PDA

View Full Version : Two centers making a connection or one- in a bujutsu body?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


DH
10-09-2012, 05:42 PM
It is very simple to state that of the men known to possess unusual power and skill...they follow known paths; pretty much with the same source material. I keep running into teachers who move and feel like every other Tom, Dick and Harry. No worries, no big deal. I just wonder why we want to spend half a life time training to learn how to.... "feel and move like any other human being we can pull off the street." That seems very odd to me.

Moving the way it is outlined in many threads here -will all have you generating power in such a way that you will be one side weighted and "patterned to be thrown." I suppose that's okay if you want to be able to be thrown and want to fit in to your nage and desire to have him control you. All of that will fit in with the "make connection between two people" and "make a four legged animal" model making a joined center between to people.
In fact making connection between two people as an act is a) to be thrown, or b) to be open to being thrown, by design.

For those desiring to be able to defend their centers while manipulating other's centers-an entirely different way to learn to move the body is in order; one that produces an aiki or bujutsu body. That way, is almost diametrically opposed to the way outlined in many threads and curiously it fits in with other methods known to produce power.... and all while remaining vertical!! Retaining your center and not revealing your center, and not connecting to his center is the way to go.

Were one to wonder how logical what I am saying is:
1. Imagine your life depended on the outcome and you were being told to "make connect" or make a four legged animal....to Takeda or Ushiba's center!! :eek:
2. How smart of a gambit do you suppose that would be?
3. How smart would you be to open your center up to "making a connection" to my center or trying to make a four legged animal, with me? :cool:
It is not a very smart idea, and it is not the way. You will always be open to being controlled, to being late and "reactionary or responding to their movement. It is not the way to exert your will on them as Ueshiba outlined as aiki. When you move with a bujutsu body; they are late, they are reacting and they are open to being owned.

In fact all of the tried and tried budo principles of push when pulled, turn when pushed, pull and quadrant the body, place their weight over the points between their legs forward and back, were designed to throw average people. And most everyone in Budo is beng taught to move like.....average people.
In short:

Takeda, Sagawa, Horikawa, Hisa, Ueshiba. Shioda, Shirata, Mochizuki, Tomiki, Tohei and Saotome were all known to "feel" different....and be devastatingly effective...sans any technique....and could not be thrown.
Where?
When?
And what dojo(s)?
Was that once considered...good?
Now......
_________________________
We are being taught
To be thrown
And we are convinced it is grand
_________________________

If we do not feel like them......
Why not?
Dan

Garth
10-09-2012, 07:29 PM
So you know,..... the next question to be asked (i know too wordy to be answered online) but how is the problem of ukemi to reconciled?

I just got corrected about this today(not giving my center up to the four legged animal) and I am not trying to be a Budo D@#k.:D

Great as usual food for thought.
G

Garth
10-09-2012, 08:48 PM
i know i know, this was listed on "Non Aikido" matters, but this is Aikiweb after all.
This stuff is hard enuff, switching your intent between "not being thrown" to , "take ukemi now" is bound to get lost in the shuffle.
:confused:

Chris Knight
10-10-2012, 03:12 AM
I'm still trying to get my head around no third point, and no push-pull theory - it just throws martial arts on it's head. I thought I'd catch you out at the end of a nights drinking - but alas....no :eek:

Lee Salzman
10-10-2012, 05:20 AM
So you know,..... the next question to be asked (i know too wordy to be answered online) but how is the problem of ukemi to reconciled?

I just got corrected about this today(not giving my center up to the four legged animal) and I am not trying to be a Budo D@#k.:D

Great as usual food for thought.
G

My ultimate solution to this for myself was a non-solution-solution: train somewhere else. At the end of the day I decided I didn't want to train my body to go-along-to-get-along, and that ultimately that was more important to me than the organization I was training with. If your training partners are honest, they shouldn't want you to take a fall just for the sake of them feeling good about their technique - their center is either developed enough that it caused you to fall, or it is not. Success is expected way too easily in most aikido dojos - it is stupidly hard for me to throw someone using my center, and so, I'd be happy to get 1 success out of 10 on a good day, so why should I really expect that my uke takes a dive for me every time? And if my uke is developing too, it doesn't get easier as I get better - because my uke is getting better too! What do I learn the other way? I need to know when I am really failing and really succeeding.

Mary Eastland
10-10-2012, 06:44 AM
Does being thrown seem like losing to you?

DH
10-10-2012, 07:13 AM
Does being thrown seem like losing to you?
No. Not at all. I take very good ukemi. I still take ukemi for my people....just not by falling down.
Why does being extremely difficult to throw seem like a negative to you?
Why is "winning" against someone so negative to you?
Why isn't it nice to have serious power in your hands and know some sophisticated ways to use it?
Why not learn and have both?
Dan

Garth
10-10-2012, 07:14 AM
Does being thrown seem like losing to you?

Uhh no in the fact that it allows nage to succeed therefore he learns, yes when it is the teacher and it is given to him. Demonstration for teaching fine, but to have me become the four legged animal (is collusion)just so he can show off his "stuff " is another matter and a fine line.

DH
10-10-2012, 07:35 AM
Does being thrown seem like losing to you?
Was it to Tohei?
How about Saotome?
How about Takeda, Sagawa, Horikawa, Hisa, Ueshiba. Shioda, Shirata, Mochizuki, Tomiki, all were all known to "feel" different....and be devastatingly effective...sans any technique....and could not be thrown.
In what dojo(s) ....was that all happening?
Why was that once considered...good, and we are being taught to fall down?

Seriously Mary.....Why were they known for the very quality you seem to despise?

I think that this worth some serious consideration.
Dan

Mary Eastland
10-10-2012, 07:42 AM
It might be....worth some serious discussion....could we discuss it and not debate it?

Chris Knight
10-10-2012, 07:49 AM
Hi Mary - hope you're well

I just cant quite put into words what this feels like. If I had the ability to stop people throwing me on my third point, I'd take it in a heart beat. Isn't that what we do in every class.

Push pull theory just doesn't work plain and simple. I'm not particularly a talented martial artist but I can push or pull most people. This just doesn't match up to cerebral understanding.

I will get there though, and will put in the hard work best I can, to understand this

DH
10-10-2012, 07:54 AM
It might be....worth some serious discussion....could we discuss it and not debate it?
Sure, Mary...how?
Dan

Mary Eastland
10-10-2012, 08:13 AM
I just reread your first post. I agree with a lot you say. I think there is a time and a place for both kinds of training. Both ideas and others too have place in Aikido training.

Last night in class we were extending though uke as uke tried to walk through...it worked well when uke didn't try to push nage with muscle. The second an uke used muscle her feet started gripping the mat and all was lost.

Ron extended and just before I met him he disappeared (that is what he felt like...of course he didn't really disappear) ...what a cool feeling as his extension reappeared and I was projected back after I was lured in.

That is how. We talk about experiences without belittling or degrading one another.

gregstec
10-10-2012, 08:46 AM
So you know,..... the next question to be asked (i know too wordy to be answered online) but how is the problem of ukemi to reconciled?

I just got corrected about this today(not giving my center up to the four legged animal) and I am not trying to be a Budo D@#k.:D

Great as usual food for thought.
G

I like to look at it this way - as uke, you don't up your center to nage; you give nage an opportunity to take it. Of course, how much opportunity will depend on the skill level of both parties - more skill, less opportunity, etc. This is how uke and nage can help each other learn without collusion and over cooperation - IMO, of course :)

Greg

DH
10-10-2012, 08:47 AM
I just reread your first post. I agree with a lot you say. I think there is a time and a place for both kinds of training. Both ideas and others too have place in Aikido training.

Last night in class we were extending though uke as uke tried to walk through...it worked well when uke didn't try to push nage with muscle. The second an uke used muscle her feet started gripping the mat and all was lost.

Ron extended and just before I met him he disappeared (that is what he felt like...of course he didn't really disappear) ...what a cool feeling as his extension reappeared and I was projected back after I was lured in.

That is how. We talk about experiences without belittling or degrading one another.

Okay. But...when you talk about your experiences in an Aikido dojo its fine. When I talk about my abilities and experiences they are coined as "advertising" or "bullying." So I try to never talk about the very real outcomes anymore. When any Shihan I have ever met tries anything on me it is neutralized and fizzles out and they stare at me. They cannot make any sort of successful response. This has also worked with many other Martial artists of all types. That's my experience.

If there were a time and a place for both-doesn't someone need to know both?

I haven't read of or seen anyone who discussed both approaches. Did I miss something?
The same body skill to neutralize aikido teachers works against others in other arts. It also works well with weapons.
The answer is not to extend through anyone. I don't project ki like that. I keep it balanced in me. Therefore I release no energy.
I make no connection-to anyone.
I do not expose or share my center with anyone
They have no access to it.
Where has that been discussed?
Dan

Mary Eastland
10-10-2012, 09:07 AM
I see we have nothing in common. Have fun.

Gary David
10-10-2012, 10:18 AM
I see we have nothing in common. Have fun.

Mary
I think that you are correct that common ground does not exist between you and Dan, though that is not because he does not have lots to offer. You are just on a different page and one I see as closer to the beginning rather than the ending of the book. That is perfectly ok, each of us working at our own pace and having time to stop anywhere along the path......or even stop. As for me I am ok with what I don't know, knowing that I don't know it and may not get to it.

As for me these days......there is likely no one in the dojo here that can do nikyo on me if I don't want them to......that doesn't Mean I don't as part of practice. I agree with Dan that you should have the ability to keep your center, giving out what you want as part of practice. Years ago Saotome Sensei said in a small class in the old OCAK dojo ('83 likely) when ask that knives could cut vegetables or people, one needed the skill to do both.....choice was then yours. Without the skill set if needed it was not available.

Have a good day

Gary

Mary Eastland
10-10-2012, 02:12 PM
You have a good day too, Gary. I am not sure how you can tell what page I am on. I am training in a different art than is being talked about on this thread. Dan asked how ...so I tried ...but it was not to be so have fun.

I have trained with people that say that Nikkyo couldn't be done on them...what does that prove? Nothing.

Gary David
10-10-2012, 02:51 PM
You have a good day too, Gary. I am not sure how you can tell what page I am on. I am training in a different art than is being talked about on this thread. Dan asked how ...so I tried ...but it was not to be so have fun.

I have trained with people that say that Nikkyo couldn't be done on them...what does that prove? Nothing.

Mary
Depends on the context whether proof means anything or not......... In the context of shared cooperative training likely it does not. Concerning effectiveness in a physical conflict, giving up one's center which is what allowing nikyo to be applied is.....not what you may want. In the context of the writing above my saying that was that just because you can doesn't mean you do every time. Back to context.

As to the page you are on....... I think we are reading the same book, though it may have come to us translated in different versions of English. When you say something that sounds like it is coming from Chapter 10 or the previous chapters that is where I put you. This book called Aikido has many chapters and some that were never published. All I am saying is be open to whatever may be out there......

Gary

stan baker
10-10-2012, 03:16 PM
I see we have nothing in common. Have fun.

Hi Mary
That is simply not true
You are misunderstanding
Alot the main points

Stan

akiy
10-10-2012, 03:30 PM
That is simply not true
You are misunderstanding
Alot the main points
Stan, rather than simply pointing out to someone that they may be "misunderstanding," please contribute to the discussion by explaining and elaborating so that the difference in opinions may be clarified.

Thank you,

-- Jun

yugen
10-10-2012, 05:39 PM
Does being thrown seem like losing to you?

IMO, yes cause technically you've been thrown and from a combative perspective (if you want to call your art martial you may now be theoretically dead :eek: . To discuss it see my questions after my ukemi comments.

These conversation/debates in the Aiki world particularly interest me as a relative outsider. I have trained Aikido in the past. Currently I train regularly in Shorinji Kempo and I drop in at Aiki Eastside with Ledyard Sensei's group that study Daito Ryu.

SK's Juho (whether they admit it or not) is documented to come from Hakko Ryu, so hence my interest in playing with the DR folks so see the similarities/differences.

From the ukemi stand point I would say a glaring difference in training mindset is reflected in that quote above. In almost all the Aikido ukemi I've ever watched the uke rolls out and stands up with their back to their opponent or they take a sidefall and slap the mat. Now that may just be a dojo thing, but it seems pretty common to the vast majority I've visited. This is the cooperative model to "learn" waza, but from a Zanshin perspective it seems like being defeated.

In Shorinji Kempo, ukemi is taught so the mindset is not that I'm defeated so I'll fall and take ukemi, but that I've been caught, now get out!, which means jumping out of lock (try to land on your feet) and ura's or daisharin (cart wheeling). With rolls you immediately turn and face your opponent with Zanshin ready to kick or strike. i.e. train with a more combative mindset. Which all of that may very well be martial arty fluff, but I personally have experience in a street fight where I did a mae ukemi with a guy on my back punching me in the head and my roll bonked his skull like a bowling ball and I got up and was able to have at it with the other two. (Not bragging here, I was punk sh*thead when i was a kid..:disgust: )

Question: Does Aikido have a methodology or martial rationale behind ukemi? Or is it cooperative falling just to teach the waza?

In terms of SK waza, basic beginning always train kagite shuho, then the throw, joint lock or escape. On the surface these can all be muscled, but kagite shuho in many techniques can be done just like aiki age. More advanced you try and develop the ability to "lead' (with timing) your opponents attempt to grab you - hence starting the unbalancing before the grab happens - now this is my Sensei and might not be common in every SK dojo training.

Question, which might not have an answer or be answered in my first question: If Aikido and Hakko Ryu come from DR, why is Shorinji Kempo Juho ukemi, which comes out of Hakko ryu presented so differently? - as least as I've experienced it.

Now having attended Dan's seminars and trained with Sam Chin (I Liq Chuan) I'm trying to find the connections even further. To me, I begin to think on the surface that the joint locking, throwing jujutsu can be performed on purely muscled basis, or average as Dan puts it and combative it will just come down to who's bigger, faster, better. Trying to lead (with timing) opponents psychology IMO tries to be a bit better than average and IMO is typical aiki as commonly seen in many dojos. Advanced is the ability to not be thrown as Dan puts it. IMO the advanced guys of the past had the bujustu body and internal development.

When experienced by average people who were NOT taught the real stuff interpreted what they experienced the best they could and considered advanced to be the typical "leading" or timing/blending kuzushi stuff. But in reality they were just bouncing off of or around the likes of Ueshiba and other greats.

So if I was to add my two cents as a newb - my questioning is what is happening that makes me take ukemi? Do i feel a lock on my joint or a simple unbalancing of my center of gravity or have I experienced a complete sense/feeling of no control due to my opponents body positioning? As Sifu Chin said to me "My present is always your future because you aren't aware." It's disconcerting and makes me want to CREATE DISTANCE quickly! :eek: Whether by means of jumping back or .... ukemi as it is my only means of escape (i.e. leaping for a distance forward roll can quickly create space).

Regards,
--Ryan

DH
10-10-2012, 05:43 PM
I'm not particularly troubled if I am on the same page as someone. I do what I do, they do what they do. Although, I have found it interesting that an incredible array of aikido teachers call what I do Aiki......do.
No matter. This thread is concerning an approach to higher levels of budo. If aikido-ka want to think that their art is unique in all the world and functions on principles never discovered by man....well....good luck with that.
For everyone else.
This model I outlined is not my own. There is much to be discussed on why "making connect" and the "four legged model is not a good path. I made an opening case, can we discuss my questions?
Cheers
Dan

Chris Li
10-10-2012, 05:45 PM
You have a good day too, Gary. I am not sure how you can tell what page I am on. I am training in a different art than is being talked about on this thread. Dan asked how ...so I tried ...but it was not to be so have fun.

I have trained with people that say that Nikkyo couldn't be done on them...what does that prove? Nothing.

I've done Nikkyo on Dan - that is, he allowed me to do Nikkyo on him. There's nothing wrong with that in a guided course of training.

On the other hand, I would think that it would be a no-brainer that being difficult to manipulate would be of value in a martial situation.

Unfortunately, the ukemi model followed in most Aikido dojo doesn't encourage the development of that skill - and it is a skill, that requires conditioning and training.

Best,

Chris

DH
10-10-2012, 05:50 PM
Hi Ryan
Sam's comment...my present is your future....matches my own. (gee what a surprise!) I say and I said here
You will always be late
You are being forced to react
It doesn't matter if they understand it on the internet, in person they keep failing BECAUSE they try to connect their centers.
More later, catching a flight.
Dan

graham christian
10-10-2012, 05:53 PM
Does being thrown seem like losing to you?

Being thrown sounds like fun to me. Extending Ki sounds like basic Aikido principle to me. Advanced or further forward on any page would therefor to me be being better able to do so continuously.

I have never heard of 'making no connection to anybody' in the realms of Aikido before today.

Peace.G.

yugen
10-10-2012, 06:02 PM
3. How smart would you be to open your center up to "making a connection" to my center or trying to make a four legged animal, with me? :cool:
It is not a very smart idea, and it is not the way. You will always be open to being controlled, to being late and "reactionary or responding to their movement. It is not the way to exert your will on them as Ueshiba outlined as aiki. When you move with a bujutsu body; they are late, they are reacting and they are open to being owned.

Takeda, Sagawa, Horikawa, Hisa, Ueshiba. Shioda, Shirata, Mochizuki, Tomiki, Tohei and Saotome were all known to "feel" different....and be devastatingly effective...sans any technique....and could not be thrown.
Where?
When?
And what dojo(s)?
Was that once considered...good?
Now......
_________________________
We are being taught
To be thrown
And we are convinced it is grand
_________________________

If we do not feel like them......
Why not?
Dan

My answers to your questions:

I would not want to open my center to you - its disconcerting and scary. To the questions where, when and what dojos is that considered good - I don't know. Hence my thoughts and questions on ukemi methodology - was there another practice for the reason behind ukemi? Which I think mirrors Gregory's question of how is ukemi to be reconciled?

"If we do not feel like them, why not?" my answer, the internal practice isn't there or was never shown - from my own felt experience. Secondly - its hard work to get that good, the body work is slow and hard to acquire and requires diligence.

So Dan my question to you. In your seminars you say that the Masters only taught this good stuff to a few. Is it possible they were just singling out the people who showed the desire and required diligence? i.e. why waste time with people who don't want to put in the work?

Garth
10-10-2012, 06:24 PM
I'm not particularly troubled if I am on the same page as someone. I do what I do, they do what they do. Although, I have found it interesting that an incredible array of aikido teachers call what I do Aiki......do.
No matter. This thread is concerning an approach to higher levels of budo. If aikido-ka want to think that their art is unique in all the world and functions on principles never discovered by man....well....good luck with that.
For everyone else.
This model I outlined is not my own. There is much to be discussed on why "making connect" and the "four legged model is not a good path. I made an opening case, can we discuss my questions?
Cheers
Dan

To me , your questions become abundantly and sufficiently answered with "hands on" and no other way/
And also to be put into words here , would sufficiently alienate 90 percent of the "average"(their problem not yours;) ) (lack of self contemplation maybe?)
Why am I studying this?
what use is it?
ETC, are basics some people never bother to ask themselves.
I think there was direct transmission break when the founder died(as far aikido is concerned) either by choice or misunderstanding as to where he intended "it" to go. As evidenced by lack of people actually doing this type of work.
Prewar guys (some) got it, not so much after the war, why?
Also, I blame the 60's
G out

yugen
10-10-2012, 08:23 PM
To me , your questions become abundantly and sufficiently answered with "hands on" and no other way/
And also to be put into words here , would sufficiently alienate 90 percent of the "average"(their problem not yours;) ) (lack of self contemplation maybe?)


Gregory,

By "hands on" do you mean always maintaining physical contact?

-Ryan

hughrbeyer
10-10-2012, 09:59 PM
So you know,..... the next question to be asked (i know too wordy to be answered online) but how is the problem of ukemi to reconciled?

Interesting question. O-Sensei learned aiki from Takeda; in his own development of it he created Aikido. Aikido, all the way back to the 1935 Asahi News demonstration, includes lots of the big ukemi we're familiar with. (Finessing here the question of whether in 1935 O-Sensei was doing Daito-ryu, Aikido, or something intermediate. Whatever he was doing, it included the big ukemi.)

Plus, he said that ukemi softens the joints, or knocks the ki loose in the joints. That's another translation I'd love to see Chris Li look at.

So the guy who knew all about aiki and created Aikido as a vehicle for expressing it didn't see a need to get rid of ukemi. He seemed to think ukemi was important to learning what he was trying to teach.

In our dojo, where our sensei is integrating aiki concepts into everything, ukemi is both feedback to nage and a martial response on the part of uke to keep themselves protected throughout the technique. (Ellis Amdur talks about this in Ukemi from the ground up--you keep yourself centered and protected until you can't anymore, at which point you roll out.)

So if I'm working with a kohai, and they're putting a technique on by trying to oppose force with muscle, I don't move. I don't freeze up, but I don't let them move me. If they try to deal with force by moving out of the way, or trying to move the point of contact out of the way, I move in on them to demonstrate that they've just opened themselves up. If they move even the littlest bit correctly, I allow myself to be moved by it, trying to remain open and sensitive to their movement so my response is genuine, not forced. Yes, I could shut them down, but that's not the point. This continues up to the point where I either have to lose balance or step out of the technique we're practicing and do something else. At that point, I take the fall.

This lets them practice and gives me practice feeling exactly what they're doing, so I learn where they're tense, where their weight is, and how they're trying to apply force.

Total agreement that this kind of ukemi is not just giving up and falling. At every point, I'm responding only as much as I need to--there's always the possibility of reversing the technique if nage screws up. And you have to maintain zanshin all through the roll and after. (One of Sensei's favorite tricks is, if you try to stand up from a fall too close to him, he just punches you on the way up.)

But from the outside, it doesn't look that different from anybody else's ukemi. It's all in the feeling.

tombuchanan
10-11-2012, 01:36 AM
Isn't a center to center connection just a little bit too much like a fair fight?

It's not only giving away the intention, it's also providing an optimal path for resistance. Why study martial arts at all if you're going to do that? Doesn't it just become a different sort of strength contest?

Wouldn't "all of you" against "some of them" be better?

If I can find "the center" of their resistance and attack that, without exposing my foundation, there is less of a "handle" for them to resist me with? Maybe something like that?

Garth
10-11-2012, 06:04 AM
Gregory,

By "hands on" do you mean always maintaining physical contact?

-Ryan

I meant " hands on" or training in person w/ Dan or other competent IS artist. All the BS ends almost immediately.
The only thing left to say after one of those sessions is "how you do that".
A lot of people are afraid to realize "what they dont know"
G

Garth
10-11-2012, 06:08 AM
"So if I'm working with a kohai, and they're putting a technique on by trying to oppose force with muscle, I don't move. I don't freeze up, but I don't let them move me. If they try to deal with force by moving out of the way, or trying to move the point of contact out of the way, I move in on them to demonstrate that they've just opened themselves up. If they move even the littlest bit correctly, I allow myself to be moved by it, trying to remain open and sensitive to their movement so my response is genuine, not forced. Yes, I could shut them down, but that's not the point. This continues up to the point where I either have to lose balance or step out of the technique we're practicing and do something else. At that point, I take the fall. " Hugh Beyer

I like that, good on you for putting into words.
G

yugen
10-11-2012, 08:59 AM
I meant " hands on" or training in person w/ Dan or other competent IS artist. All the BS ends almost immediately.
The only thing left to say after one of those sessions is "how you do that".
A lot of people are afraid to realize "what they dont know"
G

ah, yes, true.
-R

Cliff Judge
10-11-2012, 12:01 PM
So seeking connection, making unity, training without competition, these are no longer "real" aikido? Or they at least belong in the "There is nothing WRONG with that, BUT...." bucket.

Okay, great.

Jeremy Hulley
10-11-2012, 12:32 PM
I think that when someone has a bujutsu body, has done the work there is no competition when you touch them. That produces unity and connection.

Cliff Judge
10-11-2012, 12:49 PM
I think that when someone has a bujutsu body, has done the work there is no competition when you touch them. That produces unity and connection.

Sounds from the original post that unity and connection make you a Tom, Dick, and Harry who has wasted your life.

Lee Salzman
10-11-2012, 12:56 PM
Sounds from the original post that unity and connection make you a Tom, Dick, and Harry who has wasted your life.

I don't think that's what is being articulated here by Jeremy. If your center is so profoundly non-resistant, you don't have to move it - anything anyone puts into you just echos back - mountain echo. So as Jeremy says, there is no competition, they just feel themselves mirrored in you - they never get to tag your center.

Cliff Judge
10-11-2012, 01:22 PM
I don't think that's what is being articulated here by Jeremy. If your center is so profoundly non-resistant, you don't have to move it - anything anyone puts into you just echos back - mountain echo. So as Jeremy says, there is no competition, they just feel themselves mirrored in you - they never get to tag your center.

I was not responding to what Jeremy was saying.

Though I guess I could ask in what way this type of reflection or mirroring results in connection or unity?

Lee Salzman
10-11-2012, 01:27 PM
I was not responding to what Jeremy was saying.

Though I guess I could ask in what way this type of reflection or mirroring results in connection or unity?

They are not fighting you, you are not fighting them. They are one with you, not the other way around. They are connected to you, not the other way around. You, you're just being the happy old mountain. What do you care if some rabble wants to push on you?

yugen
10-11-2012, 01:38 PM
I was not responding to what Jeremy was saying.

Though I guess I could ask in what way this type of reflection or mirroring results in connection or unity?

The connection or unity in my experience is that if you are the aggressor and launch an attack you quickly find you have no opening for your attack and quickly find yourself reacting and defending to protect yourself.

The uncanny and disconcerting thing is you don't feel overwhelmed by strength or power or timing, its a feeling that the guy with the bujutsu body is suddenly always one step ahead of you. So you start reacting to make your exit, but its blocked because you're one step behind. You feel like you're stuck or glued and only can exit until its allowed (i.e. your thrown, struck or joint lock) that's the unity and the connection.

It's like if you're running down hill with no control and the bujutsu body guy is controlling the slope of the hill.

Cliff Judge
10-11-2012, 01:54 PM
They are not fighting you, you are not fighting them. They are one with you, not the other way around. They are connected to you, not the other way around. You, you're just being the happy old mountain. What do you care if some rabble wants to push on you?

This is a little pacifistic of an image for me, and it sounds very different than what Dan was originally talking about. But that's fine, except you are still toast if your opponent happens to be a river, a glacier, or dynamite.

DH
10-11-2012, 02:44 PM
Gary
Your comments about people not being on the same page is truly appropriate. Particularly your recognition that like it or not, get it or not....we are in fact reading the same playbook. This is a major sticking point for many in budo who still erroneously believe that their master teachers were somehow unique in all the world.
We keep pointing out that "the work" we are discussing (Internal strength that produces aiki) is ages old and was taught in several cultures and was the source material for many of the greats. I am intrigued -and continuing to research- to find mounting evidence that it was the source material for a significant number of the giants in budo .
It makes all the more sense considering the effects it is having on modern budo people doing the work. In an of itself the evidence is irrefutable for most budo practitioners of all types, but Aikido in particular becomes troubling- for those who continue to believe their master teacher was unique.
Why?
Because he himself kept pointing to the fact that it wasn't his. He cited Takeda and kept quoting Chinese sources and terminology. Terminology that in and of itself was revealing in that it consistently pointed to work that predated Ueshiba. So at a point all people are really saying is "I didn't get educated in this in my budo career."

Two centers or one?
Since the main thrust of the work was in solo training it begs...positively begs the question
"Why develop the center in solo training in the first place?"
what was so important in developing center of yourself?
Why would Sagawa say that AIki was in developing the body through solo training...and only a fool thinks you can get it through techniques?

1.Being thrown sounds like fun to me.
2. Extending Ki sounds like basic Aikido principle to me.
3. I have never heard of 'making no connection to anybody' in the realms of Aikido before today.
Peace.G.
1. That's fine. Have fun. But, being thrown and liking to be thrown pretty much promises that- as an end result. Even when...you... don't want to be thrown-when up against those training NOT to be thrown.
2. Extending ki as an age old model is not the same as is often described here. From what I have seen and read; Tohei meant and actually did -one thing- and just about everyone I have met is doing something different. From what I see and feel, most understand the "model" but can't pull off the balance of yin and yang in one center, therefore they are hopelessly outclassed against someone who trains their center in a more sophisticated manner to retain itself.
3. I know you have never heard of not making a connection with two centers. That's fine too. Have fun with it. It has escaped your attention and education that virtually all of the higher level arts have solo training (including your Master teacher) just for that reason. Exposing your center by connecting will forever leave you vulnerable and reactive. Doing it with people who train UEshiba's way will guarantee...absolutely guarantee that you will lose. This is why Ueshiba stated ...his... way of aiki was to exert your will on others.
I know you do not understand that, that is why he did not cooperate and all of the tales about him were of him doing what??????
Winning
He was after all a budo man. Budo men tend to be like that. THat's why their famous and no one else is. No one wants or cares..what the loser...had. ;)
Dan

Cliff Judge
10-11-2012, 03:42 PM
No one wants or cares..what the loser...had. ;)
Dan

I know not all of us consider ourselves as praciticing Japanese martial arts, but some people mentioned in this thread do. So I figure it might be appropriate to point out that nothing makes the Japanese more misty-eyed than a good loser. In point of fact, traditions that derive gravitas from the Kashima shrine often hearken back to Yoshitsune himself, perhaps the hunkiest, most awesome loser in all of Japanese history. He is said to have been trained by a Tengu on mount Kurama. This was before he was so instrumental in helping his brother win the big war between the Minamoto and the Taira that his brother had him dealt with. So he was definitely a loser and yet is considered one of the patron saints of martial arts.

Garth
10-11-2012, 04:22 PM
I know not all of us consider ourselves as praciticing Japanese martial arts, but some people mentioned in this thread do. So I figure it might be appropriate to point out that nothing makes the Japanese more misty-eyed than a good loser. In point of fact, traditions that derive gravitas from the Kashima shrine often hearken back to Yoshitsune himself, perhaps the hunkiest, most awesome loser in all of Japanese history. He is said to have been trained by a Tengu on mount Kurama. This was before he was so instrumental in helping his brother win the big war between the Minamoto and the Taira that his brother had him dealt with. So he was definitely a loser and yet is considered one of the patron saints of martial arts.

Yoshitsune WHO????..............exactly!!!!

Garth
10-11-2012, 04:31 PM
Didnt mean to be glib.
Exactly the difference is that Yoshi is relegated to a shrine in Japan, that only a Japanophile would know of , and Ueshiba amongst others(see Chinese, Indian martial masters) have something that has reached around the world several times. Whatever Yoshi had is in that shrine with him.

Cliff Judge
10-11-2012, 05:17 PM
Didnt mean to be glib.
Exactly the difference is that Yoshi is relegated to a shrine in Japan, that only a Japanophile would know of , and Ueshiba amongst others(see Chinese, Indian martial masters) have something that has reached around the world several times. Whatever Yoshi had is in that shrine with him.

It is also in anybody who trains a Kashima-oriented tradition. Who might that list inlude? Hmm...

DH
10-11-2012, 06:08 PM
Good grief Cliff, don't be so- over the top-with it!! It's not conducive to the conversation and makes it travel off topic.
Dan

hughrbeyer
10-12-2012, 07:55 PM
This whole question of NOT connecting center to center, but preventing your opponent from connecting to your center, was THE first big revelation for me when picking up this IS stuff. And it was apparently also significant for my teacher, who has a few more years on the mat than I do. But in practice, it creates the experience of kuzushi-on-contact and in fact makes aikido techniques work without collusion, and without depending particularly on momentum or timing.

Ellis Amdur
10-13-2012, 10:54 AM
In the interest of precision, there is frequent reference to the "four-legged animal" metaphor, a term pioneered, as I understand it, by Tohei Koichi, who stated his disagreement with Ueshiba K. was that, if I have it corrrectly, that he believed that aiki was something that was developed within one whereas Ueshiba K. believed it happened between two individuals (awase). Whether he was fair to Ueshiba K. is not germane, at the moment.

So my question is, when there is a reference to the "four legged animal," and criticism of the utility of this image, is the critic speaking about which of the two attached images, that of Tohei Koichi or that of Dr. Doolittle?

Ellis Amdur

hughrbeyer
10-13-2012, 06:43 PM
And how do you come to have a Dales pony in your Tohei pic?

chillzATL
10-14-2012, 09:00 AM
FWIW, I've only ever understood the four-legged animal to be a way of looking at how to move two connected people so that the other person is always kept balance deficient. You learn to connect (or not) to the other person, move them where there balance isn't and try to keep them there. To me, it's been something related too, but separate from what's going on in me.

As for going out and connecting to someones center and giving up your own, I'm pretty sure that obtuse way of going about things is only meant to be entry level. As soon as you're able to relaxedly connect to someone else, you have to start being just as aware of your own center as well. I've felt a few people at this point who were able to connect to me and put pressure on me without giving me any clear idea of where their center was and also put up resistance to me, making me feel like I was connected to them, but without giving up their balance to me. Essentially baiting me to give up more so they could take my balance.

I don't see how that's a bad thing. It becomes obvious pretty quickly, even against non-IS skilled people, that just making a connection isn't all there is to it.

sakumeikan
10-14-2012, 10:05 AM
Okay. But...when you talk about your experiences in an Aikido dojo its fine. When I talk about my abilities and experiences they are coined as "advertising" or "bullying." So I try to never talk about the very real outcomes anymore. When any Shihan I have ever met tries anything on me it is neutralized and fizzles out and they stare at me. They cannot make any sort of successful response. This has also worked with many other Martial artists of all types. That's my experience.

If there were a time and a place for both-doesn't someone need to know both?

I haven't read of or seen anyone who discussed both approaches. Did I miss something?
The same body skill to neutralize aikido teachers works against others in other arts. It also works well with weapons.
The answer is not to extend through anyone. I don't project ki like that. I keep it balanced in me. Therefore I release no energy.
I make no connection-to anyone.
I do not expose or share my center with anyone
They have no access to it.
Where has that been discussed?
Dan

Dear Dan,
While it may well be possible to neutralise a person in body art unless you are really skilled guy
I think you would struggle against people who are masters of kenjutsu /escrima or batto ho.Kendo masters can whop you as quick as look at you. What about Kyudo exponents /archery or a slingshot from a distance?Do you evade these as in the manner of O sensei [who reputedly saw bullets in flight]?Please explain your methods of dealing with these scenarios. Hope you liked Bristol. Good place to have a few glasses of wine. Did you by chance meet Mike Narey?? Cheers, Joe.

DH
10-14-2012, 12:19 PM
Dear Dan,
While it may well be possible to neutralize a person in a body art unless you are a really skilled guy- I think you would struggle against people who are masters of kenjutsu /escrima or batto ho. Kendo masters can whop you as quick as look at you.
Why thank you Joe. It has gone very well- extraordinarily so as a matter of fact- for me and my guys, and continues today. I don't like to take all the credit though. How do you take credit for things... you were taught? We.... just decided long ago to stop just doing kata and take it out for spin in freestyle with fighters and with all types of weapons. I could tell you some pretty interesting stories that happened in open rooms with various experts and ranked people, but I won't. At least not here anymore. I save them for people I know.
I prefer to be a fan of aiki and not me.
What about Kyudo exponents /archery or a slingshot from a distance? Do you evade these as in the manner of O sensei [who reputedly saw bullets in flight]?Please explain your methods of dealing with these scenarios. Hope you liked Bristol. Good place to have a few glasses of wine. Did you by chance meet Mike Narey?? Cheers, Joe.
I like what Kisshomaru said. People shouldn't believe such nonsense. And for that reason I won't bother to respond to it.

I very much enjoyed Bristol-more than London. It was so convenient to get places. London is a pain: Up at 7, walk to bus stop, get to train, screw up the hard to read schedule and weird tunnel ways to my stop, to get to a bus, to take a mule...to walk a mile an half to the seminar location. Eat breakfast -in hand- on the way if your lucky!
I was tired before I begin.

Whydon'tyouusethespacebarwhenyoutype?

Dan

DH
10-14-2012, 12:40 PM
FWIW, I've only ever understood the four-legged animal to be a way of looking at how to move two connected people so that the other person is always kept balance deficient. You learn to connect (or not) to the other person, move them where there balance isn't and try to keep them there. To me, it's been something related too, but separate from what's going on in me.

As for going out and connecting to someones center and giving up your own, I'm pretty sure that obtuse way of going about things is only meant to be entry level. As soon as you're able to relaxedly connect to someone else, you have to start being just as aware of your own center as well. I've felt a few people at this point who were able to connect to me and put pressure on me without giving me any clear idea of where their center was and also put up resistance to me, making me feel like I was connected to them, but without giving up their balance to me. Essentially baiting me to give up more so they could take my balance.

I don't see how that's a bad thing. It becomes obvious pretty quickly, even against non-IS skilled people, that just making a connection isn't all there is to it.
It ...is....fine. I see it as just low entry level / high level- work. Sort of like trying to use the popular spinal wave for power generation. It is a step up from normal day-to-day work, but no where near the pinnacle of the bodies potential. Connecting centers will see you owned at speed against someone using a better model of retained center. You can't and will never be able to connect -to them- in the first place, so all else, all theory is for not. I continue to have people stare at me blank trying to figure out what I am doing, including the Chinese big dogs I was told to go test with.
I'm not trying to change your mind about anything. Most people in Aikido do your model. Some Aikido teachers out teaching "internal power" teach that "make connection" and change your insides model. Don't get me wrong. As I said earlier, with people less skilled than you it works. It "feels" great, even amazing for people who don't have IP/aiki. It softly controls, it moves and motivate others. It is very easy to be lulled into sticking with it and thinking it's the bee's knees. However, if those same teachers meet someone doing the model I am discussing -they will simply...lose. They will be reactive and late. It isn't even up for debate. It continuously happens over and over. It is made worse when and if the person retaining center knows how to smoothly make change over and over under stress and remain neutral within themselves, and worse still ...if they can fight with it.

The retained center relies on "no connection.' It is moving in accord with yin and yang freely and it becomes a difficult endeavor to find their center at all, in the process of which, yours is exposed and has to react. To further the point once again, it is the main thrust for solo training- spanning generations. The Japanese opted mostly for prearranged paired training. The result, was two very different approaches to power and control.
The fellow who argued for "I am the universe" understood what I am saying. So didn't three top level Chinese Taiji teachers.
Dan

chillzATL
10-15-2012, 08:51 AM
I'm not trying to change your mind about anything. Most people in Aikido do your model. Some Aikido teachers out teaching "internal power" teach that "make connection" and change your insides model. Don't get me wrong. As I said earlier, with people less skilled than you it works. It "feels" great, even amazing for people who don't have IP/aiki. It softly controls, it moves and motivate others. It is very easy to be lulled into sticking with it and thinking it's the bee's knees. However, if those same teachers meet someone doing the model I am discussing -they will simply...lose. They will be reactive and late. It isn't even up for debate. It continuously happens over and over. It is made worse when and if the person retaining center knows how to smoothly make change over and over under stress and remain neutral within themselves, and worse still ...if they can fight with it.


I welcome having my mind changed, Dan. That's why I keep harassing you to come visit us. Though to be honest, I wouldn't call it changing my mind because in my experience so far, we're closer to being on the same page than not. I think anyone who put in the time and had the luxury of having some people to work out with would come to those conclusions pretty quickly unless they have something invested in doing only what they're doing, which I do not. I have nothing invested in the training beyond the enjoyment of it. When you practice and come up with ideas and they're wrong, you fix them and keep moving forward and on those rare occasions that those ideas turn out to be right, you pat yourself on the back for putting in the time and thought and then you keep moving forward.

January you said?

DH
10-15-2012, 10:34 AM
I welcome having my mind changed, Dan. That's why I keep harassing you to come visit us. Though to be honest, I wouldn't call it changing my mind because in my experience so far, we're closer to being on the same page than not. I think anyone who put in the time and had the luxury of having some people to work out with would come to those conclusions pretty quickly unless they have something invested in doing only what they're doing, which I do not. I have nothing invested in the training beyond the enjoyment of it. When you practice and come up with ideas and they're wrong, you fix them and keep moving forward and on those rare occasions that those ideas turn out to be right, you pat yourself on the back for putting in the time and thought and then you keep moving forward.

January you said?
Hi Jason
Yes, I can see you're pretty "clean" when it comes to not holding on and just examining an approach. The differences we are discussing here become strident the more stress that is applied. In short, that make connection and move the both of you model works in an aikido dojo doing waza- it is NOT going to work under freestyle fighting, and it will never work with people with developed centers and moving the way I am discussing.

Japanese Kata approach
How much power, how much center...is enough?
What does it look like under higher stress levels?
What does it look like against someone with a highly developed center who is not cooperating?
Does fighting ability validate an understanding of IS or Aiki?
Does IS or Aiki validate fighting skill?
Does rank...validate an understanding of either?
Those are the questions people should be also asking themselves.
It is interesting to note that these teachers, coming out of kata driven systems, don't really spend time interacting with people with highly developed centers, moving with retained centers, who have trained under extreme stress. Instead they tend to stay within a defined paradigm-thus their "development" and any discoveries they may have made come from the exact same input source they gave out. Hey, what's wrong with that, if you stay within those parameters it all works, you can pull off some really groovy stuff and the students will swear to God that were not cooperating-even while they were!

If people were to step-up, and to test themselves under serious stress they would make different discoveries and realizations about aiki, center, and training needs. There is a recent post about traditional arts dying in Japan, which echos another series of articles on the traditional arts of China dying. I really don't think it was the quality of the original arts that are failing. I think most of them were actually useful in their day. I think the problem is our inability to make them effective under modern stress and neutral "unaffiliated" analysis and critical examination. When is the last time you heard of a Menkyo in Koryu donning armor and going at it with boken or shinai...at speed in freestyle on a regular basis? Why then are we shocked that people who train like the dog bothers have made themselves very capable with weapons in the modern era. Certain Chinese ICMA guys have opened up to playing with grapplers and they will be better for it.

Again though-this is not my idea or my thoughts alone. This is a tried and true method that has worked for ages, hence all the solo training models. Beginning with the ability to retain a highly developed dynamic stability. It seems such a non argument that it speaks volumes to me when I see traditional people flummoxed by the very idea. After that it is learning how to use it and taking it out for a spin.

To repeat the opening post, does anyone think it was a smart idea to "make a connection" to Ueshiba's center? Takeda's? I certainly don't. And neither did generations of Asian martial disciplines.

Interestingly, the historical model of kata training finished with Musa shugyo. The idea was to go out and test ourselves, not go to other dojo's in our own systems who are all doing the same thing.
Test, Test, Test and prove you knew what you were talking about or die trying is a pretty severe challenge. But it made highly capable legends. Most people have no interest in doing what the greats did.

How is Jan 19 looking?
Dan

Budd
10-15-2012, 11:20 AM
Near as I can tell, most of the things I've seen described here are small steps towards what the full suite of skills and body development are anyways, as espoused by the various folks espousing them. Whether it's "two centers making a connection" or "mutually opposing spirals", I think the tenor of the debate would go a long way if whatever the theory is being espoused - that it's kept either within the framework of "here's how it lives within the overall discipline of Internal Strength" versus "here's how this training at this level makes for more effective martial application". Those are two separate arguments, tho related. I also don't think it helps that the discussion jumps from factual to anecdotal to sentimental all in a go as they distract from each other rather than reinforce any single point.

The stickler for me is the notion that the "make a connection and move your insides" is being propped up as the endgame of some "four-legged animal" approach. I don't think anyone has made that point - at best, I've seen it described as a training exercise and foundational approach to handling simple forces. Which is why I'm puzzled as to how it can be disproven as a method when near as I can tell it's intentionally stood up as a gateway checkpoint before you can do other things that are more complex along the spectrum of internal strength. Now, if you can't do some of the simple things within that framework, that's kind of a tell in its own way, but that's also a different discussion. But I think, unless your working definition of internal strength also includes fighting skills (which I think most have agreed is more a parallel framework that works with internal strength, depending on your style, art, etc.) and hypnosis activities - like I've seen also attributed to some teachers - it may make sense to be clear about what you're relating and where it fits within micro and macro considerations.

I kind of liken it to how you receive a simple push. There's being rooted and strong to receive a push. There's being soft and ghost-like such that the pusher never feels you, only the ground. There's being soft and connected so that the pusher doesn't feel like they can actually push you, etc. and so on and so forth. It's basically a drill to train how you handle simple loads. Is it the end-game? Hopefully not, as I actually think that would be stupid from both IS and fighting perspectives. But I do think it can be indicative of where someone is on the IS spectrum with how they choose to handle a simple force that's brought to bear on them. Does how you handle a simple force load indicate how well you can fight? Probably not, although if you can't take any load, even with basic muscular strength, balance and bracing - I'd be suspicious of one's ability to do much more. But I'd never make a final call based alone on that criteria.

And that's just on how you'd handle a simple push. If someone starts telling me that I shouldn't fight that way - I'm not going to bother debating them because, "DUH" (see here on Aikiweb from about 2004-2007 for lots of "DUH" discussions of that nature). If someone tells me they don't have to receive a push IN A TRAINING DRILL because they could move out of the way of the push - I'm not going to bother talking to them about internal strength. If someone says the best way to not get pushed is to punch the pusher in the faced, again, I'm not going to have a discussion with them about internal strength.

How about them apples? There's Macintosh, Gala, Pink Lady, Empire, etc. No, sir and madam, I do not wish to hear about your oranges. Or furthermore hear you say you know all about apples as you go on to describe the merits of Clementines as your resultant proof. Away with you to another tree, altogether, I say.

chillzATL
10-15-2012, 01:20 PM
How is Jan 19 looking?
Dan

no problems here. The venue info I emailed you previously should still be valid as well.

DH
10-15-2012, 02:40 PM
Budd

1. All primary concerns are: The manipulations of forces within you. You asked how it relates in a classical sense? This is covered in so many sayings, descriptions and models it is hardly worth mentioning. All point to the primary Motion in stillness, as the first level. the most important level as it sustains you and balances you and manipulates before contact. Hence solo work.
How it relates martially?
2. All secondary concerns are: the manipulation of force enacted upon you
a. You can join centers and manipulate force from outside within you. This is in my view late and reactive and can be played with. I also do not agree that it is a needed step. It implies -too all I have met who use it-,a passive body that is receiving. In and of itself this is not a method in keeping with any discussion I have had with Master class teachers, or have read of many others. Moreover, in a fighting sense, it is inferior.
b. You can manipulate forces within you that are continuously resolving yin and yang. Thus any force enacted upon you meets force in motion and action, thus reducing and redirecting upon contact. There was never an intent to make a connection, and there is a greatly reduced chance of playing your center. This can easily transfer from internal to external with a smooth transition and no break in either feel or load. There are various modes to accomplish this and not all agree.

I do not agree in the least bit that the best way to accomplish #2 The manipulation of force, is by passively connecting and then attempting connection to make kuzushi. While we agree that fighting is an ancillary or parallel issue, the deliverable results in that venue are in fact superior to the model of joining centers to move. Internal movement prior to motion accomplishes significant division and manipulation of initial force... upon... you without much thought as it is a constantly trained state. Thus #1 is faster, and harder to play with from the onset.

Ask LCD and then WHJ where a jin force starts. You might be surprised to see they do not agree. Then you can read certain amateurs stating it is THIS and always was THIS. :rolleyes:
There any number of teachings and discussions involving Chen Yu, CXW, LCD, LCG, HJS, his ideas from CFK and Feng's, which do not all match and compare them to LDX or HJB and go on and on from there. DR has it's own basis of kuzushi in it's own model describing how motion precedes receiving. Now, add the internal non-visible component to that model and you have yin and yang present, this is expressed by Ueshiba as well in his discussion of heaven/earth/man "releasing the mountain echo" and ask why that is, then on to various chi gongs to move energy within as a constant state..... prior to and during actual motion.
When they contact motion in you, they are automatically reacting even when they don't realize it. And no...I am not talking about moving around...;)
Cheers
Dan

Howard Popkin
10-15-2012, 02:50 PM
how do you like my new signature ?

Cheers !

DH
10-15-2012, 03:27 PM
This (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=317260&postcount=76) also applies as a direct answer, Budd.
Cheers
Dan

DH
10-15-2012, 03:30 PM
how do you like my new signature ?

Cheers !
:D :D :D :D
Hey now!! :o
I have and always will ask myself the same question....everyday!!! :blush:

Cheers
Dan

Budd
10-15-2012, 03:35 PM
This (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=317260&postcount=76) also applies as a direct answer, Budd.
Cheers
Dan

Hah, I am still responding to your other post and I like Plato's Dialogues as a means of exploring a topic. Nor am I arguing against the importance of some of the things mentioned in your link. But I am questioning a bit the assertion you're making regarding how the connecting to others step is somehow both inferior to and not stressing the importance of managing the forceload within yourself.

Anyways, more to come in my other response. I do like where the discussion is going - especially, as you pointed out, some of the differences that people of greater stature in the community seem to be focusing on.

Budd
10-15-2012, 04:22 PM
Budd

1. All primary concerns are: The manipulations of forces within you. You asked how it relates in a classical sense? This is covered in so many sayings, descriptions and models it is hardly worth mentioning. All point to the primary Motion in stillness, as the first level. the most important level as it sustains you and balances you and manipulates before contact. Hence solo work.
How it relates martially?
2. All secondary concerns are: the manipulation of force enacted upon you
a. You can join centers and manipulate force from outside within you. This is in my view late and reactive and can be played with. I also do not agree that it is a needed step. It implies -too all I have met who use it-,a passive body that is receiving. In and of itself this is not a method in keeping with any discussion I have had with Master class teachers, or have read of many others. Moreover, in a fighting sense, it is inferior.
b. You can manipulate forces within you that are continuously resolving yin and yang. Thus any force enacted upon you meets force in motion and action, thus reducing and redirecting upon contact. There was never an intent to make a connection, and there is a greatly reduced chance of playing your center. This can easily transfer from internal to external with a smooth transition and no break in either feel or load. There are various modes to accomplish this and not all agree.


I think the key phrase is joining with someone's center from within you. How you do that is the name of the game. I've met a number of folks that were hard to move when someone was pushing on them with a dumb force but then got really easy to move when you knew how to muck with their sense of where down and up were going. So I'd say yeah, it's a combination of conditioning and skill with the result you're shooting for enabling kuzushi on contact because you are better developed. I've had some luck with folks that have in theory been training this stuff for multiple years but couldn't do basic jin things by getting them to use the "make a connection with their center" exercise - but I also acknowledge it is just a starting point and that there's a bunch of other things going on in tandem. Maybe folks that don't need to adjust their sensitivity regarding how additional forceloads get reconciled inside themselves don't need the step.

I do not agree in the least bit that the best way to accomplish #2 The manipulation of force, is by passively connecting and then attempting connection to make kuzushi.

I do not agree either that you passively connect, nope. You need to understand how gravity and ground are reconciled inside you before you can effectively make someone else's gravity and ground part of the overall system. So, yeah, lot's of solo work to get there. Lot's of conditioning. But that piece of making somebody else's orbit part of your ecosystem - I guess we're going to disagree on the utility of training that as a discrete thing to develop sensitivity and layer in to the overall package as it becomes one thing.

While we agree that fighting is an ancillary or parallel issue, the deliverable results in that venue are in fact superior to the model of joining centers to move. Internal movement prior to motion accomplishes significant division and manipulation of initial force... upon... you without much thought as it is a constantly trained state. Thus #1 is faster, and harder to play with from the onset.

Well, yeah, in applications there's no time to do a step by step engage-act-react. Your body needs to be trained to handle itself. I don't think anyone's making the case for the training drill to be a technique you perform in a live environment. If your body hasn't developed the sensitivity to handle and adjust to external inputs in a live environment then you need to do more solo work and try it out with a partner against more moderate resistance.

Ask LCD and then WHJ where a jin force starts. You might be surprised to see they do not agree. Then you can read certain amateurs stating it is THIS and always was THIS. :rolleyes:

Nope, not surprised they don't agree based on where each came from, etc. The only certainty I'd subscribe to is that there's a baseline set of skills and rules that different people have developed to different degrees with different areas of focus. It gets more interesting as you get exposed to more people, for sure.

There any number of teachings and discussions involving Chen Yu, CXW, LCD, LCG, HJS, his ideas from CFK and Feng's, which do not all match and compare them to LDX or HJB and go on and on from there. DR has it's own basis of kuzushi in it's own model describing how motion precedes receiving. Now, add the internal non-visible component to that model and you have yin and yang present, this is expressed by Ueshiba as well in his discussion of heaven/earth/man "releasing the mountain echo" and ask why that is, then on to various chi gongs to move energy within as a constant state..... prior to and during actual motion.

Right and they all have different ways of alluding to the same or similar buzzterms to show they get it and are in the club. Considering some of the flare-ups that have happened based on lineage, style, etc. I think we're actually having a pretty healthy disagreement around a definition and training progression. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that resolving the forces inside you is primary - no argument here - then you go to how you need this in applications, fighting, etc. No argument there, either. What I'm arguing against is dismissing the "connecting centers" bit as a wrong step or unnecessary one. Managing the bits inside you in such a way that you automatically connect to someone and can manage them as well is awesome and the way to go. But I'm not convinced that advocating against training the extra sensitivity parts to link the "inside" to the "outside" isn't a worthy step in the overall progression.

When they contact motion in you, they are automatically reacting even when they don't realize it. And no...I am not talking about moving around...;)

Hah, I know you aren't - but, see, if I wanted to - I could borrow a similar argument to the one you gave and say, "Sure, that works on someone with little to no skill but meet someone that's resolved the forces inside themselves and can better manage yours as well you'll find that you can't manage the forces inside yourself very well and are easy to keep off-balance" ... yadda yadda ...

Anyways, this is a much better disagreement to have than those of the years before regarding "I know all this ki crap already" or "It doesn't exist!" :cool:

Cheers
Dan

Always a pleasure.

James Sawers
10-16-2012, 02:07 AM
Interesting question. O-Sensei learned aiki from Takeda; in his own development of it he created Aikido. Aikido, all the way back to the 1935 Asahi News demonstration, includes lots of the big ukemi we're familiar with. (Finessing here the question of whether in 1935 O-Sensei was doing Daito-ryu, Aikido, or something intermediate. Whatever he was doing, it included the big ukemi.)

Plus, he said that ukemi softens the joints, or knocks the ki loose in the joints. That's another translation I'd love to see Chris Li look at.

So the guy who knew all about aiki and created Aikido as a vehicle for expressing it didn't see a need to get rid of ukemi. He seemed to think ukemi was important to learning what he was trying to teach.

In our dojo, where our sensei is integrating aiki concepts into everything, ukemi is both feedback to nage and a martial response on the part of uke to keep themselves protected throughout the technique. (Ellis Amdur talks about this in Ukemi from the ground up--you keep yourself centered and protected until you can't anymore, at which point you roll out.)

So if I'm working with a kohai, and they're putting a technique on by trying to oppose force with muscle, I don't move. I don't freeze up, but I don't let them move me. If they try to deal with force by moving out of the way, or trying to move the point of contact out of the way, I move in on them to demonstrate that they've just opened themselves up. If they move even the littlest bit correctly, I allow myself to be moved by it, trying to remain open and sensitive to their movement so my response is genuine, not forced. Yes, I could shut them down, but that's not the point. This continues up to the point where I either have to lose balance or step out of the technique we're practicing and do something else. At that point, I take the fall.

This lets them practice and gives me practice feeling exactly what they're doing, so I learn where they're tense, where their weight is, and how they're trying to apply force.

Total agreement that this kind of ukemi is not just giving up and falling. At every point, I'm responding only as much as I need to--there's always the possibility of reversing the technique if nage screws up. And you have to maintain zanshin all through the roll and after. (One of Sensei's favorite tricks is, if you try to stand up from a fall too close to him, he just punches you on the way up.)

But from the outside, it doesn't look that different from anybody else's ukemi. It's all in the feeling.

Can't help but agree with Hugh, here. I would only add to: "It's all in the feeling", it's also all in the intent.

I also saw a few references that taking ukemi implies somehow that you have "lost" an encounter. This may be so, but I usually explain ukemi to my kohais that they are not taking ukemi for me (nage), but to protect themselves. Course, this is all in the training, particularly at the earlier levels. Later, resistance, reversals, etc, can all be factored in.

I agree with Budd when he states that you do not passively connect (in response to something Dan H. said: Dan Harden wrote:
I do not agree in the least bit that the best way to accomplish #2 The manipulation of force, is by passively connecting and then attempting connection to make kuzushi. with an attacker, but rather nage is actively connecting, blending, merging, creating that so-called unity, in order to take control of the situation and the attacker. I may be going beyond what Budd was saying, so the rest is my take on this.

"Motion in stillness". This caught my attention and I had to close my eyes and think about it for awhile before I got it (I think).

Anyway, I found this a facinating thread. I'm guessing that most of what Dan is saying here can best be understood by experiencing it. I hope one day to be allowed to take one of Dan H's seminars.

In Good Practice...

Jim

DH
10-16-2012, 04:30 PM
I think the key phrase is joining with someone's center from within you. How you do that is the name of the game. I've met a number of folks that were hard to move when someone was pushing on them with a dumb force but then got really easy to move when you knew how to muck with their sense of where down and up were going. So I'd say yeah, it's a combination of conditioning and skill with the result you're shooting for enabling kuzushi on contact because you are better developed. I've had some luck with folks that have in theory been training this stuff for multiple years but couldn't do basic jin things by getting them to use the "make a connection with their center" exercise - but I also acknowledge it is just a starting point and that there's a bunch of other things going on in tandem. Maybe folks that don't need to adjust their sensitivity regarding how additional forceloads get reconciled inside themselves don't need the step.

.....I do not agree either that you passively connect, nope. You need to understand how gravity and ground are reconciled inside you before you can effectively make someone else's gravity and ground part of the overall system. So, yeah, lot's of solo work to get there. Lot's of conditioning. But that piece of making somebody else's orbit part of your ecosystem - I guess we're going to disagree on the utility of training that as a discrete thing to develop sensitivity and layer in to the overall package as it becomes one thing.
..... If I understand you correctly, you're saying that resolving the forces inside you is primary - no argument here - then you go to how you need this in applications, fighting, etc. No argument there, either. What I'm arguing against is dismissing the "connecting centers" bit as a wrong step or unnecessary one. Managing the bits inside you in such a way that you automatically connect to someone and can manage them as well is awesome and the way to go. But I'm not convinced that advocating against training the extra sensitivity parts to link the "inside" to the "outside" isn't a worthy step in the overall progression.
Training to link the inside to the outside is a requirement and is far more difficult to do correctly IMO than people give credit to. And.....it has nothing to do with connecting to someone else's center.

I think you, and many others advocating this lower level (lower/high level- not low level) work of connecting centers are missing some very important key factors that can see you undone at higher levels. And you are beginning...in the wrong direction. Try thinking of this. If you pushed on a Tibetin prayer wheel attached to a post and it turned...would have made a connection to your center? Or would its structure have just moved and you lost yours. Now, thinking of internals without or with movement; you can move inside or inside to outside, in a such a way that it doesn't expose your center, and anyone touching you, becomes part of you as ....you move. And it can be done without exposing your center to them but having theirs exposed to yours.
I have a nice paper somewhere arguing for that understanding out of China. And there was a nice video talking about hiding your center while taking theirs done by one of the Chen guys. No matter. I am sure everyone is happy doing there thing.

Hah, I know you aren't (talking about moving externally)- but, see, if I wanted to - I could borrow a similar argument to the one you gave and say, "Sure, that works on someone with little to no skill but meet someone that's resolved the forces inside themselves and can better manage yours as well you'll find that you can't manage the forces inside yourself very well and are easy to keep off-balance" ... yadda yadda ...
Really? :D
Well...I can't wait to meet em. :cool:
I will only say that in relation to the type of movement and training I am talking about, there is a quite a bit of expert opinion that agrees with me. I will also add that ....I..... did what I was challenged to do in these very pages (unlike some)....I HAVE taken it to freestyle push hands with big dog experts in open rooms. Trust me-the last f-ing thing you would EVER want to do is to "make connection"...with their centers!!! As well I am doing it with MMA fighters and a ridiculous amount of Kali, Escrima, Koryyu, Aikido and Daito ryu teachers and others....and sparred with them?????
Thus far...things have gone very well for me.
And?
Anyone else done that....yet?
Anyone?
At least ...I...am stepping up and trying and experimenting
I have no ego about winning or losing. Nothing has changed from my wrestling days. If I win I win, if I lose I win because I learn. It's just more research for me...yeah!!!

Anyways, this is a much better disagreement to have than those of the years before regarding "I know all this ki crap already" or "It doesn't exist!" Always a pleasure. :cool:
I feel the same. No more fighting and bad blood. but in all honesty...and fairness. I think it is partly because I and others have taken it out for a spin on an international scale and UNLIKE the ki war days.
We...deliver!! And in person, there isn't a damn thing that doubters have been able to say. To a man...they were stumped.
Cheers
Dan

Howard Popkin
10-16-2012, 07:14 PM
We...deliver!! And in person, there isn't a damn thing that doubters have been able to say.
Cheers
Dan

Um...That's not true....."They say, How'd you do that? " and..."could you teach me how to do that ? "

Cheers :):D

PS you were supposed to email me :)

chillzATL
10-17-2012, 09:56 AM
Really? :D
Well...I can't wait to meet em. :cool:
I will only say that in relation to the type of movement and training I am talking about, there is a quite a bit of expert opinion that agrees with me. I will also add that ....I..... did what I was challenged to do in these very pages (unlike some)....I HAVE taken it to freestyle push hands with big dog experts in open rooms. Trust me-the last f-ing thing you would EVER want to do is to "make connection"...with their centers!!!

Cheers
Dan

Ok, question time. Hopefully you can show me what you mean soon enough, but until then it's a slow day at work so here goes:

How do you move someone if there is no connection? You have to, at some point, take the slack out of their body in order to move them. If I give someone my arm and tell them to move me by only using my arm, they either have to stretch my arm out away from me enough to take the slack out and make a connection to me in order to pull me or they have to find some way to get that connection pushing in, either by getting me to collapse my arm in a way that it gets connected to my center, getting me to introduce tension into my body to give them that connection or by finding some way to lock me and make that connection, yay or nay?

Now the above would be pretty rudimentary and would assume that I have no other ability to keep my center hidden if they do manage to get some sort of connection through the arm to the rest of my body, but as we know, even getting a connection through the arm to the rest of my body does not guarantee that they're going to get my center.

Make sense?

DH
10-17-2012, 10:59 AM
Ok, question time. Hopefully you can show me what you mean soon enough, but until then it's a slow day at work so here goes:

How do you move someone if there is no connection? You have to, at some point, take the slack out of their body in order to move them. If I give someone my arm and tell them to move me by only using my arm, they either have to stretch my arm out away from me enough to take the slack out and make a connection to me in order to pull me or they have to find some way to get that connection pushing in, either by getting me to collapse my arm in a way that it gets connected to my center, getting me to introduce tension into my body to give them that connection or by finding some way to lock me and make that connection, yay or nay?

Now the above would be pretty rudimentary and would assume that I have no other ability to keep my center hidden if they do manage to get some sort of connection through the arm to the rest of my body, but as we know, even getting a connection through the arm to the rest of my body does not guarantee that they're going to get my center.

Make sense?
1. You are moving into martial tactics of either internal power or externally driven power. and they can overlap.
2. You are designing an example with a goal in mind of me trying to take slack out of someones arm. I don't wanna. :p Screw em. I'm not trying to make a waza work. I am going to play the person with an intact center and be predatory about it; taking their center when it is smart and opportunistic to do so. Whether by my design or their involuntary agreement (or both) or not, doesn't matter to me. I am still not going to "make connect" to a persons center.

Okay my turn. Going back to the original point of centers; who..is connecting or getting connected to who?
What causes Kuzushi in the first place? Is it always the same?
Does a train "make connection" to your center to toss you a hundred feet? Or is it intact and moving itself?
Using the age old Elephant models; If you push on an Elephant he doesn't need to "connect to you" in order to move you. He moves himself, you move with him. If you noodle your arm against the Elephant the slack won't be removed unless he is trying to do other things. Assuming he needs to do other things to off you.
What if there is some sophisticated management of forces within that Elephant to allow it to do much of the same thing by itself on the inside...without moving?

There is a reason that motion in stillness becomes stillness in motion. If you make it a goal to throw someone who is noodling or muscling up...does it change you internally? No, it doesn't. You stay intact and unchanged while you move and still retain and hide your center. What is moving on the outside is being driven by your center and it is affecting them but they are following through their own disconnected bodies until they either muscle up or collapse and you place them into a position of instability. In no way during the course of that is it necessary to reveal your center, or make a center to center connection. The external manipulation of your body can make their stability compromised as there is no way for them to alight with force on any part of you. For them its like sticking a finger into a blender all movement from within to without, getting off-lined and/or hit and kicked from any number of angles of a moving structure retaining its center. And...not caring one bit about yours.

In feel, it is opportunistic and non-dedicated multiples of force vectors happening at once. This is one of the reasons for Sam saying "My present is your future!" and me saying Aiki in me, before aiki between thee and me!" They...don't know what we are doing or how we are moving and they're striving to connect...to us...leaves them reactive to forces they cannot perceive and that have no wind up, as inyo makes them one. It makes aiki....at speed.
Dan

chillzATL
10-17-2012, 01:39 PM
1. You are moving into martial tactics of either internal power or externally driven power. and they can overlap.
2. You are designing an example with a goal in mind of me trying to take slack out of someones arm. I don't wanna. :p Screw em. I'm not trying to make a waza work. I am going to play the person with an intact center and be predatory about it; taking their center when it is smart and opportunistic to do so. Whether by my design or their involuntary agreement (or both) or not, doesn't matter to me. I am still not going to "make connect" to a persons center.

Okay my turn. Going back to the original point of centers; who..is connecting or getting connected to who?
What causes Kuzushi in the first place? Is it always the same?
Does a train "make connection" to your center to toss you a hundred feet? Or is it intact and moving itself?
Using the age old Elephant models; If you push on an Elephant he doesn't need to "connect to you" in order to move you. He moves himself, you move with him. If you noodle your arm against the Elephant the slack won't be removed unless he is trying to do other things. Assuming he needs to do other things to off you.
What if there is some sophisticated management of forces within that Elephant to allow it to do much of the same thing by itself on the inside...without moving?

There is a reason that motion in stillness becomes stillness in motion. If you make it a goal to throw someone who is noodling or muscling up...does it change you internally? No, it doesn't. You stay intact and unchanged while you move and still retain and hide your center. What is moving on the outside is being driven by your center and it is affecting them but they are following through their own disconnected bodies until they either muscle up or collapse and you place them into a position of instability. In no way during the course of that is it necessary to reveal your center, or make a center to center connection. The external manipulation of your body can make their stability compromised as there is no way for them to alight with force on any part of you. For them its like sticking a finger into a blender all movement from within to without, getting off-lined and/or hit and kicked from any number of angles of a moving structure retaining its center. And...not caring one bit about yours.

In feel, it is opportunistic and non-dedicated multiples of force vectors happening at once. This is one of the reasons for Sam saying "My present is your future!" and me saying Aiki in me, before aiki between thee and me!" They...don't know what we are doing or how we are moving and they're striving to connect...to us...leaves them reactive to forces they cannot perceive and that have no wind up, as inyo makes them one. It makes aiki....at speed.
Dan

Thanks Dan,

1. yep, I understand, though my way of doing would hopefully not rely on the external, hopefully.

2. I think you outlined the differences in perspectives perfectly. I'm relating most of this to trying to make a waza work while still maintaining those things in me vs. the more unpredictable scenarios you're coming from. I've found that a lot of times, depending on the other person, I have to "make connect" in order to make a particular technique work. Not always, but more often than not and those are the times that I try to do enough to get them going, but also keep my center away from them. It's always done with a mind towards what's going on in me and not giving that up just to make a connection or get the technique to work. Though I'm not going to lie, as you've said elsewhere, it's easy to get comfortable doing that and having it come back to bite me. I also get to practice with some non-aikido people who are better than me and I've experienced the other side as well where going and and trying to make a connection and make something happen got me had.

What causes kuzushi? Sometimes it's me, sometimes it's them coming in contact with me and sometimes it's them coming into me and me not being there.

As for the train and elephant, they don't overtly try to connect to me. They just are, doing their thing, until I get in the way and get knocked on my ass. They didn't change anything to get me there, it's just what happened when I got in the way of where they were going.

If you make it a goal to throw someone who is noodling or muscling up...does it change you internally? No, it doesn't. You stay intact and unchanged while you move and still retain and hide your center. What is moving on the outside is being driven by your center and it is affecting them but they are following through their own disconnected bodies until they either muscle up or collapse and you place them into a position of instability. In no way during the course of that is it necessary to reveal your center, or make a center to center connection.

What you described there is really how I try to look at it and what I try to do, but as I said above, sometimes, depending on what you're getting and who it is, it's hard to not just go out and "make connect", take control and overpower disconnected floppiness with better structure. I think the point you're getting at in the thread, in general, is that making a connection isn't an internal vs. external thing, but one of tactics and one that if you get in the habit of operating that way, can get you in some bad spots, no matter what you have on the inside, right?

Good stuff Dan, thanks. Hopefully we'll get you down here in January and you can show me more first hand. Looking forward to it.

Alister Gillies
10-17-2012, 02:18 PM
To connect or not to connect? Is that the question? Or is the question about being connected? If so, connected to what? Presumably the universe, if we are to believe what O Sensei said. But he did qualify that by saying the universe is inside you; that is, in each one of us. It obviously has an individual dimension, but is it exclusively so?

When two universes connect what do you get? Do you get mutual respect and harmony, or perhaps the opportunity to explore what that harmony is like and what it means? In social terms this means reaching an understanding about connection and proceeding along a path until that understanding is challenged and modified. This is a social dimension of connection, but is it exclusively so?

The answer is obviously a matter of experience and point of view - both of which are relative. IMO centre to centre connection is a training paradigm, nothing more nothing less. It has its uses and its limitations. Usefully, it enables two people to cooperate and learn together. At higher levels it should be forgotten about entirely. At higher levels its presence is your partner's advantage and your disadvantage.

At higher levels there is no centre, only opportunity - tsuki. For me that is a sobering thought, and if it does not strike a chord with anyone then you might profitably ask yourself: what am I doing? Martial arts begin and end with respect for good reasons.

mathewjgano
10-17-2012, 03:57 PM
At higher levels its presence is your partner's advantage and your disadvantage.


Gillies Sensei, I really enjoyed reading this post! Thank you! May I ask if you would elaborate on your meaning in the section above?

Take care,
Matt

Alister Gillies
10-17-2012, 06:43 PM
It is simple really. Presenting an obvious centre to your partner is creating an opening that can be exploited or manipulated. In sword - see Yagyu Munenori - a distinction is drawn between attacking the seen and unseen. Too obvious a preoccupation with centre is the 'seen'. This does not mean not to have centre, but instead advocates less attachment to it.

mathewjgano
10-17-2012, 08:48 PM
Thank you, Sensei Gillies! I think I understand you better.
Take care,
Matt

ashe
10-17-2012, 11:30 PM
Hi Ryan
Sam's comment...my present is your future....matches my own. (gee what a surprise!)

well, sort of...

Sifu's comment is more of a description of an expanded mental state (as a cause), as opposed to a physical skill or skill set (i.e the effect / outcome on an opponent) , although it [awareness] will increase your physical skill. it's a description of the result of advanced awareness, which can be applied to your shen fa (body method).

the expanded awareness allows you to notice change sooner, monitor more variables and adjust.

if we compare using mindfulness to improve your shen fa to a fire, adding more fuel / wood (mindfulness) results in more flame, but wood itself is not the flame in the same way that awareness is not the shen fa itself.

most people train their shen fa into a reflexive kind of habit, which is a very different approach than what Sifu is advocating.

from an ILC point of view, our skill on touch is dependent on mindfulness, but mindfulness itself is independent of the skill, which is why meditation is such an important part of the ILC training process.

Budd
10-18-2012, 10:05 AM
Training to link the inside to the outside is a requirement and is far more difficult to do correctly IMO than people give credit to. And.....it has nothing to do with connecting to someone else's center.

Let's break it down into component parts. Train the insides to be connected. Manage the up-down ground-gravity that's always applying. Make any external force part of the system that you control. Any disagreements so far? I know, it's a simplification and there's a lot more. But as you start to go down the path below of applying value statements to a specific slice of an approach to train a very specific things - and then seem to broaden that perspective into how you're going to then apply the entirety of the skillset in the realm of sparring and fighting, seems specious to me at best and lacks credibility. If I train a sensitivity skill drill where I close my eyes to better feel what's happening around me, does that somehow mean that in a fight I will keep my eyes closed? In a contest? :rolleyes:

I think you, and many others advocating this lower level (lower/high level- not low level) work of connecting centers are missing some very important key factors that can see you undone at higher levels. And you are beginning...in the wrong direction. Try thinking of this. If you pushed on a Tibetin prayer wheel attached to a post and it turned...would have made a connection to your center? Or would its structure have just moved and you lost yours. Now, thinking of internals without or with movement; you can move inside or inside to outside, in a such a way that it doesn't expose your center, and anyone touching you, becomes part of you as ....you move. And it can be done without exposing your center to them but having theirs exposed to yours.
I have a nice paper somewhere arguing for that understanding out of China. And there was a nice video talking about hiding your center while taking theirs done by one of the Chen guys. No matter. I am sure everyone is happy doing there thing.

Ah, but I think where we're going to have to agree to disagree is around the common understanding of some of the interpretations of just what you're describing above. I have some papers and testimonials and personal experiences too at this point, and like you said, I'm sure everyone is happy doing their thing. But if I look just academically at what you describe above - you're saying that the internal action required isn't as important as the external frame managing things? (Tibetan wheel example) I don't think that's what you're saying but can you see how it comes across that way (and thus creates a false impression)? If it is what you're saying, then I'd argue your understanding of what's actually being advocated (that you keep bringing up and arguing against) may be a tad off . .

Really? :D
Well...I can't wait to meet em. :cool:
I will only say that in relation to the type of movement and training I am talking about, there is a quite a bit of expert opinion that agrees with me. I will also add that ....I..... did what I was challenged to do in these very pages (unlike some)....I HAVE taken it to freestyle push hands with big dog experts in open rooms. Trust me-the last f-ing thing you would EVER want to do is to "make connection"...with their centers!!! As well I am doing it with MMA fighters and a ridiculous amount of Kali, Escrima, Koryyu, Aikido and Daito ryu teachers and others....and sparred with them?????
Thus far...things have gone very well for me.
And?
Anyone else done that....yet?
Anyone?
At least ...I...am stepping up and trying and experimenting

I am not gonna comment on who you have met and what those outcomes have been. That's a zero sum game. Likewise, I tend not to talk about who I get together worth, for good or bad. Additionally likewise, I still think you're escalating a training drill with a specific purpose in mind to a full-blown approach - which puzzles me, especially as the alternative you're giving seems to be more in the realm of a physical conditioning engine - which I agree is important, but cooperative and working with rather than in replacement of.

I have no ego about winning or losing. Nothing has changed from my wrestling days. If I win I win, if I lose I win because I learn. It's just more research for me...yeah!!!

I think that's the whole point of forcing yourself into positions of training to failure. That's one of the most effective ways to learn and see what needs to improve. Find those people that can outclass you in specific ways and keep learning from them ;)

I feel the same. No more fighting and bad blood. but in all honesty...and fairness. I think it is partly because I and others have taken it out for a spin on an international scale and UNLIKE the ki war days.
We...deliver!! And in person, there isn't a damn thing that doubters have been able to say. To a man...they were stumped.
Cheers
Dan

I would agree partly that I think it's been more useful for people to get together, try things and out and see for themselves what works, what's available and where this kind of training can go. I'm glad you've had success getting this stuff out there and it's resonating with folks. The more exposure people get, the better.

DH
10-18-2012, 04:24 PM
Let's break it down into component parts. Train the insides to be connected. Manage the up-down ground-gravity that's always applying. Make any external force part of the system that you control. Any disagreements so far? I know, it's a simplification and there's a lot more. But as you start to go down the path below of applying value statements to a specific slice of an approach to train a very specific things - and then seem to broaden that perspective into how you're going to then apply the entirety of the skillset in the realm of sparring and fighting, seems specious to me at best and lacks credibility. If I train a sensitivity skill drill where I close my eyes to better feel what's happening around me, does that somehow mean that in a fight I will keep my eyes closed? In a contest? :rolleyes:
There not the same thing. I'm saying training to connect the centers or training to retain the center are two different approaches, not steps or stages along the same path. So what I am discussing as solo practice retains the same value down the path toward push hands, sparring etc. For that reason it is not the same as me saying you would spar with eyes closed and then open them. Its a different paradigm of movement internal to external.

Ah, but I think where we're going to have to agree to disagree is around the common understanding of some of the interpretations of just what you're describing above. I have some papers and testimonials and personal experiences too at this point, and like you said, I'm sure everyone is happy doing their thing. But if I look just academically at what you describe above - you're saying that the internal action required isn't as important as the external frame managing things? (Tibetan wheel example) I don't think that's what you're saying but can you see how it comes across that way (and thus creates a false impression)? If it is what you're saying, then I'd argue your understanding of what's actually being advocated (that you keep bringing up and arguing against) may be a tad off . .
As for papers and testimonials: I know there are different approaches. It is one of the issues I cited years ago here when the argument was being made that all internals fit into a certain paradigm. There are many disagreements regarding approaches in solo training, when and how to introduce things, what is more important, what should be stressed and when, big...disagreements on practical applied use of that training.

My example of the prayer wheel: I threw that out there to make an obvious example of external movement of something that had greater structure than the force acting upon it. I NEVER...meant, said, or alluded to..." the internal action required not being as important as the external frame." Where did you get that from? In fact I discussed the internal management of moving oneself:
from internal to the external..internals without or with movement; you can move inside or inside to outside, in a such a way that it doesn't expose your center, and anyone touching you, becomes part of you as ....you move. And it can be done without exposing your center to them but having theirs exposed to yours."

So, what I actually did say has nothing to do with your reading of it as "the internal not being as important as the external." Your going to have to explain how you understood it Budd, I'm lost to where you got your idea from. Do you really think ...that I think...that external movement is the requirement? Really?


Your overall response to this idea I am stating that retaining your center FROM connecting to their center was to state ..to me.... "That works out great until you meet someone who can actually get into your center." Which is why I responded as to my own personal success and other big dogs vetting of the same model. I suppose you meant it works out fine until a practitioner (anyone) meets someone who outclasses them and -not me personally. So.....all good. Lets stick to the topic.

In keeping with that
The important part is how a practitioner is organizing his system internally and how that is being used with his system externally to manage load. Carrying weight on a point on the body; arm shoulder chest etc., and supporting it by creating a ground connection is not the same as "dealing" with the same load on a given point by "receiving it...at all. The requirement is there-but not the need. The ability to make change, eliminates the moment of force alighting, The method to enact change, is internal. External movement will not cover it and will in fact many times mask the failure of poor connection.

The differences are easy to understand and not complex. Lets assume we agree on the internal management;
1. One way is to allow external force into the practitioners body and they manage the additional force load with.... the forces being managed already in the practitioners body.
2. The other way is to not allow external force into the practitioners body and yet still do so with... the forces being managed already in the practitioners body.

The key issue for our purposes here is that in both models the body is supporting the load internally. one allows it to enter and be manipulated, the other has it always reside on the surface and has it manipulated. You..think this means external movement requirements. I am stating there is every bit as much internal work going on in that scenario.

In the end though it is important to realize that you can affect and take someone's center, without ever attaching yourself to theirs or revealing yours.

There are some direct teachings on this in DR and why it is too be avoided. there are even some interesting drawings floating around on the web. Other teachings exist in Koryu; discussing never receiving power from someones weapon. Something which is desperately important were you to consider facing large weapons with a sword or short sword. Other teachings exist in Taiji, where their power may never alight on your body. An interesting example of which is the famous myth of the Tai chi saint who held a bird in his hand and it couldn't fly away from his ability to neutralize it's lift.

Anyone who can do what I am talking about can easily allow force to alight on them and deal with it going through them and neutralizing or adding to their forces in a myriad of ways. Not everyone who has the skill to neutralize and generate forces in them has attained the level of having those forces reside ever present on the surface and know how to manipulate those forces while they reside on the surface. The means to do this can and are displayed with almost no movement, to obvious movement, but the qualities of that movement must move in accord with in yo and are not...not...normal movement. It is exceedingly difficult to attain, evne slowly, much less to become second nature....at speed.

I think many keep misunderstanding the use of internal strength to connect to another's center for the simple reason that they are trying to make a kata or technique "work." The process of -having- to make a kata work means many times you have to deal with their center in otherwise unnatural constructs. Lets say you have to take the slack out of -them- and you to move them. This is not a requirement in a fight or even in push hands where the need to do something is not prevalent. You can remain neutral, and be predatory and opportunistic.

I still think you're escalating a training drill with a specific purpose in mind to a full-blown approach - which puzzles me, especially as the alternative you're giving seems to be more in the realm of a physical conditioning engine - which I agree is important, but cooperative and working with rather than in replacement of.
I think that's the whole point of forcing yourself into positions of training to failure. That's one of the most effective ways to learn and see what needs to improve. Find those people that can outclass you in specific ways and keep learning from them ;)

I would agree partly that I think it's been more useful for people to get together, try things and out and see for themselves what works, what's available and where this kind of training can go. I'm glad you've had success getting this stuff out there and it's resonating with folks. The more exposure people get, the better.
It's not going to be conducive to the discussion to talk about each other, All I am going to say is that I will continue on this path until I meet the people you are describing who can supposedly...easily handle...the methods I am employing. As stated I was advised to keep meeting big dogs, I will continue to do so. If I get tuned I will let you know and hopefully I might get some different approaches. Rest assured when it happens, I will be all ears and having fun!! :cool:

Dan

Budd
10-19-2012, 10:46 AM
There not the same thing. I'm saying training to connect the centers or training to retain the center are two different approaches, not steps or stages along the same path. So what I am discussing as solo practice retains the same value down the path toward push hands, sparring etc. For that reason it is not the same as me saying you would spar with eyes closed and then open them. Its a different paradigm of movement internal to external.

I know we disagree on this and I think I get your perspective. That said, I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree as the only options I see from my perspective are either 1) The connection part I'm talking about gets included in what you're doing already (which I'm skeptical of, but don't have a definitive opinion one way or another) 2) There's a disconnect what's meant regarding the connection and force management already - which at this point of talking past each other a few times I don't think is gonna get resolved in debate. The only reason I keep pressing the point is that you keep bringing up the "make a connection" and "four-legged animal" approach as flawed (even in light of attempts at explain where I think you might be misunderstanding what's intended as a result of the approach) and I've not seen your logic support that beyond saying there's a better way to manage the body for applications and fighting. The logical path doesn't compute for me based on what I've experienced chasing the internal strength stuffs nor with the efforts I've made to put it in more live pressure testing.

Another example - the back bow and how it trains some things from a body conditioning and awareness perspective. I know some folks that get hung up on how it looks and others that don't do the appropriate work and think that the back bow is some sort of application. In either case I can see how people would write it off entirely - never minding how it changes externally the frame and then governs how force loads are delivered internally into the system - kind of an awakening moment to get the mind to understand how the body can function differently than previously thought. But the folks that get too hung up on it being either a funny looking activity or a flawed application won't be able to benefit in either case. No big whoop if they are getting the skills and conditioning some other way (Which I'm sure most think they are), but then lots of people assume they are already doing this stuff anyways :straightf


As for papers and testimonials: I know there are different approaches. It is one of the issues I cited years ago here when the argument was being made that all internals fit into a certain paradigm. There are many disagreements regarding approaches in solo training, when and how to introduce things, what is more important, what should be stressed and when, big...disagreements on practical applied use of that training.

And I wish it were a better playground for people to get together and try things out, have the disagreements, work through them credibly etc. I see too much posturing and opinions metamorphed into proclaimed academics - it sours me from participating outside of my little box most of the time. I figure everyone involved will all get what they're looking for one way or another.

My example of the prayer wheel: I threw that out there to make an obvious example of external movement of something that had greater structure than the force acting upon it. I NEVER...meant, said, or alluded to..." the internal action required not being as important as the external frame." Where did you get that from? In fact I discussed the internal management of moving oneself:
from internal to the external..internals without or with movement; you can move inside or inside to outside, in a such a way that it doesn't expose your center, and anyone touching you, becomes part of you as ....you move. And it can be done without exposing your center to them but having theirs exposed to yours."

So, what I actually did say has nothing to do with your reading of it as "the internal not being as important as the external." Your going to have to explain how you understood it Budd, I'm lost to where you got your idea from. Do you really think ...that I think...that external movement is the requirement? Really?

Of course not, that's the point I was making - it's easy to take a slice of an argument or supposition and then extrapolate it in ways that defy credibility and accuracy. That's kinda how I keep scratching my head at your continued stance of decrying the "center to center connection" work. I understand that you wouldn't bring it up if you didn't think it worth mentioning, but I guess I have to fundamentally disagree once more for the record before I go about my way.


Your overall response to this idea I am stating that retaining your center FROM connecting to their center was to state ..to me.... "That works out great until you meet someone who can actually get into your center." Which is why I responded as to my own personal success and other big dogs vetting of the same model. I suppose you meant it works out fine until a practitioner (anyone) meets someone who outclasses them and -not me personally. So.....all good. Lets stick to the topic.

Actually - No. That was me saying in an offhand way that's it's easy to flip your logic around of "This will fail against X" and turning it into "That will fail against Y". See what I did there? I am in agreement that it's not credible to make such suppositions without full exposure and understanding.

In keeping with that
The important part is how a practitioner is organizing his system internally and how that is being used with his system externally to manage load. Carrying weight on a point on the body; arm shoulder chest etc., and supporting it by creating a ground connection is not the same as "dealing" with the same load on a given point by "receiving it...at all. The requirement is there-but not the need. The ability to make change, eliminates the moment of force alighting, The method to enact change, is internal. External movement will not cover it and will in fact many times mask the failure of poor connection.

Here's where we agree

The differences are easy to understand and not complex. Lets assume we agree on the internal management;
1. One way is to allow external force into the practitioners body and they manage the additional force load with.... the forces being managed already in the practitioners body.
2. The other way is to not allow external force into the practitioners body and yet still do so with... the forces being managed already in the practitioners body.

The key issue for our purposes here is that in both models the body is supporting the load internally. one allows it to enter and be manipulated, the other has it always reside on the surface and has it manipulated. You..think this means external movement requirements. I am stating there is every bit as much internal work going on in that scenario.

In the end though it is important to realize that you can affect and take someone's center, without ever attaching yourself to theirs or revealing yours.

I think you're extrapolating the example I gave of the validity of arguing against a whole approach based on a flawed understanding of a specific model - into now I think you're moving externally. Not what I said at all. I also think you're creating a false division based on how you want to segment what you see as two approaches. While I think there are differences in approach, I wouldn't categorize or align them as you did - even while I agree in tactical application you are showing the differences of someone with a connected body taking someone's center while masking their own - versus someone leaving theirs open. I do not believe anyone is advocating leaving their center open - and my experiences with the approach you are decrying are that nobody gives up their center for the taking except in drills to give someone a dumb force to react to. (just like every other legitimate place I've seen practice)

There are some direct teachings on this in DR and why it is too be avoided. there are even some interesting drawings floating around on the web. Other teachings exist in Koryu; discussing never receiving power from someones weapon. Something which is desperately important were you to consider facing large weapons with a sword or short sword. Other teachings exist in Taiji, where their power may never alight on your body. An interesting example of which is the famous myth of the Tai chi saint who held a bird in his hand and it couldn't fly away from his ability to neutralize it's lift.

Another example is the Taiji man who would stand peeing off the edge of a hill/drop and offer his students the chance to push him over it from behind when he wasn't looking - many tried, none could. Yadda yadda . . the point is a developed and conditioned body is going to behave differently than someone still figuring out how ground and gravity act on them in real functional life. That's a long road to travel - lots of ways to get hung up along the way.

Anyone who can do what I am talking about can easily allow force to alight on them and deal with it going through them and neutralizing or adding to their forces in a myriad of ways. Not everyone who has the skill to neutralize and generate forces in them has attained the level of having those forces reside ever present on the surface and know how to manipulate those forces while they reside on the surface. The means to do this can and are displayed with almost no movement, to obvious movement, but the qualities of that movement must move in accord with in yo and are not...not...normal movement. It is exceedingly difficult to attain, evne slowly, much less to become second nature....at speed.

Yup and at speed is where things more easily break down depending on what's been conditioned and how the skill level allows for it to be applied and made manifest. Nobody's arguing against that, either.

I think many keep misunderstanding the use of internal strength to connect to another's center for the simple reason that they are trying to make a kata or technique "work." The process of -having- to make a kata work means many times you have to deal with their center in otherwise unnatural constructs. Lets say you have to take the slack out of -them- and you to move them. This is not a requirement in a fight or even in push hands where the need to do something is not prevalent. You can remain neutral, and be predatory and opportunistic.

Whole bunch of things there. Thinking an internal strength drill means you can fight is stupid. Thinking because you can perform a choreographed kata means you can fight is stupid. Thinking your internal strength conditioning can be applied easily in a fight without having some progressive resistance training to give you a clue is stupid. None of these things are being argued for as near as I can tell, so please stop presenting them as if I am in favor of them.

It's not going to be conducive to the discussion to talk about each other, All I am going to say is that I will continue on this path until I meet the people you are describing who can supposedly...easily handle...the methods I am employing. As stated I was advised to keep meeting big dogs, I will continue to do so. If I get tuned I will let you know and hopefully I might get some different approaches. Rest assured when it happens, I will be all ears and having fun!! :cool:

Dan

I think that's the way to go - keep genuinely seeking people that can tune you up in ways that surprise you and then learn what the hell they are doing. Best way to improve, near as I can tell and while I won't name names - I have no problem admitting that there's any number of folks in internal arts and combat sports that have been tuning me up in fun ways - which I'm okay with because I've learned a ton. With that, I think I'll bow out. Have a bunch of stuff to finish at work and gonna be traveling next week so between preparing and being away - will not be around that much.

DH
10-20-2012, 11:21 AM
One last point.
I also think you're creating a false division based on how you want to segment what you see as two approaches. While I think there are differences in approach, I wouldn't categorize or align them as you did - even while I agree in tactical application you are showing the differences of someone with a connected body taking someone's center while masking their own - versus someone leaving theirs open. I do not believe anyone is advocating leaving their center open - and my experiences with the approach you are decrying are that nobody gives up their center for the taking except in drills to give someone a dumb force to react to. (just like every other legitimate place I've seen practice)

You still haven't categorized or aligned...anything!! much less defined your distinction of the differences, Budd. Give me something to cause me pause. You haven't as yet offered anything by way of rebuttal. :)
Example:
I said "....It is important to realize that you can affect and take someone's center, without ever attaching yourself to theirs or revealing yours."
You replied "....nobody gives up their center for the taking except in drills...
You are not making any clear distinctions, worth discussing, that produce a benefit other than repeating it might or might not be a needed step. Whereas I have outlined why it is not needed as a step.
I will assume you know you can apply weight and force without giving your center to someone, that you can manipulate their force without giving them access to your center. You seem to understand and agree to this in your replies.So, it begs the question, since you agree this can be done, why any need to "connect" to their center at all?

Do you think you "need" to connect to someones canter to throw them? That's not even necessary in external arts, much less internal. Consider their own connection -to themselves- in the equation of forces meeting. If they are muscling through a movement, and they encounter a person who is internally connected, the connected person can let the muscle guys power pull on themselves and get placed, or arrive at a place they can't manage due to the way they carry themselves. In kata it has one result, in jujutsu it will just cause a series of positional changes to take place until one has an advantage. This is what I meant by opportunistic and predatory. In the end though, the lessor connected person ends up being reactionary as the neutralizing of forces inside the connected person carries through to the outside "on contact" in such a way that it is consistently instant and in the now by default. Empty hand or weapons no matter.

To touch a hand or arm of a connected person is a different event than touching the arm of muscle/shoulder/hip driven person. The first step in managing those forces is to manage forces in you that support any contact point and dissolve the forces so they have no entry point. Hence no need to connect to their center at all. If they are not connected they can be bounced, re-directed and hit, kicked or thrown, or re-positioned. If they are connected the game can continue.

In any event, "connecting" to their center, or having their forces go through you to connect to them is unnecessary for kuzushi to occur or be created.
Thinking an internal strength drill means you can fight is stupid. Thinking because you can perform a choreographed kata means you can fight is stupid. Thinking your internal strength conditioning can be applied easily in a fight without having some progressive resistance training to give you a clue is stupid. None of these things are being argued for as near as I can tell, so please stop presenting them as if I am in favor of them.
They were examples of practicality in use... only for talking points. I know you enough to know you understand the practical fighting game, so I was talking ...to you.... not down to you...on shared end-use goals, Budd.
Nice talking with you and being able to debate without the B.S.
Dan