith will write the definitive manual of IT, complete with diagrams, and they will be properly 'vetted' by those in the know then we can stop all this IHBF business and just get on with IT already.

Well, "knowing" IT and "really knowing" it (being able to "do" it) are quite different. But even if someone writes very convincingly, we should understand that they still might not be "able to do". After all, we have many accounts of folks who would seem to be experts in writing, but in-person meetings reveal that they don't really have a clue. Without feeling what someone does, you'll never know for certain if they really can do it.

Best to you.

David

eyrie
10-14-2009, 11:44 PM
all I ask is for solid, reliable, main stream scientific explanation of how the facisa [sic] works to improve your martial arts technique, especially in Aikido. I don't think you're going to get a qualified answer here... much less a scientific explanation... (is there a doctor in the house?)

Do yourself a favor... get a good anatomy book, and one on kinesiology.

David Orange
10-14-2009, 11:57 PM
Could you please fill me in on who are these many people who got their information from koryu, am sorry I not sure who you are talking about, and what koryu?

Dan bases his stuff largely on DR and the koryu he practices. Ark Akuzawa bases his on traditions coming from yagyu shingan ryu (though not as a member of the ryu) and he was a student at Sagawa's aiki dojo. And then there is Toby Threadgill...I mean, just read these threads carefully. The information has been posted repeatedly.

I didn't know Dan Harden was a medical doctor researching fascia and its role in martial arts, am not sure what art he is noted as being an expert. I am sorry, I lack that information.

No. He's a martial artist in a tradition that has deep roots in dissection of bodies for anatomical analysis. Of course, that tradition is deeply informed by "Chinese" medicine (with a form widely practiced in Japan as well) and he has the intelligence to benefit by modern anatomical research that has become widely available as well. No mystery to it.

You said, [Dan] also showed how those support lines become the major focus of technique instead of some combinations of muscular effort. Since it is a central factor in daito ryu, O Sensei learned directly from Sokaku Takeda and emerged as one of the most powerful adherents of that art, we have much reason to believe that he not only used it but developed it to an extremely fine level.....

I want to ask, is Dan an expert in daito ryu? Has he trained in that art, and what is his rank and teachers. I ask this because the answers would provide greater credibility to Dan's resume.

Buck, if he can throw you clear across the room almost without moving a muscle, are you going to be more impressed by that ability if he shows you a DR resume and names his teacher?

The fact is, he's named his teacher in DR and I think most people will consider him an "expert" although he never told me what rank he might hold in the system. He has given a lot of that information and I have been satisfied with its authenticity by feeling what he does and having him explain the roots of it to me. The other big names also have high level backgrounds and it would do you more good to go and feel what they do than to continually re-question "what they know," etc.

But unfortunately is doesn't really provide scientific proof, or evidence of how the fascia works in improving technique.

You're right, Buck. You should just forget you ever heard of the idea and go on with whatever it is you've been doing that has made you so famous for throwing people vast distances with tiny movements.

It reminds me of ... the Aikido demo of where you sit in seiza and then you tell another person to push and try to slide you back. As they try to push you, you stand up. The person trying to push you is amazed you can do that...Us Aikidoka know how that is done. It is all about the direction the force (push) is coming from and where it is placed (usually on the shoulders). The person who is pushing you is doing so from a disadvantaged position. Direction of force (push) is wrong, the pusher's posture is such that it counters a productive and strong force to get the result of pushing you back. Even more so if it is done on a textured flooring.

Buck, I will put oil on my feet and I'll bet you can't do that with me pushing on you. MUCH LESS DAN, MIKE or ARK.

In other words, what you think you "understand" is meaningless when you run up against something that is so highly refined that it is beyond your understanding. A dog can dig up a chunk of gold ore, but it can't refine that gold and make a chalice of it and your "understanding" of what you described is just something you have "heard" and definitely "NOT" something you can "do." And the difference is what counts.

...I am baffled that asking for a scientific explanation ( a real one ) is apostasy and heresy, and met with contempt and ridicule. What am I to think?

Well, you are apparently to think that your mental powers are so great that you can understand things you've never encountered and can explain things you cannot do.

Again, Buck, just forget you ever heard of it and go back to your nap.

David

David Orange
10-15-2009, 12:02 AM
...all I ask is for solid, reliable, main stream scientific explanation of how the facisa works to improve your martial arts technique, especially in Aikido.. And if that can't be done then simply say it.

It's not that it can't be done. You should have reviewed (at least) the information in the links to Anatomy Chains and at least gotten an idea from that. But the fact is, what you're really asking for is not "scientific data" but "layman's science" explained in English sentences rather than in pure statistical data form, as most real scientific explanation is done.

And again, as everyone has told you, your questions are not even valid questions until you have gotten hold of someone like Dan, Mike or Ark and felt "what" is being discussed. Anyway, I'm working on a follow up article to The Leather Man that will go into more detail about what I've learned about fascia / the suit since I wrote that first article.

Meantime, you won't be ready to understand the most basic level of this discussion until you feel someone who can "do" it and get a glimpse of the absyss that separates their ability from your vague and meandering conceptions.

Good luck.

David

Buck
10-15-2009, 12:05 AM
I think the "fascia" discussions are probably premature. No one is going to understand any of the mechanisms from these types of discussions, so the worry is more that people will waste time on tangents that lead nowhere when they should be devoting more time to good basics. It's probably important to note that, as I've said before, there are many variations, gradations, and levels to these skills and all the attendant body-mechanics. In terms of "fascia", for instance, look at some of the harder style development types seen in the early parts of this vid clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Q1WDGSUn44&feature=related

versus this type of development:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj0qSe9Ryps

The first vid, even though it contains "fascia" and jin examples in it, is what would actually be called an "external" martial art. The second video shows how development could be done in an "internal" martial art. Most of the discussions I've seen so far on this forum in re fascia are actually along the lines of "external martial arts". The real question is 'what did Ueshiba do... internal or external development of the qi/ki/jin/kokyu skills?'.

FWIW

Mike Sigman
Mike is this what your trying to get across?
I am sorry, and I don't mean to be insulting, but that first vid was hilarious watching the British journalist kicking the Master's package with his shin and pulling the kicks as well. And the poor way the journalist checked to see if the Master was padded or had a cup. British love a good practical joke, crop circles comes to mind.

The master explained, "...that the power comes from the internal, the chi, the organs the tendons, nothing to do with the muscle." Isn't that external? And there is nothing said about fasica, if the fasica is associated with muscle than it is disregarded with the muscle.

Now I see in the second vid how fasica is supporting they guy's posture, just as some people say it should. But, there is no explanation and stuff showing how the fasica is works to improve martial art technique.

If the fasica works with the muscle, besides other things, and the fasica is one big thing, then the sections of fascia that works with muscle must be disregarded along with the muscle per the Master. So does the facsia, as one thing, does work in part (independently from other sections) or in whole, how does that work? :)

Buck
10-15-2009, 12:18 AM
Meantime, you won't be ready to understand the most basic level of this discussion until you feel someone who can "do" it and get a glimpse of the absyss that separates their ability from your vague and meandering conceptions.

Good luck.

David

Why do you make the assumption I haven't? You don't, honestly. The world is a big place and not everyone wants to be popular on or off the internet. Not everyone wants attention. The other thing you fail to understand is I have no conceptions, am just asking for a scientific explanation of how the facsia works to improve your martial arts technique, especially in Aikido. And what am getting is go feel it, much like the unbeliever who sits in the folding chair under the big white tent full of believers, listening to the Good O' Boy Southern Preacher saying, you must believe the in Jesus, and his power to heal. The power he put in these hands. The power to heal the sick, the cripple...." That is what I am feeling from all this. Maybe, I just should do what Borat did when he was in a similar situation. :)

Buck
10-15-2009, 12:25 AM
In terms of "fascia", for instance, look at some of the harder style development types seen in the early parts of this vid clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Q1WDGSUn44&feature=related

versus this type of development:



I forgot add, is there fascia in the scrotum, testes, and penis? I am not clear what the Master is attributing being kicked poorly in the package to? If chi is about the tendons and organs well...you get the picture. Am reminded in a way about those Chinese monks some years ago pulling buses and stuff with their penis, and contributing it to chi.

Voitokas
10-15-2009, 12:43 AM
Whoa there, guys! I can guess from your very effective baiting that this is an argument you've had before... having not been solved then, it probably won't be solved now..:D

@David: point made, by many, I think, that some things have to be felt to be learned or even understood, like describing colour to the blind. On the other hand, surely one can empathise with the blind person's desire to understand colour and their insistence on repeated description, even if it's impossible to understand from words alone?

@Buck: I think the 'contempt and ridicule' you speak of is probably from another thread? This has been relatively tame and respectful, for the most part. As to the science, I don't think that the kind of experiments you ask about have been (or maybe even could be) done. On the other hand, we use words all the time that approximate what we are trying to explain, even when the specific application of those words is scientifically unproven or unprovable. It seems like people are just trying to use the best words they can to explain a very difficult concept.

Not trying to stifle anyone's voice - just trying to keep the shouting down...:)

DH
10-15-2009, 12:45 AM
Mr. Morrison
Excellent point yet there is no need to shout. I am not mad at a single person-in the room. Aiki is honest, flat, and in your face. It levels the playing field against all internet jocky's opinions, to the point that all they really have left is...talk.

To Mr. Burgess
I represent me and no one else. My understanding is in my own hands. Is there a reason I should feel compelled to tell you anything, anything at all about who I am or what I do?
And since you decided to be so direct, let me just say, I have yet to find anyone in your art; from yondan to 8th dan who can handle anything I can deliver. And that is with me just using aiki and not actually fighting. If there is some aikido shihan somewhere who can, I would love to meet him.
Not the least of which, is every teacher in the aiki arts who has tried, is now taking lessons from me, because I can do and I can actually teach what I do. It's all good fun.
I do what I do...because I can-and you, what do you do?

Since your betters can't handle this, or know just what it is that is happening to them, just who...are you- that I should tell you a single thing?
I don't want to convince you of anything sir. I am sure you have everything you need.
Good luck in your training
Dan.

Voitokas
10-15-2009, 12:48 AM
I forgot add, is there fascia in the scrotum, testes, and penis?
For what it's worth - there are several layers of fascia in the scrotum and penis. There are also a lot of nerves and blood vessels, though - I can't begin to imagine the 5th kyu test for getting kicked in the nuts:blush:
:uch: :uch:

Buck
10-15-2009, 01:00 AM
Whoa there, guys! I can guess from your very effective baiting that this is an argument you've had before... having not been solved then, it probably won't be solved now..:D

@David: point made, by many, I think, that some things have to be felt to be learned or even understood, like describing colour to the blind. On the other hand, surely one can empathise with the blind person's desire to understand colour and their insistence on repeated description, even if it's impossible to understand from words alone?

@Buck: I think the 'contempt and ridicule' you speak of is probably from another thread? This has been relatively tame and respectful, for the most part. As to the science, I don't think that the kind of experiments you ask about have been (or maybe even could be) done. On the other hand, we use words all the time that approximate what we are trying to explain, even when the specific application of those words is scientifically unproven or unprovable. It seems like people are just trying to use the best words they can to explain a very difficult concept.

Not trying to stifle anyone's voice - just trying to keep the shouting down...:)

No one is shouting. I don't think a voice (per se) has been raised. I think I can get the explanation needed if the fasica played a role in improving martial arts technique beyond what it already does. I think someone has to do the proper research. There is a great Judo book and I forgot what the name of it is, but it explains Judo very well scientifically, you know Judo being an art and all. It shows all sorts of physics and stuff on what makes Judo work. I have been told there is allot of scientific research on Judo. I am confident it can be done with the fascia stuff. I am at the point that there isn't any scientific research out there that supports that the fasica does improve martial arts technique. How do I know it really is the fasica at work? Just because people are struggling for a language doesn't mean it's the universal scientific language. By using a universal scientific langauge we avoid, you say tomato, I say red healing ball, and all that kind of stuff.

I am now at the point that I understand that most people can't answer my question, as of yet. and that is fine.So there is no solid research published pertaining to my question, maybe in the future. THAT WAS EASY HUH, now I am shouting. :D I wonder if there is going to be an echo. :D

Buck
10-15-2009, 01:18 AM
For what it's worth - there are several layers of fascia in the scrotum and penis. There are also a lot of nerves and blood vessels, though - I can't begin to imagine the 5th kyu test for getting kicked in the nuts:blush:
:uch: :uch:

Honestly, I can think of better ways to treat my package then by letting someone get kick happy on it. How many sperm do you think gets killed with kick? They probably think it is some kind of natural catastrophic disaster. :)

Buck
10-15-2009, 01:40 AM
Mr. Morrison
Excellent point yet there is no need to shout. I am not mad at a single person-in the room. Aiki is honest, flat, and in your face. It levels the playing field against all internet jocky's opinions, to the point that all they really have left is...talk.

To Mr. Burgess
I represent me and no one else. My understanding is in my own hands. Is there a reason I should feel compelled to tell you anything, anything at all about who I am or what I do?
And since you decided to be so direct, let me just say, I have yet to find anyone in your art; from yondan to 8th dan who can handle anything I can deliver. And that is with me just using aiki and not actually fighting. If there is some aikido shihan somewhere who can, I would love to meet him.
Not the least of which, is every teacher in the aiki arts who has tried, is now taking lessons from me, because I can do and I can actually teach what I do. It's all good fun.
I do what I do...because I can-and you, what do you do?

Since your betters can't handle this, or know just what it is that is happening to them, just who...are you- that I should tell you a single thing?
I don't want to convince you of anything sir. I am sure you have everything you need.
Good luck in your training
Dan.

Mr. Harden,

I am sorry if you feel this is about you. I realize, and am sure you do too, that you are the very prolific publicly and advocate energetically the way the fascia is used in martial arts, intently. I just wanted solid scientific research explaining all that. There isn't any yet. I can't say until then if the fascia does or doesn't play a role. I can't say it can or can't be controlled like a muscle, and all that. What am saying is I would like to read the solid scientific research, and really can't take any other explanation, cause lets face it we are talking Asian martial arts. and there is a lot of myth associated. Just like that old story of O'Sensei dodging bullets, and all that kind of stuff.

Look at it from my perspective, I say this with no disrespect, but why should I believe your theory, or any ones on this subject? Take the unbendable arm, same deal. It was attributed the power of ki of that calibrated the keenness of martial arts skill for many years that I know of. But the function is very simple, and a child can do it if properly instructed. I am skeptical, you have to be in the martial arts where magically powers are taught everywhere.

Buck
10-15-2009, 02:14 AM
Mr. Harden,

When I was in school, there was this guy who could lock up his body in such a way he would be stiff as a board. He would put two folding chairs apart from each other, lay across them. His head on one, and only his heels on the other. Then he would have other kids walk on him. He could stand up right and lock up on command and fall stiff as a board. He would challenge other kids to "unlock" him. They couldn't. There was no genetic mutation of joints, tendons etc. he was just a normal kid who figure out how to "lock up", be stiff as a board and hold that position overtime.

Now if that skill was picked-up in the martial arts it would be some mysterious, magical, chi/ki power thingy. It would be pandered to every wide-eyed eagar beginner that walked the planet. It would be taught as the holy grail of principles. A religion; a Yellow Bamboo. There is so much of this is the martial arts it is unmeasurable.

The other things the Chinese arts are laden with Taoism, not the Lao Tzu type, but the magic, superstitious stuff which has spilled over to the Japanese arts. To survive as a martial artist, you sanity that is, you have to be skeptical in a world that breeds hype, snake oil, gulibness, suckers, and fantasy. It's a mine field. You have to be skepical of what you see, hear, and read.

Buck
10-15-2009, 02:21 AM
I didn't mention the amount of misinformation, misdirection, B.S. and all that, that exists.

What do you go by, to get the facts? 1. experience in such things. 2. Science.

So you will have to forgive me if you think I don't need scientitfic proof, explination, and stuff. And not instead of taking someone's or anyone's explaination.

jss
10-15-2009, 03:33 AM
To survive as a martial artist, you sanity that is, you have to be skeptical in a world that breeds hype, snake oil, gulibness, suckers, and fantasy. It's a mine field. You have to be skepical of what you see, hear, and read.
Don't forget feel. ;)

thisisnotreal
10-15-2009, 07:50 AM
Hello Dan,
Thank you. I think I understand...

Hello Kevin,
I think I got you. Although, I am still a fan of the kind of thinking Rob mentions. Actually, he summed up perfectly how i feel. But ..I definitely do agree with you. (not that it matters what i think! ..I know!)

Hello Buck,
I propose that the clear-cut evidence you are seeking may not exist...yet. Information about these skills would have to have been publicly available and then the science would have to have been done. I do not think this has happened.
So far; quite widely mentioned on this board are the tests of striking power (including Ark's testing for a TV show...<link>?) and body speed mentioned (motion capture study in UCLA?..<link>?). I would suggest that you take the discussions here in the spirit of a plausibility argument; and not as a given fact (yet). Then I would think that it's fine...just like that (for now). Even if true; how much would that change daily life for you? Not much, i think. I am predicting that as the state of understanding of these skills advance then so will the science try to keep up. As it usually has. Sometimes it inverts; but usually discovery precedes theory. Usually. I think we are seeing things in a new light...and that this will be reflected in science.
Here's another plausibility argument. Remember; you have Dan, Mike and Rob all, I believe (and sorry for putting words in anyone's mouth), who can do some pretty interesting things, by all accounts(!), who look to the fascia for the explanation (!!!). It may, of course, be wrong, but you have these 3 gents all pointing to the same thing. Through their own independent study they have arrived at a quasi-similar view of some very strange out-of-the-normal things. This should make any reasonable man take a pause. Perhaps there is an opportunity for some scholarship here....these seem like some very exciting potential areas to study. I am betting that some astute readers are thinking the exact same thing.
Either way; theory is theory. It will not transform daily life, let alone motion or ways of movement, for you, or anyone. I think the required burden of proof to allow you to suspend your disbelief has been met, by virtue of the fact that 3 exemplars of this IT (e.g. 2 of which are *highly disagreeagble*) do, in fact, agree that fascia is a good thing to consider.
Put another way (1) history is being made right now (this is always true, actually!!) (2) old knowledge is coming out and being made open to scientific inquiry. Relax....question everything..including, especially, yourself ..
It is a very interesting time to be around.
or maybe it's not. Depends on you.

Regarding scientific evidence:
My sempai once (long ago) told me of a posthumous dissection of a developed martial artist and it showed some 'development' of 'connection's in the back. I will contact him and try to find out more. This would have been done in our lifetimes. I am throwing this out there to see if anyone else heard of this.(?)

In the meantime, just for fun, Chen Xiao Wang explains double weighted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxrdPNw4Nyo)

Josh

thisisnotreal
10-15-2009, 08:12 AM
Buck,
In furtherance to the plausibility of the importance of fascia.. may I suggest to consider this:
From today's NY Times:

Fascinating.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/health/24hand.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1185291103-lBe6F0edeYtxTYZEvTxeVg

This is the way i see it
1. body is an adaptive feedback loop; adjusting to the demands placed on it. (e.g. the training effect exists)
2. fascia can build up and adjust as a result of the demands placed on it (e.g. see article)
3.fascia can effect body to such a degree that 'outward mechanical possibilities' are drastically effected (see article)
4. fascia can change over time (see article)
5. a body's movement capabilities can be 'weakened' as you have 'negative' fascial development. (see article) This suggests the opposite is, at least theoretically, possible. There is the possibility of fascial development that will strengthen and help body movement capabilities.

6. some here are saying there are modes of movement that exist that use and develop fascia and also/then use those changes advantageously. It seems it is linked with using ground path through the body; and relying on fascia (and fascial development) to provide (among other things?) structural reinforcement.

anyhow, just some more ideas.

Take care,
Josh

p.s. regarding that nutsack thing? I think he was checking that the master pulled 'em up inside!! Mike S mentions that there is a fascial tab there. fwiw. (Don't go around kicking or being kicked there...it is so 'advanced'...it snaps back around again and actually looks kind of retarded. something ironic in that, i think)

David Orange
10-15-2009, 10:17 AM
The other thing you fail to understand is I have no conceptions, am just asking for a scientific explanation of how the facsia works to improve your martial arts technique, especially in Aikido.

Do you really want a "scientific" explanation? I really don't think it would do you much good.

I think what you're really looking for is a "rational" explanation in layman's terms, isn't it?

And that has been given repeatedly. You just seemed to have glazed over every time you've come across explanations and just skimmed over them without absorbing the ideas at all.

And what am getting is go feel it, much like the unbeliever who sits in the folding chair under the big white tent full of believers, listening to the Good O' Boy Southern Preacher saying, you must believe the in Jesus, and his power to heal.

The difference is that you can't get your hands on Jesus. All that's available from that approach is "mental" inspiration or "emotional" gratification. Maybe even spiritual uplifting. Whether any physical healing can be gained in a tent revival, in general, I doubt it.

However, you can get your hands on Dan, Mike or Ark and they can knock you across the mat with almost no movement. Why are you avoiding that experience? Be like a scientist and conduct some experiments with people known as experts. What kind of "scientist" would you be if you demanded all kinds of "explanations" of neurology but wouldn't go and meet any neurologists? You want them to explain all about how they do brain surgery without ever meeting them and observing what they do. So don't tell me you want "scientific" explanations that you clearly wouldn't understand when you can't even grasp layman's rational descriptions.

Maybe, I just should do what Borat did when he was in a similar situation. :)

Are you telling me your whole schtick is not an act? You really are like that? Because you come so close to Borat's character in every post you make that a lot of people really believe you're just spoofing everyone. Could anyone miss so many clear explanations?

Borat could....

Maybe you should go learn IT from him.

David

DH
10-15-2009, 10:37 AM
Mr. Harden,
I am sorry if you feel this is about you.
Don't play games with me. You started discussing me and my qualifications and authority to discuss what I do.
Frankly, I had more respect for you when you made your statements and stood by them, rather than this nonsense.

I will say this one more time, since you remain confused about my intent. I am not trying to convince you of anything, and I have no information I want to qualify for you or even want you to consider. Please leave me out of your dialogue.
Thank you
Dan

Kevin Leavitt
10-15-2009, 10:43 AM
Well I am/was not one to drink the Kool Aid or base things on faith, and I am very concerned with the whole "isn't this a cool trick" and "group think" mentality that can enter into martial arts so easily.

No, I need stuff to work and I have been fortunate enough to have a huge "laboratory" of soldiers and others in BJJ to show me the failures and shortcomings.

So in a sense, I do look at things "scientifically" or at least applied...I am not just doing the computer simulated modeling, theorectical discussions, or the "wind tunnel" testing...but developing my own assessment criteria and trying to learn what works for me and what doesn't.

My goal is focused on developing and harnessing methods of training that can be adapted for soldiers essentially and integrated into their training regimes.

Hence my comments on why I have not "come over" 100% to the IS side of the house as of yet.

That said, the time I have spent with these guys has been useful and I see great value in what they are doing, and while I am no "Internal Master" by any stretch of the imagination, there are somethings that I picked up and continue to pick up that have made me understand the dynamics better, and that I have been able to integrate into my own training with an immediate return on investment.

Yes, an immediate return on investment!

So, what is that 'hands on time" worth when you are considering ROI?

It is up to each individual to decide....

For me though, it has been worth the investment...what little I have put into it.

What is the correct ratio of time spent training? I am still figuring that out for myself as I believe everyone needs to.

For some that may be none...for others a little, and still for others...a full time investment.

And it may change over time.

When you finally feel the power from someone like Mike when he "pushes" in on your chest with very little movement and can knock you back and essentially hit your reset button....

Well I don't really need scientific proof or care what is going on internally. what I do is look practically at that.

How can I use that?

Welll on doing CQB..very helpful. Entering and clearning crowds...if I can maintain my base, reach up with minimal physical comittment and knock someone back...well I have use for that..

So once I have a practical use for that thing...then it comes down to .."okay, how to you get there?"

and now you are balancing priorities and deciding how to adopt/integrate training methods...which is the REAL challenge we face.

So, as far as "having faith" or determining "what is going on"...I tend to approach it from an application/tactical level of understanding.

Either way, it requires you to get out from behind the keyboard and develop a criteria for assessment that is physical in nature.

However, nothing is stopping you from dismissing it based on conversations and theorectical discussions.

It ain't like anyone is twisting your wrist and MAKING you accept this stuff. Drive on with your life if this ain't your thing!

David Orange
10-15-2009, 11:01 AM
The master explained, "...that the power comes from the internal, the chi, the organs the tendons...

Buck: tendons are fascia.

...nothing to do with the muscle."

Isn't that external? And there is nothing said about fasica, if the fasica is associated with muscle than it is disregarded with the muscle.

He didn't associate the fascia with the muscle. He differentiated it and place it with the organs and "the internal". Even though, as Mike pointed out, that particular approach is more external than the kind of "internal" associated with tai chi.

Now I see in the second vid how fasica is supporting they guy's posture, just as some people say it should. But, there is no explanation and stuff showing how the fasica is works to improve martial art technique.

There's another big misunderstanding. It's not that fascia improves "technique" per se. It's that proper use of the breath and reliance on fascia more than muscle improves the body and martial power. The improved body and supercharged power can produce superior technique, but the role of fascia is not so much directly in technique. It's above, below, before and after technique. It's like the water where the "fish" of technique lives. Much of why you don't understand is that you're looking at the technique instead of the body.

If the fasica works with the muscle, besides other things, and the fasica is one big thing, then the sections of fascia that works with muscle must be disregarded along with the muscle per the Master.

Again, you totally misunderstood the man's statement. He did not associate the tendons with the muscle but differentiated them.

Here's your rational explanation.

Part of the reason it's difficult to grasp is that while developed partially through solo training, the effects are seen in the interaction with another person. For analysis, say that person A is the IT man, and person B is a "normal" muscle-oriented person.

B pushes A.

A does not resist with muscle but lets his fascia-connected body (mediated by proper breathing) receive the push along a path through the body right into the ground. There is no way to do this purely with muscle because all the muscles are separate, unconnected items, but the fascia system does link up the whole body and can support paths through the body that allow the force to go straight to ground.

That is the vaunted ground path and, once one is familiar with it, it doesn't have to go directly through the body but can be maintained across spaces, such as from the hip to the forearm, as in the famous tai chi stance. If you let the fascia and the breath maintain the ground path, they will also mediate and distribute the proper and minimal muscle tonus through the whole body to do the work with as little effort as physically possible.

Person B, however, using only muscular effort to push against a solid ground path, finds himself subject to the law of physics which states that every action has an equal and opposite reaction and with no ground supporting him, he finds that he is literally pushing himself away from A just as if he were pushing a solid wall.

That is one weakness B creates in himself instantly by pushing against A's ground-supported structure.

Two more things can happen here: B can change his angle of attack and try to push in a different direction. This will only complicate his "equal and opposite reaction" and will change the organization of muscles required to make that push. Often, he will keep trying this until the "equal and opposite reaction" finds his weakest point and his stance and efforts completely collapse.

Or A can make small adjustments in his position, turning slightly from the waist, or pressing up or down into B's push and forcing B to change his angles, so that A "leads" his effort into "a hole" in B's stance, so that B's stance and power collapse.

To recap: A relies on whole-body fascia to mediate whole-body muscular tonus to channel incoming force directly to the ground.

B relies on coordinated use of muscles-only and pushes himself off balance because he is pushing against something completely supported by ground and he either exhausts himself uselessly or is subtly led into pushing directly back into his own weakest point, collapsing him.

MORE ADVANCED

That, of course, was a quick sketch of the basic concepts. The fascia also has the function, long described in the Chinese classics, of "carrying qi" or "carrying the intent".

Think of the feeling you get when you step into a tub of hot water. The instant your foot hits the water, your whole body tingles all over.

Intent is like that. The guy grabs your wrist and you can feel it through your whole body. You then feed your intent back into him and disrupt his own intent to break him down.

That's a very sketchy outline of how intent works and it's very advanced, so I won't try to go further with it.

Now if you say no one has rationally explained how the fascia is used in martial arts, you might really be Borat. You have only poor reading to blame if you don't get it.

David

David Orange
10-15-2009, 11:05 AM
@David: point made, by many, I think, that some things have to be felt to be learned or even understood, like describing colour to the blind. On the other hand, surely one can empathise with the blind person's desire to understand colour and their insistence on repeated description, even if it's impossible to understand from words alone?

Sure. I was there, myself, and words finally did help me to understand. However, if someone is "willfully blind" and just "baiting" people like Borat, there may be no hope. From Buck's comments and a couple of particularly swinish types on another thread, I'm beginning, for the first time on aikiweb, to believe I might just have to start an IGNORE list.

Thanks.

David

C. David Henderson
10-15-2009, 11:13 AM
For the sake of discussion, I concede there is no scientific proof to satisfy the skeptical consumer that it is the involvement of fascia that contributes characteristic x to action y when performed by someone well versed in "IS" and "IP."

I think this model is, however, more plausible if one understands some basic information about (a) the characteristics and role of fascia in movement and perception; and (b) the characteristics of effective movement from an "IT" perspective.

Keeping with an earlier comment and again for the sake of discussion, let me call (a) the "stick," and (b), the "moon."

In this thread, there are multiple ways to talk past one another, including use of the "no proof of this mechanism" trope as a stalking horse for the "no such phenomena exist to be studied" argument.

In essence, this is an argument that unless you can prove this "stick" is pointing at the "moon," having never seen the moon myself, I don't concede the moon exists (irrespective or how many reliable people report that it does).

As to the nature of the "moon," i.e., the characteristics of movement the fascia model is meant to (partially) elucidate, there are plenty of threads on this forum that contain detailed basic descriptions/discussions from people who train this way and know what they are talking about.

Even those who want "scientific proof" (and are not satisfied by ample "empirical evidence") that these methods have something to recommend them might benefit by understanding more of this basic discussion; its unclear whether people even are "pointing" to the same "moon" with the fascia "stick."

As to the element (a), the Anatomy Trains materials provide some background -- e.g., the tensile quality, strength, and mutability of fascia; their role in supporting the skeleton under gravity and in initiating movement; the interconnectedness ("lines" and "switches") of and in the network of fascial tissue that create this dynamic, tension-balanced structure; and the consequences of imbalance on well-being and performance.

Even those who want "scientific proof" that it is the action of fascial tissue (and not some other combination of factors) that contributes the amply documented characteristic x to action y might benefit by understanding some of this information more fully.

It's unclear to me that everyone is pointing, in other words, with the same conceptual "stick."

FWIW

cdh

DH
10-15-2009, 11:58 AM
David
I think you missed this in post #27
Really though it is only the first step. You can train fascia in tension or in "exercising" to your hearts content. You might get stronger and make a step toward IT but you won't ever really get there. There is much more to it than that. And DR teachers knew that as well. In / yo is (yin yang) not a just referred to as In... Yo. It is In Yo Ho (yin Yang method). The study of how to train the mind and body in sustained and trained opposition in movement is where you really start to get into the work. And it can get complex
I initially brought up the limits of fascia training for the simple reason that training it can produce effects that mimic IT but are really just very beginning level stuff. Moreover training fascia in certain ways can actually lead you astray, all while you are noticing that you are getting "stronger" and more "connected" to boot! In reality you are, but certain people who do "exercises" are really swapping one level of tension, for that of another kind. It still isn't really soft or internal, It gets confusing because both may feel "powerful," and a lot of people are fooled into thinking they are the same thing. For martial artists the first-which is easier to accomplish- may seem like the right road-why not, right? But it isn't the soft style of training where aikido came from (DR). Daito ryu (only the few good ones in it) is an exceedingly soft style and trains power through building the body in various ways, the use of spiral energy and in the use of breath-power through aiki in yo ho. It does not make use of tensioned facial lines.
I met a hung gar fellow; great guy, really good fighter trained all over the world, even did Mongolian wrestling in Russia! He did his version of what he considered internal really well. Then he met CXW. It wasn't that he thought CXW was "all that" over what he could deliver, but he recognized right away that it was a different power and he wanted to learn it. He had to start over, just like everyone else -to train soft.

The ground
Discussing bringing a path to the ground is fine, but in and of itself it is nothing more than a first step. Although I get people started that way (it is a step you have to take) I never "bring a path to the ground" and neither do a few VERY good ICMA teachers I have played with. There are other ways to train past that where the ground; while present is expressed in a different manner that is faster in response and more whole body in application. Same thing with how people load and release; there are ways to do that, that are NOT all the same. Transparent power has a distinct meaning that has not one thing to with sending a path to the ground. On the whole I would rather let your face pass right through me, while I enter in.
Anyway, finding people to train with who do this "stuff" is a great first step, but they are most assuredly not all doing the same 'stuff"even regarding fascial training, and not all of it relates to Aikido. Unlike some who have audacity to tell you what is what, I'll leave that up to you guys to figure out and decide on your own.
Cheers
Dan

Tim Fong
10-15-2009, 01:16 PM
Buck,
Can you explain to me what you mean by scientific proof?

Thanks,
Tim

Rob Watson
10-15-2009, 01:23 PM
I know fascia is getting the lime light right now, but there're other mechanics that comprise IS, .

No doubt (I half heartedly kept to the fascia thread topic, mostly).


Certain elements can be found in the animal kingdom as well...but you still need a foot in the door to recognize what's going on.

Cool! Now if I can just find that door I'll be sticking my foot in (maybe both, even).

Thanks

mathewjgano
10-15-2009, 01:47 PM
But it depended first on mentally recognizing a potential in the body, mentally identifying its workings and then physically/mentally refining that potential into various forms. It's the same thing with my old idea that "external" aikido technique developed from child movement and Dan's assertion that IS is "natural" but not "just natural" and that children do not have the capacity to develop it purely from their innate instincts of movement.
My one-legged theory:
It seems what we're talking about here is an innate system of load transference which is built into the physiology of all humans. All movement is brought about through both contraction and relaxation. Muscles require much less upkeep to use regularly so it only makes sense that they would be the primary system of movement (and thus the most obvious system of load transferal). The fascia in the body seems to explain a lot. As a structural "tie-together" it would seem to be a place where large loads could be handled...much like our bones except that fascia behaves as an elastic sort of semi-fuid. Since it can contract and relax, it can add to movement while bearing great load. Since it's elastic and spring-like there seems to be a natural force acceleration ability built into it. It seems like fascia is a good place to look for much of the dynamic found in physical aiki. My hunch is that these things are natural, just like our muscles which also require practice to make more perfect. Being a bit more subtle to movement, it requires more time spent paying attention and kids don't focus as well.

Ron Tisdale
10-15-2009, 02:16 PM
I wonder if there is going to be an echo.
PLONK.

There's your echo. Enjoy! :D

B,
R

thisisnotreal
10-15-2009, 02:27 PM
I don't have much more to contribute other than a sincere thank you. Truly. I want to express my ongoing gratitude, both to the big dogs (! very cool that you guys deign to post here), and to all the people who share their thoughts, investigations and time. I really enjoy congregating here with you and consider it an honor to be able to participate.

I would also like to point out, again, just what a strange existence this is... where the most objectionable and even downright rude people.. can serve as a focal point for, and even cause an advance in, discussion. Perhaps truly there are no vestigial organs...we each have our purpose. Even if it is only to serve as a bad example.

Best,
Josh

mathewjgano
10-15-2009, 02:32 PM
PLONK.

There's your echo. Enjoy! :D

B,
R

Ok ok...what's PLONK? Looking it up on wikipedia I see it can denote ignoring a poster (which is ironic) or essentially telling them to take a hike.

mathewjgano
10-15-2009, 02:37 PM
I don't have much more to contribute other than a sincere thank you. Truly. I want to express my ongoing gratitude, both to the big dogs (! very cool that you guys deign to post here), and to all the people who share their thoughts, investigations and time. I really enjoy congregating here with you and consider it an honor to be able to participate.

I would also like to point out, again, just what a strange existence this is... where the most objectionable and even downright rude people.. can serve as a focal point for, and even cause an advance in, discussion. Perhaps truly there are no vestigial organs...we each have our purpose. Even if it is only to serve as a bad example.

Best,
Josh

I like that. Thank you. Useful is as useful made.

Ron Tisdale
10-15-2009, 02:45 PM
Ok ok...what's PLONK? Looking it up on wikipedia I see it can denote ignoring a poster (which is ironic) or essentially telling them to take a hike.

In the old days PLONK was the sound of someone whose contributions were less than usefull hitting the bottom of your kill file on usenet. The kill file was used to filter out posts you pretty much knew you didn't need to read.

Personally, I don't use the ignore feature here anymore...there were one or two people that made it there at one time or another, but they either moved on, got better, or I relented out of that kind of sick fascination that makes you look at a fight in the school yard. :eek: I am reconsidering that...I may have to start using it again. When you type a 3 line post, and someone still doesn't read it...

You get the idea.

Best,
Ron

Mark Kruger
10-15-2009, 02:53 PM
You don't need to know about general and special relativity to use a GPS receiver. You don't need to understand quantum mechanics to use your computer. You can use crude models to do quite a bit. When I took a course in celestial navigation we still used an earth-centric model of the solar system and stars. I could get within a few miles of my actual location.

However, because you can do something with no or inaccurate understanding does not reduce the need for better models of the world. Imagine if we had stuck with the "bad air" theory of disease transmission or the four element theory of chemistry (five if you are chinese).

Having said that, I doubt most of the folks trying to come up with new models for IP. From what I've read here, either they are trying to discredit IP, or are stuck in some sort of Platoic mode where direct observational evidence and testing aren't needed, or lack the cross section of skills needed to investigate intelligently. It reminds me of any number of conversations I've had we folks with minimal science and math backgrounds about how general relativity can't work or how thoughts can affect objects at a quantum mechanical level.

Rob Watson
10-15-2009, 05:49 PM
You don't need to know about general and special relativity to use a GPS receiver. You don't need to understand quantum mechanics to use your computer.

GPS users will have precious little to contribute to the next generation GPS system or even a new and improved GPS receiver. That is what we are talking about - build the system so folks can learn to use it.

Thanks

Buck
10-15-2009, 06:59 PM
Don't forget feel. ;)

Very good point. Here is the issue with feel, do you recognize what is happening when you experience something as it should be or you don't and then try and come up with something to explain it. And the latter usually is framed in the abstract and not the concrete. The other thing is the person performing the technique can plant a suggestion in the mind of the individual to direct their explanation. This is so common in martial arts it goes un-noticed most of the time, as well as misdirection. These are factor that we have to consider.

Is it really the fasica, we real don't. We can speculation and theorize but that must be identified as such, and not confused with fact.

We really have to stop using Taoism (both Chinese and Japanese arts) models, framework, structures, and language to explain martial arts feats. It is archaic, out dated, and lends itself to be tools for deception and fraud, and most of all maintaining ignorance. Dan once said, in short, recently, that he will teach what the Japanese teachers are keeping secret. Part of that secret keep is using scientific langauge and in stead using metaphysical language.

*Personally, I don't think there is anything that hasn't already been discovered and isn't in the open already functioning that isn't readily accessible, when it comes to secrets in today's world. It may have a been a different story 50 years or more ago in Japan. That is a theory of mine, I have allot of confidence in. The best way to keep secrets now is not to explain things, and keep them private, and use obscure and archaic language and ideas which are embellished upon.

I got an email from a friend following this thread and responded to the point I made about the kid who could "locking up" his body and make is stiff as a board, and he said Harry Houdini had a feat that killed him. He challenge people to punch him in the gut and he wouldn't be hurt. Now, if that was in the martial arts, this could be called his chi is protecting him, it would be a highly sought after skill, but when Houdini wasn't ready some college kid hit him in the gut and it lead to his death. So, that truncated that skill right then and there. Martial arts are full of such performance/circus acts that are sold as martial arts feats indicating the strength of the martial artist. But, people still suck it up still after thousands of years. Martial artists with super human strength, skill, and what ever.

So it isn't just about feel. I can say, I take a punch to the gut and say my chi is protecting me. Is that true? Is that accurate? Or is that a great way to hide what am really doing, or what really is happening. If I go see the weeping statue of Mary, whose tears are of blood, do I believe it? I mean I seen it with my own eyes. Or if someone touches my neck and I black out and they say it was do to chi/ki or it is the interrupted energy meridian of my heart, do I believe it? Or do I say, statues can't weep blood, something is fishy. And in simply terms, say, the loss of conscious in the result of the interruption of blood and oxygen to the brain, and that if nerves signals experience an interruption and fail the result also can be loss of consciousness. Therefore, my vega nerve and my carotid artery artery experienced interruption do to a touch or strike.
Yea, it is easy to experience something and be told it is one thing, when possibility it is not, or yet has to be explained scientificially.

I have yet to see someone who really defies the limits and capabilities of being human. Until, then I will assume it is a perception issue. Some people believe it as it is told, some people don't. I believe 1/2 of what I see, hear, and experience. Until there is solid reliable proof, in form of a scientific explanation. Think about it what kind of Doctor would you go to, the one that practices and claims to heal you with invisible forces and sound all mystical with archaic Taoist language, who at best might rid you of a headache cause he relaxed you, and you where unaware he did so, or the one grounded in science and fact, and medical training. If it was my life hanging in the balance, say in a car accident, get me to the archaic room, where a doctor who went to an accredited medical school, has a Ph.D. was trained in the trenches of archaic room trauma, and is licensed to practice medicine. I don't care what the other so called-doctor claims he can do, or his patience testimonies are, get me to a real doctor.

It is common sense and general protocal to ask for the research, if they can't deliver fine, I will give it time. But, until then I can't by into it merely based on opinion, or what someone says it is. Ya got to have the studies.

We don't any more live in a world where we are told it is flat. It does looks flat doesn't it, as far as the eye can see no matter if we stand still or travel, we never see the curves of the earth when doing so, but we can circumnavigate it and photos from space show the earth is round, and not flat. :)

I suspect someone will say you can see the curves of the earth from a plane, or from reading specialized equipment. True you can, and thank you science. But, when I said, traveling I ment on foot or beast as they did when they believed the earth was flat, and if you believed differently and spoke aloud about it, you where tortured and or killed in the name of God.And I also mean even to day you can't see the curves of the earth when standing, walking, or driving.

And science does and has kept the frauds and ilk from propogating lies and stuff. It also works to support and give credit to those who are truely on to something or have something as well.

Buck
10-15-2009, 07:25 PM
Got timed out: And science does and has kept the frauds and ilk from propagating lies and stuff. It also works to support and give credit to those who are truly on to something or have something as well.

That is something we see throughout history and most importantly to day. Heck, if we didn't have scientific studies proving stuff, for example, the pharmaceutical industry would be like the cosmetics industry, no it would be worse. Look at Enzyte for example. http://erectile-dysfunction.emedtv.com/enzyte/does-enzyte-work.html
A news channel did a report and when the reporter called the company and said it didn't work and wanted the money back. The customer support, said if there was an erection any time after the pill was taken then it worked, refusing a refund.

So yea, scientific research is important. For those who think otherwise, the earth is still flat and the mood is made of cheese. ;) Good luck. :)

Demetrio Cereijo
10-15-2009, 07:26 PM
[I]I suspect someone will say you can see the curves of the earth from a plane, or from reading specialized equipment. True you can, and thank you science. But, when I said, traveling I ment on foot or beast as they did when they believed the earth was flat, and if you believed differently and spoke aloud about it, you where tortured and or killed in the name of God.And I also mean even to day you can't see the curves of the earth when standing, walking, or driving.


Bullpoo!!!

Who was tortured or put to death in the name of God for claiming the Earth was not flat?. Citations please.

David Orange
10-15-2009, 07:31 PM
David
I think you missed this in post #27

Dan,

thanks for the lot of clarification. I was just making an attempt to sketch a general outline of the very basic rationale of how fascia is used in MA so that Buck couldn't say no one had described any of it in "scientific" terms. Lord knows I can't do much of the IT at all, and I do realize that it's only a very general description. Also, I realize that the fascia is just one element among many involved, and that even at that, I haven't scratched the surface.

Looking forward to January.

David

Buck
10-15-2009, 07:42 PM
David, Dan, and others,

Good luck in your pursuits. I wish you the best. Please let me know when a published study is done, I would like to read it. :)

David Orange
10-15-2009, 07:46 PM
Ok ok...what's PLONK? Looking it up on wikipedia I see it can denote ignoring a poster (which is ironic) or essentially telling them to take a hike.

I only know it as referring to very low quality wine. "It was plonk."

Which often seems to fit well with Ron's usage.

David

David Orange
10-15-2009, 07:56 PM
David, Dan, and others,

Good luck in your pursuits. I wish you the best. Please let me know when a published study is done, I would like to read it. :)

Buck, (or should I say Borat?)

The I Ching has a line for most everything. Ancient martial arts and methods including aiki no in-yo ho were derived from deep consideration of its teachings.

Here is the one I think best applies to you:

It is not I who seek the young fool;
The young fool seeks me.
At the first oracle I inform him.
If he asks two or three times, it is importunity.
If he importunes, I give him no information.

After all this, you have finally convinced me that you don't deserve any further attention from anyone who knows anything and if you did find a really great teacher, he would teach everyone else in the class and just let you wonder what you're missing because he would teach the others in plain sight and you would never see it.

Tata.

David

Buck
10-15-2009, 08:24 PM
David,

You're saying then, you don't see any scientific studies coming forth in the future in the area of martial arts and the fasica. You are satisfied with the information you have, and the sourses and don't need to pursue knowledge anymore then you feel necessary, or go outside of your sourses. You are satisfied with all that. I respect that. Good luck, and good training.

Janet Rosen
10-16-2009, 12:35 AM
Buck: tendons are fascia.
David
Um...no, sorry. From an anatomy and physiology perspective, fascia is the thin connective tissue the totally encases each muscle - when you cut a steak apart it is that membrane stuff. WHen you've had surgery it gets cut and can create all kinds of pain and scarring and stiffness.
Tendons are the connective tissues that bind muscle to bone, the way ligaments bind bone to bone. Tendons are the things running through the top of your hand to each finger, letting the contraction of muscles in the forearm make your fingers move.

Walker
10-16-2009, 01:23 AM
Ligaments, tendons, and fascia differ in their function and not so much in their nature. Ligaments connect bone to bone, tendons connect bone to muscle, and fascia connect muscle to muscle. Other than that, they are made of the same kinds of stuff (collagen) and merge into one another when not sitting dissected on a table or in a book.

Janet Rosen
10-16-2009, 10:35 AM
Ligaments, tendons, and fascia differ in their function and not so much in their nature. Ligaments connect bone to bone, tendons connect bone to muscle, and fascia connect muscle to muscle. Other than that, they are made of the same kinds of stuff (collagen) and merge into one another when not sitting dissected on a table or in a book.
Being made of the same substance and yes, merging into each other, does not in my world make them the same thing; I stand by my statement that it is incorrect to say that what we call the fascia equals what we call a tendon.

David Orange
10-16-2009, 10:40 AM
You are correct on a technical level, but for IS purposes, "fascia" has been used to refer to the entire system of connective tissue, including the fascia, tendons, cartilage. But if we say "connective tissue," that includes the skin and we're really talking about the stuff under the skin that is neither muscle nor bone nor viscera nor blood vessels nor nerves. The more correct term would be "connective tissue". Others have pointed this out, but the term "fascia" has become pretty much interchangeable with "suit" and "connective tissue."

So "tendons" are included when the IS discussions refer generally to fascia because the fascial lines comprise all those elements to connect the various areas of the body.

Thanks.

David

Um...no, sorry. From an anatomy and physiology perspective, fascia is the thin connective tissue the totally encases each muscle - when you cut a steak apart it is that membrane stuff. WHen you've had surgery it gets cut and can create all kinds of pain and scarring and stiffness.
Tendons are the connective tissues that bind muscle to bone, the way ligaments bind bone to bone. Tendons are the things running through the top of your hand to each finger, letting the contraction of muscles in the forearm make your fingers move.

David Orange
10-16-2009, 10:42 AM
Ligaments, tendons, and fascia differ in their function and not so much in their nature. Ligaments connect bone to bone, tendons connect bone to muscle, and fascia connect muscle to muscle. Other than that, they are made of the same kinds of stuff (collagen) and merge into one another when not sitting dissected on a table or in a book.

Right, and that's how the Chinese classics use them. It's only important to differentiate them when you get down to specific joints. When referring to the whole connective trains, you have to include all the parts. It doesn't change the functioning for IS purposes, as far as I can tell.

David

David Orange
10-16-2009, 10:45 AM
Being made of the same substance and yes, merging into each other, does not in my world make them the same thing; I stand by my statement that it is incorrect to say that what we call the fascia equals what we call a tendon.

No, they don't. Neither does the shift stick equal the gears in a car, but they're all part of the drive train. You are correct that they are not the same, but we're not so much concerned with the parts as with the whole functioning unit and the connective tissues (including the skin) work as a discrete mechanism of the body like "the circulatory system" or the "nerve system," both of which include many differentiated parts that do not equal one another but which function together in a system separate from other discrete systems.

It's a loose term for the discussion's purposes, but technically you are correct.

David

David Orange
10-16-2009, 11:10 AM
You're saying then, you don't see any scientific studies coming forth in the future in the area of martial arts and the fasica.

Buck, are you a scientist? How many "scientific studies" have you done?

For the past decade, I've been deeply involved in studies of cancer, herbicide toxicity, diseases related to rubber tire manufacture, myasthenia gravis and others. That's all I do.

Who do you suppose would do a study of "fascia in 'internal' martial arts"?

Who would fund it?

What would be their research goals?

How would they determine their hypotheses and how would they measure their results?

I remember when I was very young, long before I was directly involved in research, when I used to come up with all kinds of ideas for "scientific studies" that should be done on various elements of martial arts. All it took was a few conversations with people actually involved in research to realize that your bird won't fly.

Dan and others have offered you a sword and you've pretty well cut both your own feet off with it, but you're demanding a sharper sword because the one that cut your feet off isn't sharp enough for you.

Zannen. Kawaiso Borat.

Ja ne.

David

C. David Henderson
10-16-2009, 11:26 AM
FWIW, and deferring to those with a better and more accurate understanding of the human body, I found fascinating the following,discussion, excerpted from page 170-71 of the link posted earlier (http://www.anatomytrains.com/uploads...nsOverview.pdf.). Among other things, and without negating the validity of Janet's distinction above, it suggests an ontogenic inter-relatedness of different types of "connective tissue" in addition to positing the sort of functional wholism to which David was referring.

Regards,

cdh

"[F]rom the central armature of the notochord (the embryological form of the vertebral bodies and discs), connective tissue spreads out to create protective sacs and nets around the cells, structures, and systems of the body, organizing stable mechanical relationships, allowing certain movements, and discouraging others. …

This system of connective tissue can be seen as our ‘organ of form' … The ability of connective tissue [creating] cells to alter and mix … water, the fibers, and the gluey ground substance gel of glycoaminoglycarts produces on demand [a] wide range of familiar building materials in the body -- bone cartilage, ligament, tendon, areolar and adipose networks -- all the varieties of biological fabric. The body's joints, the ‘organ of movement,' are almost entirely composed of extracelluar matrix constructed by the connective tissue cells."

Mike Sigman
10-16-2009, 11:31 AM
"Connective tissue" would be a better term to use than "fascia", in terms of the references/usages in qi/ki development. Of course there's a lot more to it than just "using" them. ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Rob Watson
10-16-2009, 01:10 PM
It's a loose term for the discussion's purposes, but technically you are correct.

David

"Connective tissue" would be a better term to use than "fascia", in terms of the references/usages in qi/ki development. Of course there's a lot more to it than just "using" them. ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Words and language are actually critical in these discussions. Criticism and clarification of terms is the basis for progress in the realm of discussion. This is especially important in multi-disciplinary discussion in which the same or very similar terms are actually used to describe/refer to completely different things - which happens very often. This type of thing happens even with specialized disciplines by those with different 'interprative lineages'.

It would be nice if the distillation of these threads that provide clarity on the distinctions find their way into the aikiwiki - seems to be an area that could use more participation.

So to the OP and topic: Fascia is this context has been used as a misnomer that actually refers to the collection of tissues that comprise the connective tissues and systems (primarily elements of the extracellular matrix) in the body. How these systems are used and/or developed are another matter.

Ron Tisdale
10-16-2009, 01:35 PM
Rob, what you just wrote would make a fine start! Go ahead and post it. ;)

Best,
Ron

Voitokas
10-16-2009, 01:35 PM
Indeed - it's confusing just within the scientific milieu, too, I guess. Blood is technically connective tissue, but no one really thinks of it that way. And while Janet is right that there are different names for structures made up of Type I collagen depending on where they are, you and the Davids are right that they are so connected that it's impossible to say where one begins and one ends. Connective tissue (medically, "connective tissue proper", i.e. excluding blood, bones, and teeth) is an intrinsic part of the musculoskeletal system. I'll defer to Mike S. on the best term for the ki/qi context, since many of us look to him and those few others who have trained so extensively in that area for a window into it - but from an outsider's point of view, "connective tissue" seems a pretty accessible handle.

thisisnotreal
10-16-2009, 01:46 PM
um...I disagree, respectfully, and challenge that.
Specifically I challenge that the strict categorization, naming, listing and definitions are needed ...right now.
I..er....am obviously not arguing that we need words to have a conversation or that we have to generally agree about what they mean; but that there is a danger in pulling out the microscope too soon.
For the average schmoe talking about things we can't do anyway now seems the time for brainstorming, serendipity, sharing, thinking laterally...being open. ....you know; remembering about seeing the forest for the trees. While nomenclature can keep you busy; it will kill the spirit. This is a continual danger in pursuing real science. Don't get lost because of your own noise... It is possible that your own guideposts become unintentional boundary markers.
While thinking and reflection are (as always critical) nomenclature , organization and rigid definitions and that kind of stuff are best left to the crusty museum curators.
Ducks don't like staying in their nice neat rows. At least not when there's a lot of action going on.

just feeling argumentative today. don't mind me.

Voitokas
10-16-2009, 01:55 PM
FWIW, and deferring to those with a better and more accurate understanding of the human body, I found fascinating the following,discussion, excerpted from page 170-71 of the link posted earlier (http://www.anatomytrains.com/uploads...nsOverview.pdf.). Among other things, and without negating the validity of Janet's distinction above, it suggests an ontogenic inter-relatedness of different types of "connective tissue" in addition to positing the sort of functional wholism to which David was referring.

Regards,

cdh

"[F]rom the central armature of the notochord (the embryological form of the vertebral bodies and discs), connective tissue spreads out to create protective sacs and nets around the cells, structures, and systems of the body, organizing stable mechanical relationships, allowing certain movements, and discouraging others. …

This system of connective tissue can be seen as our ‘organ of form' … The ability of connective tissue [creating] cells to alter and mix … water, the fibers, and the gluey ground substance gel of glycoaminoglycans produces on demand [a] wide range of familiar building materials in the body -- bone cartilage, ligament, tendon, areolar and adipose networks -- all the varieties of biological fabric. The body's joints, the ‘organ of movement,' are almost entirely composed of extracelluar matrix constructed by the connective tissue cells."

Interestingly, the ontogenic inter-relatedness they suggest is totally valid - but their vision of the actual embryology of it is kind of sketchy, being more a story of the beginnings of the mesentery and borrowing more from poetry than science. It's funny; I think that the real story is even more convincing in terms of conceiving as the musculoskeletal system as being all one - the lineages of bone, tendon, muscle etc. all start as the same kind of cell in the same place. As the embryo develops, populations of cells become more specific, differentiating into myotome (future muscle) and sclerotome (future bone) with mesenchyme all around. Populations of cells divide and grow and become more and more differentiated (different kinds of muscle cells or fibroblasts etc.), but they are developing together. And functionally, without any of those aspects, we wouldn't be able to move...

Mike Sigman
10-16-2009, 02:08 PM
Indeed - it's confusing just within the scientific milieu, too, I guess. Blood is technically connective tissue, but no one really thinks of it that way. And while Janet is right that there are different names for structures made up of Type I collagen depending on where they are, you and the Davids are right that they are so connected that it's impossible to say where one begins and one ends. Connective tissue (medically, "connective tissue proper", i.e. excluding blood, bones, and teeth) is an intrinsic part of the musculoskeletal system. I'll defer to Mike S. on the best term for the ki/qi context, since many of us look to him and those few others who have trained so extensively in that area for a window into it - but from an outsider's point of view, "connective tissue" seems a pretty accessible handle.This is all an interesting topic and it's far more extensive than the elementary discussions here, but let's save a lot of it until there are more and more-complete skills out there. The one point I'd make is that "collagenous structures" is indeed a broad topic and even bone is, what, about 50% collagen? So your above exclusion prompts me to point out that this is a fairly complex topic.

Incidentally, there's an almost immutable logic to these things and how they work. And various training regimens aren't necessarily going to address the whole logic and spectrum of possibilities. On the other hand, I'm interested in watching the various competitive factions that are now in the horse race. This cannot help but be good for Aikido, having a number of different "sources" each trying to be the best and the most knowledgeable. Someone should keep notes of these times for later chronicling. ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

DH
10-16-2009, 02:16 PM
The Japanese and Chinese (who defined such things as tendon changing) both discovered and successfully taught how to do these things with training methods that were reliant upon intent and feel within the body more so then some western methods of "proving" what connected what.
I only mention fascia and anatomy trains as they help define certain paths. While they helped define some basic paths, knowing them in detail will not help one wit with how to train them or show where they aid you in mutually supporting each path and the whole body. They do not cover a training regimen to feel connections and strengthen connections with the breath and extremeties while avoiding the use of muscle either.
Everyone knows about your lungs and Diaphragm, and even the "idea" of moving from the center as well. I can point you to hundreds of thousands of words written about them, as well as Chinese classical internal training methods, that from my experience so far, hasn't helped the majority of JMA or ICMA'ers much at all. They all pretty much continue to flounder around using muscle and jacking up at hips and shoulders and approaching their arts like any good athlete would

And ounce of good intent instruction is worth a pound of knowledge about anatomy.
Cheers
Dan

Voitokas
10-16-2009, 02:33 PM
An ounce of good intent instruction is worth a pound of knowledge about anatomy.
That's for sure! And thinking about something is worth a whole lot more when one has some instruction to base it on..

thisisnotreal
10-16-2009, 03:12 PM
Here is some interesting stuff ...


1. Check out the 'suit' of thoracolumbar fascia< (http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article//lats_not_just_for_pulldowns) Takes on a new meaning, eh? I like how he discusses running.
btw; that lead me to a whole bunch of other cool stuff about how the SI joint works (force closure, (counter/)nutation, etc.)

2. secret method? (http://wujimon.com/chen-fake-silk-reeling-power-exercise) ?

3. And this was interesting...an example of fascia as a force conduit...

As we walk, we swing one leg and the opposite arm forward in what is termed counter rotation. Just prior to foot strike, the hamstrings become active. The DLS [deep longitudinal sling], uses the thoracolumbar fascia and paraspinal muscle system to transmit kinetic energy above the pelvis, while using the biceps femoris as a communicating link between the pelvis and lower extremity. For example, Vleeming shows that the biceps femoris communicates with the peroneus longus at the fibular head, transmitting approximately 18% of the contraction force of the biceps femoris through the fascial system into the peroneus longus.
From< (http://www.enhancedfp.com/training/outer-unit-paul-chek)

4.An interview I liked with CXW himself< (http://taijiyang.wordpress.com/2007/11/09/discussions-with-chen-xiaowang/)

5. Another interesting thread (http://tnation.tmuscle.com/free_online_forum/blog_sports_training_performance_bodybuilding_alpha/fascia_what_it_is_and_why_you_need_to_know_about_it)

... that won't help at all!

Rob Watson
10-16-2009, 07:36 PM
just feeling argumentative today. don't mind me.

Mongo no like words.

Sure, then throw out " thoracolumbar" ya old sandbagger.

Sorry, I sometimes can't help myself. Quick, hide my keyboard before I post again!

Janet Rosen
10-16-2009, 08:01 PM
I am always willing to accept that within a particular subgroup or culture, words may be understood to have a different meaning, and I thank David and others who were able to go into the depth of that.

As it relates to TCM and the Asian conception of the body, I find it very interesting - a book I've read through carefully twice now and will no doubt reread one day soon - HIGHLY recommended - is The Expressiveness of the Body and the Divergence of Greek and Chinese Medicine (http://www.amazon.com/Expressiveness-Divergence-Greek-Chinese-Medicine/dp/0942299892/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255741275&sr=8-1) by Shigehisa Kuriyama

David Orange
10-16-2009, 08:19 PM
Sounds like a very interesting book.

Of course, my part in this is just an effort to organize some of the ideas I've gleaned from paying a lot of attention to the people who actually have the skills. I don't. But I'm trying to understand and as Mike and Dan have both pointed out, it's far more complex than the little outlines I've made.

I just think its something worthy of a lot of attention and especially of meeting and training with those who do have the skills.

Best to all.

David

Mike Sigman
10-16-2009, 08:36 PM
As it relates to TCM and the Asian conception of the body, I find it very interesting - a book I've read through carefully twice now and will no doubt reread one day soon - HIGHLY recommended - is The Expressiveness of the Body and the Divergence of Greek and Chinese Medicine (http://www.amazon.com/Expressiveness-Divergence-Greek-Chinese-Medicine/dp/0942299892/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255741275&sr=8-1) by Shigehisa KuriyamaIn some ways the perspective on the human body is important and unique, in respect to the Asian view. Neither the western nor the Asian view was without faults, glitches, and errors, of course, but ultimately it needs to be recognized that the ancient view of qi/ki as having an etheric flow component simply didn't work... the Law of Thermodynamics in re the conservation of energy simply precludes many of the claims about qi/ki. Hence, modern Asia uses the principles of western physics, etc., and Beijing has numerous western-medicine hospitals, as well.

The Asian view of the body had a lot to do with strength and health. Qi and body strength always go hand in hand; even a western weight-lifter develops "qi" in the classical sense, even though it may not be useful in the "internal strength" sense. The 'divergence' of the two medical views is an interesting aspect to look at philosophically, but the critical element about the internal strength discussions is in regard to the methods used and the body-mechanics of internal strength... not the perspectives.

Regardless of the language or the medical perspective, the ancient Asians noticed some real physical phenomena that tends to elude western physiologists because western physiology neglected to view the fascial structures as parts of the overall strength equations. Incidentally, let me suggest that the overall complexity of these types of strengths is greater than the discussions on AikiWeb suggests.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

thisisnotreal
10-16-2009, 10:03 PM
Do you think it will change, Mike?

Rob Watson
10-16-2009, 11:11 PM
Incidentally, let me suggest that the overall complexity of these types of strengths is greater than the discussions on AikiWeb suggests.

Do you think it will change, Mike?

I suspect that until the affects, properties and effects of the various factors that are distinctive of the various levels mentioned there will be little more than more talking in circles around each other. This is exactly what the call for clarification and terminology is about. As others have suggested maybe we are not quite ready for that but certainly we can all appreciate the need and take stock of where the current state of affairs rests for the time being.

Not being one of the informed I still can glean from the posting that there most likely is a real difference between aiki, internal strength and internal power, and the other 'terms' that have been floating about. I suggest that until these are enumerated and described in a way that is more complete than currently is evident we are back to that talking circle game.

I'm content for now to presume that we are not there yet but I hope y'all don't mind an occasional 'are we there yet?' in the interim.

Thanks

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 08:20 AM
Not being one of the informed I still can glean from the posting that there most likely is a real difference between aiki, internal strength and internal power, and the other 'terms' that have been floating about.

Well, I've heard people try to argue that "Ki" is actually different from "Qi"... yet when you begin dissecting the terms and looking for any real differences there are none. At best there are some *perceived* differences because people didn't really understand Ki/Qi so they built up differences in their mind. The greater the misunderstanding, the greater the differences *appear*.

The same thing is true with these ongoing (and amateurish) discussions about ki, "aiki", kokyu, "tendon changing", fascia, and so on. There are only a few basic principles defining all the terms and if there appear to be differences, it's because people don't understand the larger picture, yet. I think some of these threads should be archived in special places, though, so that people can come back and understand that some of the *experts* five-years from now were only getting their foot in the door today. It will be part of the fun. ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

DH
10-17-2009, 08:54 AM
The same thing is true with these ongoing (and amateurish) discussions about ki, "aiki", kokyu, "tendon changing", fascia, and so on. There are only a few basic principles defining all the terms and if there appear to be differences, it's because people don't understand the larger picture, yet. I think some of these threads should be archived in special places, though, so that people can come back and understand that some of the *experts* five-years from now were only getting their foot in the door today. It will be part of the fun. ;)

FWIW
Mike Sigman
True
The premier repository of amateurish and tedious discussion-the nejia list- bore evidence to that. There are other lists and forums equally inane and tedious. I encourage everyone to peruse these discussions and then go feel those -in- the discussions. Make sure to find "real experts" as well. It's all an eye opener; "supposed" experts and "supposed" amateurs alike.
There are plenty of them.
Make a list and save some of the comments from certain people.
If the humor of the idea offered that "No one can really see or understand beyond their current level of exposure" hasn't escaped you, then reading the many highly debated, yet classified as... "larger picture discussions" taking place among "self-professed amateurs" should prove very entertaining.
Not all is as it appears, then again maybe it is.

Knowledge is an interesting thing; it can be empowering and it can be a labyrinth of useless information. Then again even good information can be useless information at the same time when it comes to physical skills. Keep checking people out; Real experts; with both knowledge and skills, in the Japanese or Chinese arts- are getting harder to find.
Cheers
Dan

DH
10-17-2009, 09:36 AM
http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6656
They, are watching -our- discussions
You won't do much better there, than here as far as who actually has something-as opposed to people just talking your ears off about what they think they "know."
The smart guys over there are even MORE jaded than people here. Some have been all over the world, and have trained with Internal power, master-level teachers, others with high level DR and aikido teachers and have seen the majority of their fellow MA'ers ...miss it. In general most -of them-are students and teachers of the internal Chinese arts and they argue about what constitutes "internal power" all the time.
Every once in a great while there is some interesting discussion.

As always IHTBF includes every supposed amateur and expert you can find. Don't trust in single sources get out there and compare and work on you.
Cheers
Dan

Buck
10-17-2009, 09:47 AM
Well, I've heard people try to argue that "Ki" is actually different from "Qi"... yet when you begin dissecting the terms and looking for any real differences there are none. At best there are some *perceived* differences because people didn't really understand Ki/Qi so they built up differences in their mind. The greater the misunderstanding, the greater the differences *appear*.

The same thing is true with these ongoing (and amateurish) discussions about ki, "aiki", kokyu, "tendon changing", fascia, and so on. There are only a few basic principles defining all the terms and if there appear to be differences, it's because people don't understand the larger picture, yet. I think some of these threads should be archived in special places, though, so that people can come back and understand that some of the *experts* five-years from now were only getting their foot in the door today. It will be part of the fun. ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

I would like to jump in here real quick and make comment. I think it is important. Sometime we get caught up in that ancient mystical, magical world of martial arts, and forget that world isn't the real world works.

Rob makes a good strong reasonable point in his comments that is very grounding. It is something I echo, only as being a reasonable person.

Mike, I think your comments here really encapsulate an important point in discussing *perceived* differences and that of(amateurish) discussions.

If anything in this world is going to be seen as or be credible it has to go through scrutiny. The martial arts world is full of misinformation, myth, miscommunication, and ignorance. All of which has been around for hundreds of centuries, resulting in so much of it, that there needs to be a beacon for truth, fact, proper information and communication. That is the role of scientific investigation.

Many other people, and rightly so, feel the only benchmark or test needed is the old standby. That credibility of a theory goes to the last guy standing (consider experiencing or seeing a feat can be faked and the follow applies to the frauds), resulting in if he says it is chi or god's power, then that is what it becomes, thus a fact. Amazed by such a feat, multitudes of people flock eagerly and naively to him to learn his skill for themselves. This creates an instant acceptance of what ever he tells the result of his skill is, how it works, and how he did it. In the the martial arts it is the tool of myth and misinformation that hides it all. But, what these people fail to realize is, he isn't going to give it all away and lose his importance, no matter who he is or what he proclaims. This does give credibility to only the fact, that he is the last man standing, his skill.

It can't be seen as an unreasonable request to ask for scientific clarification, understanding, a demystification of something, especially if it is something new, before it is declared fact, real, more than a hypothesis. This is done for all the obvious and mentioned reasons. Let me highlight a very important reason for this, it can give solid and grounded credibility. But, on the downside it can prove it otherwise.

I think it is fair if those who can't get or are able to prove scientific study state that, and judgement suspended. But the issue there is there is no instant credibility. I think that is why so many turn to the "ancient" frameworks as for some reason we all feel if it was practice by ancient peoples its got to be credible. Even though those ancient people knew far less of themselves, and the world around them then we do today. That isn't to say they didn't contribute to what we know today. But to say that their knowledge and methods of themselves and the world where not as complete as today, just as ours will be tomorrow.

In closing, what Rob and Mike said in their last posts has to be really seen as the normal. And also what I have been saying, scientific study (even though it isn't as romantic and entertaining as myth) has a place in martial arts. The benefits of doing so out-weight not doing so. Finally the don't call boxing "The Sweet Science" for nothing.

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 09:56 AM
http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6656
They, are watching -our- discussions
You won't do much better there, than here as far as who actually has something-as opposed to people just talking your ears off about what they think they "know."
The smart guys over there are even MORE jaded than people here. Some have been all over the world, and have trained with Internal power, master-level teachers, others with high level DR and aikido teachers and have seen the majority of their fellow MA'ers ...miss it. In general most -of them-are students and teachers of the internal Chinese arts and they argue about what constitutes "internal power" all the time.
Every once in a great while there is some interesting discussion.

As always IHTBF includes every supposed amateur and expert you can find. Don't trust in single sources get out there and compare and work on you.At one time I'd met a number of the people who posted a lot on Empty Flower, before they had their hugely childish, name-calling break-up and part of them became Rum Soaked Fist (a telling choice of names, eh?). I.e., I actually "felt" a lot of people who you point out as "have been all over the world, and have trained with Internal power, master-level teachers, others with high level DR and aikido teachers and have seen the majority of their fellow MA'ers ...miss it." I've spent a lot of time in martial-arts and read a ton of credentials and yet most of these people I've met can't perform simple jin tests, much less move with qi and dantien. So the idea that the judgement of people on any current public martial-arts forum is something to worry about is unfounded. Name me someone on that forum you think has good qi/jin skills. Other than that, why worry about them lurking on a public discussion?

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 10:44 AM
I've posted this before, but here it is again, since it's relevant to the topic:

Membrane

(Extracted from the "Yi Jin Jing")

A man's body consists of the entrails, spirit, and virility internally; and
of the arms, legs, tendons, bones, and flesh externally. For example,
tendons and bones are outside the entrails, flesh is outside the tendons and
bones. Blood vessels are inside the flesh. But Qi is the dominant factor
for one's physical movement. Thus the secret for cultivating one's physical
and mental capabilities is to improve one's Qi and to invigorate one's blood
circulation. One's spirit and virility are invisible or untouchable, but
one's tendons, bones, and flesh are substantial. To cultivate internal
spirit and virility, one must start doing the practice of the substantial
parts of his body first. Therefore, one should not practice the invisible
and untouchable spirit and virility only or just practice the tendons,
bones, and flesh. The practice of one's body must go along with the
practice of one's spirit and virility. Because of this, the practice of
internal work should be done in thie sequence: Qi, membrane, tendon.

While the practice of the tendon is easy, the practice of the membrane is
difficult, and the practice of Qi is more difficult. Students must start
practicing from Qi first in order to keep Qi moving everywhere within their
bodies. The membrane will stretch automatically at the place where Qi
reaches and be as strong as tendons. If one practices tendons without doing
the practice of the membrane, the membrane will be weak. If he practices
membrane without doing the practice of Qi, his membrane and tendons will not
stretch. If he practices Qi without doing the practice of the tendon and
membrane, the Qi will not circulate smoothly within his body and his tendons
will not be strong. To achieve the practice of internal work, one must keep
doing it until his tendons and membranes stretch and become strong.
Otherwise it would be like plants on the ground without dirt.

thisisnotreal
10-17-2009, 10:51 AM
interesting convergence.

George S. Ledyard
10-17-2009, 11:45 AM
How do you know he didn't use it? How do you know he didn't view it under some other name, as part of some other concept?

Any more than I can say he *did* use it. How would I know?

I think we should be carefull of categorical statements like this. Just my thoughts...
Best,
Ron

No, Ron you ar right on this... Daito Ryu definitely is aware of fascial connection. This statement is just wrong.
- George

Buck
10-17-2009, 12:21 PM
No, Ron you ar right on this... Daito Ryu definitely is aware of fascial connection. This statement is just wrong.
- George

George,

I would like to know more about this, can you direct me to your sourses? Which of course would prove my statement wrong. :)


FWIW I am not against being wrong, and gladly acknowledge that if correctly proven wrong.

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 01:34 PM
It can't be seen as an unreasonable request to ask for scientific clarification, understanding, a demystification of something, especially if it is something new, before it is declared fact, real, more than a hypothesis. This is done for all the obvious and mentioned reasons. Let me highlight a very important reason for this, it can give solid and grounded credibility. But, on the downside it can prove it otherwise.
.

Too many Rob's to keep them all straight! I, however, don't presume to claim words being but into my mouth but FWIW I am NOT asking for demystification (this word carries too many negative connotations that I do not ascribe to the ongoing discussion) and I am NOT disputing the 'fact' of the existence of the topic.

I am perfectly happy to concede the matter is on plenty firm ground based on the claims and assertions made by those that have felt it. The IHTBF claim is, in fact, the basis upon which observation and the scientific method can begin to work (science must be based on observation or is quickly devolves into something less than useless). If the IHTFB group cannot, or will not, join with the 'science' group then we 'science guys' have to join the IHTBF group and get on with IT. I'm working on that ...

As for Mr. Sigman's 'levels and understanding' and Mr. Harden's poke at it I concur more with the latter then the former. One certainly can see far while standing on top of a mountain but simply bending ones neck and looking upwards works pretty good too. The view is certainly different between the two but it is worse to walk about looking mostly at our feet.

Thanks

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 01:47 PM
I've posted this before, but here it is again, since it's relevant to the topic:

Membrane

(Extracted from the "Yi Jin Jing")

A man's body consists of the entrails, spirit, and virility internally; and
of the arms, legs, tendons, bones, and flesh externally. For example,
tendons and bones are outside the entrails, flesh is outside the tendons and
bones. Blood vessels are inside the flesh. But Qi is the dominant factor
for one's physical movement. Thus the secret for cultivating one's physical
and mental capabilities is to improve one's Qi and to invigorate one's blood
circulation. One's spirit and virility are invisible or untouchable, but
one's tendons, bones, and flesh are substantial. To cultivate internal
spirit and virility, one must start doing the practice of the substantial
parts of his body first. Therefore, one should not practice the invisible
and untouchable spirit and virility only or just practice the tendons,
bones, and flesh. The practice of one's body must go along with the
practice of one's spirit and virility. Because of this, the practice of
internal work should be done in thie sequence: Qi, membrane, tendon.

While the practice of the tendon is easy, the practice of the membrane is
difficult, and the practice of Qi is more difficult. Students must start
practicing from Qi first in order to keep Qi moving everywhere within their
bodies. The membrane will stretch automatically at the place where Qi
reaches and be as strong as tendons. If one practices tendons without doing
the practice of the membrane, the membrane will be weak. If he practices
membrane without doing the practice of Qi, his membrane and tendons will not
stretch. If he practices Qi without doing the practice of the tendon and
membrane, the Qi will not circulate smoothly within his body and his tendons
will not be strong. To achieve the practice of internal work, one must keep
doing it until his tendons and membranes stretch and become strong.
Otherwise it would be like plants on the ground without dirt.

The above still seems consistent with my attempted summary in posy #107. The 'membrane' falls within that group belonging to the extracellular category. The distinction between what it is and how one uses it (for IT, etc) still stands awaiting clarification.

I think we can all agree that the spirit and virility parts stand further 'afield' from the basic physical 'parts' and is considerably less able to be subjected to the scientific method (at least for the time being). Nevertheless I fell compelled to inject my pittance and suggest that the concepts of intent, mental visualization of action and the purpose of ones activities may well fall into this catergory (of spirit and virility) and serve well in clarification.

Thanks

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 01:55 PM
The above still seems consistent with my attempted summary in post #107. Do you understand what the monograph is actually referring to, Rob? ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 02:26 PM
Do you understand what the monograph is actually referring to, Rob? ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

Man, I'm really in a mood today! I just had so many replies that really are not fit for human consumption.

For now suffice to say, no, I have not read "Yi Jin Jing". Perhaps you would be so kind as to refer me to your favorite english translation (there seem to be countless offerings on the web, some including DVD's) so I can read up?

Thanks

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 02:45 PM
Do you understand what the monograph is actually referring to, Rob? ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

On second thought ... that is a joke right! Sometimes I'm slow like that. Since the "Yi Jin Jing" was originally written in ancient sanskrit and the original meaning has been lost all we have is kind of second rate guesses at what it really means so .... of course this is open for debate as well.

The best I can answer is I have Dr. Yang, Jwing-Mings Qigong: The secret of youth (which is his take on "Yi Jin Jing" and the bone marrow washing business), The essence of Shaolin White Crane and his DVD on the same. Hidden but not really in plain sight (behind some other stuff) and yes, I have read those materials. Perhaps you care to reiterate your comments about the utility of these materials?

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 03:06 PM
On second thought ... that is a joke right! Sometimes I'm slow like that. Since the "Yi Jin Jing" was originally written in ancient sanskrit and the original meaning has been lost all we have is kind of second rate guesses at what it really means so .... of course this is open for debate as well.

The best I can answer is I have Dr. Yang, Jwing-Mings Qigong: The secret of youth (which is his take on "Yi Jin Jing" and the bone marrow washing business), The essence of Shaolin White Crane and his DVD on the same. Hidden but not really in plain sight (behind some other stuff) and yes, I have read those materials. Perhaps you care to reiterate your comments about the utility of these materials?Well, I was just responding to your statement that what was in the monograph is consistent with something you'd already written.... indicating that you understood the monograph, as I read it. Bear in mind that I'm a very literal reader with a background in the physical sciences (as you have, also).

YJM's book is worth having because it is a best-guess translation of some very old texts (YJM did not do the translating and he didn't really give credit proplerly to the man that did it). YJM's personal interpretations are sketchy, so I don't pay much attention to them. Regardless, the descriptions in the old texts are almost all useless because of the vague and general way that they describe things. It's a case of "if you don't already know the subject, none of the descriptions means much".

Anyone who has researched the "fascia" topic back to the Neijia List days (as Dan indicates he has) knows that the topic can boringly lead nowhere in most discussions because people don't understand the full depth of the subject. As the topic is now being treated, "fascia" is being used as a variant of training that is common in Shaolin martial-arts. It (the subject of "fascia") can get so tricky, though, that there's no way to adequately discuss it in writing to people who have had no feel/demonstration of what can be done and the various approaches. Give it a few years... things will improve. ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 03:20 PM
Well, I was just responding to your statement that what was in the monograph is consistent with something you'd already written.... indicating that you understood the monograph, as I read it. Bear in mind that I'm a very literal reader with a background in the physical sciences (as you have, also).

Mike Sigman

My bad. What I meant was the membrane snippet (not the monograph) and the use of the term membrane seems to fit into that category of extracellular materials that comprise the connective tissues - whether membrane=fascia I cannot tell. Not to mention my general understanding of the YJM material is a bit hazy-it has been a while. "Yi Jin Jing" <> YJM's materials notwithstanding.

My other comments are simply idle speculation (re: spirit & virility).

I can say the the hand excersizes (as described by YJM) have helped in improving my grip strength (although the practice did reinjure one of my previously broken knuckles). Word to the rest - punching really hard materials really strongly will result in something becoming broken.

If you have some reference(s) that you consider better than YJM's works ...

Thanks

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 04:04 PM
Do you understand what the monograph is actually referring to, Rob? ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

Not to beat a dead horse ...
"Yi Jin Jing" could be considered one of the original books on IT. It could also be considered as just a physical training manual for lazy monks who are want to sit about meditating and getting stiff with poor muscle tone and really has nothing to do with IT at all.

According to YJM it is part of a method to live to be 200 years old. Not really about IT so much as general good health and longevity. Perhaps a side effect of such health practices are unusual modes of strength that could be classified at IT.

Naturally, it is plainly obvious, the missing companion book ("Xisuijing") has the secret decoder ring in which all the questions are answered to full satisfaction for all. More likely "Xisuijing" is IT and "Yi Jin Jing" is external. The real question is what ever happened to the book "Unification of internal and external" ?

Thanks

brian p
10-17-2009, 04:06 PM
We really have to stop using Taoism (both Chinese and Japanese arts) models, framework, structures, and language to explain martial arts feats. It is archaic, out dated, and lends itself to be tools for deception and fraud, and most of all maintaining ignorance. Dan once said, in short, recently, that he will teach what the Japanese teachers are keeping secret. Part of that secret keep is using scientific langauge and in stead using metaphysical language. [/I]

Phillip,
Before taking exception with the above quote I would like to point out something... science is a specific method which is utilized to produce theories and presumed facts which do not vary appreciably based on the opinions and wishes of the observer.
I whole-heartedly agree with your objections to the conflation of pseudo-science (pop-sci use of anatomical terminology and concepts) with "internal stuff".
However one of science's most valuable features is that it is allowed, encouraged, heck *required*, that the scientist be able to say "there is insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion".
A scientist may find theology fascinating as an intellectual exercise but when people start talking about a Higgs boson as the "god particle" a scientist has the responsibility to interject with a simple "this is an idea which, however tantalizing, is not presently supported by the evidence".

And yet.. despite the very laudable interjections you have made on this thread (i.e. the "may I see the peer-reviewed verifiable evidence for these pop-sci notions regarding internal power") the above quote is something which I (as a scientist) need to take objection to.
"We really have to stop using Taoism (both Chinese and Japanese arts) models, framework, structures, and language to explain martial arts feats."

If evidence is insufficient to elevate (I use the term in a knowing biased manner) a field of study or inquiry to the level of reproducible, verifiable, experimental inquiry.. then we must not compromise science by attempting to include that which manifestly, by science's own rules, is not a suitable subject of inquiry.
If someone is talking about "the fascia of God" then science needs to say "this is not something science has anything to say about, other than it seems incompatible with our present understanding of cosmology".
The scientist does NOT need to say "well we need to stop talking about God in theological terms and use more anatomical terminology.. Let's also discuss the cerebrum of God and his vascular network".
The scientist should say "this is not science, despite the inclusion of the term *fascia*, it doesn't meet the evidential standards of scientific inquiry". Period.

Utilizing Daoist metaphors and cosmology is NOT science. It's not supposed to be.
And trying to dispense with the cosmology and terms in favor of "science" impoverishes culture UNTIL such time as the subject under consideration (internal martial arts in this case) can be investigated by scientific methods.

Yes, call people to account for trying to conflate science and archiac stuff (they are trying to have their mystic cake and scientifically derive nutrition from it).

But please DON'T suggest flensing a beloved tradition because it is not what it is not.

Gongfu (and whatever the JMA equivalent for this idea is) is not about science. And until science can provide a better alternative ( like it has done in biology, neuroscience, physics, medicine etc.) then leave gongfu for the people who love it *on it's own terms*!.

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 04:12 PM
Not to mention my general understanding of the YJM material is a bit hazy-it has been a while. "Yi Jin Jing" <> YJM's materials notwithstanding. The Yi Jin Jing (Tendon Changing Classic) is considered a baseline Shaolin (external martial arts) exercise from which many improvements and permutations came over time. However "tendon changing" is comparatively coarse and is somewhat removed from the "softer" methods of exercising and exactly the things they develop. I doubt Ueshiba exercised in the Yi Jin Jing mode. I see some indications about some of the ways he trained and I think it will be an interesting discussion someday. But not yet. Why worry about the fifth hill in the road ahead when you're only at the first one? ;)
If you have some reference(s) that you consider better than YJM's works ...
I really don't know of any. Well, hmmmm.... The closest book would be Mantak Chia's book "Iron Shirt Chi Kung I", but it's a sort of hash/melange of stuff that you need someone to explain more clearly than is in the book, if you want to derive physical benefit. However, the general principles might be worth looking at. Even though they appear to have nothing to do with anything ever heard of in Aikido, they do... because the logic is a closed matrix of interrelated phenomena.

Best.

Mike

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 04:22 PM
Not to beat a dead horse ...
"Yi Jin Jing" could be considered one of the original books on IT. It could also be considered as just a physical training manual for lazy monks who are want to sit about meditating and getting stiff with poor muscle tone and really has nothing to do with IT at all. Well, I wouldn't believe all the old legends as being accurate reflections of history. Let's just leave it that it was an old form of exercise. However, many of the even older texts are just missing due to purges, book-burnings, time, etc., so no one really has a clear idea of the exact history. The pictures, etc., from the tomb at Mawangdui indicates strongly that these body-training methods are much older than anyone thought before ( see: Yang Sheng Fang manuscript).
According to YJM it is part of a method to live to be 200 years old. Not really about IT so much as general good health and longevity. Perhaps a side effect of such health practices are unusual modes of strength that could be classified at IT. I wouldn't put too much faith on the guess about the longevity method. Let's just say the Yi Jin Jing is a strength trainer and health ensues.

Naturally, it is plainly obvious, the missing companion book ("Xisuijing") has the secret decoder ring in which all the questions are answered to full satisfaction for all. More likely "Xisuijing" is IT and "Yi Jin Jing" is external. The real question is what ever happened to the book "Unification of internal and external" ?
The Xisuijing is the "Marrow Cleansing" exercise and despite a lot of texts on it, no one knows for sure exactly how it was done. A lot of people have their guesses out there as "the original knowledge", but there's a lot of variation. If I were to enter my guess, I'd say generally that the Yi Jin Jing is where the conversation and training methods are at the moment (on AikiWeb and in some of the training methods) and the Xisuijing is the softer methods that come later. The question, though, is what method did Ueshiba use, isn't it? ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

thisisnotreal
10-17-2009, 04:30 PM
If you have some reference(s) that you consider better than YJM's works (http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6656&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15#p111912)
Sounds interesting...

Rob Watson
10-17-2009, 04:36 PM
Why worry about the fifth hill in the road ahead when you're only at the first one? ;)

It is nice to know the hazards on the road ahead so one can prepare accordingly. Nothing worse that coming to the ravine and wishing one had only known about that before leaving the house that day. Kind of makes the journey so far a waste of time/effort to get to the ravine are no help in getting across.

Anyway, I'm under no illusion that there is quite a bit of work to go and it may even be impossible in several lifetimes. How long has this stuff been around and we still are working on it(IT)? I really don't think it is that tough of a problem it is just that so far we all have been using the wrong tools to try and reach that goal of scientific explanation (even if it does not particularly help ones practice). At least that is what I keep telling myself.

It may well be that after all is said and done and the great tome is delivered one still has to put in the time and IHTBF before one 'gets it(IT)'. That is the jist of my previous reference to organic chemistry in my blog (desk+bench time under guided direction of an expert).

The good news is that according to some it only takes 300 days of practice to get IT - presuming one has the right guide.

Thanks

PS Not to be rude but I'm done with this thread.

Mike Sigman
10-17-2009, 05:25 PM
The good news is that according to some it only takes 300 days of practice to get IT - presuming one has the right guide.I guess that depends on the level. Some people can do rudiments of IT in less than an hour. In a weekend workshop, I can get people to do a lot of things that are parts of "IT". In 300 days, people can get a certain level of *some* skills, but not all, since some skills are dependent on the level of body-conditioning. Ueshiba mentioned something, IIRC, about working on things for 40 years. I don't think he was a dunce... I think these skills are just more complex than some people think.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Thomas Campbell
10-17-2009, 05:35 PM
For anyone interested, selected remnants of the Neijia List are archived here: http://www.jangchoe.name/neijia/

A peruser can pick up on references to fascia, breathing, qi and movement, and discern certain common themes. It takes awhile.

Voitokas
10-17-2009, 06:17 PM
PS Not to be rude but I'm done with this thread.

Not rude at all - I think that everything can be said has been said. (I'll call it - time of death, 19:16EST) Maybe we can all meet back here in a year or two to share what we've learned on the mat in the interim. Thanks everyone!
:)

dps
10-17-2009, 07:26 PM
The good news is that according to some it only takes 300 days of practice to get IT - presuming one has the right guide.

Gee wouldn't that cut down on the number of seminars that one would have to attend?

David

Buck
10-17-2009, 08:17 PM
Not rude at all - I think that everything can be said has been said. (I'll call it - time of death, 19:16EST) Maybe we can all meet back here in a year or two to share what we've learned on the mat in the interim. Thanks everyone!
:)

I have access to an acupuncture school (utilizes Eastern and Western medicine and theory, western medical schools and surgeons), which I have had previous discussions with and they shape the way I see claims such as the facisa and how it is discussed here. I am planning to do pick their brains further on this issue.

Ya know, nothing is new in the martial arts today it's all out there in books and DVDs and all that, and that creates a problem today in that people who want attention and be out there, have to do so by either ]great skill or repackaging old ideas, to make the person sound what they have is new different, or unique. Now, there is a loop hole in all this. There are those who are not well versed in martials principle and stuff, they are the new students to martial arts or they the ones that are myopic in their art (a martial artist hazard), as well as other reasons. This loop hole provide some people to gain interest in them, usually not the art of course, but what they have repackaged. The focus is on them and what they offer. And, if it is the same stuff that is on the book shelves for the last twenty years, the same stuff that has been taught on the seminar circuit, and in every school, and recycled for just as long. Then it isn't special, or the person isn't special, and they are not in the spot light. Remember we are talking martial arts, and not martial combat skill. There is a difference as martial arts leans toward esotericism and scholarship, and stuff. The problem then is it is hard to determine, unlike combat, who is an expert.

The last thing is when we remove the esotericism in the martial arts there is less threads like these. But, the advantage of esotericism is you don't have to prove anything. And when you have something that has esotericism in it such as Alchemy and the esotericism is removed then you have something more powerful, like Chemistry. But I don't think that will happen in a year. :)

George S. Ledyard
10-17-2009, 10:17 PM
I guess that depends on the level. Some people can do rudiments of IT in less than an hour. In a weekend workshop, I can get people to do a lot of things that are parts of "IT". In 300 days, people can get a certain level of *some* skills, but not all, since some skills are dependent on the level of body-conditioning. Ueshiba mentioned something, IIRC, about working on things for 40 years. I don't think he was a dunce... I think these skills are just more complex than some people think.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Sagawa talked about training every day for decades to get to a really high level. Obviously not simple.

George S. Ledyard
10-17-2009, 10:33 PM
George,

I would like to know more about this, can you direct me to your sourses? Which of course would prove my statement wrong. :)

FWIW I am not against being wrong, and gladly acknowledge that if correctly proven wrong.

Something shown to me by a teacher from Daito Ryu dealt with this specifically. Also, Saotome Sensei has shown us things that I only recently understood had to do with this but he didn't have the terminology to explain in our terms. Now that it's been shown to me more concretely, I understand what he was trying to show us.

Research has shown that the brain receives something like a quarter million signals every second which process on an unconscious level. The number that can be processed consciously is somewhere around 40. Part of "aiki" is working with this unconscious input. The connective tissue is part of this sensory system.

This is a separate issue I think from issues concerning power release via internal power.

George S. Ledyard
10-17-2009, 10:51 PM
Buck, are you a scientist? How many "scientific studies" have you done?

For the past decade, I've been deeply involved in studies of cancer, herbicide toxicity, diseases related to rubber tire manufacture, myasthenia gravis and others. That's all I do.

Who do you suppose would do a study of "fascia in 'internal' martial arts"?

Who would fund it?

What would be their research goals?

How would they determine their hypotheses and how would they measure their results?

I remember when I was very young, long before I was directly involved in research, when I used to come up with all kinds of ideas for "scientific studies" that should be done on various elements of martial arts. All it took was a few conversations with people actually involved in research to realize that your bird won't fly.

Dan and others have offered you a sword and you've pretty well cut both your own feet off with it, but you're demanding a sharper sword because the one that cut your feet off isn't sharp enough for you.

Zannen. Kawaiso Borat.

Ja ne.

David

What I love about these arguments is listening to people who think of themselves as rational, logical beings ignore the possibility of gaining empirical experience because there is no "scientific" explanation for something. There is no scientific explanation because no one has taken the time or spent the money to study these things. However, there is descriptive terminology that has existed for hundreds of years. There are people who can teach these skills. They can demonstrate these skills. So what are folks waiting for? A grant from the NIH? These discussions between the folks that know and the folks that have no clue are ridiculous.

You think its BS, get on the mat with one of these folks. If you think you can do what they are talking about, show people you can. But sitting back and questioning everything in a discussion when you have absolutely no direct experience of it is ridiculous.

I have trained in Aikido most of my adult life. I have met people from outside of the art who have skills which very few, if any, Aikido people posses, and I have trained with many of the best. So I don't particularly care if there is "scientific" explanation. I want someone to teach me how to do it , how to train it, and I'll be happy to develop my own descriptive terminology for it all. I don't care if it's scientific, I just care if I can get others to do it once I understand it.

Buck
10-17-2009, 11:00 PM
Something shown to me by a teacher from Daito Ryu dealt with this specifically. Also, Saotome Sensei has shown us things that I only recently understood had to do with this but he didn't have the terminology to explain in our terms. Now that it's been shown to me more concretely, I understand what he was trying to show us.

Research has shown that the brain receives something like a quarter million signals every second which process on an unconscious level. The number that can be processed consciously is somewhere around 40. Part of "aiki" is working with this unconscious input. The connective tissue is part of this sensory system.

This is a separate issue I think from issues concerning power release via internal power.

Thanks. It was helpful. I know the corpus callosum is connective tissue that aids us as well. From what I am told much of our movement is involuntary and done without conscious input. Thus, I agree, proficient Aikido requires that.

How did the Daitoryu instructor deal with this area directly noting it and it's voluntary function to enhance or play a role in technique? Where there instructions specifically dealing with the fascia, in a voluntary to get a specific result, like say as we can do with muscle like close or open our hand. But not like our heart, and other involuntary actions of our bodies. I am not looking for a result which then is labeled to be such when I referenced O'Sensei. I was more referring to him having anatomical knowledge and was able to associate the fascia to exact a result in relation to a technique.

Hope that helped. :)

Kevin Leavitt
10-17-2009, 11:03 PM
George Ledyard wrote:

I have trained in Aikido most of my adult life. I have met people from outside of the art who have skills which very few, if any, Aikido people posses, and I have trained with many of the best. So I don't particularly care if there is "scientific" explanation. I want someone to teach me how to do it , how to train it, and I'll be happy to develop my own descriptive terminology for it all. I don't care if it's scientific, I just care if I can get others to do it once I understand it.


My thoughts exactly George!

Buck
10-17-2009, 11:45 PM
What I love about these arguments is listening to people who think of themselves as rational, logical beings ignore the possibility of gaining empirical experience because there is no "scientific" explanation for something. There is no scientific explanation because no one has taken the time or spent the money to study these things. However, there is descriptive terminology that has existed for hundreds of years. There are people who can teach these skills. They can demonstrate these skills. So what are folks waiting for? A grant from the NIH? These discussions between the folks that know and the folks that have no clue are ridiculous.

You think its BS, get on the mat with one of these folks. If you think you can do what they are talking about, show people you can. But sitting back and questioning everything in a discussion when you have absolutely no direct experience of it is ridiculous.

I have trained in Aikido most of my adult life. I have met people from outside of the art who have skills which very few, if any, Aikido people posses, and I have trained with many of the best. So I don't particularly care if there is "scientific" explanation. I want someone to teach me how to do it , how to train it, and I'll be happy to develop my own descriptive terminology for it all. I don't care if it's scientific, I just care if I can get others to do it once I understand it.

Becareful George it's not nice to start off a thread that way. You have to stay on topic and make it about a person. I got in trouble for that in this thread. :)

I am like most people, I don't think it is BS if it is proven properly. But that isn't what this is about. It is about researching, it is getting a hold of a study to see what is going on. That is the norm in the world, like medicine, business, and finance, and isn't that what they teach in college? I need to see all kinds of research in my business before I can make a decision, or give credibility to any idea or proposal. Also, medicine relies heavily on research studies. I don't know how many papers have been done on the fascia, but I am sure someone looking for a Ph.D. thesis might do it on the fascia and martial arts.

As I said before, martial arts is an area that has allot of misinformation, and stuff. What is wrong with asking for the best explanation modern science can give? As I said before, if it isn't their fine. I hope to read one someday.

But if this is simply a matter of nomenclature, terminology, specialized language and such then there is no need to prove anything, is there? I mean becomes a mute point, right. Because the principle exists without the langauge, and it can be taught with limited language (move here, move there, or by pointing here or there, moving a limb etc.), and not of the language of western anatomy. Just as Shakespeare pointed out in his play, Romeo and Juliet, What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.... Language doesn't define things or shapes something into being, it communicates it. Things exist without a langauge, but it's hard to communicate things complex to others, like teaching medicine and getting something done with others if there is no common and proper langauge. Societies advanced in large part due to langauge, communication of ideas, building, etc. to others and with others. That is why proper language is important. That is why a study is important. Both proper language and study leads to proper understanding and knowledge. If that wasn't the case we would all still believe the earth is flat and not round.

To recap, all I initially said was, is there a study on what Dan is talking about in term of fascia. And it would be great if Dan was a part of it. I thought that was complimentary, it was intended to be. But as it stand, there isn't a study, but I will hope for it in the future. :) :)

Keith Larman
10-18-2009, 12:13 AM
Language is also necessarily a two-way medium. I.e., someone has to say/write it, and the other person has to be perceive/understand it. When the disconnect is the ability of the speaker/writer, well, that person needs to improve their communication skills. However, when the disconnect is persistent and apparently on the end of the receiver... There is precious little the speaker/writer can do to remedy the situation.

Your understanding is not necessary for something to be true. And whether you are convinced or not has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is in fact true.

There is a famous quote from Samuel Johnson when asked about Berkeley's subjective idealism. He kicked a rock and said "I disprove it thus." Reality has a way of crushing misconceptions... Like your toe on a rock.

You don't have to accept the "metaphor" of fascia. You don't have to believe anything. However, there are people who can do some pretty amazing stuff. And it is much like kicking that rock to have someone who really knows their stuff start playing with you...

So here's to kicking rocks...

George S. Ledyard
10-18-2009, 01:12 AM
As I said before, martial arts is an area that has allot of misinformation, and stuff. What is wrong with asking for the best explanation modern science can give? As I said before, if it isn't their fine. I hope to read one someday.

Nothing wrong... it just doesn't help much. There are folks who can talk all day long about a certain topic. The problem is that what they say indicates that they don't have any idea what they are talking about. They may use scientific terms, know their anatomy, etc and they still don't know what they are talking about. Dan, Mike, Rob, etc keep trying to point this out but folks don't want to put themselves in the "don't get it"category.

Then there are the folks that can do it. But many of them either cannot or will not (a matter of some debate which) explain. There are a small number of people, those on this Robert's list in particular, who can both do it and explain it. They are actively producing students who have the goods.

As far as I can see, there is an entire range of skills contained in this IT discussion. Some of these teachers can drop you on your butt and you don't feel a thing, and I mean nothing. Some of these teachers can blow you across the room without it looking like anything. Some can mess up your structure before they actually touch you. The systema folks do some stuff I have never seen anyone else do.

But as far as I can see, direct experience is crucial, meaning you have to feel it being done and then you have to feel yourself doing it. Preferably you do it on one of the folks who already has the skills because they can give you direct feedback about what you are doing which you don't want to be doing and what you are not doing which you need to be doing. One spends a lot of time with these guys feeling them do it. Angier Sensei once spent a day and a half with us doing one movement. I'd grab him and he'd drop me. He'd grab me and he'd say no, no, no, too much, too hard, that's pushing, etc. I don't think any amount of scientific understanding or explanation would help this process. Once you have gotten started, perhaps it might help you refine your training but initially I don't think its worth much.

George S. Ledyard
10-18-2009, 01:24 AM
Thanks. It was helpful. I know the corpus callosum is connective tissue that aids us as well. From what I am told much of our movement is involuntary and done without conscious input. Thus, I agree, proficient Aikido requires that.

How did the Daitoryu instructor deal with this area directly noting it and it's voluntary function to enhance or play a role in technique? Where there instructions specifically dealing with the fascia, in a voluntary to get a specific result, like say as we can do with muscle like close or open our hand. But not like our heart, and other involuntary actions of our bodies. I am not looking for a result which then is labeled to be such when I referenced O'Sensei. I was more referring to him having anatomical knowledge and was able to associate the fascia to exact a result in relation to a technique.

Hope that helped. :)

It's not really for me to describe anything I have done in my Daito Ryu training in detail. I'm not "qualified" to speak for them. Also, instruction simply isn't done that way. Much of my understanding I have had to piece together from something my teachers have shown me, which I practice, and then I find other sources of information that help me explain what I am doing. In other words, there are a number of things I can do currently which I really do not know why it works. I am currently reading a book called The Body Has a Mind of Its Own. It's about body mapping. It has gone a long way towards helping me understand why some of what I am doing works. It has also helped me direct my training process to better refine the principles at work once I have identified them.

I seriously doubt whether O-Sensei understood anatomical structure the way we do. I think he had a vast knowledge of cause and effect, and as I said before, he certainly knew about the role of the fascia in making a center to center connection, as we would call it.

Buck
10-18-2009, 10:52 AM
It's not really for me to describe anything I have done in my Daito Ryu training in detail. I'm not "qualified" to speak for them. Also, instruction simply isn't done that way. Much of my understanding I have had to piece together from something my teachers have shown me, which I practice, and then I find other sources of information that help me explain what I am doing. In other words, there are a number of things I can do currently which I really do not know why it works. I am currently reading a book called The Body Has a Mind of Its Own. It's about body mapping. It has gone a long way towards helping me understand why some of what I am doing works. It has also helped me direct my training process to better refine the principles at work once I have identified them.


Good to know. That helps me understand you statement better.


I seriously doubt whether O-Sensei understood anatomical structure the way we do. I think he had a vast knowledge of cause and effect, and as I said before.

I too think through his writings he understood cause and effect, and that of polar opposites and their dynamics.


he certainly knew about the role of the fascia in making a center to center connection, as we would call it.

Here is where I am confused, and here is I see it hence the confusion. The center to center connection in short is the result of body mechanics, and dynamics. This of course would include proper alinement body in relation to physics. As far as anatomy is concerned lends to what we already know about it; the skeletal muscles, tendons, and ligaments all support movement. Nervous system processes stimulus to the brain. Every part of the body works as we know it. Therefore, fascia being an anatomical membrane sheath that in an example can simply be thought of as a cellophane food wrap keeps stuff in place, packed tight. So, I go with the mainstream modern western research of the function and purpose is of the fascia.

Now I understand the metaphor of the fascia being support for a stable body, as you said. But I don't see how that consciously/ voluntarily can be manipulated to improve technique, and do more than what it is already doing. In my mind the fascia function in these terms is no different then what the skeletal structure/bones, cartilage, Plantar fascia and other tissue bands in the body.

Therefore, the metaphor of the fascia is misleading, because the fascia isn't a catch-all term for support; there are lots of other things in the body that work in greater major ways and with other things like fascia and retinacular tissues (just not lumped all together as being connective tissues as their functions and placement and size differ and serve different purposes) in the body to provide support.

It isn't in my mind a matter of you say "tomato" and I say "tomatoe." But keeping things straight, and adhering to definitions already in place that communicate established ideas. I would hate to have people think much of the misunderstanding of the subject that has already been seen. But I am not teach such things to others and choose those terms to explain, what I feel it already has more than adequate langauge to communicate it.

Now, unless there is a finding that the fascia can be manipulated to work differently and directly with technique then why create a metaphor, and say O'Sensei knew of the fascia in terms of our discussion as you note it, gives credit to something he has already did so why rename his knowledge of body mechanics, physics etc.

I think the fascia metaphor has lots of purposes for some, though it is in some ways I see it as like reinventing the wheel, rebranding and stuff, in terms of language. I ask, do we really need more dfferent ways of saying the same thing, and stuff? I don't think so, I perfer to stick with the norm.

Thanks for the discussion. I really enjoy it, even though we see things differently. :)