Some similarities in Internal Body Skills between Chinese and Japanese arts [Archive]

Mike Sigman

12-19-2009, 07:04 PM

I realize that there will be another of the many archived "sudden silence when telling questions are asked" answers, but let's take this comment by Dan Harden:

You also might want to consider that Hong considers peng to be chansi-jin, "the one jin" in the first place, and not rooting or bouncing out with the dantien or the Sigman ground path model; it's more inclusive and complex than a single path.

So, Dan, since you're the expert and you're using my name to establish your own bona fides (a very traditional keyboard tactic that goes back to the 1990's, if anyone wants to check various archives), how does "groundpath" work in relation to this comment from the Taiji classical literature:

"The root is in the feet, Jin is generated from the legs, controlled by the waist and expressed through the hands and fingers. From the feet to the legs to the waist must be integrated with one unified Qi."

Could you give us your explanation of what "the one jin" is (a term that I introduced as far back as the 1990's)? Can you for just once explain in definitive terms what the factual problem is, rather than just throw my name out on BS public forums? At least on the old Neijia List we had the habit of explaining the issues rather than just trying to trivialize via assertion, self-proclamation, and so on.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

rob_liberti

12-19-2009, 08:44 PM

For the love of god, give it a rest.

Mike Sigman

12-19-2009, 08:48 PM

Lorel Latorilla

12-19-2009, 09:01 PM

Sorry... I didn't bring my name up. On the other hand, looking at some of your old posts................................. there's a sort of viciousness that seems to be making a resurgence. How about simple, straight replies?

Mike Sigman

Mike you told me on your own forum that you should stick to functional, how-to's, suggesting also that we should even if we are being personally attacked, but it looks like you can't even follow your own advice. Can you tell me where the functional/how-to is in this?

Mike Sigman

12-19-2009, 09:04 PM

Mike you told me on your own forum that you should stick to functional, how-to's, suggesting also that we should even if we are being personally attacked, but it looks like you can't even follow your own advice. Can you tell me where the functional/how-to is in this?Again... my name was brought up, so I asked for a how to. Unless, of course, you can provide the how-to, Lorel? I've asked you for how-to's in the past, if you remember.

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

12-19-2009, 09:05 PM

I'll spread it out.... Dan, Liberti, Lorel... can you provide a good how-to description of the one jin?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Lorel Latorilla

12-19-2009, 09:08 PM

Again... my name was brought up, so I asked for a how to. Unless, of course, you can provide the how-to, Lorel? I've asked you for how-to's in the past, if you remember.

Mike Sigman

No you didn't Mike. You replied to Rob Liberti not asking for a functional-how to, but suggesting that his 'viciousness' from old posts' have made a 'resurgence'. Can you explain to me the 'functional how-to' in this?

12-20-2009, 01:16 AM

So, Dan, since you're the expert and you're using my name to establish your own bona fides (a very traditional keyboard tactic that goes back to the 1990's, if anyone wants to check various archives),

How does "groundpath" work in relation to this comment from the Taiji classical literature:
"The root is in the feet, Jin is generated from the legs, controlled by the waist and expressed through the hands and fingers. From the feet to the legs to the waist must be integrated with one unified Qi."
Could you give us your explanation of what "the one jin" is (a term that I introduced as far back as the 1990's)? Can you for just once explain in definitive terms what the factual problem is, rather than just throw my name out on BS public forums? At least on the old Neijia List we had the habit of explaining the issues rather than just trying to trivialize via assertion, self-proclamation, and so on.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
*Note*
a. I don't respond to yu for the simple reason that your passive / agressive baiting nonsense is sophmoric, and I have no interest in your opinions on IP/ aiki. Why would I need or want to have a discussion with you?

b. Instead of peppering all of your posts to me with personal digs and ugly inuendo- then playing the fauning "victim" when I reply to you in a more forthright, honest and direct manner, why don't you follow your own advice-stick to the topic. Your'e a grown man Mike, step up and state your points.

c. This idea of yours that using your name will boost someones "standing" reveals a rather ugly and smug view of yourself, Mike.
I don't even think in those terms.

The topic
So...I'm an "expert" now because I offered some advice on a forum, interesting.
I was quoting Hong's position.This is what I said:
You also might want to consider that Hong considers peng to be chansi-jin, "the one jin" in the first place, and not rooting or bouncing out with the dantien or the Sigman ground path model; it's more inclusive and complex than a single path.
For the most part the advice you have offered here and elsewhere continues to be very limited baby step stuff, Mike; mostly focused on breathing and simple pushing. The "translation" I offered on that thread on RSF (while still basic) is more in-depth than anything I have ever read from you...anywhere. Which might explain why you are always asking me to talk about how I train.

Since you disagree with him, and he wrote it, and some of his students have explained it- why don't you try explaining how a real expert like Hong, is so off-base.
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-20-2009, 09:09 AM

[BThe "translation" I offered on that thread on RSF (while still basic) is more in-depth than anything I have ever read from you...anywhere. Which might explain why you are always asking me to talk about how I train. Well, you have your opinion about your knowledge and skills, Dan. Each to his own. Here's what you said, using my name gratuitously:

Quote:
You also might want to consider that Hong considers peng to be chansi-jin, "the one jin" in the first place, and not rooting or bouncing out with the dantien or the Sigman ground path model; it's more inclusive and complex than a single path. [/quote] Obviously Hong didn't use my name, so you've indicated an opinion (via your assertion) about "chansi-jin", telling us that Hong considers chansi-jin (the reeling-silk jin/skill) to be the "one jin". The problem is that the core/one jin in Chen's taiji is "peng jin", which is there name for the neijin. The groundpath is, as I pointed out in my quote, the basic jin that goes from the foot, is controlled by the waist, and expressed by the hand. Hong knows that. The core variant of neijin/pengjin that the Chens style uses is chansi-jin, but it is not the core/peng jin.

Since you made an assertion about what Hong believes and tossed my name into the pot, I asked you to explain. I doubt seriously that Hong or his people need you making misstatements/misunderstandings about what Hong knows. But I guarantee you that Hong understands that chansi-jin is simply an offshoot of the neijin. Anyone with basic knowledge knows that.

FWIW

Mike

Mike Sigman

12-20-2009, 09:11 AM

[BThe "translation" I offered on that thread on RSF (while still basic) is more in-depth than anything I have ever read from you...anywhere. Which might explain why you are always asking me to talk about how I train. Well, you have your opinion about your knowledge and skills, Dan. Each to his own. Here's what you said, using my name gratuitously:

You also might want to consider that Hong considers peng to be chansi-jin, "the one jin" in the first place, and not rooting or bouncing out with the dantien or the Sigman ground path model; it's more inclusive and complex than a single path. Obviously Hong didn't use my name, so you've indicated an opinion (via your assertion) about "chansi-jin", telling us that Hong considers chansi-jin (the reeling-silk jin/skill) to be the "one jin". The problem is that the core/one jin in Chen's taiji is "peng jin", which is their name for the neijin. The groundpath is, as I pointed out in my quote, the basic jin that goes from the foot, is controlled by the waist, and expressed by the hand. Hong knows that. The core variant of neijin/pengjin that the Chens style uses is chansi-jin, but it is not the core/peng jin.

Since you made an assertion about what Hong believes and tossed my name into the pot, I asked you to explain. I doubt seriously that Hong or his people need you making misstatements/misunderstandings about what Hong knows. But I guarantee you that Hong understands that chansi-jin is simply an offshoot of the neijin. Anyone with basic knowledge knows that.

FWIW

Mike

Lorel Latorilla

12-20-2009, 10:00 AM

No you didn't Mike. You replied to Rob Liberti not asking for a functional-how to, but suggesting that his 'viciousness' from old posts' have made a 'resurgence'. Can you explain to me the 'functional how-to' in this?

Hi mike. can you reply to this?

stan baker

12-20-2009, 10:20 AM

Hi Mike,
Who is the real expert that we can ask, who are you referring to.

stan

12-20-2009, 10:21 AM

Well, you have your opinion ...
Since you made an assertion about what Hong believes and tossed my name into the pot, I asked you to explain. I doubt seriously that Hong or his people need you making misstatements/misunderstandings about what Hong knows. But I guarantee you that Hong understands that chansi-jin is simply an offshoot of the neijin. Anyone with basic knowledge knows that.
FWIW
Mike
I still haven't offered an opinion, and you can "guarantee" nothing-you're not qualified.
I offered a description of someone else, coupled with what has been explained by a couple of his top people (which for some strange reason lined up with what I later read of Hong's stated view). By their own deliberate choice- it differentiated itself from any discussion of a single path -into a duality that must exist at all times-as one. It's their interpretation; your opinion, or mine was neither asked for, or required.

Attempting to disqualify anything that doesn't agree with your own limited understanding as an "outsider," is a dicey game. I don't agree with everything I read, hear and feel-particularly the results of what it did for some people, but that's different from a presumption of knowing what every master level teacher of the ICMA thinks, believes, interprets and teaches within their own lineage.
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-20-2009, 12:02 PM

I still haven't offered an opinion, and you can "guarantee" nothing-you're not qualified.

Always the personal shots, Dan. No answers; personal shots. I just laid it out for you, direct from the Taiji classical literature that everyone uses: The jin that starts from the feet, is controlled by the waist and is expressed in the fingers. That's the basis. If you want to pretend that you know more about how that applies to reeling-silk, go for it. If all you can do is cheapshot anyone and everyone as not being as great as you, it gets the discussions nowhere. Remember the disgusted posts from people over the years about how all your posts seem to be advertisements for Dan Harden's greatness? You haven't changed. If you have any knowledge, try showing it by debating a point rather than trivializing everyone.

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

12-20-2009, 12:19 PM

12-20-2009, 12:34 PM

Always the personal shots, Dan. No answers; personal shots.
Who gave the cheap shots Mike?
Let's examine that -including the one above- and let everyone decide.
I stated a topic related and accurate comment on another board:
You also might want to consider that Hong considers peng to be chansi-jin, "the one jin" in the first place, and not rooting or bouncing out with the dantien or the Sigman ground path model; it's more inclusive and complex than a single path.
It was a neutral statement that highlighted your (self admitted and agreed to) view for comparison.
To which I received (bold notations added by me):

I realize that there will be another of the many archived "sudden silence when telling questions are asked" answers, (Cheap shot 1) but let's take this comment by Dan Harden:

So, Dan, since you're the expert(Cheap shot 2) and you're using my name to establish your own bona fides (a very traditional keyboard tactic that goes back to the 1990's,(Cheap shot 3) if anyone wants to check various archives), how does "groundpath" work in relation to this comment from the Taiji classical literature:

"The root is in the feet, Jin is generated from the legs, controlled by the waist and expressed through the hands and fingers. From the feet to the legs to the waist must be integrated with one unified Qi."

Could you give us your explanation of what "the one jin" is (a term that I introduced as far back as the 1990's)? Can you for just once explain in definitive terms what the factual problem is, rather than just throw my name out on BS public forums?(Cheap shot 4) At least on the old Neijia List we had the habit of explaining the issues rather than just trying to trivialize via assertion, self-proclamation, (Cheap shot 5)and so on.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
Stop guaranteeing things you are not qualifed to address and I'll stop reminding you of that fact.

I just laid it out for you, direct from the Taiji classical literature that everyone uses:
And I just laid it out for you what i read, was told and shown.

The jin that starts from the feet, is controlled by the waist and is expressed in the fingers.
That can exist in a duel form at the same time.

That's the basis. If you want to pretend that you know more about how that applies to reeling-silk, go for it (cheap shot 6).
I'm not the one pretending to know the basis for all that is internal-you are.

If you have any knowledge, try showing it by debating a point rather than trivializing everyone.
I do it often, just not with you. Talking with you is a waste of my time that I enjoy occasionally- like today on a beautiful snowing day here in New England.
If all you can do is cheapshot anyone and everyone as not being as great as you, it gets the discussions nowhere.
(Cheap shot 7) and totally off topic context. I didn't discuss me at all.

Remember the disgusted posts from people over the years about how all your posts seem to be advertisements for Dan Harden's greatness? (cheap shot 8)
You haven't changed. If you have any knowledge, try showing it by debating a point rather than trivializing everyone. (cheap shot 9)

Again, do you think you are capable of making a post and not personally attacking me with this passive / agressive nonsense and then playing "the sensitive victim" when I respond to it in a very direct manner?
Good luck in your search
Dan

12-20-2009, 12:43 PM

The jin that starts from the feet, is controlled by the waist and is expressed in the fingers

Incidentally, that very well known classical statement is not just unique to Taiji; variations are found in a number of arts. It is the path from the ground to the hands. What I call the "groundpath". The people who don't understand the "groundpath" don't understand the basics of I.S. more than superficially. It's worth it to note how often someone puts his foot into it by belittling the idea of the oh-so-obvious term "groundpath". Granted it's not a Chinese term like neijin or pengjin... but it doesn't take a genius to figure it out. Even though Chen Xiaowang's English is limited, he refers to the one jin that goes from the point of contact to the ground.

So in line with the discussion topic about similarities in I.S. between CMA's and Japanese MA's, someone give me an example of where Tohei, Ueshiba, etc., were standing against a push or pull and *not* using a groundpath.

Moving with a groundpath/jin? Linear movement is called "chou ssujin" (pulling silk). Spiralling movement is called "chanssujin" (reeling silk). They are both built from the static one-jin of the groundpath.

There it is and no one can logically argue it, so probably the conversation will go back to the personal. :rolleyes:

FWIW

Mike Sigman
Well, I will conitnue to point out to people the questionable veracity of an amateur disqualifying everyone's view that doesn't line up with his.
The "ground path" is your term not theirs. Although it's not bad; it is simplistic in it's scope and what it can mean (sort of like Tohei's).
The use of a single ground path instead of the duality in the body at the same time is and has been disputed by men far more accomplished than you or I.
Again I advise people to dismiss the arguing of morons on the net and go pursue the real experts. IP/aiki is much more in depth than what you are going to find in Aikido or those who want you to focus on breath power and pushing or even Tohei's own limited understanding.
And there are methods that can be used for "actual fighting" and all that entails, though it apears many just are not capable of doing or teaching those aspects.
If you want it-it's there to discover.
Good luck in your search
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-20-2009, 01:07 PM

Well, I will conitnue to point out to people the questionable veracity of an amateur disqualifying everyone's view that doesn't line up with his. Holy smoke.... "amateur"? You're the one that wanted to come visit me... I didn't want to come visit you. :p
The "ground path" is your term not theirs. Although it's not bad; it is simplistic in it's scope and what it can mean (sort of like Tohei's).
The use of a single ground path instead of the duality in the body at the same time is and has been disputed by men far more accomplished than you or I. Oh wait.... do you mean the ground + weight paths that I have discussed many times over the years and which is archived a number of times on this very forum? It's odd how you talk knowledgeably about so many things like this "duality" that were there for the picking in posts, videos, archives, etc. You still haven't addressed the question and it appears that you're now trying to use the idea that it wasn't your words (except the comparison with me, of course) and that you were just saying what someone else on the video said. They said nothing about me.... you did. So why put my name and "groundpath" in except to trivialize it? If you're going to trivialize it, then explain it. Why do you think the old saying only mentions the path from the ground and not your "duality"??? Again I advise people to dismiss the arguing of morons on the net and go pursue the real experts. IP/aiki is much more in depth than what you are going to find in Aikido or those who want you to focus on breath power and pushing or even Tohei's own limited understanding.
And there are methods that can be used for "actual fighting" and all that entails, though it apears many just are not capable of doing or teaching those aspects.
If you want it-it's there to Tsk. Let's go back to a past question that you went silent on, Dan. Speaking of "real experts", why is your method so different from Ueshiba's and Tohei's? What is it that you know that they didn't know? I.e., are you the "real expert" you're referring to?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 07:40 AM

Holy smoke.... "amateur"? You're the one that wanted to come visit me... I didn't want to come visit you. :p Oh wait.... do you mean the ground + weight paths that I have discussed many times over the years and which is archived a number of times on this very forum? It's odd how you talk knowledgeably about so many things like this "duality" that were there for the picking in posts, videos, archives, etc.
More baiting and bruised ego stuff eh? Run out of meaningful things to say?
Nice dodge of the cheap shot post.
That was when you first drew my attention. Whatever made you think I wanted to come visit you to *learn* anything? I've visited a lot of people for different reasons.

The Internet
I've never once seen you even begin to adequately address the way we move. Not even close. In fact all of your posturing, and beating of your chest about your posting history, and drawings and explanations both here and on the neijia list has resulted in what?
Nothing more than beginner level stuff with a few drawings.
And your Tohei one-legged-army ground vector stuff you go on about ad nauseum is so simplistic and rudimentary that it fully explains why he looked and moved like he did. You may be impressed by him, but I sure as hell never was.

Your comments about the duality being the ground path+ gravity doesn't even begin to cover what we do, nice try though. Your ground path idea-while correct- is too simplistic. Why did I reference it? Since your Neijia list, ground path model is known and out there, it was a good starting point to address; sort of like the hip-tied-to-shoulders is the well known and accepted way many martial artists move; yours is a good starting point to show where to begin and then to get away from, for better power and stability and better fighting movement later on.

If you know more or have more, and I presume you do (I always like to think the better of you) you have yet to write it down anywhere. Past all your rhetoric, your shtick seems to be to get others to talk than you follow with comments.

While I have appreciated your efforts to get the word out-you continue to overplay your hand.
Good luck in you search
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 08:39 AM

I've never once seen you even begin to adequately address the way we move. As I've said many times, there are a number of variants: some good, some not so good, some complete, some not so complete. I've also said many times that the internet forays are meant to get basics out there... period. Since you've debriefed a few people who have been to my workshops (too bad, Joel, and others), you're aware that there is more than what I've posted ... and there's a lot more than I've shown at workshops, too. Your swipe is pointless, since you're personally aware of these things.

"Posturing"? Pooh. No person on the internet brags about himself as much as you do. If nothing else, you've cut yourself off from a number of sources of information with your egocentricity. So what's your belief... that you already know everything? If you do, I guess you're safe in alienating as many potential sources of information as you have by the things you've said about people in your posts about yourself.

Think about this. The main reason strife and contention initiates on various forums is because people with wannabe or 'established' credentials react defensively when they feel that there is a challenge to their status. I see you doing just that. Whether it's talk about "koryu", or "you have to come to my school because I can't discuss basics in public", or whatever, these are just variants of the old pecking-order psychology. The old neijia list was anomalous in that if someone entered the discussion with a claim (or if a current list-member made a claim), the discussion went to "how does it work", not into a defense of position/status. And the idea that someone in any school, koryu, whatever, can't even discuss basics is fatuous.... only a neophyte would use such an excuse when it becomes obvious that the basics are known by many people.

So the big difference between you and me is that I don't particularly care about the topic other than as an interesting discussion that leads toward further progress; you appear to be establishing a typical pecking-order with you on top and trivializing comments made about anyone you feel threatened by. That's fine, Dan, but leave me out of your ill-disguised expectations.

There are a couple of people that have an interest in keeping a file on how much you can't answer over the last 5 years, how often you have gone silent over the years when a question is asked that you can't answer, how often you have gone back and literally pulled off your posts from forums when you've become embarrassed, and so on. You might take the time to review some of your historical comments and actions and statements about I.S. and understand that you can't reinvent your expertise with each new thread, Dan. There are archives to consider.

Lastly, each time I ask you to explain something, I'm doing so from a public claim that you've made and I take you at your word that you're an expert. So, the next time I ask you a functional "how-to" question, think about your choices: you can either try to start yet another diversionary attack against me personally or you can shut me down with your expertise, which of course must be far higher than my "amateur" level, right? :cool: Your inability to answer (or to answer correctly in a number of cases) stands out like a beacon.

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 08:49 AM

Normally, I'd let the "big boys" go at it. Guess not today.

Quit the personal bickering, please. I'd rather not see Jun shut this thread down. I read the RSF thread and it's actually going somewhere. I'd hoped it would do so here. Is that possible?

Thanks,
Mark

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 09:04 AM

I read the RSF thread and it's actually going somewhere. I'd hoped it would do so here. Is that possible?
I just looked at it, Mark. I must be missing it... what do you see that is "going somewhere"? I see Doc Stier is using one of my drawings without attribution, but I think some of the comments about how things work are missing the mark. Why don't you give us *your* opinion of what's valuable, how it works, and so on? Seriously.

Mike

thisisnotreal

12-21-2009, 09:12 AM

...not to be antagonistic; but after all this Mike, I would literally love to hear your nuts-and-bolts explanation. No kidding.
-----------------------------------------------

Seriously: Merry Christmas guys. This is for fun; and it is a luxury.

It is an honour to read (all!) you guys.

Wishing you all health, happiness, a sound mind, spirit and a strong body to be able to continue in your training.

and if you do go battle royale; tape it.
vid or it didn't happen.
: ]

Josh

12-21-2009, 09:23 AM

I just looked at it, Mark. I must be missing it... what do you see that is "going somewhere"? I see Doc Stier is using one of my drawings without attribution, but I think some of the comments about how things work are missing the mark. Why don't you give us *your* opinion of what's valuable, how it works, and so on? Seriously.

Mike

Hi Mike,

My opinion of what's valuable? I've barely begun training these internal skills, so In the RSF thread, people are posting about what they think is going on or how it works. That's valuable to me. Not posting back and forth bickering. That's not valuable, IMO.

If you think some of the comments about how things work are missing the mark, then posting here about why is valuable. Not posting back and forth bickering. That's not valuable, IMO.

If you find something in that video at RSF that you know is similar to what you've seen in some Japanese Martial art, that's valuable. Not posting back and forth bickering. (Is that phrase getting overly tired of reading? Think of the rest of the Aikiweb readers going through all the bickering posts.) That's not valuable, IMO.

I'm not picking on just one person, I'm saying quit the bickering to both of you. If either of you can't interact online without resorting to bickering, then please quit interacting.

I would have never known of the similarities in internal skills between the Chinese Martial Arts and the Japanese ones except for a few people. And two of them keep bickering online and it's getting old. I'm asking for both of you to keep it in check. Please.

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 09:28 AM

...not to be antagonistic; but after all this Mike, I would literally love to hear your nuts-and-bolts explanation. No kidding.
-----------------------------------------------

If you think back, there were some very good discussions on how-to's for basics, using drawings, detailed explanations, a few years back. That was mainly Rob John and me. And then this "greatness" began to intrude and other people, including Ueshiba, became "amateurs". The process of "The Cross" (which is very limited and comes from Southern Shaolin) began to develop into "spiralling" and a host of other things, just as I predicted things *must* go, some years back.

Back in the nineties we saw a number of systems in CMA's suddenly start "revealing things that they'd known for years" after those same topics became public on the Neijia List (which is why the neijia-type forums became so restricted, aamof). What I'm doing now is enjoying watching a deja vu scenario play out in Aikido that played out before. I'd probably still contribute more "how-to" stuff, but once the personal shots started appearing a few years back, I figured I'd let it go and watch history replay itself.

Take it all with good humor; I do. This stuff is enlightening to watch because in some ways you're seeing a part of why not only Aikido but many other arts lose these skills or have such difficulty in gaining them.

Incidentally.... it's far better for everyone to join into these conversations than to wait for someone else to explain things. I'm always willing to help someone who is making an effort. Someone who is simply waiting for people to hand him info (sometimes they *demand* it!)... not so much.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 09:35 AM

I've barely begun training these internal skills, so In the RSF thread, people are posting about what they think is going on or how it works. That's valuable to me. I asked you *what* was valuable, Mark. Think of it from my point of view.... if you find all that stuff that's being posted in the RSF thread "valuable", but I don't, then your view of valuable is different from mine, in that regard. So my question is why I should say anything when you're apparently confused about what is valuable and what is not.... see my point?

That's why if you want someone to offer some pointers, you need to step up and write some how-to's and show that you're thinking and not just waiting for a handout.

Incidentally, most of that stuff on RSF is guys impressing each other with buzzwords; it's not useful "how-to" information. Go through each post and read it carefully for any "how-to" information while comparing what is said in terms of buzzwords, veiled hints of secret knowledge, and so forth. You'll see what I mean.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Lorel Latorilla

12-21-2009, 09:48 AM

As I've said many times, there are a number of variants: some good, some not so good, some complete, some not so complete. I've also said many times that the internet forays are meant to get basics out there... period. Since you've debriefed a few people who have been to my workshops (too bad, Joel, and others), you're aware that there is more than what I've posted ... and there's a lot more than I've shown at workshops, too. Your swipe is pointless, since you're personally aware of these things.

"Posturing"? Pooh. No person on the internet brags about himself as much as you do. If nothing else, you've cut yourself off from a number of sources of information with your egocentricity. So what's your belief... that you already know everything? If you do, I guess you're safe in alienating as many potential sources of information as you have by the things you've said about people in your posts about yourself.

Think about this. The main reason strife and contention initiates on various forums is because people with wannabe or 'established' credentials react defensively when they feel that there is a challenge to their status. I see you doing just that. Whether it's talk about "koryu", or "you have to come to my school because I can't discuss basics in public", or whatever, these are just variants of the old pecking-order psychology. The old neijia list was anomalous in that if someone entered the discussion with a claim (or if a current list-member made a claim), the discussion went to "how does it work", not into a defense of position/status. And the idea that someone in any school, koryu, whatever, can't even discuss basics is fatuous.... only a neophyte would use such an excuse when it becomes obvious that the basics are known by many people.

So the big difference between you and me is that I don't particularly care about the topic other than as an interesting discussion that leads toward further progress; you appear to be establishing a typical pecking-order with you on top and trivializing comments made about anyone you feel threatened by. That's fine, Dan, but leave me out of your ill-disguised expectations.

There are a couple of people that have an interest in keeping a file on how much you can't answer over the last 5 years, how often you have gone silent over the years when a question is asked that you can't answer, how often you have gone back and literally pulled off your posts from forums when you've become embarrassed, and so on. You might take the time to review some of your historical comments and actions and statements about I.S. and understand that you can't reinvent your expertise with each new thread, Dan. There are archives to consider.

Lastly, each time I ask you to explain something, I'm doing so from a public claim that you've made and I take you at your word that you're an expert. So, the next time I ask you a functional "how-to" question, think about your choices: you can either try to start yet another diversionary attack against me personally or you can shut me down with your expertise, which of course must be far higher than my "amateur" level, right? :cool: Your inability to answer (or to answer correctly in a number of cases) stands out like a beacon.

Mike Sigman

Mike where is the functional how to in this? Can you explain to me the the principle of the ground path when you make personal attacks at Dan?

gregstec

12-21-2009, 10:05 AM

I'm not picking on just one person, I'm saying quit the bickering to both of you. If either of you can't interact online without resorting to bickering, then please quit interacting.

IMO. I think the bickering has a certain perverse value in a 'National Enquirer' sort of way - kind of like a soap opera appeal :)

Who out there is keeping the cheap shot score?

Is there a fight promoter in the house? maybe we can get a Vegas venue and have the MMA match of the year in MIke S vs. Dan H - any odds anyone? That would be a hoot :D

On the serious side, I have immense respect for both parties and believe that they have more similarities than they do differences. Going forward, I think that the first one to reach out with a big internet hug to the other is the winner in my book (sorry about that visual to those with a squeamish stomach :) )

It's the holidays guys - chill out a bit and let's have some fun:)

best regards to all
Greg

12-21-2009, 10:21 AM

If you think back, there were some very good discussions on how-to's for basics, using drawings, detailed explanations, a few years back. That was mainly Rob John and me. And then this "greatness" began to intrude and other people, including Ueshiba, became "amateurs". The process of "The Cross" (which is very limited and comes from Southern Shaolin) began to develop into "spiralling" and a host of other things, just as I predicted things *must* go, some years back.
During which- through phone discussion with Rob and on-line postings I made Rob asked to borrow one of my training examples of using the cross (the drive shaft with the peg) and posts it -with credit to me- right here in the training section.
Also during which I was talking with Rob- and writting before he ever met you about spiral energy and how it is essential for actual fighting with IP/ aiki.
Then after I saw the published training vid on Shiko and read the hand outs I talked with him about carrying the weight across the body and wrote about it detail on E-budo

You have a very warped sense of reality and what went on and when as well as a meglomeniacal sense of owning information.
Such as you stating you coined this and that phrase -even telling me you coined "heavy hands" a term that has been used in boxing for decades.
FWIW, you can read about sprial energy in DR from DR teachers on Aikido Journal.
Sorry to burst your bubble about being the in resident expert on everything internal.

Incidentally.... it's far better for everyone to join into these conversations than to wait for someone else to explain things. I'm always willing to help someone who is making an effort. Someone who is simply waiting for people to hand him info (sometimes they *demand* it!)... not so much.
No this is where you opt out and say nothing or offer more baby step nonsense like your famous post on breathing. With people asking for breath power exercises and you told them to breath in and relax. I called you on that BS then and there.
This isn't a real discussion Mark and never has been.
At least I finally got him to admit...after pages of insults and innuendo...that I was right along in posting that his stuff is only basics.
See how easy that was instead of all the huff and puff.
Dan

12-21-2009, 10:37 AM

IMO. I think the bickering has a certain perverse value in a 'National Enquirer' sort of way - kind of like a soap opera appeal :)

Who out there is keeping the cheap shot score?

Is there a fight promoter in the house? maybe we can get a Vegas venue and have the MMA match of the year in MIke S vs. Dan H - any odds anyone? That would be a hoot :D

On the serious side, I have immense respect for both parties and believe that they have more similarities than they do differences. Going forward, I think that the first one to reach out with a big internet hug to the other is the winner in my book (sorry about that visual to those with a squeamish stomach :) )

It's the holidays guys - chill out a bit and let's have some fun:)

best regards to all
Greg
That's all well and good Greg, I am well aware of the spread the guilt around idea.
Lets review. Go back and find me who was the one to start calling me a fraud in public, and then keep after it. Who got pursued for information then chastised for not giving it and told I didn't know what I was talking about. Hell just read the posts above.
Its all a ploy he uses. He wrote about it on the Neijia list and E-budo. Its all an act, a lie, set up to get people to talk and spill information by his own admission!
Lets call it for what it really is and stop being polite. I got worse from him in some very serious private letters. These are things he is known for by the way and why he has been banned from places.

You know me and know I have a hard time ever being serious; if I'm talking I'm joking right? Now imagine me pissed-off. I don't ever want to be in the same room with this guy.
I can understand Mikes process -an ICMA guy thinking his arts are all that and then finding out there is a lot of it in the JMA as well. I just cannot imagine telling everyone they're full of it to get the information. There are nicer ways to get information that work quite well.

Dan

12-21-2009, 11:14 AM

gregstec

12-21-2009, 11:24 AM

Just having spoken off line with a few people I think it is best that Mike and I simply avoid each other. It does nothing to forward the discussion and throws one big wet blanket on something which is becoming near and dear to them in their own training.
Not the least of which is there are guys who like us both and they hate to see this keep happening.
So happy holidays to one and all.
Dan

Overall, this appears to be as close to an 'internet hug' as can be expected concerning this issue - maybe not directly to Mike, but at least to the rest of us - sounds like a winner to me:)

Greg

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 11:38 AM

No this is where you opt out and say nothing or offer more baby step nonsense like your famous post on breathing. With people asking for breath power exercises and you told them to breath in and relax.Show me the famous quote. I've never said that.

Mike Sigman

Erick Mead

12-21-2009, 01:36 PM

Show me the famous quote. I've never said that.

Mike SigmanGive it up, Mike. You won't get a quote, much less a context. :)

You will discover an agenda, however..., glad-handed though it may be.

12-21-2009, 03:33 PM

I asked you *what* was valuable, Mark. Think of it from my point of view.... if you find all that stuff that's being posted in the RSF thread "valuable", but I don't, then your view of valuable is different from mine, in that regard. So my question is why I should say anything when you're apparently confused about what is valuable and what is not.... see my point?

That's why if you want someone to offer some pointers, you need to step up and write some how-to's and show that you're thinking and not just waiting for a handout.

Incidentally, most of that stuff on RSF is guys impressing each other with buzzwords; it's not useful "how-to" information. Go through each post and read it carefully for any "how-to" information while comparing what is said in terms of buzzwords, veiled hints of secret knowledge, and so forth. You'll see what I mean.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Well, let me take portions and give you the opportunity to show where it misses the mark or you don't find it valuable and why.

I would tend to agree about the knee winding translation. but he might be showing some deeper things (I don't know Chinese).
Twining the knees is indicative of the hips being tied to them, (this is how most people move, and it is more pronounced in western fighters)all in all it's something which I would avoid. Coiling or winding is an accurate statement but mores the point is what is coiling from where. I think it's very important to understand that the legs are coiling and the feet are stable and grab the earth. The feet rock most often because the knees pull them out of line. and its the hips that pull the kness out of line. The bones of the legs need to remain stable and the muscles are pulled coiling up and opening on one side and coiling and winding down on the other. But the bones stay straight and therefore the feet are stable. If anything the knees may go back and forth (like in and out from front to back) but never are they pulled with the coiling as to sway side to side with the hips. Twining the knees weakens the peng and in training it also can hurt the knees over time. Proper coiling makes VERY strong and stable knees that function independant from the hips. they are held stable by opposing spirals from the feet up through the kua drawn by the dantian, turned by the waist and supported be the lower back (with the psoas). Trainng this way stabilizies the entire chain, so walking and being "rocked" by uneven terrain (like he comically tries to demonstrate at the end when he is mimicing a stumble) is less likely.

That pretty much goes into some detail on spirals and windings through the legs and to watch for the knees in particular. Granted, it doesn't give a specific "how-to" but then again, most would agree IHTBF to be trained.

If you disagree, where would that be? Why? I can't see it to be the spiral portion because here, you state:

The process of "The Cross" (which is very limited and comes from Southern Shaolin) began to develop into "spiralling" and a host of other things, just as I predicted things *must* go, some years back.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

I took that to mean you know about spiraling. So, I'm confused as to where you think things miss the mark.

And then this "greatness" began to intrude and other people, including Ueshiba, became "amateurs".
FWIW

Mike Sigman

Even you have trivialized Ueshiba's knowledge and skills, Mike. And you've readjusted your views of what he knew over the years.

And a last thing to think of: It's unclear how much of the complete hara/dantien usage that Ueshiba had. My opinion of what he knew has grown over the last 4-5 years.

Best.

Mike

Watching the pattern of my speculations/observations about Aikido and I.S. over the years, the trend is that I have to amend to allow that Ueshiba, Tohei, and a few others new more than I originally estimated, but less that "full banana" level of some of the so-called "internal martial arts". Aikido, as done by Ueshiba, appears to be an art that uses "neijin" (internal strength) and "neigongs" (internal exercises via misogi, breathing techniques, etc.), but it is not one of the "neijia" (internal family of martial arts) because it doesn't have the full-blown Six Harmonies movement.... but there are caveats too complicated to go into on this forum.
FWIW

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 03:58 PM

That pretty much goes into some detail on spirals and windings through the legs and to watch for the knees in particular. Granted, it doesn't give a specific "how-to" but then again, most would agree IHTBF to be trained. Right... it doesn't go into any details on "how to". That's the main point, Mark. Also, that quote describes something that could be called "spiralling", but it doesn't describe classical spiralling at all.
If you disagree, where would that be? Why? Honestly, think back to how much stuff you read about in posts in the past about how to do I.S. stuff. At a certain level at least the written description can give people an academic idea of in which direction to look/think. Past that elementary level, though, it's pretty hard to describe something without showing it first. Conversely, people who try to learn things (figure them out) from descriptions almost always wind up doing something wrong (hasn't that been your experience, too?). So where I disagree is fairly easy to show but difficult to explain in writing. What I've been doing is making sure that people who are progressing nicely learn how to do these things and so they'll be available to show them to a wider audience pretty soon (plus I'm sure a number of them will get beyond what I've been able to do). I took that to mean you know about spiraling. So, I'm confused as to where you think things miss the mark. A lot of people think they know what spiralling is, Mark. I run into people all the time who "teach spiralling". You see what a mess that discussion can be. Look at how many people on AikiWeb said just a few years ago that they teach ki/kokyu skills.
Even you have trivialized Ueshiba's knowledge and skills, Mike. I didn't trivialize his skills in that quote you supplied. I simply said that it's unclear how much dantien usage he had. That's not a trivialization at all, since most of the Japanese martial arts appear to have a southern Shaolin origin (look at their practice method similarities) and southern Shaolin (Nanquan) uses a different approach than the so-called "neijia" arts which use a lot of dantien control. As I've stated a number of times, the differences between those two do not mean better or worse. My opinion rising on Ueshiba's level actually has nothing to do with your statement. So I assume you must mean some other word than "trivialize", unless you were just doing a reach for some sort of equivalency to toss back at me? BTW... why haven't you been publicly asking Dan all these questions?
And you've readjusted your views of what he knew over the years.Let's be clear, Mark. You have posted a number of posts about Ueshiba that diminish his role in Aikido. The comment of mine you quoted doesn't diminish but simply states something is unclear. My readjustment of Ueshiba's skills is part of an ongoing attempt to see what he knew, not an attempt to make him pale in comparison with Daito Ryu or anything else.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

12-21-2009, 04:27 PM

BTW, Mark, let me re-emphasize a point. If *you* (or someone else) want a discussion to progress about a topic, why not post your own understanding? As I noted before, too often I see posts from someone who wants to start a discussion or get casual information, but that sort of approach has never really inspired me to offer much. The person who is really working on something must have some input or starting impression based on their own work, so they should have something to put into the discussion. I've contributed a lot of discussions over the years (note again the humorous part that Gary Stier used one of my illustrations on RSF as part of the discussion you think is so good) that turned out to be nothing more than satisfying someone's afternoon whimsical thought and which had nothing to do with anything that they're really working on. It sort of gets tiring, after a number of years of it.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

phitruong

12-21-2009, 05:06 PM

"The bones of the legs need to remain stable and the muscles are pulled coiling up and opening on one side and coiling and winding down on the other. But the bones stay straight and therefore the feet are stable. If anything the knees may go back and forth (like in and out from front to back) but never are they pulled with the coiling as to sway side to side with the hips."

pull out the quote. isn't this the same as sanchin stand, i.e. walk like a duck? question though, if the coiling/winding goes up one side and goes down the other side, where is the middle, where the up and down meet? wouldn't the up on one side then down the other side creates a loop, with your body and the earth as two opposite poles? just thinking out loud.

you know, you guys can bicker all you want about who is the expert and so on; however, it's a common knowledge that Asian DNA has the decoder algorithm for IS. :D

Thomas Campbell

12-21-2009, 11:03 PM

[snip]
you know, you guys can bicker all you want about who is the expert and so on; however, it's a common knowledge that Asian DNA has the decoder algorithm for IS. :D

They've got the knees for it too. :D

bob_stra

12-22-2009, 03:35 AM

12-22-2009, 06:53 AM

Let's be clear, Mark. You have posted a number of posts about Ueshiba that diminish his role in Aikido.

As you have said, "Show me the famous quote. I've never said that."

12-22-2009, 07:26 AM

I understood there to be a difference between peng and peng jing ('the jing'), so am somewhat confused as to the classification of chansi-jin as 'the jing'. Always thought that meant 'reeling energy', which - whilst the hallmark of Chen style - wasn't the hallmark of IS.
There is no such classification. There were other statements of differentiation as well; to support that the classics were mistinterpreted and misunderstood by other prevous masters. Like their comments about double-weighting, it's deliberate - and meant to be controversial.
In perspective-have you ever been in a room with a master level teacher of the JMA, who states that other Master class teachers of a single style got it wrong?
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 07:52 AM

As you have said, "Show me the famous quote. I've never said that."Er... you've never said what? I didn't give a quote for you to ask for, so that's a bizarre statement to ask for the quote. Do you mean an example of one of the numerous posts where you've talked about how Ueshiba owed everything to Takeda.... posts which have been mentioned a number of times, as you well know? Any particular flavor you want? What you started doing after those posts was say that they weren't meant to trivialize and that you really respected Ueshiba, yada, yada, but that doesn't change the fact that you have made a number of them and we all know it. Of course, you'll then want to discuss whether you were really trivializing Ueshiba, so if that's the sort of discussion you want, start a thread that says "I've never trivialized Ueshiba" and let's see how many people can contribute various posts of your, without derailing this thread.

Mike

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 08:09 AM

There is no such classification. Since your vague assertion is sloppy with its pronouns, let me ask, to be clear: are you saying that there is no difference between peng and peng jing as descriptors in Taijiquan? If that's what you're saying, I can quote from several books to show you that "peng" is used to indicate a directive jin while peng jing is used within Taiji to indicate the basic neijin itself. What is your assertion?

BTW.... don't forget that you have a number of questions in the thread that you haven't been able to answer yet.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 08:22 AM

That's not what I meant.
You have avoided real answers to both Mark's and Josh's questions and not answered points in several of my posts.
Don't bother.

Mark,
Did you actually expect an answer? He is not going to answer, he can't answer. He sidesteps direct and truly informative answers to questions of his own statements "That this or that person is wrong or partally right but there is something deeper, or missing" and yet he never offers clear and detailed amplification and answers.
It's a cat and mouse game he plays with people..
Call him on it and he states, "Well I could help but_____________insert reason of the day, then he goes on to misrepresent why others don't answer.

Stop and consider, is it possible to be so informed of such a wide ranging topic encompassing many arts and then have real ability in all of them?
Or is it just havng enough outsider information you can quote to BS your way around others who don't. The same can be said for a couple of guys I know who are extremely, well read in various JMA, but....

Again, I encourage people to.go meet the real master level guys and cross-hands with them.
Happy holidays
Dan

12-22-2009, 08:32 AM

Er... you've never said what? I didn't give a quote for you to ask for, so that's a bizarre statement to ask for the quote. Do you mean an example of one of the numerous posts where you've talked about how Ueshiba owed everything to Takeda.... posts which have been mentioned a number of times, as you well know? Any particular flavor you want? What you started doing after those posts was say that they weren't meant to trivialize and that you really respected Ueshiba, yada, yada, but that doesn't change the fact that you have made a number of them and we all know it. Of course, you'll then want to discuss whether you were really trivializing Ueshiba, so if that's the sort of discussion you want, start a thread that says "I've never trivialized Ueshiba" and let's see how many people can contribute various posts of your, without derailing this thread.

Mike

Um, Ueshiba does owe his martial skills to Takeda. That's fact. Just as Sagawa owed his martial skills to Takeda. You might still be searching for that holy grail of the Chinese connection via Deguchi, but it's pretty obvious to anyone doing the in depth research in Daito ryu where Ueshiba got his martial skills. Where aiki came from. That would be Takeda. Fact. And aiki isn't a trivial matter at all. It's what gave Ueshiba the base to branch off into the spiritual side of things.

But I didn't say Ueshiba owed everything to Takeda. I've stated numerous times Ueshiba had a spiritual side. I've stated numerous times that Ueshiba created something new in aikido, but that in video he's still seen doing Daito ryu techniques. It's all fact for anyone to see. Doesn't trivialize what Ueshiba had done. And unlike you, I always knew he had the "skills". I've never had to readjust my view of Ueshiba's skills. Quite a few people have had to readjust their views of Daito ryu and Aikido because of certain people being able to use Takeda's aiki in a live environment. Huh. Isn't that a kicker.

Way too off topic for me. I'll leave things at that.

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 08:40 AM

That's not what I meant.
You have avoided real answers to both Mark's and Josh's questions and not answered points in several of my posts.
Don't bother.
Hey, I'm quite happy to start a separate thread and begin filling it up with posts from both you and Mark (it will be a big number, total) that spend time on trivializing Ueshiba. I'll start today.

"Answering peoples' questions" is quite different from "making a bold, wrong assertion and then refusing to back it up with facts". I'm not under any compulsion to answer questions at whim, but if I'm factually challenged on a statement I publicly made, I answer it. When you're challenged on off the cuff and incorrect assertions that you can't support, you go quiet.

I'll start a thread this afternoon and start filling it up with posts from you and Mark that spend a lot of time trivializing Ueshiba. Anyone want to start a raffle on how many posts the total will be? I'll shoot from the hip and place my guess at the total for Dan and Mark will be 30. Other guesses?

I'll start the thread in Open Discussions.

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 08:49 AM

Um, Ueshiba does owe his martial skills to Takeda. That's fact. Just as Sagawa owed his martial skills to Takeda. You might still be searching for that holy grail of the Chinese connection via Deguchi, but it's pretty obvious to anyone doing the in depth research in Daito ryu where Ueshiba got his martial skills. Where aiki came from. That would be Takeda. Fact. And aiki Nobody has ever questioned where Ueshiba got his prior training. Did Takeda do Misogi the way Ueshiba did? Do you understand what Misogi breathing does (hint: take a look at a post I recently put in one of P. Goldsbury's threads). So does Ueshiba owe everything in Aikido to Takeda? Not proven. But the sheer number of posts you and Dan have devoted to it show that it's a fixation to diminish Ueshiba's role in Aikido. Let's see how big that number of posts is, now that you've asked for it.

Mike Sigman

Stormcrow34

12-22-2009, 08:52 AM

Again, I encourage people to.go meet the real master level guys and cross-hands with them.
Happy holidays
Dan

Excuse the interruption gentlemen, but will someone please tell me who "the real master level guys" are and where I can find them?

Thanks and Happy Holidays!

12-22-2009, 09:24 AM

Nobody has ever questioned where Ueshiba got his prior training. Did Takeda do Misogi the way Ueshiba did? Do you understand what Misogi breathing does (hint: take a look at a post I recently put in one of P. Goldsbury's threads).

Mike Sigman

Great questions, Mike.

Can you post the relevant proof of how Ueshiba did Misogi breath training? Can you post the relevant proof of if, when, or how Takeda did breath training? Then, can you correlate the two? How in depth is your research into Daito ryu breath training methods from known and capable men who use aiki (there are less than a handful in that category)? How in depth is your research into Ueshiba's breath training. You can't use Tohei because he went elsewhere for his breath work. We're talking Ueshiba and Takeda.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if Ueshiba's spiritual Misogi breath work was an adaptation/incorporation of what he learned from Takeda's breath training? Just like his spiritual vision was incorporated into his aiki training, which, btw, he learned from Takeda.

Just as all the other students of Takeda took their training into personal levels, so did Ueshiba (I've said that many times). Ueshiba found the spiritual (for example, Deguchi and Oomoto kyo) and incorporated that into his martial abilities. I don't get into the spiritual because it's a worse mess than aiki. IHTBE, not IHTBF. It Has To Be Experienced. Reading, writing, and Feeling won't get you there. Spirituality is in the direct experiences. Feeling Ueshiba as he's possessed by kami isn't going to do anything. You have to experience that first hand. So, anyone out there want to jump on that bandwagon???

Anyway, until proof surfaces of what the actual breath training that Ueshiba and Takeda did, I think it's pretty much a stab in the dark at what they mean. So, hint wise, unless you've got proof of the above, I don't see where anyone without the necessary research could come to distinct conclusions. Opinions, yes. But we all have that, don't we?

Unless you want to post in depth research into correlations between the Chinese breathing methods, Japanese breathing methods, Ueshiba's take on breathing methods, and Takeda's breathing methods? Like I said, great questions ... no research, facts, or answers given ... just opinions. It would be a nice offshoot thread from this one, though.

Course, if you really want to trivialize things, you could just open a thread on being trivial instead. That'd be a much greater use of time and research. Oh, wait. You did. Huh. Choice between posting information and research about Ueshiba, Takeda, breathing methods, etc or a thread about digging up supposed posts on trivializing Ueshiba. What was that Indy scene ... oh yeah, which Carpenter's Cup did you choose?

12-22-2009, 09:27 AM

Excuse the interruption gentlemen, but will someone please tell me who "the real master level guys" are and where I can find them?

Thanks and Happy Holidays!

While they probably wouldn't say they were "master level guys", I'd say that Liu Chengde and Li Chugong seem pretty good. Howard has spoken very highly of Okamoto. A lot of people seem to think Sam Chin is very good. There was a thread here on Aikiweb that listed people to visit. Quite a few people have trained with Akuzawa. That's a start, hopefully. :)

Chris Covington

12-22-2009, 09:55 AM

"Can you post the relevant proof of if, when, or how Takeda did breath training?"

Has anyone looked into the kiai/kokyu methods of Jikishinkage-ryu? Nahhh... couldn't be.

Stormcrow34

12-22-2009, 10:17 AM

While they probably wouldn't say they were "master level guys", I'd say that Liu Chengde and Li Chugong seem pretty good. Howard has spoken very highly of Okamoto. A lot of people seem to think Sam Chin is very good. There was a thread here on Aikiweb that listed people to visit. Quite a few people have trained with Akuzawa. That's a start, hopefully. :)

That's a start and thank you. With all of the....well you know....going on around here, it's difiicult to tell who the charlatans are...or aren't....

Thanks again.

thisisnotreal

12-22-2009, 10:26 AM

THESE are the Charlatans (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhSA8FwdS2A&feature=fvw)

-------------------

My opinion = 2cents; okay? Keep that in mind. : ]

I find it funny talking about off-topicness in this thread.
What was the topic again? "Internal Body Skills between Chinese and Japanese arts"....shame really...you guys may have had a really interesting talk and we (/I) would've gotten to learn a lot by eavesdropping.. dang. Isn't this kind of one area of your specialization Mike? Something historically you have been most interested in discussing? I would love to hear more from you on this very topic; and how you experience chansijin; and all this stuff. Is chansijin an inner loop in the body too? Is it the same as how the (parts of the) DR model was explained? SOrry; if I make a lot of mistakes. My reach exceeds my grasp (as usual)

I guess now there's so much bad mojo a real discussion isn't likely. Maybe others'll run with it.

RE: last post. Thanks for your response Mike. Can I be honest enough to say, I struggle with something. Frankly; your answer as to why it's difficult to post 'how-to' or nuts-and-bolts details flies in the face of what and how you claim QIJIN workds. You see that, right? Then at the very same time you suggest we do that very thing to stimulate the conversation. :confused: I really only care about the specifics; that stuff is really cool. Any chance you could post a reference to a post of yours you feel has a similar level of detail from the archives? I don't know; and re: Detail vs. How-To:: at some point a specific enough description of "what" is going on has to be able to be taken as a 'type' of a 'how-to' in that....well....now you know "what'....that should be a good enough hint/helper for you to start to find 'how-to'...so I feel it gets confusing when the descriptions are specific enough. Yeah; it certainly could be more step-by-step; but I don't know that i ever saw that here.
2/ And also; Dan made some pretty serious accusations about your MO and past behaviour. What's up with that? If that is true well...damn...no kidding you guys don't get along. Keep in mind; I have no idea about any of this personally; but that is what a stranger to all this sees.
3/ re: breathing=relax (http://www.aikidojournal.com/?id=3838): i personally felt it was referring to this post. You could probably go into more specific detail had you wanted to there (no?). You wrote on the type or quality of relaxing; but can it be taken literally as the same type of 'description' taken as a 'how-to'? I think you are. Is there more you could point to to help? Are you pointing to submerged breathing? Or something else? You talk about the importance of the breath: I always wished you had gone on and wrote more on that post. Just a teaser that! Or do I miss the thing right in front of my eyes? (again!?)
4/ And re: "Giving to Get"...For instance Phi made a cool post just now you could've launched off of; and i've tried to do that too(for sure i've not done as well); but you and others choose not to respond. And that has to be okay; and now maybe neither the time nor place, nor absolutely is it not owed ;but you do choose when and how to respond (as you should); so it doesn't seem fair to accuse Dan of doing the same, eh? That is a bit of a disconnect.

Anyhoo.... as usual; those are unsolicited thoughts from the peanut gallery. worth what you paid for them.
NATTA!

p.s. re: Phi's post
"where is the middle, where the up and down meet"
How about this; They don't meet...as in collide; but rather have two lines (that are either up/or/down) that do either...and then you 'intentionally' meet/or/mix them in the 'switching yard' that is the hara/dantien area (i.e. the cinnabar/mixing field): between either 'groundpaths':
gp 1/ they go right into the "wheelhouse" of the gluteus maximus (http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_repair/lats_not_just_for_pulldowns%3bjsessionid=424AB16BECB2530D75A3F04DCD6B5FC6.hydra) and then connect and link on the lines on the 'outside/rear' of the body
or
gp 2/ The go up through the soleus/rear-groin/psoas/dantien/center line on the 'inside/front' of the body
Then 'choose' with bodyskill how to combine them to 'meet' in a useful way with the center/intent/dantien area. Which one is up and which one is the down... is 'up' to you?
? dunno.

More interesting would have been is these question'
re: "where is the middle, where the up and down meet"
Do all arts have the same answer to this question?
Are there 'standard' answers to this question in JPN and CN arts? Is one more likely to 'answer' it in one way or the other?
How does 6-harmony movement answer this? How does Aikido/DR answer this?
/random thoughts

Happy Festivus Everyone!
Don't forget your pole!

Be safe out there!

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 11:10 AM

Great questions, Mike.

Can you post the relevant proof of how Ueshiba did Misogi breath training? Can you post the relevant proof of if, when, or how Takeda did breath training? You've got it backwards, Mark. You and Dan are the ones claiming Ueshiba got all his stuff from Takeda, so those particular proofs are in your court, as I've pointed out before. If you don't have any knowledge or proof that Takeda's misogi training was the same as Ueshiba's then the "Ueshiba got everything from Takeda" argument falls on it's face.

Asking me to prove/disprove what you've posited about Takeda/Ueshiba is frowned upon in Debate 101.

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 02:02 PM

You've got it backwards, Mark. You and Dan are the ones claiming Ueshiba got all his stuff from Takeda, so those particular proofs are in your court, as I've pointed out before. If you don't have any knowledge or proof that Takeda's misogi training was the same as Ueshiba's then the "Ueshiba got everything from Takeda" argument falls on it's face.

Asking me to prove/disprove what you've posited about Takeda/Ueshiba is frowned upon in Debate 101.

Mike Sigman
Usually the burden to counter previously known and accepted research is on the late arrival.

Actually I don't state what you just offered as my opinion. That's yet another incomplete and poorly defined view of my opinion.
I offer known facts and the research of others. The proofs are already established. To which I often discuss how and when and where he modified that to include specific directional changes, as well as changes to the body method that had to take place to achieve his goal.
I think you are confusing my comments about his proven training history, with what he did after.

Verified training history of Ueshiba
1.The only lengthy training Ueshiba ever got (over 20+ years) was in D.R. period. Everything else was discredited.
2. He taught and handed out scrolls to all of the prewar deshi in...DR.
3. The only people known in Japan known to have equaled or surpassed (pick your poison) were his peers in.....DR.
4. There is no other evidence to support or negate that what he did was based on anything other than DR. And that he-like his peers-only expanded on later. The essential skills and power being DR
4. There is no proof that what he trained was not already included in Takedas training regimen. (I think he did add things too, but we cannot prove it didn't already exist in DR. No one knows what Takeda taught).
5. To date; no one can produce evidence of anyone who trained ONLY in Ueshiba's later methods who matched his power. Only those from DR with Takeda's teachings did.

I am all for giving him credit for "growing" and changing and making discoveries. Which when I am not being misquoted, I frequently say. Sagawa , Okomoto, Kodo, all stated they made discoveries past their initial eye-opening experience in DR. In fact many in DR say that. The body method -by its nature-opens your mind. Ueshiba's changes were more prounounced as they were a marked difference in the execution and look and feel of DR...by choice. I happen to admire the choice, as I am quoted on in Ellis's book.

But in the end what do we know and can prove? In his time, the story of unusual and immense power and skills begins and ends with Daito ryu.

What isn't true
All that is left is a continuing string of people to show up over the years with their "theories" and speculations of where he got his body skills, to include; yagyu, mastery of multiple koryu, Bagua, misogi training and others. All of which have been debunked.
But no one until now- asked for or demanded an unsupported speculation be proved false.

To state I trivialize Ueshiba -or that anyone from establised DR schools does, is a fabrication. I think he is just viewed in a proper perspective.
Happy Holidays
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 02:15 PM

Usually the burden to counter previously known and accepted research is on the late arrival.

Actually I don't state what you just offered as my opinion. That's yet another incomplete and poorly defined view of my opinion.
I offer known facts and the research of others. The proofs are already established. To which I often discuss how and when and where he modified that to include specific directional changes, as well as changes to the body method that had to take place to achieve his goal.
I think you are confusing my comments about his proven training history, with what he did after.

Verified training history of Ueshiba
1.The only lengthy training Ueshiba ever got (over 20+ years) was in D.R. period. Everything else was discredited.
2. He taught and handed out scrolls to all of the pewar deshi in...DR.
3. The only people known in Japan known to have equaled or surpassed (pick your poison) were his peers in.....DR.
4. There is no other evidence to support or negate that what he did was based on anything other than DR that he-like his peers-only expanded on later. The essential skills and power being DR
4. There is no proof that what he trained was not already included in Takedas training regimen. (I think he did add things too, but we cannot prove it didn't already exist as no one knows what Takeda taught).
5. TO dat, no one can produce evidence of anyone who trained ONLY in Ueshiba's later methods who matched his power. Only those from DR did.

I am all for giving him credit for "growing" and changing and making discoveries. Which when I am not being misquoted, I frequently say. Sagawa , Okomoto, Kodo, all stated they made discoveries past their initial eye-opening experience in DR. In fact many in DR all say that. The body method -by its nature-opens your mind.

But in the end wha to we know and can prove? In his time, the story of unusual and immense power and skills begins and ends with Daito ryu.

What isn't true
All that is left is a continuing string of people to show up over the years with their "theories" and speculations of where he got his body skills, to include; yagyu, mastery of multiple koryu, Bagua, and others. All of which have been debunked.
But no one until now- asked for or demanded an unsupported speculation be proved false.

Happy Holidays
DanWhat was that? It certainly wasn't a logical defense of the idea that Ueshiba got his "power" and/or m.a. skills only from Takeda. Your reasoning falls back to "no one has proved that Ueshiba didn't get everything from Takeda", which is, again, back to the question of asking others to prove a negative.

Let's go to one point that I've made a number of times. If Ueshiba got his "power" from training some unknown methods of Takeda, why did Ueshiba use misogi breathing exercises (and related)? Was Ueshiba preaching his misogi breathing/exercuses while in secret he was doing something else, in some bizarre attempt to mislead people?

In other words, the constant minimization of Ueshiba's skills has a very big question-mark/hole that calls, at a minimum, for further exploration and a few less posts denigrating Ueshiba's efforts. The number of posts spent diminishing Ueshiba on an Aikido forum has got to be something for the record books.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 02:34 PM

Nobody has ever questioned where Ueshiba got his prior training.
Oh REALLY? Where have you been

Did Takeda do Misogi the way Ueshiba did?
Do you understand what Misogi breathing does?
Do you understand what AIki in yo is and does?

So does Ueshiba owe everything in Aikido to Takeda?
Not proven
Not disproven either

You're still at zero.

There were 23 years of training in DR- and nothing else that even comes close.
1. He got and was being recognized for power DURING his time with Takeda.
2. There was no time period AFTER when he suddenly (and provably) got MORE power.

Now, once again, put your thinking cap on.
Who else do we know had that kind of power that we have testimony of?
Takeda
Sagawa
Hisa
Kodo

And??? Who do we have in that time period from misogi training with provable power and skills like those men?
Er...no one...you're back to zero again aren't you?
Dan

ChrisMoses

12-22-2009, 02:36 PM

Just sayin... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/)

:D

12-22-2009, 02:37 PM

Priceless!:D

dps

12-22-2009, 02:40 PM

Just sayin... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/)

:D

"This is like deja vu all over again."
Yogi Berra.

David :)

thisisnotreal

12-22-2009, 02:52 PM

just sayin' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx_ZU-qRD1Q#t=0m19s)

John Connolly

12-22-2009, 03:48 PM

LOL, Chris!

gregstec

12-22-2009, 04:32 PM

just sayin' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx_ZU-qRD1Q#t=0m19s)

Yeah, that is IT ! - now all we need is a 'How to' manual - any takers? :D

Mike Sigman

12-22-2009, 04:38 PM

Oh REALLY? Where have you been Gee.... I just flipped open a book by K Ueshiba and it's there.... all about D.R. Maybe I'm misreading.

Do you understand what AIki in yo is and does? Is it like Vodka and makes you drunk? We oughta make that a new toast: "Alki in yo face!".
Not disproven either Er... I rest my case.

"Not disproven" means your case isn't proven, in other words. I could say more, but it might give away something and I want you and your guys to enjoy what you have. ;)

Mike Sigman

Lorel Latorilla

12-22-2009, 09:23 PM

In the words of Rob Liberti, "for the love of God, give it a rest".

12-23-2009, 09:38 AM

Maybe I'm misreading. Is it like Vodka and makes you drunk? We oughta make that a new toast: "Alki in yo face!". Er... I rest my case.

....I could say more, but it might give away something and I want you and your guys to enjoy what you have. ;)
Mike Sigman
This misdirection may work on some people but it's transparent to me.
1. So you don't know what Aiki in yo ho is and does?
Why not just say that?
2. The translation I offered of what the Hong guy was doing you say wasn't accurate? How, where?
3. You say over and over I don't offer information-I pointed out your many errors in that regard....no answer just more misdirection

Please spare us more invective, dissembling of your knowledge and very questionable abilities to actually fight with what you do or do not know. In your reply follow your own advice:
Start with a sentence of actual substance of a technical process.

I call B.S. on you Mike. SImple, and direct. Other than you quoting others-I've never read a single word of anything "deep" coming from -you- personally.

I've a sense that I'm arguing with a desk sergeant who never put his boots in the mud.
Dan

12-23-2009, 10:29 AM

Since this started out as a potential discussion of internal power in the JMA and how it might compare with the CMA, I would like to once again suggest people get out and test and play with both. How are-you-going to know unless you get get dirty and do the work? At a point, experienced people can at "feel" what some teachers feel like and know it's not a direction they're interested in-others may feel something they have not felt before and start a wonderful second martial art career.

Most-if not close to all- of the people who train or have trained here have now felt and to some extent trained with various combinations of: Okomoto, Kiyama, Saotome, Otake, Chiba, and Liu ChengDe, CXW, LDX, Wang hai jun, He jin bao. Added to that list are Sigman and Arkuzawa. I could include modern style MMA styles (but its not the point).

When it comes to training and testing they have at least stepped up to begin their own personal evaluations and search. It's best for each person to be a bit cold-blooded and analytical. Take nothing at face value and make personal assessments of what you have felt and where you want to personally go. It does no good to take advice from sources with questionable hands-on skills, nor from people playing expert from outside the arts.
Get in and get dirty and feel actual experts and then see what their top students feel like. Here's another tip; if you are looking for IP/ aiki, and the substance of the training is waza, or "principles" of waza and the teacher isn't getting their hands on you and fixing various ways you are carrying and handling your weight, or getting into details of how to help you feel and adjust and fix your body and giving you solo work - it might not be where you want to go long term.

Waza and a teachers "feel" can be compelling, and if their students can express similar characteristics, then even more so, but the key is to get a firm comparison to others doing similar work and -their- students as well. Ask how long they have been training and what they do. If they don't have regular students or if you can't feel someone with power they have created-that might speak volumes. There is no end of teachers in the JMA and CMA who are guilty of that.

Even though Mike and I don't get along we can at least say that there is an effort under way for some people like him, and Ark, Ushiro, and I to actually teach various methods to gain power and sensitivity. Forgive us our debates and don't let it sway you. I know from people who have trained with them that Mike and Ark and Ushiro are all approachable in person. If you want to know about me ask around; there are dozens of people here who know me. The internet isn't a good judge of personal character.
This is about you right? Like I said, be cold blooded and analytical, strive for you. IP/Aiki remains the best training in the world for understanding the MA of the world.
Good luck in your search
Happy holidays
Dan

Erick Mead

12-23-2009, 10:34 AM

Start with a sentence of actual substance of a technical process. OK.

Aiki in yo ho is the application of systemic resonant shear -- meaning that stresses and motions are enabled to change sign and planes of action interchangeably and continuously -- torsional, tensile or compressive shear that applies torsional, tensile or compressive buckling or funicular load shifting: torsional, like in a torqued pool noodle; tensile, like in a whip; compressive, like in a collapsing building; funicular loading, like in a chain or arch.

And technically, that was all in one sentence.

What a great exercise. Like haiku with mechanics, almost...

One training method -- find all the ways your body can act in the manner of those things.

Here endeth the lesson -- but the proof is left as an exercise for the class...,
---------------------------

But -- somehow -- I rather doubt the complete sincerity of the request.

:)

12-23-2009, 10:50 AM

I made no request from you-therefore the sincerety is not an issue.
Aiki in yo ho has not one thing to do with that Eric. It's a completely unrelated topic to what you wrote.
That was sincere by the way.
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-23-2009, 11:46 AM

This misdirection may work on some people but it's transparent to me.
1. So you don't know what Aiki in yo ho is and does?
Why not just say that?

Try the archives, Dan. I said that every variation of the single jin, neijin, groundpath, weightpath is simply a variation of the core jin. I've said it a number of times. There is nothing to Aiki in yo ho, to reiki-no-ho (just to grab another of example of how different appellations of the same core skills are still the same core skill), and others that isn't some known variant. I.e., there's nothing you know that I don't know or that any reasonably skilled-in-I.S. CMA'er isn't going to know. The fact that you don't understand that highlights where you are. You're mixed up about the idea of "one jin", "groundpath" as being a simple descriptor for the "jin that starts at the feet, is controlled by the waist, and expressed by the hands", and a number of other things. You're trying to play buzzwords, which is worse yet. All these attempts of yours to trivialize and name-call simply don't work, but they certainly leave an opinion about you.

I've asked over the years that you try to get into some explicit how-to's. I've asked explicit questions *based on assertions you have previously made* and you can't answer them. So most of your comments look like spite that is designed to compensate for what you really know. Let's drop it. Take any functional, mechanical statement I've made on this forum and expand on it. That's the way we did it on the Neijia List, Dan.... if you knew something you could discuss it in depth. If someone didn't know much, they invariably went to spiteful commentary... and it was obvious to everyone. I.e., it's very hard to hide your level when you have to engage in an open, forthright discussion. On the other hand, I'd suggest that you would be far ahead of where you are now if a few years ago you'd dropped the pretense of being all-knowing and simply engaged in honest, functional discussion.
2. The translation I offered of what the Hong guy was doing you say wasn't accurate? How, where? Dan, since you started this game of taking information from some of my old sources and then saying that it is "beginner stuff", I've blocked off your access to new info and re-jiggered the QiJin forum so that the better levels of information can't slip out for you to use. You should know what the Hong guy was saying and meant. It's pretty obvious. Your problem is that you hang around with guys who don't know enough to feed you what's really going on. BTW... why pick Hong and his guys as experts anyway? Aren't you aware of the real history of Chen FaKe and the Beijing students he had, most of whom all claim to be the single person where the true Chen style resides and that Chen Village has lost the real stuff? ;)

3. You say over and over I don't offer information-I pointed out your many errors in that regard....no answer just more misdirection
Where.... show me one instance of real and useable information that is correct. Maybe I've missed it. If so, I'll apologize.

I call B.S. on you Mike. SImple, and direct. Other than you quoting others-I've never read a single word of anything "deep" coming from -you- personally. Well, maybe so, Dan. You've quoted from my posts and videos of the past, in archived discussions, so you've obviously gone and searched for the material. You've de-briefed people who have been to my workshops. And of course you're free to continue the role that "it's all baby stuff that Dan has known for 100 years", but many of us in the CMA community have seen this play out before. Here's what happens. If you want to play that game then the spiggot gets turned off and your guys wind up in 10-20 years have the equivalent skills of a Stan Baker. All you had to do was drop the role-playing and do some honest discussion and I'd have been happy to oblige. Now my koryu vows prevent me from telling you anything.;)
I've a sense that I'm arguing with a desk sergeant who never put his boots in the mud.
Keep trivializing, Dan.

Mike Sigman

12-23-2009, 12:18 PM

DH writes:
Please spare us more invective, dissembling of your knowledge and very questionable abilities to actually fight with what you do or do not know. In your reply follow your own advice:
Start with a sentence of actual substance of a technical process.

Other than you "quoting" other sources-I've never read a single word of anything "deep" coming from -you- personally.

And?
Crickets.................

Dan

Mike Sigman

12-23-2009, 12:53 PM

Well, this isn't very deep, but it'll make my point for me. The jin skills that are the physical manifestation of "the Qi of Heaven and the Qi of Earth" (something Ueshiba referred to in his writings, BTW) are the one jin. Everyone who knows anything knows that. The "Chanssujin" (reeling-silk jin) of the Chen-style is called by them as "the basic jin from which the Chen-style gets its power". But then again, everyone knows that the chanssujin is composed of the four directions of the basic jin: peng, lu, ji, an. So anyone who would build a thesis or misunderstand the difference between chanssujin being commonly called the main (most important) jin of the Chen style and mixing that up with the "one jin", simply shows what they don't know. There's no way to hide it once a statement like that gets out in public.

Of course, there are a *number* of other similarly-revealing statements archived in AW and some other forums that do that same sort of inadvertant disclosure of what someone really understands. Now if someone makes fairly basic mistakes and then compounds it by saying they've never read anything deep, you can imagine how it looks to any of a number of knowledgeable readers who wonder about even the ability to understand anything deep if simple errors are made.

Incidentally, this whole topic of reeling-silk/spiralling expands deeper and deeper, making any discussion of "spiralling" another topic that can easily show what someone knows. But of course you already know that, right?

OK, your turn. Here's a very simple one. You misunderstood about the "one jin" (basic jin) and how it's a duality (the jin that starts from the feet, is controlled by the waist, and expressed in the fingers). See if you can explain the physical basis for that duality.

Mike Sigman

BTW, Dan. When you get into the personal comments about my "questionable abilities", be aware that I've also heard a number of stories about peoples' "questionable abilities", but I try to leave the personal smears out of a discussion, as much as possible. Please try to do the same. It's sort of Chicken***t, although I doubt you really understand that. If you can maintain a functional, in-depth discussion, please try to do so.

BTW.... I asked for one example of a detailed posting from you in my previous post .... you seem to have forgotten already. Where.... show me one instance of real and useable information that is correct. Maybe I've missed it. If so, I'll apologize.
Mike Sigman

Erick Mead

12-23-2009, 01:17 PM

I made no request from you-therefore the sincerity is not an issue.
Aiki in yo ho has not one thing to do with that Eric. It's a completely unrelated topic to what you wrote.
That was sincere by the way.
Really? You say so? I am not convinced you even understand what I wrote -- that does not mean it is the exercise in obfuscation you imply -- it just means the subject matter is dense and precise -- appropriately so for anything martially useful -- if it were shallow and sloppy it would not be martially effective.

Show, in any way you care to demonstrate it analytically that the statement is "completely unrelated." I am pleased to wait.

Your "cold blooded and analytical" advice doesn't work for anyone if you (or anyone) merely dictate the concepts and terms of the analysis -- especially because those terms are not objectively defined -- as Exhibit 1 witness your argument over the meaning of Aiki in yo with Mike (not to mention watashi-wa)...

Analytical thought requires objective concepts. Actual analytical thought requires this -- it is not optional or a matter of personal style. Not numbers or equations necessarily-- but objective terms. Mine are --- as precise as I can make them. Anyone can look them up -- independent of me -- to analyze what they mean and how they may or may not describe certain actions.

Dictating terms by assumption of authority, though ...

Hey, so much easier ...

"So let it be written;

So let it be done ..."

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:9WMEnwlx4UsYxM:http://harlowgold.tripod.com/ramses.jpg

:straightf

12-23-2009, 05:11 PM

Right back to your same old routine, Mike. Another dodge.
Why do I say this
Other than you "quoting" other sources-I've never read a single word of anything "deep" coming from -you- personally.
Because it's what you do over and over. You just did it again on the transmission thread to Toby:
willow quotes would be the usual general Chinese quotes from cosmology about using the qi/forces of Heaven and Earth, harmony with the forces of nature (use the forces; no resistance), and movement within stillness (be interested to compare notes on that one, but don't want to write an exposition).
I'll bet you'll let Toby go first...for some very obvious reasons.
Anyway, ya just keep dodging nuts and bolts answers and instead recite Chinese classics and ask other people to describe things they do for you and then tell people "Well that's not bad but.....";)

I assume then that you can't explain Aiki in yo ho in plain language as I suspected all along? As "everyone knows,Mike;" it's pretty straight forward stuff. I'm sure once someone explains it to you- you'll tell them you already know that too, and have mastered that as well. ;)
Transparent as glass.
Dan

P.S. Your actual fighting skills with IP/Aiki are questionable. It's not an insult, it's just fact. Do you spar with experienced MMA people regularly, semi-regularly? Go free style with various weapons; sticks, knives, etc since you developed these skills? No? Well there ya go. That's what I meant by "mud on your boots." No problem, I've seen it before, it just help explains the internet aggression.

12-23-2009, 05:13 PM

Its not hard Eric. It's a completely different topic alltogether.
I'll be in Flrodia in Feb Eric. Would you like to compare notes and explain what you meant in person? Dinner and drinks on me.
And that is sincere
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-23-2009, 05:46 PM

Right back to your same old routine, Mike. Another dodge.
Why do I say this

Because it's what you do over and over. You just did it again on the transmission thread to Toby:

I'll bet you'll let Toby go first...for some very obvious reasons.
Anyway, ya just keep dodging nuts and bolts answers and instead recite Chinese classics and ask other people to describe things they do for you and then tell people "Well that's not bad but.....";)
The problem with those inane comments is that I've explained, publicly shown and taught (and they're on video, videos that you've seen and commented on yourself) all those things. What are you trying to do.... pretend that my entire history has disappeared because you have some desperate urge to attack me personally? Why don't you appeal to the public and ask if I've ever explained anything in depth to any of them? I'm not sure who you're think you're posturing to with this absurd nonsense, but think about it a second..... there is a huge number of people that you have to know realize you're simply blowing smoke about never having explained anything. I assume then that you can't explain Aiki in yo ho in plain language as I suspected all along? As "everyone knows,Mike;" it's pretty straight forward stuff. I'm sure once someone explains it to you- you'll tell them you already know that too, and have mastered that as well. ;)
Transparent as glass. Someone else just asked me the same question I'm thinking, Dan, so let me ask you.... do you really think that Aiki in yo ho is something that is outside of basic internal strength skills? In other words, did you understand my response that there is no big deal about Aiki in yo ho? You've seen my written, at-length descriptions of "aiki" in numerous posts on AikiWeb and I've asked in the past why you treat aiki as a "thing" when it's really just a variation of basic jin. You've never been able to answer. Yet aiki, as you term it, is simply a usage of jin. Do you want to deny that? P.S. Your actual fighting skills with IP/Aiki are questionable. It's not an insult, it's just fact. They're not questionable by you, Dan. You're once again simply looking for some way to smear. You're like these clowns that go around looking for some anecdote (usually something that happened in a controlled demonstration, but they hop on it anyway) about Chen Xiaowang, Ueshiba, Liang Shouyu, etc., etc., not because there's any interest in discussing what really happened or principles, but because they're looking for some way to put someone down. Like I said, pretty low class.

What big names have you defeated? That's the first question the Chinese ask about some loudmouth that brags incessantly about himself as a fighter. So what big names have you defeated, Dan, if your fighting is so important a proof of what you can do? Are you unbeatable? If not, then anyone who beats you in a real fight has got better I.S. credentials than you do, according to the rules you're trying to set. Or can you see the logical trap that you're setting for yourself? It's the same bs you did when you denigrated Ueshiba (an old Ueshiba) and let on how your skills are better than his were. But hey... you seem intent on some sort of desperate trivializing everyone you've met or heard of as not being quite up to par with you. So good luck, little man.

And by the way... you haven't answered a single substantive question I've asked. You simply can't. You made a chump of yourself with that comment about the one jin on RSF and not understanding about the famous jin quote.... so I'll ask the obvious question again: how can you claim to spot something "deep" when you're on record numerous times not understanding the superficial and obvious? My posts on "jin" and "aiki" are archived, so you can't say there's no answer. Your numerous sudden silences when confronted with an embarrassing revelation about your posts are archived, too.

Last time I'm asking.... either post something substantive or just live with it that you're fully and completely exposed now. I'm tired of the nonsense. Let Jun close the thread.

Mike Sigman

Stormcrow34

12-23-2009, 05:47 PM

I'll be in Flrodia in Feb Eric. Would you like to compare notes and explain what you meant in person? Dinner and drinks on me.
And that is sincere
Dan

Hey, I'll buy a couple of rounds too!

12-23-2009, 06:01 PM

We were talking about you, not me. And smearing? You've stated in the past you don't fight with it. I reiterated that and you're offended? Please.
Merry Chrismas
Mike

stan baker

12-23-2009, 06:31 PM

Hi Mike.
You should get some direct experience with Dan so you can stop embarrassing yourself with this talk, I have seen and felt what you have to offer.

stan

Marc Abrams

12-23-2009, 06:49 PM

What big names have you defeated? That's the first question the Chinese ask about some loudmouth that brags incessantly about himself as a fighter. So what big names have you defeated, Dan, if your fighting is so important a proof of what you can do? Are you unbeatable? If not, then anyone who beats you in a real fight has got better I.S. credentials than you do, according to the rules you're trying to set. Or can you see the logical trap that you're setting for yourself? It's the same bs you did when you denigrated Ueshiba (an old Ueshiba) and let on how your skills are better than his were. But hey... you seem intent on some sort of desperate trivializing everyone you've met or heard of as not being quite up to par with you. So good luck, little man.

Last time I'm asking.... either post something substantive or just live with it that you're fully and completely exposed now. I'm tired of the nonsense. Let Jun close the thread.

Mike Sigman

Mark kindly suggested that Dan and Mike, in the spirit of the holiday season go to their perspective corners and stop it already. Mike, the Master Debater, consistently violates his own rules about personal attacks. He has simply fails to impress anybody in his role as some Master Debater.

Mike likes to talk the talk, and now maybe it is time that he walks his talk.

Okay Mike, You present yourself as somebody. Why don't we arrange a private meeting between you and Dan so that both of you can both talk it out and work it out. Hell, I will open my house and dojo up to both of you to finally meet and step up to the proverbial plate. I would assume that at least Dan will step up to the proverbial plate and put his words to the test. How about you?

I frankly am sick and tired of both of you going at each other in the manner in which you both do. I would not be surprised that a poll would show that a majority of us feel the same way.

So Mike, If Dan is the "little man" and if you are not willing to walk your talk, what does that make you? My money is on that Dan would be willing to have such a meeting. Dan seems to have no problems meeting others to check things out for himself. I frankly think that you will not stand behind your own words. Heck, if you do, I can promise both of you that I will wine and dine both of you in a wonderful manner. Who knows, maybe, just maybe such a meeting would stop the kind of back-and-forth that is going on. Why not leave Jun out of this and handle it directly for a change?

Marc Abrams

ps- Happy Holidays!

phitruong

12-23-2009, 07:55 PM

gp 2/ The go up through the soleus/rear-groin/psoas/dantien/center line on the 'inside/front' of the body
Then 'choose' with bodyskill how to combine them to 'meet' in a useful way with the center/intent/dantien area. Which one is up and which one is the down... is 'up' to you?

More interesting would have been is these question'
re: "where is the middle, where the up and down meet"
Do all arts have the same answer to this question?
Are there 'standard' answers to this question in JPN and CN arts? Is one more likely to 'answer' it in one way or the other?
How does 6-harmony movement answer this? How does Aikido/DR answer this?
/random thoughts

i am not as well versed as many of the internal folks here. couldn't tell you about yin-yang or in-yo-ho or any of those things. me no speaking chinese or japanese or many other languages. we can miscommunicate even with face-to-face, much less over the internet. so i'll use the common language here, i.e. english, at least the english that i know.

i think we need to strip everything down to the basic. if you look at the human body (for you folks who are aliens among us, please ignore this, because it won't apply to you) :), we are basically a bundle of sticks, tied together with sinew and muscle and fat, wrapped with fascia, and covered with hide and hair. then controlled by a sophisticate computer with vast neural networks. our basic configuration isn't optimal for staying up-right, much less doing anything else.
so most of the time, our muscles tried to keep us up-right. our muscle fiber pulls, do not push. most of the times our muscles worked against each other to keep us up-right, and we are in a precarious balancing act all the time. so, some of the main equations we need to solve are,
1. how do we deal with incoming force?
2. how do we efficiently generate and focus a force?
3. how do we maintain balance, whether we are on our feet or our back or ..., while doing the above two points?

regardless the origin of the IS, whether from Chinese or Japanese or Swahili or wherever, they all have to deal with such questions above; they all have to deal with how human body constructed and its limitations. then there is various physical laws that we have to abide on this world, for example, gravity.

how do you deal with incoming force? spread it out to as much surface area as you can. the earth has large surface if your feet are on it, a big wall if your back is against it, another person if that person happens to be within reach, and so on. in order to do that, you have to take all the slacks out of your body (bundle of sticks, ... remember?). how do you take the slacks our of your body? winding, tightening, binding your whole body into one unit so it can distribute force through your entire body and to whatever that body touches.

how do we efficiently generate and focus a force? straight muscle, but we have counter-balance muscle which oppose; thus, lessen the generated force. what-if we could lessen the counter-balancing affect and using every muscle, sinew, fascia, skin, hair, bone, pretty much our entire body to perform an action, for example, picking up a glass of water. if we can do that, then we can throw, kick, punch, lift, walk, run, kiss, and so on with our entire being; thus, we have "one moves all move".

how do we maintain balance while doing 1 and 2? every force has an equal and opposing force to stay neutral, thus in balance. a push toward the front, need an equal push toward the back. a push up needs an opposing push down, your body is in the middle.

since our body controls by a computer and neural network, that's where the whole mind/intent comes about. so the first part is to train your body to become one unit that can do as the mind directed. most folks methink could spend their lifetime on learning how-to taking the slack out of their body. then the next is how-to generate power with their body, by taking the slack out of their body in segment so that power generate like a whip through their entire body, and at the point of release, their entire body now have no slack but full of power. now do all of that with your will.

tough works. and i am rambling. so for those who have strong will, please put my name in it too. :D

Mike and Dan, I'll take on both of you. I will let you know that i make a mean curry. Let see how your internal take that! :)

Lorel Latorilla

12-23-2009, 08:18 PM

BTW, Dan. When you get into the personal comments about my "questionable abilities", be aware that I've also heard a number of stories about peoples' "questionable abilities", but I try to leave the personal smears out of a discussion, as much as possible. Please try to do the same. It's sort of Chicken***t, although I doubt you really understand that. If you can maintain a functional, in-depth discussion, please try to do so.

Really Mike? If that's the case, can you explain to me the functional how to in the other thread where you basicaly dedicated a post showing Dan "trivializing" Ueshiba's skills? Can you explain to me how I can some practical, training or even "academic" (as you put it) from that thread? In fact, can you point to me the practical value in anything you wrote in this thread?

thisisnotreal

12-23-2009, 11:39 PM

http://www.acuxo.com/meridianPictures.asp?point=LR1&meridian=Liver

thisisnotreal

12-23-2009, 11:51 PM

ooh. that was good Phi
i agree as far as i see

so most of the time, our muscles tried to keep us up-right. our muscle fiber pulls, do not push.
about this; pushing can (re-)introduce slack into the body. you can 'biggify' and/ use windings (&(stacking)/breath) to (re-)remove the slack and swallow/absorb that (delta) back into the body. then use that bone-stacking fajin thing you wrote, to get it out. 'generate harmony'. just some ideas.

Heh. random droppings.

you wrote: Q:how do we efficiently generate and focus a force? A:straight muscle
pulse muscle?. maybe deltas are more important than absolute offsets. the changes.

Erick Mead

12-23-2009, 11:54 PM

thisisnotreal

12-23-2009, 11:59 PM

Is explaining the issue ? If so, being in person ought not matter. Tallahassee or west?
:)
Hi Erick, why do you think it is consensus that `it has to be felt`? Do you think everyone else lacked imagination?

stan baker

12-24-2009, 06:53 AM

Hi Josh

That is true it has to be felt and usually more then once for some people. That is why I have to laugh at sigman's ranting.

stan

chillzATL

12-24-2009, 08:57 AM

As an outsider to the "group" here, but someone who is inspired by the conversation and sincerely wants to learn more, the bickering is disappointing. This topic is the single most interesting thing that I've read relating to martial arts in a decade or more and it's sad to see it being brought down by the same subtle trolling that I can find on a million other sites around the web...

I'm supposed to be the target audience for this stuff! The same person you talked about in threads 2-3 years ago that you wanted to be interested in it and who should want to learn more. Now it's hard enough to get any information at all!! It's like the whole concept of it has regressed back to the point of you being worthy or dedicated enough to be worth discussing it with in the first place. I'm almost afraid to ask questions for fear of being regarded as some scrub who's looking for a "handout". Which is ironic considering how often that was discussed as being the reason these concepts and applications haven't been more wide spread over the decades. How the hell can you say that you want people to learn this stuff and then have that attitude towards outsiders who want to ask questions?

Anyway, like I said, it's hard enough to get clear information as it is, it's even harder when the channels are clogged up with two people who actually know something, bickering back and forth over nonsense. As your supposed target audience, I beg you, give it a rest!

phitruong

12-24-2009, 09:42 AM

about this; pushing can (re-)introduce slack into the body. you can 'biggify' and/ use windings (&(stacking)/breath) to (re-)remove the slack and swallow/absorb that (delta) back into the body. then use that bone-stacking fajin thing you wrote, to get it out. 'generate harmony'. just some ideas.

you wrote: Q:how do we efficiently generate and focus a force? A:straight muscle
pulse muscle?. maybe deltas are more important than absolute offsets. the changes.

can't push. our muscle is either in contraction (pull) state or non-contraction. a push to your chest is the same as a pull to your back. essentially, our body is a large and complex pulley system. adding to the complication, some muscles are fast twitch and some, slow, i.e. they don't contract at the same speed.

to generate force, can't just use muscle alone, although a large percentage of it. one thing about human body, because of the construct, we have springiness built-in as shock absorber. so what-if, we can use the shock absorber as part of the power generation equation to augment the muscle? what-if we can take the incoming force, be it from external or internal, and store it in the shock absorber to be released along with our muscle? our biggest shock absorber? our middle. how to build a good absorber? breathing techniques.

there are various standing meditation techniques that are shared between Chinese and Japanese. it really comes down to how to control your body muscle to use the least to up hold the body, and creating opposing force, and build shock absorber. so if you stand in meditation and imagine someone pushes against you chest, then you can increase the shock absorbing capability through certain type of breathing, then you mind direct you body to relax certain muscle and activate other muscle to counter the push.

if you twisted your body parts certain way, you feel you have a more connected body, i.e. winding/twisting/binding. you see similarity in various arts in the way they move, for example, corkscrew punch. the corkscrew motion wind/twist/bind your whole arm into one unit instead of a bundle of loose sticks. you will also see breathing techniques accompany such practice, because of the shock absorber affect in order to augment the muscle power and to handle the recoil force (every action has an equal and opposite reaction).

Force = mass times acceleration. acceleration is delta velocity (delta v) over time. yup, delta.

Erick Mead

12-24-2009, 10:19 AM

Hi Erick, why do you think it is consensus that `it has to be felt`? Do you think everyone else lacked imagination?Good questions. But you need to unpack your premises.

1) You presume I disagree; 2) You assume that we read "IHTBF" the same way; 3) You presume that there is only one way to understand the "it" being felt -- i.e. -- the 'consensus' view; and 4) You presume the consensus has a broadly coherent form. Each of those is premises is false or questionable

They don't lack imagination, far from it. Consensus is simply not knowledge -- it is authority by dint of nothing but numbers -- a collective feeling about that knowledge (lit. - "consensus" = "feeling together"), which is no more liable to be right than any individual feeling about that knowledge. Consensus once was that man could not fly, and that it was not possible to have a computer smaller than a largish bedroom, either...

A counter-assertion to me that, "You're wrong" without a demonstration of asserted error is not very persuasive to me when I work with and through the ideas I express here for real practical benefit for myself and others. Are they the best? Probably not -- but are they correct as far as they go? -- Yes. Demonstrably. Are they objectively based -- absolutely. The fact that I can accurately describe action and thus correct bad action routinely is better reason than anyone's opinion - or any number of them. I could be wrong, but you have to show me where.

People are far too committed to their subjective expressions of their subjective impressions. That's why things break down over description -- moreso even than ego -- of which there is certainly no lack. There is more than one set of people to feel as far as IHTBF. There are also people who have elements and degrees which can be felt regardless of the level of consistent application. IF -- one has an objective reference to recognize what is the same and what is not.

And finally there is one's own body and that of one's partners to study -- directly. I am constantly amazed at the disconnect between the admonishment of the need do solo work -- all the while denying that anyone who just carefully observes their own movement can learn much of anything on one's own. It makes no sense -- even though I grant that what we speak of, as practical mechanics goes, seems counter-intuitive.

The possibility that one can learn to apply the perspective gained from learning other counter-intuitive mechanics and apply that turn of mind to this, is disregarded. There is more than one way to come to knowledge of something -- and more than one way to express that knowledge.

Point being, if the "feeling" in IHTBF were objectively described it would be more accessible -- to everyone -- than any subjective consensus, however broad, will ever allow. It would depend on agreement about "the thing" felt -- and not agreement on our personal impressions of how we feel and express that feeling. Don't get me wrong, one can glean a lot from people's expression of subjective impressions, (Morihei's Doka are a rich vein in this regard, actually) but they remain subjective and there is no substitute for actual objective description.

Analytical thought -- which is being expressly advocated here -- cannot operate on anything else

Erick Mead

12-24-2009, 10:47 AM

if you twisted your body parts certain way, you feel you have a more connected body, i.e. winding/twisting/binding. you see similarity in various arts in the way they move, for example, corkscrew punch. the corkscrew motion wind/twist/bind your whole arm into one unit instead of a bundle of loose sticks. you will also see breathing techniques accompany such practice, because of the shock absorber affect in order to augment the muscle power and to handle the recoil force (every action has an equal and opposite reaction). Is that the consensus view (http://www.aikiweb.com/blogs/but-why-7854/aiki-physical-model-structure-dynamic-3259/)? hm.

Force = mass times acceleration. acceleration is delta velocity (delta v) over time. yup, delta.Acceleration is a derivative. Rewrite in terms of momentum, and they are all primary quantities, mass and velocity and potential and actual motion can be treated equivalently:

F= dp/dt

= (either) v*dm/dt

= (or) m*dv/dt (or m*a)

= (m1*v1-m2v2)/dt

Effective mass (moment) changes as the moment arm changes -- i.e -- as the center of rotations shifts position relative to loads.

Effective velocity changes as the radius of rotations changes relative to loads.

Much simpler to see in action than acceleration. The point is not in the equations, but to see that they objectively describe the change of centers of rotation and the change of radius -- in combination. One can learn to feel these changes remotely through the body of another person -- which is kokyu tanden ho. Which only works if the body is coherently connected and without discontinuities that block action and structural sensation.

If one "biggifies" one increases moment arm and effective mass and increases radius and decreases effective velocity -- if one "contractifies" one decreases moment arm (effective mass) and decreases radius and thus increases velocity. But they work in spherical terms (read Kisshomaru again) S- and T- normal mode spheroidal waves. Imagine twisting a nerfball -- it torques and shrinks -- it untorques and expands. Then one can treat 'biggificaiton' and 'contractification' in progressive terms -- like a snapped whip to concentrate or its converse -- a wave runup on a beach -- to dissipate.

phitruong

12-24-2009, 05:54 PM

Is that the consensus view (http://www.aikiweb.com/blogs/but-why-7854/aiki-physical-model-structure-dynamic-3259/)? hm.

consensus? from me? i am a nobody in this world of martial arts, much less internal stuffs. Erick, most of the stuffs you wrote went right over my head. i am not as learned and much less in imagination. maybe your model rightly describes the process. but you have to discuss that with the experts, as i mentioned, i am a dabbler san expertise. one thing though, do you want shear stress and torque apply to the various joints in your body? how would your model work, for example, with middle of your body where, according to some of the so-called classics of martial arts, your shoulders should align with your hips, i.e. you are not suppose to twist your body to deal with incoming force or to release a force? who know, the classic could be wrong, and that's too a possibility.

12-26-2009, 08:39 AM

I'm supposed to be the target audience for this stuff! The same person you talked about in threads 2-3 years ago that you wanted to be interested in it and who should want to learn more. Now it's hard enough to get any information at all!! It's like the whole concept of it has regressed back to the point of you being worthy or dedicated enough to be worth discussing it with in the first place. I'm almost afraid to ask questions for fear of being regarded as some scrub who's looking for a "handout". Which is ironic considering how often that was discussed as being the reason these concepts and applications haven't been more wide spread over the decades. How the hell can you say that you want people to learn this stuff and then have that attitude towards outsiders who want to ask questions?
Hello Jason
Can you tell me who this is targeted at?

Anyway, like I said, it's hard enough to get clear information as it is, it's even harder when the channels are clogged up with two people who actually know something, bickering back and forth over nonsense. As your supposed target audience, I beg you, give it a rest!
Seems the general consensus is I get attacked, I defend.
Asking someone "When did you stop beating your wife?" is a well known example of journalistic baiting and disshonest discussion.
You might note that I generally don't ask for information, much less chase people around and chastize them for a) not answering b) not making all of their own examples fit in with known and accepted (Japanese) terms and methods that they are unfamilair with.
Consider that the conversation killing has a point source, an origination point...and you might key into what others already have figuered out and now know to be true.

If I ever made people feel like "scrubs" for asking questions you have my apologies-though I cannot think of when that might have happened.
Happy holidays
Cheers
Dan

Mike Sigman

12-26-2009, 08:56 AM

Seems the general consensus is I get attacked, I defend. Er, sorry, but you posted the Rum Soaked Fist post about me and it was incorrect. I.e., you initiated it. The discussion is about similarities in Internal Body Skills between Chinese and Japanese martial arts. My position is, and has been for years, that there is no substantive difference between Chinese and Japanese I.S. skills simply because they work on the same basic principles. "Aiki in yo ho", "Ju", "Reiki no ho", "Kokyu", Misogi breathing, and many other terms Japanese sound "Japanese", but the physical actions, skills, and practices, give or take some minor variations in the process but the not the principle, are to be found in Chinese martial arts. The most I can get a really knowledgeable Chinese expert to say is the word "similar" rather than "same", but that's only because of the variations. The principles are the same.

And of course even a cursory investigation into what a, for instance, Japanese expert is demonstrating and a Chinese expert is demonstrating demonstrates quickly that things *must* be the same if they are demonstrating the same I.S. skill.

The only place I can see an argument would be when someone *thinks* the same thing is being shown, but they misunderstand the point. As an example, a Yiquan person may stand against a push to his forearm while a Tohei-analogue from a Japanese m.a. does the same apparent thing. However, the Japanese person may think that he is demonstrating the grounding of the force of the push and the Chinese person will acknowledge that he is to a degree doing that, too, but he's also showing something else that is not as obvious. I.e., my point is that if there are differences, it's probably just a level of degree; the basic principles will and must be the same.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Erick Mead

12-26-2009, 03:34 PM

how would your model work, for example, with middle of your body where, according to some of the so-called classics of martial arts, your shoulders should align with your hips, i.e. you are not suppose to twist your body to deal with incoming force or to release a force? who know, the classic could be wrong, and that's too a possibility. If you allow the body to twist, you convert an applied load to a torsional motion -- At that end of that motion then the body reaches its limit of motion and must take up any remaining load in torsional shear stress, but -- and this is the key --without any further reserves of motion or allowable structural stress. You are stuck with whatever structural resistance you have left in relation to the remaining applied load at that point.

If, conversely, the body is maintained to accept the torsional stress -- without the torsional motion -- then the limb/torso acts as a torsion tube. See this diagram (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=509&d=1215185239)

When this torsion is received as stress without initial movement then any element of the tube's surface wants squish in one diagonal stress line (L hand to R foot, for example) and stretch in the other diagonal (R hand to L foot). Look at the stresses on the square element of the torsion tube above, as though it were your torso (good name, huh?)with the stresses extending diagonally along those lines and along the opposing arm and leg. The preferred terminology in this crowd for this aspect seems to be "windings."

Rather than relieve the torsional load stress by allowing the torsional movement, allow this torsional shear (contradictory forces or stress if you prefer that terminology) to develop.
This response gives reserves of both displacement AND allowable stress in your structure so you can apply either or both in succession or combination. Then, in the case of a push -- relieve it by
1) isolating the load in one diagonal (squishing for a push) and then 2) extending back into the source of the load along the "stretchy" diagonal -- as a result the applied torque becomes converted and transferred to the opponent rather than you -- assuming you are properly connected to transfer it -- which is another topic.

The same works in inverse terms in a pull.

What I just described is the equivalent in stress interaction of ikkyo in motion. Just treated stress and motion as equivalent and interchangeable. The point is to imagine correct shapes of the stress and the dynamics.

When Kisshomaru wrote about spherical and spiral motion this is what he spoke of. Spheroidal waves are applicable because, topologically, your body is a deformed version of the actual three-layer sphere it once was (http://departments.weber.edu/chfam/prenatal/images/Blastocyst.gif).

Technically, what I described was a spheroidal wave S-mode torque conversion. I don't use those terms to sound impressive or to go over your head, but because they have a precise, objective, unambiguous meaning and you can look them up (http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NormalModeSphere.html) without relying on me or any claim of authority. You can have valid images of action that is occurring in your body in a simplified and yet mechanically correct form. If I am wrong you can call me on it -- in those terms -- which are just as available to you as to me -- with only a very little study.

S-mode waves involve radial and horizontal displacements/stresses like uniform expansion/contraction oscillation -- like a breathing balloon; or oblate/prolate oscillation - (a ball going from squashed sphere to a football and back); T-mode is purely tangential and either torsional or toroidal -- toroidal is harder to envision -- but is a donut wave travelling from pole to pole of the sphere and back, dissipating a the midpoint and concentrating at the extremity -- these relate to fajin.

The two modes also relate to one another, but that's enough for your question.

12-28-2009, 10:35 AM

bob_stra

12-28-2009, 01:14 PM

Liu Chengde video:
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTAzMTk4ODMy.html

He uses nikkyo, kote gaeshi, reverse kote gaeshi, kokyu throws, etc. It just highlights a Chinese master using internal body skills in a familiar environment. :)

Same lineage as Li Chugong.

Move vids from Li Chugong at this thread:
http://rumsoakedfist.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5927

Very nice - thank you. Here's one in return

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

Starts off a little slow, but OTOH it does show how the basic movements are used to power various strategies

thisisnotreal

12-30-2009, 11:04 PM

can't push. our muscle is either in contraction (pull) state or non-contraction. a push to your chest is the same as a pull to your back. essentially, our body is a large and complex pulley system. adding to the complication, some muscles are fast twitch and some, slow, i.e. they don't contract at the same speed.
-snip-

And yet *we can push*.
And is there is something special in *pushing* that Ueshiba taught Tenryu that way.
q) Why is that?
q2) How and in what way is pushing special?

some thoughts i had (what do you think):
"putting your center behind your push"
"putting you intent behind your push"
"putting the groundpath through the push"
"using the force of your body's gravity through the push"
?
-you can 'pull' parts of your body so strongly that they can line up and push hard (pinnacling at fa-jin?) or tear yourself apart if you are not doing it right (i.e. misaligned, for instance)
-you can clearly be perceived as a push or a pull; but your muscles always pull, as you say. that is cool. still not done thinking thru that. (was thinking 'You build a push out of your muscle pulls' , or something like that)

what do you think? I agree, by the way, that a muscle cannot push, but you can

the rest of your post was great too. been thinking about that stuffs.

take it easy

phitruong

01-05-2010, 07:10 AM

-you can clearly be perceived as a push or a pull; but your muscles always pull, as you say. that is cool. still not done thinking thru that. (was thinking 'You build a push out of your muscle pulls' , or something like that)

an example, take a balloon and grip one side of it. that is in essence a pull or contraction on one side. if you notice, the other side expand out which, in a way, a push. so in effect, you use a pull to create a push. now look at the human body, if you contract your entire backside, wouldn't that create a similar push to the front? and vice versa? so, the question is how do you train your body to be a balloon? this is one variable of the equation.

another variable of the equation (the most important one), what-if the one-point from Tohei which is the hara/dantien isn't statics but dynamics, i.e. mobile and is the actuator of all these pull (indirect push) actions? what-if Tohei only understood a small aspect of the one-point?
*put on asbestos underwear, going to be hot here soon*

01-05-2010, 08:01 AM

what-if Tohei only understood a small aspect of the one-point?
*put on asbestos underwear, going to be hot here soon*

Off topic, but it's a moot point. Just as Ueshiba gave the nod to Tomiki, Shioda, etc, he also gave the nod to Tohei. It's aikido.

IMO, just as Ueshiba looked at his peers and saw that they were making the way of aiki their own personal way, so, too, did Ueshiba look at his students. I think Ueshiba understood that aiki requires a personal approach in which to display those skills.

Historically, Tohei went elsewhere to start learning these skills and so far, that seems to have been okay with Ueshiba. Shioda went to the Kodokai and so far, that seems to have been okay with Ueshiba.

If you're studying a system designed by Tohei and you're using aiki, it's aikido. If you're studying a system designed by Shioda and you're using aiki, it's aikido. Etc, etc, etc.

What Tohei's understanding about One Point, etc really doesn't matter to me. It would if I were learning from Tohei, but I'm not. If you started training in that system and started learning aiki and you take it as far as you can go ... well, hopefully, you'll surpass your teacher. Isn't that the plan anyway? If you have to get outside help, well, that wasn't exactly frowned upon by the founder either, as far as I can tell.