Spiritual Discipline Driils-Ki (ip?)

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[graham christian]

So much talk on ip/is that I thought I'd put up a video that we simply have as Ki exercises.
Maybe it's what others call ip? Who knows, to me it's just part of Aikido on the spiritual side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_6jZgzQJ74

Enjoy.G.

[lbb]

I suspect the IP guys are just going to explain (again) that IP is not a spiritual practice but a different/more aware/more informed way of using your physical body.

[Mike Sigman]

I suspect the IP guys are just going to explain (again) that IP is not a spiritual practice but a different/more aware/more informed way of using your physical body.I just say, "So how does it work? What's the physics behind it?", Mary. And from my viewpoint that's what everyone should ask when they're watching or doing something that looks or feels odd. If you figure out how it works physically you can work on it and add it to the things you can do... i.e., you can "steal this technique". If you just 'believe' and 'feel the energy', I don't think you ever go very far.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

[Eric in Denver]

I see no problem with physics-based explanations for spiritual exercises. If mind and body really are one, then the result of what some would call a spiritual or mental exercise should have at least some residual effect in the physical world that can be talked about or analyzed. Isn't that what a ki test is all about?

[graham christian]

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding.
Good luck on your path.G.

[Mike Sigman]

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding.
Good luck on your path.G.Of course you realize that "steal this technique" is a saying attributed to O-Sensei? ;)

FWIW

Mike Sigman

[graham christian]

I see no problem with physics-based explanations for spiritual exercises. If mind and body really are one, then the result of what some would call a spiritual or mental exercise should have at least some residual effect in the physical world that can be talked about or analyzed. Isn't that what a ki test is all about?

Hi Eric. How about spiritual-based explanations for physical exercises?
Spirit is spirit, mind is mind, body is body. They're always connected but how often are they in harmony?
Of course you can analyze the physical effect but by limiting yourself to the physical only then you may never find the real why.
Just being aware that there is a mental aspect and a spiritual aspect means that as you train and come across realizations then you can acknowledge them for what they are and gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing no?
Regards.G.

[Mike Sigman]

Hi Eric. How about spiritual-based explanations for physical exercises?
Spirit is spirit, mind is mind, body is body. They're always connected but how often are they in harmony?
Of course you can analyze the physical effect but by limiting yourself to the physical only then you may never find the real why.
Just being aware that there is a mental aspect and a spiritual aspect means that as you train and come across realizations then you can acknowledge them for what they are and gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing no?
Regards.G.Graham, the whole mind and body in harmony thing comes from the traditional observation about qi, jing, and shen (just like the Japanese "shin"... it's all borrowed from the Chinese). What they mean by "spirit" is not really at all like the "spirit" we use in "Holy Ghost" or something like that. It's more akin to "a fine, noble, spirit" in terms of alertness, focus, etc.

The pertinent saying about mind and body is basically that the desire to do something (this comes from the "heart") triggers the mind, the mind triggers the qi/ki, and the ki/qi triggers or leads the actual application of strength. This is "mind and body coordinated". It refers to a type of coordination in human movement.

O-Sensei understood this relationship because he was raised on reading the Chinese classics. The use of the mind to lead the qi to lead the strength is what he referred to in his douka as "the Divine Intent" or something like that. It appears that you are appending some different perspectives to the whole mind and body thing.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

[Mark Freeman]

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding. Good luck on your path.G.

Hi Graham,

You can copy the words of a joke, by re-telling using the same words, what happens though if you don't get the joke because the humour is too subtle or leftfield? Stealing words - easy, stealing the humour - not so. :D

Personally I don't think that physics is going to explain the totallity of what is happening inside the mind/body of someone doing aikido.
Sure if you get the required funding and willing scientists to wire up the willing aikidoka, you will get readings that explain the body position and condition. Where the scientists will struggle is with the measuring/quantifying what is happening in the mind of both uke and nage. How Nage uses the mind to manipulate his/her own body and how the mind is used to create the connection to uke's mind/body.

When someone can measure that, then we might be able to have a fully objective debate. Until then it's all about more of what we have at the moment, which is a bit of a messy subjective minefield.

regards,

Mark

[graham christian]

Graham, the whole mind and body in harmony thing comes from the traditional observation about qi, jing, and shen (just like the Japanese "shin"... it's all borrowed from the Chinese). What they mean by "spirit" is not really at all like the "spirit" we use in "Holy Ghost" or something like that. It's more akin to "a fine, noble, spirit" in terms of alertness, focus, etc.

The pertinent saying about mind and body is basically that the desire to do something (this comes from the "heart") triggers the mind, the mind triggers the qi/ki, and the ki/qi triggers or leads the actual application of strength. This is "mind and body coordinated". It refers to a type of coordination in human movement.

O-Sensei understood this relationship because he was raised on reading the Chinese classics. The use of the mind to lead the qi to lead the strength is what he referred to in his douka as "the Divine Intent" or something like that. It appears that you are appending some different perspectives to the whole mind and body thing.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Thank you Mike. Nothing is borrowed, it is translated and understood. Spirit is indeed to do with alertness, focus etc. for they are all of the spirit obviousely. However I do append a perspective which may well be different to yours.
Simply put it's spirit leads mind and mind leads body. True
desire is of the spirit as is true purpose as is true intention.
True spirit is indeed noble, hence it is kind, compassionate, humble, loving, understanding, responsible, able, all noble qualities.
Losing these qualities you will be left with mind not in harmony with spirit and false understandings and thus motions opposed to true spirit. Thus no Aikido.
This is my view and my practice. Discipline in the practice of spirit, calming of mind, harmoniouse motion.
Regards. G.

[graham christian]

Hi Graham,

You can copy the words of a joke, by re-telling using the same words, what happens though if you don't get the joke because the humour is too subtle or leftfield? Stealing words - easy, stealing the humour - not so. :D

Personally I don't think that physics is going to explain the totallity of what is happening inside the mind/body of someone doing aikido.
Sure if you get the required funding and willing scientists to wire up the willing aikidoka, you will get readings that explain the body position and condition. Where the scientists will struggle is with the measuring/quantifying what is happening in the mind of both uke and nage. How Nage uses the mind to manipulate his/her own body and how the mind is used to create the connection to uke's mind/body.

When someone can measure that, then we might be able to have a fully objective debate. Until then it's all about more of what we have at the moment, which is a bit of a messy subjective minefield.

regards,

Mark

Hi Mark. Copying a joke and yet not understanding was precisely my point was it not?
Measure? It's not subjective at all. Why worry about scientists measuring? You measure all the time don't you? You can measure how comfortable you are at a certain move or technique and thus understand where you need more practice. You can measure how much focus you are applying, you can measure how well you kept center or not, you can measure what type of intention or feeling you were expressing.
Responsibility lies not with others but with self.
Regards.G.

[Hellis]

So much talk on ip/is that I thought I'd put up a video that we simply have as Ki exercises.
Maybe it's what others call ip? Who knows, to me it's just part of Aikido on the spiritual side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_6jZgzQJ74

Enjoy.G.

Graham

I am sure that if your old friend Tony Wagstaffe was able to see your video, he would agree that you exhibit the very best of Ki and IP. :)

Henry Ellis
http://aikidoarticles.blogspot.com/

[Eric in Denver]

Hi Eric. How about spiritual-based explanations for physical exercises?
Spirit is spirit, mind is mind, body is body. They're always connected but how often are they in harmony?
Of course you can analyze the physical effect but by limiting yourself to the physical only then you may never find the real why.
Just being aware that there is a mental aspect and a spiritual aspect means that as you train and come across realizations then you can acknowledge them for what they are and gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing no?
Regards.G.

I am happy to discuss this line of thinking further, but to make sure we are talking about the same things, could you explain your position on what spirit, mind, and body are? It will become very messy if we don't have a similar vocabulary to start from.

[mathewjgano]

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding.
Good luck on your path.G.

I think I essentially disagree. If we look at stealing understanding as simply copying and then stopping, then I would agree somewhat, but I think one of the keys to this concept is the idea of actively applying what someone else already actively applies. The thing I personally like most about the idea of "stealing" the understanding is that it places the impetus of learning where I think it belongs: on the student. Having a good teacher is important and very helpful, but ultimately the responsibility of the learning is on the learner.
Rather than merely copying what the teacher says to do, it invites the student to observe and explore their own understanding through observation/feeling, which I think is invaluable.
I've taken a lot of classes on how to be a teacher and one of the things which got reinforced was the idea that a good teacher teaches a student how to learn. The passing on of content is almost always of secondary importance on the whole because it's dependant upon the quality of learning performed by the learner.

[graham christian]

I think I essentially disagree. If we look at stealing understanding as simply copying and then stopping, then I would agree somewhat, but I think one of the keys to this concept is the idea of actively applying what someone else already actively applies. The thing I personally like most about the idea of "stealing" the understanding is that it places the impetus of learning where I think it belongs: on the student. Having a good teacher is important and very helpful, but ultimately the responsibility of the learning is on the learner.
Rather than merely copying what the teacher says to do, it invites the student to observe and explore their own understanding through observation/feeling, which I think is invaluable.
I've taken a lot of classes on how to be a teacher and one of the things which got reinforced was the idea that a good teacher teaches a student how to learn. The passing on of content is almost always of secondary importance on the whole because it's dependant upon the quality of learning performed by the learner.

Hi Mathew, I agree. When I mention stealing as copying I mean copying physically or copying data for you cannot copy understanding as that comes through the student studying, applying and learning as you say.
Regards.G.

[graham christian]

I am happy to discuss this line of thinking further, but to make sure we are talking about the same things, could you explain your position on what spirit, mind, and body are? It will become very messy if we don't have a similar vocabulary to start from.

Hi Eric. I'll explain my position as simply as I can as of course it is a vast subject in all.
Firstly, we have a body. A body has many parts and we are all pretty much aware of this.
Then we have a mind. A mind is basically a storage depot, a database, it's where we store things including memories. We can store all manner of things in the mind including feelings, good and bad ones, etc. As with the body, many parts.
I thus differenciate between the mind and body also thusly: whereas the mind is the database, the brain is the telephone exchange.
Then we come to our true self, spirit, who is responsible for the other two as well as self. As spirit we learn about ourselves and capabilities. Spirit is pure, hence without negatives, thus we have a lot to learn.
For true self or spirit it is natural to be harmonious, to learn, to love, to act with virtue and honour etc. etc.
This is my basic position from which I learn.
Thanks for asking.
Regards.G.

[Mark Freeman]

Hi Mark. Copying a joke and yet not understanding was precisely my point was it not?
Measure? It's not subjective at all. Why worry about scientists measuring? You measure all the time don't you? You can measure how comfortable you are at a certain move or technique and thus understand where you need more practice. You can measure how much focus you are applying, you can measure how well you kept center or not, you can measure what type of intention or feeling you were expressing.
Responsibility lies not with others but with self.
Regards.G.

Hi Graham,

Personally I'm not worried about anyone measuring what I do, and I fully agree that responsibility lies with self. All of my own measures against what I am feeling or not feeling though, are subjective. The only objective measure, is to see the affect that I have on things or people externally. If I affect another on an immesurable level spirit/psyche/mental, then where do we go with that? We only have the others subjective report on what happened.

I say all this, because it seems many folk are asking/looking for physical explanations of states that are not only physical. They are wanting the humour to be described in the words, sometimes humour is in the timing, sometimes it is in what is not there, sometimes it is in the expectation of the opposite. The words are only the transport mechanism for the 'funny'.:)

regards,

Mark

[graham christian]

Mark, what can I say? Well put.
Regards. G.

[jonreading]

I think we have some exercises that train us to feel internal structure and use that structure to create power. My weak theory is under scrutiny, but I'll stick to my guns for this point that aikido does have some internal/core structure training. I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was internal power/strength training.

To me, it seems a big difference comes is the fact that IP people have exercises for training and they know what they are doing and what is the purpose of the exercise. Aikido, on the other hand, has a collection of exercises for what purpose most cannot accurately describe. The fact that we cannot classify anything in the video as internal strength training says that the video does not teach internal strength training.

We are granted a period of time to figure out what we are doing and how to share this information with others. After that period expires we either need to be able to adequately explain what is going on, or we have not yet learned that piece of the puzzle. For me, this argument extends into the "creepy" stuff too. Now, we may be able to label that incomplete training ("spiritual - contents under scrutiny"), place it aside and keep training. For the record, this is one of those holding places for the real "you need to feel this" aikido. We need to eventually open that box and better classify that content.

In aikido, we sometimes settle for vaguery as a satisfactory answer to some of the more heady stuff. "Move your ki" only works as an answer for so long. After a while if you cannot explain to me what that phrase means, I will look for myself and find someone who can. I give exception in this comment to those issues which arrive out of cultural or language miscommunication.

In this sense, our technique has an omote and ura (in the old sense). We can copy what others do and replicate the action; but without the substance of the technique (the "why") we will never learn more that the outer shape of the technique. To really learn technique you need to also learn the ura, the "why" the technique works. Again, aikido seems to settle for simply learning the shape and not digging deeper to make the technique theirs with true understanding of what is going on and the ability to share that knowledge with others.

I think this response may be slightly tanget to the thread, but I thinks it important that we place the proper emphasis on those roles sharing information with those absorbing information.
Freakanomics is a great book that looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...

[phitruong]

looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...

i need to get my vision checks. i thought i read "casual relationship" and i said to myself "awwwright! finally someone who want to discuss the spirituality of casual relationship" and i was about to reliving my college days. and couldn't understand how it would relate to aikido. :D

[Janet Rosen]

i need to get my vision checks. i thought i read "casual relationship" and i said to myself "awwwright! finally someone who want to discuss the spirituality of casual relationship" and i was about to reliving my college days. and couldn't understand how it would relate to aikido. :D

Because this is a marital art, silly! :)

[SeiserL]

Freakanomics is a great book that looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...
Osu,
I love that book.
Yes, coorelated and contributing is not causative.
Agreed.

[graham christian]

I think we have some exercises that train us to feel internal structure and use that structure to create power. My weak theory is under scrutiny, but I'll stick to my guns for this point that aikido does have some internal/core structure training. I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was internal power/strength training.

To me, it seems a big difference comes is the fact that IP people have exercises for training and they know what they are doing and what is the purpose of the exercise. Aikido, on the other hand, has a collection of exercises for what purpose most cannot accurately describe. The fact that we cannot classify anything in the video as internal strength training says that the video does not teach internal strength training.

We are granted a period of time to figure out what we are doing and how to share this information with others. After that period expires we either need to be able to adequately explain what is going on, or we have not yet learned that piece of the puzzle. For me, this argument extends into the "creepy" stuff too. Now, we may be able to label that incomplete training ("spiritual - contents under scrutiny"), place it aside and keep training. For the record, this is one of those holding places for the real "you need to feel this" aikido. We need to eventually open that box and better classify that content.

In aikido, we sometimes settle for vaguery as a satisfactory answer to some of the more heady stuff. "Move your ki" only works as an answer for so long. After a while if you cannot explain to me what that phrase means, I will look for myself and find someone who can. I give exception in this comment to those issues which arrive out of cultural or language miscommunication.

In this sense, our technique has an omote and ura (in the old sense). We can copy what others do and replicate the action; but without the substance of the technique (the "why") we will never learn more that the outer shape of the technique. To really learn technique you need to also learn the ura, the "why" the technique works. Again, aikido seems to settle for simply learning the shape and not digging deeper to make the technique theirs with true understanding of what is going on and the ability to share that knowledge with others.

I think this response may be slightly tanget to the thread, but I thinks it important that we place the proper emphasis on those roles sharing information with those absorbing information.
Freakanomics is a great book that looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...

Hi Jon. Aikido settling for the shape and not digging deeper may be the apparency, as in most of life where most people do the same. However there are also no doubt many who can explain the why I suspect.
The real problem as I see it a lack of reality on what Aikido can be and a reverting to the 'old' ways of Aiki pre Aikido.
'Aiki' existed for centuries before O'Senseis' Aikido and thus the purpose of practice was changed even though done through the same techniques.
The ip I read about to me is not much different to the old Aiki as in aikijujutsu or indeed in all past samurai training.
Thus modern Aikido will end up no different to prior O'Sensei and may as well be called a version of Aikijutsu for the great samurai of the past, the great martial artists of the past from various martial arts be they in china or wherever all learned of these principles of internal power so it's all well and good but it's nothing new.
There were in fact many warrior monks in the history of Japan but this minor detail has been superceded by the glamorization of shaolin, which I also love by the way. These warrior monks who practiced these internal power ways were often hired by samurai 'clans' in times of war as they were often seen as superior warriors.
But all said and done unless a person understands the change O'Sensei made as to purpose then they will never learn his Aikido and therefore the practice of the exercises he gave will not be understood properly and the why will not be seen.
Your post was good I thought by the way. I just offer my view.
Regards. G.

[Mark Freeman]

But all said and done unless a person understands the change O'Sensei made as to purpose then they will never learn his Aikido and therefore the practice of the exercises he gave will not be understood properly and the why will not be seen.
Your post was good I thought by the way. I just offer my view.
.

Hi Graham,

I thought Jon's post was good too as it raises interesting questions that make us think about why and how we do what we do.

On learning O Sensei's Aikido, I'm not sure that will happen for any of us. For instance, both you and I use Ki development exercises to inform us of how to aproach the practice of aikido. These exercises as you know were not O Sensei's, they were developed to help aikidoka train towards what one talented student/teacher felt was the 'stuff' that O Sensei had, but wasn't teaching in an explicit way. So as much as we get from the deep study of these exercises, they are there to point us in the right direction, not to be the destination.

My guess is that by relentlessly pursuing the essence of what lies inside these exercises (and I don't know about you, but the more I delve the more I see), we will come to our own conclusion of what aikido is for us as an individual.

If we can discover where the moon actually is then and only then can we start pointing at it :)

regards

Mark

[graham christian]

Hi Mark. Well said. My Aikido is indeed mostly influenced by Ki Aikido principles and I have found by doing as you say I come across realizations as to what O'Sensei meant when he said certain things.
This has always been my experience, I relate it to the buddhist story of the lotus.
Thus I have what he said always in mind as targets of understanding. 'They come, I meet, I turn, they follow.' That for instance now makes perfect sense, so much in one sentence.
Then there are principles he mentioned which to me equal true 'power' and yet are hardly ever mentioned except as being 'out there' and yet they are very real and essential to his Aikido. For example the principle of non-resistance. This alone rules out competition for it transcends it. From this I have found non-oppositional makes sense, as does non-aggression and also leads to the principle of non-disturbance.
These can all be applied and taught and practiced especially from the viewpoint of energy and motion.
The key to me is it must be practiced from the viewpoint and purpose of harmonizing with and being with. Thus there is no against, there is only the path to true power and that power is harmony.
Regards. G.

[SeiserL]

IMHO, O'Sensei was a mystic so any activity was an opportunity and expression of his spirituality.

As it is for all of us, if that is the intent we bring to the training.

[Mark Freeman]

Hi Mark. Well said. My Aikido is indeed mostly influenced by Ki Aikido principles and I have found by doing as you say I come across realizations as to what O'Sensei meant when he said certain things.
This has always been my experience, I relate it to the buddhist story of the lotus.
Thus I have what he said always in mind as targets of understanding. 'They come, I meet, I turn, they follow.' That for instance now makes perfect sense, so much in one sentence.
Then there are principles he mentioned which to me equal true 'power' and yet are hardly ever mentioned except as being 'out there' and yet they are very real and essential to his Aikido. For example the principle of non-resistance. This alone rules out competition for it transcends it. From this I have found non-oppositional makes sense, as does non-aggression and also leads to the principle of non-disturbance.
These can all be applied and taught and practiced especially from the viewpoint of energy and motion.
The key to me is it must be practiced from the viewpoint and purpose of harmonizing with and being with. Thus there is no against, there is only the path to true power and that power is harmony.
Regards. G.

Hi Graham,

for me the principle of non-resistance or no- contention is one of the holy grail type principles of aikido to embody and attain. It is not easy even when you have spent your time practicing in one of the 'softer' styles with an exceptional teacher. Once you become even reasonably adept at being relaxed and co-ordinated, it is fairly easy to start stopping nage's exercise, as they try to use strength they clash with your co-ordination. Going beyond this to being completely non resistant is a challenge, but one worth seeking. I have found once this is accepted there is nothing to fight, harmony of energy and motion can be achieved.

You are correct it is a transcendent state.:)

regards

Mark

[graham christian]

Hi Mark. Thanks for the response. I am giving a link here that I think you may like very much. It's a guy in the U.S. who I have never personally met but has videos of how he teaches Aikido and he calls it an aikilab. It's the nearest I have found to my way of teaching and he deals directly with the principles and explains as he goes.
His whole 'channel' is well worth watching for those who want a better explanation in English.

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

Regards. G.

[Mark Freeman]

Hi Mark. Thanks for the response. I am giving a link here that I think you may like very much. It's a guy in the U.S. who I have never personally met but has videos of how he teaches Aikido and he calls it an aikilab. It's the nearest I have found to my way of teaching and he deals directly with the principles and explains as he goes.
His whole 'channel' is well worth watching for those who want a better explanation in English.

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

Regards. G.

Hi Graham,

thanks for the link. I will give it some proper attention when I get back, and let you know my thoughts. Right now I'm dashing for an early morning train.

regards,

Mark

[jonreading]

I think when push comes to shove, there is a lot of similarity between Aikido and Daito Ryu Aikijujitsu. Probably, there is an argument somewhere that Aikido is an offshoot of DRA. DRA still includes exercises specific to training center. Its interesting that Aikido struggles to produce exercises of the same nature. I don't think the argument is that internal power does not exist, or even that it does not exists in Aikido (to some extent); I think my observation is that somewhere along the line we obscured those elements from our aikido.

We are now trying to figure out what we are missing and how to integrate that back into mainstream aikido. O'Sensei's aikido did contain internal power, probably learned from Daito Ryu. Since O'Sensei, Aikido has not produced a comparable icon to the founder. Post-war aikido is different than pre-war aikido (aiki budo). "Modern" aikido is different than pre-war aikido. I do not think at this time it is even conceivable to argue someone will meet or exceed the status and ability of O'Sensei. Yet we cling to this notion that if we train the way we want to train we will eventually be like O'Sensei. Most of the exercises we have we not even given to use by the founder, but from the uchi deshi trying to make sense of things.

So we are looking for something, but we don't know what. We don't know how to replicate it and we cannot explain it. We are creating a culture of coorelative explanation because we do not know the causes of why excellent aikido works. "Well, I thought about hugging puppies when I turned and since there was no resistence from my partner, then thinking about hugging puppies is non-resistence." This is a ridiculous example or coorelative argumentation, but we make these arguments all the time in aikido. This means justifies the ends BS is hurting our training. "Well, I want aikido to be about non-resistence, so how can I retro-fit the curriculum to justify my end believe that aikido is non-resistence."

Students who let their teachers snow them over with vague instruction and reasoning hurt aikido. Ideologues who fit their training to prop a ideology hurt aikido. This was my point that we need to get specific about what we are doing and why we do it. The poor aikido will correct itself or dissolve...

[graham christian]

Hi Jon. Interesting reading your reply and thus I understand where you're coming from.
When you mention about what hasn't been shown or is missing and so how 'everyone' so to speak is looking for this missing ingredient then who am I to argue if that is the concensous of opinion.
However, up to now I havn't seen or heard this complaint from advanced students of Ki Aikido, indeed quite the opposite. I may be wrong as there may be many but not in my experience.
Having said that I did visit a Ki Aikido dojo a couple of years ago and was quite surprised by some of what was going on there but put it down to a one off.
Myself? No problem, nothing missing, plenty to learn.
Sorting out any confusion as to the purpose of Aikido is absolutely no problem to me or to any student who comes. They are shown principles of center, kokyu, center line, circle, koshi on day one where they have to feel it and do it. They are given the choice of self improvement with self defence as a consequence of, or if they want self defence as the priority then I send them elsewhere. No problem, the usual response is either a bright this is what I want or else it's wow, I'm not ready for this yet, that takes real discipline.
It's all good. When people are ready they will see what was right in front of them.
Until then it will seem unreal to them but so be it as it's all part of the process of learning.
Regards. G.

[jonreading]

Hi Jon. Interesting reading your reply and thus I understand where you're coming from.
When you mention about what hasn't been shown or is missing and so how 'everyone' so to speak is looking for this missing ingredient then who am I to argue if that is the concensous of opinion.
However, up to now I havn't seen or heard this complaint from advanced students of Ki Aikido, indeed quite the opposite. I may be wrong as there may be many but not in my experience.
Having said that I did visit a Ki Aikido dojo a couple of years ago and was quite surprised by some of what was going on there but put it down to a one off.
Myself? No problem, nothing missing, plenty to learn.
Sorting out any confusion as to the purpose of Aikido is absolutely no problem to me or to any student who comes. They are shown principles of center, kokyu, center line, circle, koshi on day one where they have to feel it and do it. They are given the choice of self improvement with self defence as a consequence of, or if they want self defence as the priority then I send them elsewhere. No problem, the usual response is either a bright this is what I want or else it's wow, I'm not ready for this yet, that takes real discipline.
It's all good. When people are ready they will see what was right in front of them.
Until then it will seem unreal to them but so be it as it's all part of the process of learning.
Regards. G.
I think this is kinda my point. For example, this thread began with a post from you implying, yet not confirming, a video clip was internal strength training. Yet in this thread you claim there is nothing missing from your training. If internal strength training is part of your training, and you know the exercises for IP/IS training, then I think you are sending a mixed message. If you don't know what is IP/IS training and you are proposing an exercise about which you are soliciting advice that is a different matter. In that case, you are correlating the video exercise with what you believe to be internal strength training. Why not just ask an IS/IP guy if you are unsure? While I wouldn't hang em upside down and whack 'em with a stick, they all seem professional and amiable to answer a post now and then.

Where was IP/IS in the principles you share with your students? In your post you cited several principles but did not include internal strength. So again, is IP/IS part of your training, or is it not; is it a smaller part of a larger component, or a larger component unmentioned? We are so unspecific in our curriculum and "principles" we can't even keep them straight.

I am trying to limit my comments to the discussion of IP/IS in aikido, with some overlapping observations I have about aikido at large. Internal strength training is a good topic right now because we are breaking through some of the prejudices facing it. But if we cannot even be honest with ourselves, we have no chance of having the necessary conversations to figure out what we are doing. If I were tutoring a student in math, would I be able to use the response, "it's all good. you'll see the answer when you're ready."? Of course not. No, at some point in time we have an obligation to our students to teach them something concrete. Again, understanding that for a period of time, "I don't know" is acceptable as an answer. What happens when "I don't know" becomes "I don't care" and you never find the answer to why "center" principle works...

Right now, I believe Ikeda Sensei is the most humble man on the mat. You look at a guy doing shihan aikido and he breaks himself down and starts working to improve his aikido (and how to disseminate it), in front of everyone. I see people rethinking their aikido and I am impressed, not only by what they are doing physically...they can explain the stuff better, too. I am following the aikido that can be explained to me because I want to learn it. Nothing mystical, nothing magical. Creepy, yes.

[Budd]

Nicely put, Jon.

There's an ongoing debate to describe the Internal Strength pieces around the "how's it work" and "what Person X is doing versus Person Y". I think a lot of people are going to be quick to try to offer their "take" on the people, personalities and activities. It's going to be a hard mix of listening to people that know more while scrambling to get as much information from different sources as possible, working on your own skills enough to have a valid opinion, then ultimately running everything through your own processor/filter to decide what's the best course for you.

And for me that's the roadmap just for someone interested in IS/IP. How they do all that while also training in a traditional/mainstream aikido dojo (with all its accompanying . . er . . characteristics) . . is going to be interesting to watch over time. I might even start visiting one or two within traveling distance once in a while ;)

[mathewjgano]

I think this is kinda my point. For example, this thread began with a post from you implying, yet not confirming, a video clip was internal strength training. Yet in this thread you claim there is nothing missing from your training.

He also said he has plenty to learn, which clearly describes, in one sense at least, something understood to be missing. I think a big part of this problem is that the phrase "internal arts" can mean a lot of different things. No one owns the language so we're all free to use the terms as we see fit, which is always based on whatever experience we have up to that point.
I think it's a fair point for "IP/IS folks" to make that not all "internal" approaches are equally valid per some given task, but this is where individual goals/intent start to differentiate and people seem to start talking past each other. My personal view is that if someone is working on any aspect of "internal" development, no matter how poorly, it should still be allowed to be called "internal." I started my internal study as a kid when I saw that if I relaxed certain parts of my body (which parts were based on "looking inward") I could keep the bigger kids from pinning me to the ground. That's internals. It's not the sum total. If anything, it's barely a positive value, but I believe it still fits the description. .01 is still cash, albeit not as impressive as 100.00...and to follow the analogy, many folks would say having a penny isn't "really" having any money at all. That, in a nutshell, is my guess on the nature of many of these conversations.
There is always more to learn, more pieces of the picture to add to make the picture more complete, but a partial picture is still a picture...and whether you're godly or crap, it's always a partial picture anyway, from what I hear told. The question has to do with how useful it is for the things you're trying to make it do.
Of course, I'm one of the folks who doesn't have the experience to compare things very well. Hopefully over time I'll change that and be able to point to something even a little bit concrete instead of offering guesses...
Anyway...online chitchat completed, time to go do something with greater long-term rewards.
Take care folks!
Matt
p.s. I'd like to add I like the way Graham seems to put himself out there: "this is what I do; what do you think?" Open-mindedness is perhaps the most important thing we as students can have. I've long been of the opinion that knowledge often obscures as much as it reveals. The more understanding we get, the more important it is for us to remain open-minded...and really, if for no other reason than it invites those we interact with to do the same.
...something like that anyway.

[graham christian]

I think this is kinda my point. For example, this thread began with a post from you implying, yet not confirming, a video clip was internal strength training. Yet in this thread you claim there is nothing missing from your training. If internal strength training is part of your training, and you know the exercises for IP/IS training, then I think you are sending a mixed message. If you don't know what is IP/IS training and you are proposing an exercise about which you are soliciting advice that is a different matter. In that case, you are correlating the video exercise with what you believe to be internal strength training. Why not just ask an IS/IP guy if you are unsure? While I wouldn't hang em upside down and whack 'em with a stick, they all seem professional and amiable to answer a post now and then.

Where was IP/IS in the principles you share with your students? In your post you cited several principles but did not include internal strength. So again, is IP/IS part of your training, or is it not; is it a smaller part of a larger component, or a larger component unmentioned? We are so unspecific in our curriculum and "principles" we can't even keep them straight.

I am trying to limit my comments to the discussion of IP/IS in aikido, with some overlapping observations I have about aikido at large. Internal strength training is a good topic right now because we are breaking through some of the prejudices facing it. But if we cannot even be honest with ourselves, we have no chance of having the necessary conversations to figure out what we are doing. If I were tutoring a student in math, would I be able to use the response, "it's all good. you'll see the answer when you're ready."? Of course not. No, at some point in time we have an obligation to our students to teach them something concrete. Again, understanding that for a period of time, "I don't know" is acceptable as an answer. What happens when "I don't know" becomes "I don't care" and you never find the answer to why "center" principle works...

Right now, I believe Ikeda Sensei is the most humble man on the mat. You look at a guy doing shihan aikido and he breaks himself down and starts working to improve his aikido (and how to disseminate it), in front of everyone. I see people rethinking their aikido and I am impressed, not only by what they are doing physically...they can explain the stuff better, too. I am following the aikido that can be explained to me because I want to learn it. Nothing mystical, nothing magical. Creepy, yes.

HI once again Jon. In the title I did pose the question but that's all. I did not say that what I do is what the IP guys call IP. I don't know exactly what they call IP but from what I've read on these forums about it I don't see anything new to me.
I see the mention of ground force and when I hear it explained I recognise it, it's what I've been doing for years as Koshi. When I hear center line mentioned I recognise that too and have done the same. When I hear about center and one point and connection I recognise them also and once again have been teaching that for years.
So, having learned these from Aikido and then hearing people like yourself saying it's not in Aikido then I can but wonder.
So the comment on it's all good was on comment on this view that I see what they seem to be explaining already in Aikido. So saying it's an answer to a student is a bit off.
If you want to be honest then I would say that is a correct attitude so I would ask for those studying IP to be honest from this viewpoint:
When talking about center are you talking about a physical thing?
When talking about one point, which has been shown on the discussions can be moved for example to the hand, is that a physical thing?
Is center line a physical thing?
No.
Honesty would in fact lead one to understand the physical, the mental, the energy and the spiritual in equal measure. If one cannot see this or understand it then so be it but does that mean I call them dishonest and deluded? No. Yet for me understanding the physical and more, for those only interested in physical could say I'm being vague or unreal and in fact imply dishonesty. Mmmm. I can only smile and understand their view, It's not for me to make anyone wrong and so as I said I let them be.
If someone in IP feels they can learn something from me then they can ask me or if they feel it is totally different from what I do then they can tell me so, then I'll know so I don't see any problem.
The purpose is what I look at. If it's in order to beat someone or overpower them or win a contest then I'm not interested. If it's how to harmonise completely then I am already well advanced in this. As with anyone else on the planet if I see something I'm looking for of course I'll ask about it so again no problem there.
I assume nothing about you yet you appear to assume something about me. What can I say? Only keep on your path and you will find what you're looking for.
Regards. G.

[DH]

Aikido settling for the shape and not digging deeper may be the apparency, ....
Aiki' existed for centuries before O'Senseis' Aikido and thus the purpose of practice was changed even though done through the same techniques....
The ip I read about to me is not much different to the old Aiki as in aikijujutsu or indeed in all past samurai training......
Thus modern Aikido will end up no different to prior O'Sensei and may as well be called a version of Aikijutsu for the great samurai of the past.....
, the great martial artists of the past from various martial arts be they in china or wherever all learned of these principles of internal power so it's all well and good but it's nothing new......
But all said and done unless a person understands the change O'Sensei made as to purpose then they will never learn his Aikido and therefore the practice of the exercises he gave will not be understood properly and the why will not be seen.
Regards. G.
Mr. Christian
In order to make the statements contained in your post, a) you are claiming an understanding of the aiki of the past, b) an understanding of the aii of the founder and c) understanding of the differences.
You then went on to offer this video which you stated was a reflection of what you do.
It's the nearest I have found to my way of teaching and he deals directly with the principles and explains as he goes.
His whole 'channel' is well worth watching for those who want a better explanation in English.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRSRRgxIfAM
I would only suggest that you have painted yourself into a corner.
The teacher in that video, in an attempt to explain how to get off the wall to his frustrated student, failed to offer very simple.....VERY simple and clear explanations for what he himself was doing..

And what he did do...wait for it.....was jujutsu.....you know...the old stuff the samurai did. Where did you see Aiki or IP or KI expressed in the movements? Just mention it... like at 1:25 or something like that...maybe I missed it.
I am very confused as to what your talking points are and I suspect others are as well.
Just say'n
Dan

[graham christian]

Mr. Christian
In order to make the statements contained in your post, a) you are claiming an understanding of the aiki of the past, b) an understanding of the aii of the founder and c) understanding of the differences.
You then went on to offer this video which you stated was a reflection of what you do.

I would only suggest that you have painted yourself into a corner.
The teacher in that video, in an attempt to explain how to get off the wall to his frustrated student, failed to offer very simple.....VERY simple and clear explanations for what he himself was doing..

And what he did do...wait for it.....was jujutsu.....you know...the old stuff the samurai did. Where did you see Aiki or IP or KI expressed in the movements? Just mention it... like at 1:25 or something like that...maybe I missed it.
I am very confused as to what your talking points are and I suspect others are as well.
Just say'n
Dan

Hi Mr.Harden.
Wow! As to what you are getting at I havn't got a clue. You obviously are confused. Why else would you come up with such a silly statement?
Firstly you want to deny my understanding of Aiki existing way before aikido and used by the samurai. Then my view of O'Sensei changing the purpose. Thus seeing the difference. Well to me it's obvious if not to you. So be it.
Secondly to do with the video. Your explanation of it is quite absurd. He, if you watch every physical movement, could be said purely on that basis to be doing jujutsu, judo,aikijujutsu,aikido,wrestling......need I go on. So picking out one technique based on jujutsu as an example of old aiki is a rather stupid thing to say really for all Aikido techniques are based on that. So that would then answer your question as to where in the video do I see any Aiki.
Anyway, enough tittle tattle.
I see Aikido, Aiki, Ki and more expressed in that video obviously otherwise I wouldn't be saying it's similar to what I do would I?
To help you out I suggest you listen carefully to what is being said. Ki and expansion of Ki is mentioned on numerous occasions. When he mentions force will get you nowhere in performing the technique and then tells the guy how he's all constricted what do you think he's talking about? He is talking about constricted Ki. Then connection is mentioned and the difference it makes is shown. We have therefore some of the principles of Aikido being expressed and taught so why you are confused I don't know.
As to IP? Who knows, you're the expert on that so you tell me if it has any in it.
Finally I say this: The video was suggested, on a separate post to the other things you mention, as something the person I was addressing may like to see as we have a few similar views in the realm of Aikido. I'm sure you must of understood that context at least. On that same post I say that the guy has many worth seeing and by his reply he understood what that meant as he said he would study THEM and let me know what he thought. Did you study THEM?
Now if you're ready to tell me what's really bugging you feel free but it can't be what you wrote above, surely.
No offence intended, except by calling you Mr.
Feel free to communicate for I certainly won't be offended.
Regards.G.

[DH]

Hi Mr.Harden.
Wow! As to what you are getting at I havn't got a clue. You obviously are confused. Why else would you come up with such a silly statement?
Firstly you want to deny my understanding of Aiki existing way before aikido and used by the samurai. Then my view of O'Sensei changing the purpose. Thus seeing the difference. Well to me it's obvious if not to you. So be it.
Let me try a different approach with your terms
There is no one I know of who will accurately define and reach an undesputed agreement on what is supposed to be:
old aiki or old IP
juxtaposed to Daito ryu's aiki or IP
justaposed to Ueshiba's aiki or New IP
That was why i said you were painting yourself into a corner. You took on a very large topic.

Secondly to do with the video. Your explanation of it is quite absurd. He, if you watch every physical movement, could be said purely on that basis to be doing jujutsu, judo,aikijujutsu,aikido,wrestling......need I go on. So picking out one technique based on jujutsu as an example of old aiki is a rather stupid thing to say really for all Aikido techniques are based on that. So that would then answer your question as to where in the video do I see any Aiki.
Anyway, enough tittle tattle.
I see Aikido, Aiki, Ki and more expressed in that video obviously otherwise I wouldn't be saying it's similar to what I do would I?
To help you out I suggest you listen carefully to what is being said. Ki and expansion of Ki is mentioned on numerous occasions. When he mentions force will get you nowhere in performing the technique and then tells the guy how he's all constricted what do you think he's talking about? He is talking about constricted Ki. Then connection is mentioned and the difference it makes is shown. We have therefore some of the principles of Aikido being expressed and taught so why you are confused I don't know

It doesn't matter to me what he was saying. He was doing jujutsu. There are dozens of people here who would agree with that assessment as well. Please note" I did not say anything about what he can or cannot do or does or does not know...or anything else. Just that what he was doing can be shown instantly. Anyone can be taught to relax and redirect a straight vector force-it doesn't make it aiki or Ki or whatever.
As far as words go:
You can also see some very high level jujutsu being done on video by Don Angeir within which he said..."Ki...is crap.".
So there are a couple of guys with different opinions..
Lets assume that other than these jujutsu principles, there are many things that teacher knows that he is not showing. Let's assume that there are many other things I know that I am not saying.
As to IP? Who knows, you're the expert on that so you tell me if it has any in it.
Regards.G.
Thats not condusive to a good discussion. No one here is an expert okay? It's not a contest...
If we end up disagreeing, let's do so as gentlemen
Just say'n
Dan

[mathewjgano]

Obviously I'm not Jon, but some thoughts I had reading this post:

So, having learned these from Aikido and then hearing people like yourself saying it's not in Aikido then I can but wonder.
I don't think Jon said they weren't in Aikido. I know I recently read him as saying he believes they're just probably not (generally) practiced with the same degree of understanding as other groups who practice the same (or similar) exercises might. Aikido is a big world so I think it's incorrect for anyone to say it's completely lacking, but a good many people do seem to be saying their practice has been revolutionized through direct instruction from some of these different approaches; that they clarified much of what they were already doing.
I think it's fair to suggest Aikido in general might not have the best, most precise instruction for high-level ki-based movements. We may already have the language and the basic concepts, but the degree of understanding in how to physically manifest aiki power probably could be done better...I tend to think most things, if not all, could be done better though. The question is whether or not what we're doing satisfies the demand/goal we have for it.

...if they feel it is totally different from what I do then they can tell me so, then I'll know so I don't see any problem.
Just thought this bore repeating.
Only keep on your path and you will find what you're looking for.
Regards. G.
This could be close to what Jon was talking about when he spoke of "corroletive thinking." I'm guessing you're not saying that simply by looking one always finds what they're looking for. It's the degree with which we engage ourselves to the looking which determines what we find...that and the luck of being in the right places at the right times of course.
Thanks for the good discussions!
Take care,
Matt

[mathewjgano]

No one here is an expert okay?

It's all relative, and I always love to see humility, but for whatever it's worth, I think it's a safe description for you. You've clearly dedicated a lot of time and energy to the study of ki/aiki development...not to mention how to teach it. No one is beyond scrutiny of course, but like you said, we can all agree to disagree about things like gentlepersons. (that's a word right?)

[stan baker]

Hi Graham
It looks like they are doing Aikido with very little Aiki.

stan

[graham christian]

Let me try a different approach with your terms
There is no one I know of who will accurately define and reach an undesputed agreement on what is supposed to be:
old aiki or old IP
juxtaposed to Daito ryu's aiki or IP
justaposed to Ueshiba's aiki or New IP
That was why i said you were painting yourself into a corner. You took on a very large topic.

It doesn't matter to me what he was saying. He was doing jujutsu. There are dozens of people here who would agree with that assessment as well. Please note" I did not say anything about what he can or cannot do or does or does not know...or anything else. Just that what he was doing can be shown instantly. Anyone can be taught to relax and redirect a straight vector force-it doesn't make it aiki or Ki or whatever.
As far as words go:
You can also see some very high level jujutsu being done on video by Don Angeir within which he said..."Ki...is crap.".
So there are a couple of guys with different opinions..
Lets assume that other than these jujutsu principles, there are many things that teacher knows that he is not showing. Let's assume that there are many other things I know that I am not saying.

Thats not condusive to a good discussion. No one here is an expert okay? It's not a contest...
If we end up disagreeing, let's do so as gentlemen
Just say'n
Dan

Dan. I assure you I'm not in any corner, I'm open and free thank you. I do Aikido. The guy in that video does Aikido. Many people do the different styles of Aikido. No confusion.
Some feel they are missing something. Why? Why do they feel that? Well it could be for all kind of reasons no different to someone studying any subject and feeling stuck or lost or even betrayed. I have helped many people with their studies, people who have given up on maths or whatever subject they are or used to study but gave up.
Every time I take them back over what they were studying and find where they got stuck, where it didn't make sense etc. and proceed to clear up their problem with the subject and they end up reinvigorated and understanding and back in harmony with the subject and indeed the studying of it. Back on path.
Why am I telling you this? Because it's never the subjects fault it is always the fault of the student. How do I differerenciate? Well I know the phenomena of a student with a problem compared to a student who understands. A student who has not studied properly BLAMES. The student who hasn't studied properly blames all kind of things from the cat to too much noise to others etc. They then make it all so complicated. Another phenomenon is that they may just go in to apathy on the subject and give up and believe they're too stupid.
Now the guy in the video has a running commentary on what he's doing yet somehow you are not interested in what he is saying and therefore assume you know better. Amazing.
A guy is teaching what he knows, using communication, the major tool of teaching, and you don't want to listen? You just want to pick out bits to either prove him wrong or prove he's doing something else? I find that fascinating yet quite common for those who don't understand but think they do. Therefore I cannot take your 'discussion' seriously thus far.
Let's not just assume shall we, let's say when we are assuming and when we are not. Where we do understand and where we don't. A man who can DO comfortably with absolutely no problem, no confusion, no misunderstanding is indeed an expert. I am an expert in tying up my shoelace as are you. So there are experts here in various aspects of Aikido and no doubt in various aspects of ip.
So much significance is placed on saying when a person or even self IS an expert or Master of something that it becomes a mustn't say word. Well not me. I define what one is and therefore can say who is, it's quite simple really. A master of an art is a master of an art, what's wrong with that? Let me enlighten you.
When learning something you go through stages of learning, building up understandings and practicing those understandings in the real world. Thus you gain ability. Then you use that ability and come across various times where the use of it didn't do the job so you review and learn more and wind up more able, your ability increases. Finally for those who learn properly you reach a condition where it doesn't matter what the universe brings to you in that particular area of expertize, you are confident and able to handle it with ease. That is a master. A car mechanic who looks foreward to whatever is brought to him to fix, is totally at ease with it, enjoys it, never complains and kicks the cars, handles all cars like they are his children or long lost friends is a master orf his craft. Only the self proclaiming analytical knowalls can come along and say he isn't because blah blah blah. Amusing.
Now that doesn't mean he is still not learning believe it or not for most people falsely believe that a master now doesn't need to learn any more and I'm sure if anyone is reading this they will think I'm contradicting myself but actually I am not.
Notice when I gave the example of a person using his ability he comes across times when he has to review and learn and improve that ability. Well a Master does the same but from a totally, more advanced, more aware viewpoint. Notice that a master of a trade or art is totally in tune with the area of expertize. The master car mechanic with all cars to him being like long lost friends needing help. He is completely centered, he is fully blending with the car as it arrives. He has only compassion for the vehicle. He can turn on the engine and listen, be at one with, virtually feel it's history. No running to look things up in a book or go through loads of memory files in his mind. He has hara, kokyu etc. in his universe of car mechanics. Thus he can notice and detect new interesting things, new learnings on the path of the master.
So don't be shy now.If you can welcome and demonstrate on anybody your area of expertize, totally at ease, no problem no matter who it is, then you are a master, maybe a beginning one, of your art. You have made it yours. Now if you can teach from the same viewpoint and abilty then you are a master teacher of it too.
So a master of one style saying there is no such thing as Ki, or that Ki is a load of crap is a piece of nonsense. He is a master of his own way and knows nothing about that other way. So your logic is at fault when you say this guys Aikido isn't Aikido and then call it jujutsu, which you no doubt have experience with, and then add on to that therefore that a master of jujutsu said ki is crap. You may think that's logical, I don't. Even if it was HIS style of jujutsu then as his style is to do with Ki then you couldnt compare it to a style where there is no Ki could you?
Plus why are you saying let's disagree like gentlemen? I am a gentleman. Any disagreements I have with you thus far are none with you. I may disagree with some of what you say and at length show you my different view. None of what I say is belittling of you as a person or indeed martial artist, none of what I say insults your charachter, none of what I say is rude. So what's with the implication?
So there you are mr anderson, oops sorry I slipped into the matrix there, I must remember to take the right pill.
Have fun. Nice talking to you.
Regards. G.

[graham christian]

Obviously I'm not Jon, but some thoughts I had reading this post:

I don't think Jon said they weren't in Aikido. I know I recently read him as saying he believes they're just probably not (generally) practiced with the same degree of understanding as other groups who practice the same (or similar) exercises might. Aikido is a big world so I think it's incorrect for anyone to say it's completely lacking, but a good many people do seem to be saying their practice has been revolutionized through direct instruction from some of these different approaches; that they clarified much of what they were already doing.
I think it's fair to suggest Aikido in general might not have the best, most precise instruction for high-level ki-based movements. We may already have the language and the basic concepts, but the degree of understanding in how to physically manifest aiki power probably could be done better...I tend to think most things, if not all, could be done better though. The question is whether or not what we're doing satisfies the demand/goal we have for it.

Just thought this bore repeating.

This could be close to what Jon was talking about when he spoke of "corroletive thinking." I'm guessing you're not saying that simply by looking one always finds what they're looking for. It's the degree with which we engage ourselves to the looking which determines what we find...that and the luck of being in the right places at the right times of course.
Thanks for the good discussions!
Take care,
Matt

Hi Mathew. Nice replies.I agree. On the point of keeping on your path and you'll find what your looking for though yes I do mean it. Thus I said path, not much different to your explanation of degree we engage ourselves in the looking. If you are sincere in staying on your path you cannot fail to find the lessons you need to learn.
As such is my view.
Regards. G.

[graham christian]

Hi Graham
It looks like they are doing Aikido with very little Aiki.

stan

Hi Stan. To you maybe. To me I see the use of Ki and the use of Harmony.
Thanks anyway.
Regards.G.

[DH]

It's all relative, and I always love to see humility, but for whatever it's worth, I think it's a safe description for you. You've clearly dedicated a lot of time and energy to the study of ki/aiki development...not to mention how to teach it. No one is beyond scrutiny of course, but like you said, we can all agree to disagree about things like gentlepersons. (that's a word right?)
To me the word master means you're done...you've mastered something. I think I will be happy to remain a student who is not nearly satisfied and remain that way. ...I'm probably going to be 80 and training somewhere trying to get better. If I can help other people along the way, well, that's great.
Cheers
Dan

[mathewjgano]

To me the word master means you're done...you've mastered something. I think I will be happy to remain a student who is not nearly satisfied and remain that way. ...I'm probably going to be 80 and training somewhere trying to get better. If I can help other people along the way, well, that's great.
Cheers
Dan
Well, to be fair, I did say "expert." But I think I get where you're coming from and amen to it!
Take care,
Matt

[Mark Freeman]

Hi Graham,

thanks for the link. I will give it some proper attention when I get back, and let you know my thoughts. Right now I'm dashing for an early morning train.

regards,

Mark

Hi Graham,

I've had a chance to look at a few of the videos on the channel you suggest.

My initial thoughts are "what is he doing stealing some of the exact words I use myself":)

I will certainly continue to watch more, I like the way that they are all exploring and looking for the path of least resistance. The teacher is patient and perceptive and seems to me to be the embodiment of what he is teaching, respect to him and to his teachers.

I particularly like that uke Don gets a bit frustrated at times, which seems to me to be a very real reaction to trying to get it right, which is precisely the point, the frustration is because of the trying.

Hats off to the guys for putting their stuff out there for people to take what they want from.

If I were to nit pick at all, I would question why they allowed their arms to be so easily trapped against their bodies, personally I prefer to keep space between the two (space created by mind not by muscle). Just a small thing, they still seemed to be able to make it work though, so I will experiment with that myself.

Thanks for the recommendation,

regards

Mark

[graham christian]

Hi Mark,
Glad you like them. Your response about him using words you use made me laugh as I had the same experience.
To do with arms at their side I'm not sure if I understand exactly what you mean but I do know that I do in many circumstances other than kokyu if you see what I mean.
I did learn how to keep the elbows tucked in for example in bokken training or else they got hit. On the other hand I learned how, for example when doing funakogi undo, you must keep your elbows in. If they go out then energy disperses out through them rather than out through the wrists.
This led me to see that when being held or pushed against or tusseled with you can let the force go to center or more precisely lead it to center with your elbows. So the arms are in when directing the opposing energy in or down and they go out when leading out or for kokyu.
Anyway thanks for letting me know your view.
Regards.G.

[bob_stra]

So much talk on ip/is that I thought I'd put up a video that we simply have as Ki exercises.
Maybe it's what others call ip? Who knows, to me it's just part of Aikido on the spiritual side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_6jZgzQJ74

Enjoy.G.

A question:

What is the significance of the hats you are wearing? Is it some kind of religious accoutrement? I wasn't quite sure, so thought to ask.

[graham christian]

A question:

What is the significance of the hats you are wearing? Is it some kind of religious accoutrement? I wasn't quite sure, so thought to ask.

Hi Bob.
For the practical reasons watch this old video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViVKk7hc5To

Symbolically, it represents peace and love.

Culturally it represents my cultural background.

Secretly, it's where I keep my spare tanto. Shhh. don't tell anyone.

Regards.G.