AikiWeb Aikido Forums

AikiWeb Aikido Forums (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/index.php)
-   Open Discussions (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   True Internal Strength (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16607)

Buck 08-09-2009 12:35 AM

True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Rob Liberti wrote: (Post 237148)
I got that impression specifically from these lines:

Maybe you were not talking about this current fad of actually trying to inject aiki in AIKIdo. But if you were, it was very disheartening to read those comments. Injecting a new fad, REALLY? People are trying to resolve the issue that they have long recognized - that they didn't have much of a "choice" - unless it was more of a stylized symbolic attack. The path depends on the actual ability to CHOOSE peace.

I'm not saying EVERYONE who trains aikido devoid of aiki is a control addict who uses control to avoid feeling, but it is certainly not UNCOMMON. I think I can recognize that to varying degrees, in a lot of aikido people. That's not a true path at all - I lived it. Beware of false enlightenment. I'm not saying I have all of the answers, but I'm pretty sure I can tell you where NOT to look.

Rob

Rob,

I am not the type of person who jumps on band wagons, clings to new trends and fads, or desperately seeking something out that is the cure-all. I am skeptical and I believe 1/2 or what I read, hear and see. I am not lured in by pitchmen and their products. But when something like the understanding that if I become violent it has a high probability of enacting more or equal violence, then I respect it. Why because if you live by the sword you die by the sword. That isn't a way I want to live. The real unseen power, the real internal strength is life changing. It comes from challenges, goals, and over-coming difficulties that test you and your limits. Where you know who you really are.

I think violence really struggle for control. It really is a simple and not a complex idea. And the world is full of examples.

Internal strength is that of the mind, and not the body. It is the will of a victim to fight off an attacker. It is the will of a survivor, to survive in an unforgiving place. A prisoner of war defying the captors. It is climbing Mount Everest and reaching the summit alive with frost bitten limbs, and defeating elevation sickness. It is being in an Iron Man race and not quitting when your feet are bleeding and dehydration brings on hallucinations, and disorientation. It is a fireman, who rushes into a burning building to see if there is anyone needs to be rescued.

It isn't the new retro martial arts fad or buzz word that can be interjected into any martial art giving it that extra little something.

Maybe, if you had a better opportunity to exercise your internal strength and not mistake that for a physical remedy to a lacking ability in your Aikido, than you might feel differently about things. You might look a peace differently.

Peace is another means of control. It is another way to get what you want. It isn't as easy as violence. Violence is instinctive. It is an emotional reaction. When someone get anger they don't get a overwhelming need NOT to react violently. When the Hatfields and the McCoys, the Montagues and the Capulets, or what took place between those at the gunfight at the O.K. Corral for example didn't invoke act of peaceful behavior. How hard was for those who followed Gandhi to sit there and get beat by the British and not fight back. What great demonstration of internal strength that was. Now that is control.

Gandhi seen a more powerful control with non-violence then with violence than if both sides engaged in violence. But that isn't what happened.

In all cases, violence took place, for what ever justification, the end result wasn't pretty. Violence in all cases, as an example, shows that violence was the easiest thing to do. The result are quick, and immediate, it is high stress by the true definition of the word stress. Maybe as a means for the body going to its preferred state of homostatsis there is all those stimulating feelings that are expressed as feelings of of victory, power and control you don't get with peace when defeating others as in the examples I mentioned where internal strength to restraining violent action could have been used.

We are not taking a self-defensive situation where you life is threatened or are threatened with rape, and such where you may have no choice to use violence. I am not saying you should or shouldn't use violence if your are threatened. I am saying you just don't resolve common conflicts with violence in a knee-jerk reaction. Or you if you want your neighbor to turn down the music at 3:00am, and it is annoying the heck out of you, you don't knock on the door and when they answer you proceed to beat them. That isn't the best method of control.

I am saying internal strength is the ability to not use knee-jerk and alike violence in a situation that has other choices, results or ways. It is a matter of mental disciple in such situations. Internal strength is not about, swing first and ask questions later. It is a host of other things like diplomacy, tolerance, confidence, self-control and all that stuff.

Rob, that is what true internal strength is all about. If that is difficult for you to understand, and you choose to employ violence as your common instrument for a solution to common situations then all I can do is hope you one day hang up your guns for good and walk the path of Peace that true Aikido is about.

Janet Rosen 08-09-2009 01:01 AM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Phil, as Kevin pointed out in your original thread, you and Rob are using the term differently. What you are talking about is totally valid - and what he is talking about is also, it happens to be the same words describing something totally different and based on the very old idea of "internal" vs. "external" martial arts. I hate to see folks spinning their wheels over what is a semantic confusion.

rob_liberti 08-09-2009 07:27 AM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
My gosh.

Okay, first. I'm pretty serious about yoga and internal skills solo training (which are very supportive and compatible). Let me assure you that Ghandi's physical practice was a whole hell of lot more like mine than what is done in typical aikido.

No one is suggesting that peace is not good. I'm suggesting that you are attempting - in vain - to validate aikido devoid of aiki - by calling the current movement to put aiki back into aikido a fad and devalue the goals of the people trying to do so.

It just so happens that EVERYONE in my current *fad* (which is not going away - don't kid yourself) has been there and done that and got the tee shirts. I'm wearing one right now. We are not overlooking the value of training. I am further pointing out that more effective training is now available and that you can get just as much - and probably more - self development out of not spinning your wheels.

Rob

Buck 08-09-2009 10:48 AM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Rob,

I really am having a hard time understanding where you are coming from. In this thread it is one thing and in my other thread it is another. It is evident you have an issue over something that is going on here. Many people have told you it isn't the issue, you think it is. But, for some reason you feel it is. So I don't know what to tell you. That is all I can say. :)

David Orange 08-09-2009 12:22 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237153)
Internal strength is not about, swing first and ask questions later.

Buck,

Where do you even get any inkling of "violence" in what Rob is talking about?

Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237153)
It is a host of other things like diplomacy, tolerance, confidence, self-control and all that stuff.

Sure, that's a kind of "internal strength" but it's completely unrelated to the discussion. It's like saying an architect's power must be friendliness and respect for all people, rather than knowledge of physics and materials. The IS discussions I've come to know are simply concerned with how best to build our bodies to handle incoming power without being moved and return that power in spades without throwing oneself off balance. It's a lot more like architecture than it is about ethics. And it's a lot more like real ethics than it is about dealing violently or having "violence as your common instrument." It's like saying that making a building "strong and stable" is far less important than making it "diplomatic". In other words, it's a rather nonsensical approach to a very rational subject.

Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237153)
Rob, that is what true internal strength is all about.

Buck, what you're describing is along the lines of what Chuck Norris wrote in his book "Inner Strength." Fine, but most people I know who talk that way are good up until they get clocked one good time or find themselves mounted with a bad guy about to rain blows on their face. Then the switch flips and lack of real martial foundation transforms into a hopeless effort to "kill them, no matter what it takes." If he has already beaten you at your best game, it's too late to improvise without foundation and beat him at his best game. But if you have a better game than him from the beginning, you don't have to fight. You don't end up with him sitting on your chest and you don't have to try to kill him. See the difference?

Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237153)
If that is difficult for you to understand, and you choose to employ violence as your common instrument for a solution to common situations then all I can do is hope you one day hang up your guns for good and walk the path of Peace that true Aikido is about.

For most of us, the path of aikido is to be able to do what Morihei Ueshiba could do. That includes immoveability against pushes from one or more strong men and the ability to move a few inches and bounce the attacker back and up into the air. In addition to being nice guys. It's easier to be nice when you have tons of extra power available at a heartbeat.

David

Buck 08-09-2009 01:25 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

David Orange wrote: (Post 237177)
Buck,

For most of us, the path of aikido is to be able to do what Morihei Ueshiba could do. That includes immoveability against pushes from one or more strong men and the ability to move a few inches and bounce the attacker back and up into the air. In addition to being nice guys.

David

I can agree with that! Your preaching to the choir! :) But that isn't the only skill O'Sensei as a martial artist had. He had character. He had mental and physical discipline and all that. That is my focus here on talking about what true internal strength. True is used as narrowest or strictest sense of the word internal strength. Meaning like our internal thoughts or internal being/soul. What we are, who we are. etc. Not in the translated Chinese sense of the word relating to the mystical Chinese interpretation of physics. A term that his regained some popularity in use and trend in some circles :) Two different things. :)

David Orange 08-09-2009 01:40 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237190)
...that isn't the only skill O'Sensei as a martial artist had. He had character. He had mental and physical discipline and all that. That is my focus here on talking about what true internal strength. True is used as narrowest or strictest sense of the word internal strength. Meaning like our internal thoughts or internal being/soul. What we are, who we are. etc.

Sure, but then you get down to the same thing Christianity has come to: our leader had integrity, therefore we have integrity. I've met so many aikido teachers who give you that insipid smile and tell you about being "spiritual" but they can only operate within very narrow limits before that facade tumbles down. Then what do they have left??? It's not pretty, I can tell you that. And it's not what I'd call "spiritual" or any kind of "internal strength." Sorry. It makes the "spiritual" aspect of aikido look like a fraud. And without the technical strength, it makes the "martial" aspect of aikido look like a fraud, as well.

David

mathewjgano 08-09-2009 02:39 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
To me it sounds as if "true internal strength/power" might be described this way:
without internal (physical) power, our internal (mental) power is less potent overall.
without internal (mental) power, our internal (physical) power is more blind overall.
I'm usually inclined to think like Buck here because I place a lot more importance on mental than physical accuity, so I feel like I understand what he means by saying true internal strength is the kind generated by an indominable (always successful) character/mind. I grew up knowing lots of guys who were physically powerful and so not only does that kind of thing not impress me, it carries the baggage of my experiences with it. Physical dudes tend to lack perception where I come from, but of course that's a highly specific situation...and somewhat of an overgeneralization...even if it's still true.:p It's also one of the reasons I was so attracted to martial arts in the first place. In martial arts, it seemed to me, people were interested in developing that physical power so many of my friends valued growing up, but they also did so with an effort to use it wisely and with altruistic aims (helping "The Little Guy").
...I've always been prone to romantic thinking.:D

Kevin Leavitt 08-09-2009 03:22 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
There are lots of spiritual paths that can produce the kind of internal strength that Buck is referring to. Lots of them.

Yoga is probably the closest physical spiritual path to martial arts without being martial.

I think these paths are wonderful and for each person..well they need to find the path that resonates with them.

Aikido is one that is has a martial base. It has that martial base for a reason and if we are on that TRUE Path to realize TRUE INTERNAL STRENGTH, then we need to be on that path...and not revising it to something else that we WISH is were.

It may simply not be the right path for some folks.

At its core Budo is about resolving violence both external and ultimately internally, understanding it, studying it, and coming to grips with it.

I honestly don't think you can study it without being open to and studying as much as you can the full realm of the martial practices. We need to do this without judgement, that is without passing bias.

I think that as in everything though there is a middle way.

I think it is important to study these so-called internal skills and to see how they apply to budo, techniques, fighting, or whatever else is within the realm of martial arts.

After all, this is a martial practice....and it is NOT yoga.

It is a Martial Art.

mathewjgano 08-09-2009 03:35 PM

individual revision
 
Quote:

Kevin Leavitt wrote: (Post 237199)
Aikido is one that is has a martial base. It has that martial base for a reason and if we are on that TRUE Path to realize TRUE INTERNAL STRENGTH, then we need to be on that path...and not revising it to something else that we WISH is were.

I think it is important to study these so-called internal skills and to see how they apply to budo, techniques, fighting, or whatever else is within the realm of martial arts.

After all, this is a martial practice....and it is NOT yoga.

It is a Martial Art.

I agree some degree of physical power must accompany the mental and spiritual, but I try to leave it to the individual to sort out exactly where that line should be drawn...and if that means someone wants only 1% physical focus, as far as this non-authority is concerned, that's ok.

Kevin Leavitt 08-09-2009 03:56 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
No I agree Matthew. Everyone is on their own path and needs to go down it on their own way.

The thing I struggle with though is how long do we let folks dawdle on the edge of the pool just putting their toes in the cold water without ever really swimming?

I think sometimes we have a tendency to accept lower standard of training for fear of losing people or not gaining people cause our practice is "uncomfortable" to them.

It Should be a little uncomfortable all the time. Once it becomes comfortable...you are no longer growing.

Sure, in the beginning we certainly need to be cognizant that people learn at different rates, have different emotional states, needs, physical make up...all that.

That is fine. The struggle is staying the course and bring them along the path of growth.

You know eventually, some folks will just say. "Okay, that is enough for me". my cup is full, I am leaving the table and going out to do something else!

And that is okay.

I shouldn't feel a need to chase them down the road with the pitcher.

(What is up with my stupid analogies????)

Ron Tisdale 08-10-2009 08:53 AM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

agree some degree of physical power must accompany the mental and spiritual, but I try to leave it to the individual to sort out exactly where that line should be drawn...and if that means someone wants only 1% physical focus, as far as this non-authority is concerned, that's ok.
I don't have an issue with that. I just think both sides should be willing to respect the other. Phrases like "fad" carry some baggage of their own. If the core martial strength behind aikido is referred to as a "fad", I personally believe that is symptomatic of an overall condition in aikido. That condition being that some large proportion put more emphasis on the touchy feely spiritual aspects, without a solid foundation in the martial, or in the body skills required.

A balance is always nice.

Best,
Ron

Marc Abrams 08-10-2009 09:03 AM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237190)
I can agree with that! Your preaching to the choir! :) But that isn't the only skill O'Sensei as a martial artist had. He had character. He had mental and physical discipline and all that. That is my focus here on talking about what true internal strength. True is used as narrowest or strictest sense of the word internal strength. Meaning like our internal thoughts or internal being/soul. What we are, who we are. etc. Not in the translated Chinese sense of the word relating to the mystical Chinese interpretation of physics. A term that his regained some popularity in use and trend in some circles :) Two different things. :)

Philip:

1) You seem to idealize the founder of Aikido. I would suggest that you read some more about him. Ellis Amdur's work is a good place to start.

2) Your concept of "inner strength" might be better described by using the term "fortitude." No one is questioning the importance of fortitude. Fortitude is entirely unrelated to the internal body strength that is being talked about at length on some forums. O'Sensei certainly exhibited those VERY IMPORTANT skills.

3) Internal body strength is anything but a fad. That people are recognizing the importance of developing that "body skill" is a genuine attempt to "raise the level" of one's martial arts abilities. I would suggest that you attend a workshop from some of those people who are out there teaching those skills before you comment as though you know what those "skill sets" are and importance and place of them in one's martial art.

4) You can develop all of the fortitude in the world and can "understand" all of the "philosophy" of Aikido, but that will be of no use to you if you are attacked and have to rely on trying to stay safe by utilizing martial arts skills that do not have the important foundation of the internal body strength that is being discussed on the internet and practiced by some.

Marc Abrams

aikilouis 08-10-2009 04:42 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
The problem with what Philip expresses is that he defines aikido uniquely from its place in his own history. Every element of this picture is shaped to reinforce that : the Founder as a model of moral excellence, internal strength defined as the answer to his (Philip's) own particular problem, aikido practise being a process of finding self confidence. It is a possible interpretation but I find it very self centered. Even worse, by defining it as the True Internal Strength, he disqualifies any other possible interpretation and diverging experience.

Buck 08-10-2009 06:02 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Marc Abrams wrote: (Post 237245)
Philip:

1) You seem to idealize the founder of Aikido. I would suggest that you read some more about him. Ellis Amdur's work is a good place to start.

It may come across as that to some who really don't read what I post, see what they want to see or put allot of credit into Aikido and O'Sensei, or those who just misread me. I am a person who recognizes his skill and understands it is a difficult road to reach the heights he did. And I look at myself as person who feels looking at O'Sensei in his original/pure/honest way is beneficial. It's like looking at any sports star as they are not as the press or others describes them to be. That includes looking at the warts and all. It means taking my rose colored glasses off, it means clearing the stars out of my eyes. Not putting him on a pedestal and stuff. Looking at him as a Japanese, a human, and not someone who I project upon. Am not a fan. He is an object of study.

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

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

I have been attacked numerous times in my life. I firmly believe you can be the most knowledgable and skill martial artist or fighter with all the stuff you profess. That will not do me any good, if I don't have true internal strength. I am talking about things like will, determination, intent, fortitude and stuff. I have run across a few people who have never taken a martial arts class in their life and defended themselves very successfully. And I have seen the opposite as well. I have also seen paired martial artist go toe-to-toe and because of internal strength turn a losing situation into a winning situation without any special training, or skill other then having true internal strength. I have see in matches those who are very skill lack true internal strength and be defeated.

As you see Mark, true internal strength isn't a skill set someone put together for others who need to improve their skill by those parameters. Those who feel a plug in, or patch, skill set, is the answer to their problems. I have no problem or issue if a person goes that route in general- but that is a different thread. But what I am talking about and you are talking about in terms of internal strength are two completely different things. I don't know why some are concerned over it.

Buck 08-10-2009 06:10 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Ludwig Neveu wrote: (Post 237307)
The problem with what Philip expresses is that he defines aikido uniquely from its place in his own history. Every element of this picture is shaped to reinforce that : the Founder as a model of moral excellence, internal strength defined as the answer to his (Philip's) own particular problem, aikido practise being a process of finding self confidence. It is a possible interpretation but I find it very self centered. Even worse, by defining it as the True Internal Strength, he disqualifies any other possible interpretation and diverging experience.

I have not done such a thing.

Buck 08-10-2009 06:16 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Ron Tisdale wrote: (Post 237242)
I don't have an issue with that. I just think both sides should be willing to respect the other. Phrases like "fad" carry some baggage of their own. If the core martial strength behind aikido is referred to as a "fad", I personally believe that is symptomatic of an overall condition in aikido. That condition being that some large proportion put more emphasis on the touchy feely spiritual aspects, without a solid foundation in the martial, or in the body skills required.

A balance is always nice.

Best,
Ron

Ron,

I would also like to add that when words are used that have connotations, which are at times ever-changing, people tend to associate it with the negative, either out of ignorance, misunderstanding, or agenda. That is also something we have to consider as well in the balance of things.

Mike Sigman 08-10-2009 06:50 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Ron Tisdale wrote: (Post 237242)
I just think both sides should be willing to respect the other.

I dunno, Ron... I think that at a math convention it is probably a waste of time to treat the guy talking about "The Sacred Wisdom of the Kami", etc., with some kind of equivalence if he shows that he obviously doesn't know the subject of math and is applying his own definitions to it. One of the reasons Aikido and Aikido discussions get dismissed so easily in the Outer World is because of this imbued equivalency and "aikispeak" that needlessly clouds so many issues.

If there's a question, Buck should go see and then report on what he saw and what he showed could be done. Period. Ueshiba didn't answer challenges with "thought experiments".

Anyone can post countless posts. Everything is not equivalent. Not all interpretations of Aikido are equally valid. Remind me to tell you a funny story about Saotome blowing his cool one time just because he got tired of the BS "all views are valid" inputs and questions. Only in a fat, dumb, and happy culture would all of this flummery be treated as serious discussion about a martial art. Ueshiba carried a sword, not a keyboard. ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

Keith Larman 08-10-2009 06:53 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Mike Sigman wrote: (Post 237317)
Ueshiba carried a sword, not a keyboard. ;)

So, speak softly but have a solid ground-path? ;)

Darn, and I promised myself to stay away from discussion forums for at least a month...

Mike Sigman 08-10-2009 06:56 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Keith Larman wrote: (Post 237319)
So, speak softly but have a solid ground-path? ;)

Well.... even if you don't have a solid ground-path, at least have a clue on-board. :D

Best.

Mike

Buck 08-10-2009 07:44 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Mike Sigman wrote: (Post 237317)
I dunno, Ron... I think that at a math convention it is probably a waste of time to treat the guy talking about "The Sacred Wisdom of the Kami", etc., with some kind of equivalence if he shows that he obviously doesn't know the subject of math and is applying his own definitions to it. One of the reasons Aikido and Aikido discussions get dismissed so easily in the Outer World is because of this imbued equivalency and "aikispeak" that needlessly clouds so many issues.

If there's a question, Buck should go see and then report on what he saw and what he showed could be done. Period. Ueshiba didn't answer challenges with "thought experiments".

Anyone can post countless posts. Everything is not equivalent. Not all interpretations of Aikido are equally valid. Remind me to tell you a funny story about Saotome blowing his cool one time just because he got tired of the BS "all views are valid" inputs and questions. Only in a fat, dumb, and happy culture would all of this flummery be treated as serious discussion about a martial art. Ueshiba carried a sword, not a keyboard. ;)

Best.

Mike Sigman

Mike,

I really don't understand you and your company very well. It's worse than telling some fanatical religious group, "sorry, I disagree, I don't believe in God the way you do, and the get all weird, defensive and stuff. :crazy:

Second of all how do you know that I have experience what you talk about? It seems too that you and a few others seem to think your the only one's that have it, and no one else is capable of figuring IT out but you guys. :hypno:

I give you props over others because you are more straight forward and you put your stuff on the net. I criticized it, I thought fairly. I also think your are less favored over the other guys by many here. I tend to not agree with that. But, now you post about me like a wounded puppy. Where is the professionalism in that? :eek:

Chinese arts are and have been very available for decades. There is so much on the net, there are so many teachers of it. That is great. But it isn't Aikido. You want people to do what you do, you want people to come to you.

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

I am sorry you feel the way you do. I am sorry that I am not a believer. Not to say what you do isn't valid, probably more then the other guy, but sorry I will pass on it. Isn't that ok? Do I have to, with keyboard pointing to my head, jump on yours or the other guys internal strength bandwagon. I can't understand btw, the discussion muggings am getting from the faithful, it is starting to be a good tell.

Am sorry if you took my evaluations of what I see as you re-framing Aikido with the Chinese arts, personally. I didn't divulge everything I seen when watching your video, that I though might be too much, I didn't want to sound if I was trashing you. Again, I give you props for putting your vids on the web. When you do that you have to understand you are going to get criticism. I didn't trash you.

Aikido offers me many things, which I have talked about and stuff. I like it, I am not jaded by it, I am angry at it, I am not disillusioned by it, I don't worship it, and all that. I am satisfied with it, warts and all, as it is. I find it a challenge and I find new things in it, I just don't do it for the ability to have the tightest waza, that will make me invincible. I am not doing aikido for any other reason then for me.

Mike Sigman 08-10-2009 08:00 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237324)
Mike,

I really don't understand you and your company very well. It's worse than telling some fanatical religious group, "sorry, I disagree, I don't believe in God the way you do, and the get all weird, defensive and stuff. :crazy:

Second of all how do you know that I have experience what you talk about? It seems too that you and a few others seem to think your the only one's that have it, and no one else is capable of figuring IT out but you guys. :hypno:

I give you props over others because you are more straight forward and you put your stuff on the net. I criticized it, I thought fairly. I also think your are less favored over the other guys by many here. I tend to not agree with that. But, now you post about me like a wounded puppy. Where is the professionalism in that? :eek:

Chinese arts are and have been very available for decades. There is so much on the net, there are so many teachers of it. That is great. But it isn't Aikido. You want people to do what you do, you want people to come to you.

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

I am sorry you feel the way you do. I am sorry that I am not a believer. Not to say what you do isn't valid, probably more then the other guy, but sorry I will pass on it. Isn't that ok? Do I have to, with keyboard pointing to my head, jump on yours or the other guys internal strength bandwagon. I can't understand btw, the discussion muggings am getting from the faithful, it is starting to be a good tell.

Am sorry if you took my evaluations of what I see as you re-framing Aikido with the Chinese arts, personally. I didn't divulge everything I seen when watching your video, that I though might be too much, I did want to sound if I was trashing you. Again, I give you props for putting your vids on the web. When you do that you have to understand you are going to get criticism. I didn't trash you.

Aikido offers me many things, which I have talked about and stuff. I like it, I am not jaded by it, I am angry at it, I am not disillusioned by it, I don't worship it, and all that. I am satisfied with it, warts and all, as it is. I find it a challenge and I find new things in it, I just don't do it for the ability to have the tightest waza, that will make me invincible. I am not doing aikido for any other reason then for me.

Sorry, but I agree with Dan on this one. If you've seen this much discussion by Aikido teachers in favor of the legitimacy of the discussion and you still don't want to do more than offer your opinions with the idea that your ideas are equally valid, then you're in the situation to which I referred.

In years past I actually had people fly into Colorado to check it out and debate it (all on a very friendly basis). So far all I've seen from you is a plethora of "here's my take on things" posts. At some point in time you have to play tennis and not keep calling on the other guy to serve while only criticizing his serve. Do you understand what the "ante" in a poker game is for?

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Buck 08-10-2009 08:20 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Mike Sigman wrote: (Post 237326)
Sorry, but I agree with Dan on this one. If you've seen this much discussion by Aikido teachers in favor of the legitimacy of the discussion and you still don't want to do more than offer your opinions with the idea that your ideas are equally valid, then you're in the situation to which I referred.

In years past I actually had people fly into Colorado to check it out and debate it (all on a very friendly basis). So far all I've seen from you is a plethora of "here's my take on things" posts. At some point in time you have to play tennis and not keep calling on the other guy to serve while only criticizing his serve. Do you understand what the "ante" in a poker game is for?

FWIW

Mike Sigman

No that isn't what it is at all, you showed your stuff, and personally I didn't feel it was anything different than I experienced from Chinese arts instructors. I feel you have valid internal Chinese arts skill demonstrated in your clip. And for those who want to seek for something outside Aikido, for reason they are not getting it in Aikido, great they can do it. But I am not one of those persons. Just as you are not going to stop what you are doing for Aikido.

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

Again, am sorry am not a believer which is clearly upsetting to you. I would think also you would be able to handle some criticism. But again that is another tell that reinforces me saying, "thank you, but no thank you, I will stay the course with Aikido, for better or worse." :) 'nuff said.

Mike Sigman 08-10-2009 08:28 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Quote:

Philip Burgess wrote: (Post 237332)
No that isn't what it is at all, you showed your stuff, and personally I didn't feel it was anything different than I experienced from Chinese arts instructors. I feel you have valid internal Chinese arts skill demonstrated in your clip. And for those who want to seek for something outside Aikido, for reason they are not getting it in Aikido, great they can do it. But I am not one of those persons. Just as you are not going to stop what you are doing for Aikido.

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

Again, am sorry am not a believer which is clearly upsetting to you. I would think also you would be able to handle some criticism. But again that is another tell that reinforces me saying, "thank you, but no thank you, I will stay the course with Aikido, for better or worse." :) 'nuff said.

Well, the typical trivializing doesn't work with me, Buck. I did between 21-24 years in Japanese martial arts. How many do you have that you can discount what I do and know as "Chinese martial arts"? I'd like and answer.



In other words, you appear to read and hear only what you want to read and hear.... exactly what I was talking about. Get out from behind the keyboard theorisms and check it out. If you can't (yet Ueshiba did), how can you claim any expertise in any martial art?

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Buck 08-10-2009 09:18 PM

Re: True Internal Strength
 
Mike, I hear ya, will take it into consideration.

Now back to the subject of True Internal Strength. Due to my experiences I have come to understand the value of true internal strength. I think it is a common thing shared and understood by many.

In conclusion, the mind is powerful and I believe we are all intelligent enough to know that. There are so many examples and testimonials how powerful the mind is over the body, so much so each individual has their own experience. And I think that is why the mind is so valued. That is the eternal spring of power, true internal power that I am getting at.

Developing true internal power as we all know is often the signal deciding factor of many physical contests, from an Iron man race to a tennis match, to MMA fights, to self-defense situations. Developing it isn't difficult or complex, it is all inside of us to achieve such power. For some that may be a physical trainer, a coach or a friend, or no one at all.

What I am saying is nothing new, we all know it, we all understand it. We sometimes get caught up in other things, in the mechanics of technique, and such that we over look it. :)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:54 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.