Mike Sigman wrote:
I don't see what the question is...you may be reading something into it that's not there.
If someone is taking a force and responding to it in a certain way (i.e., "aiki"), there are multiple variations of aiki or its immediate aftermath that various individuals might utilize. If they do a good aiki technique (as Inaba defined it), then their following and finishing moves may well differ, but that doesn't mean much about the propriety of the aiki technique. In other words, regardless of different feelings *within* the technique of Tada and Yamaguchi, it doesn't necessarily imply they do anything other than aiki.
Sorry I wasn't more specific in either of my first two attempts. You originally said,
Mike Sigman wrote:
...So someone being uke for Tsuki-Kotegaeshi with Shioda might have described a "whirlpool" or whatever feeling, but the essence of what Shioda did would have been this use of "aiki" throughout the throw, regardless of the feeling his particular variation of aiki induced on uke.
I have no questions about either the first part your comments which I quote, above or the more descriptive way you speak about it both in your reply to me, above, and in your response to James Young (hi James). As for the latter part (the underlined part) I wanted to better understand what you meant there. Specifically, I agree about what you say the nage is doing, in terms of aiki, is a continuous, unbroken approach. Therefore, my approach is to effect
, or summarizing your words induce a particular feeling
in or on uke. For me the effect - whatever that may be, must be maintained with the same continuous, unbroken methodology. I wasn't sure if you were implying that the state of aiki ended within nage or at the point of connection of nage and uke and is being maintained solely by the nage - meaning that the uke's experience might actually vary throughout any one given encounter. Or, perhaps you meant that uke's feeling is based upon any of a number of varying methods employed by individual practitioners each capable of expressing an aiki-response that they (the uke) feel is maintained throughout the encounter. I was wondering whether you agree, or disagree with either of the two, above, scenarios. I just couldn't tell by what you had written.
Looking at your further comments, something else came up for me that I wanted to talk about… Simply speaking, Aiki may be looked at as the relationship between things. It is true that being able to do this, in the manner you specified in your post is a rare and high level thing. It is also true that without this being present, there is no aikido - and on that you and I have never disagreed as far as I can tell, regardless of semantics, or our personal styles of writing. I guess my point is that while what you have pointed to is the precursor to aiki, it is only when it is extended out to include harmonizing with another that it actually becomes
aiki. In many ways this may be looked at the next level of aiki, but I believe it is more accurate to state this is where the state of aiki
actually begins. To illustrate my point, the moment that uke stops his attack, nage, seeking to maintain aiki, must also cease in his harmony of the attack. This is simply, "a mirror reflects what stands before it" or mushin, if you will. Of course, the nage can still harmonize with uke's new state and in doing so he preserves the state of aiki. However, it is just that there is no aikido in a vacuum, or in a cave, and by extension, one cannot practice aikido by himself.
This is a significant point along the path one must follow towards understanding where ki & kokyu end and aiki and ultimately aikido begin. One can have all the power of ki and kokyu harnessed within themselves to the N
th degree. But, so what? That doesn't mean that they can create a state of aiki, or be able to maintain that state throughout a particularly lengthy encounter with a determined attacker.
Of course, if you agree with me there, then I would be interested to get your thoughts on my next point. This is where I will take head on the question you have as to the originality, or uniqueness of aikido. I am certainly not out to prove it in that light, nor am I able to do so should I even choose to try. However, that doesn't mean that I don't feel that it is original and unique, or that regardless of my feeling, or yours for that matter, that it isn't original and unique.
Mike Sigman wrote:
If an Aikidoist can instantly manipulate or place his kokyu power in such a way that it combines with uke's force and negates it (as part of the start of the technique), it is a very high-level martial art and worth all the hoopla. Since kokyu and its manipulations would be the power behind checks and punches (in relation to timing, etc.), then the "aiki" is still there and the art is still a legitimately superior art.
I am sure that everyone's experience of the art is dependent upon the source to which they go to experience it. I have seen some poor things done on the mat in the name of aikido, and enough has been said by others on this subject (aiki-bunnies, aikido doesn't work, is aikido a martial art…etc, etc.) that I don't need to comment here. However, I can honestly say that my experiences coming from the sources from which I sought it in the past, and seek it even now, have always been exactly the way you have described it, above. That is not to say anything about my particular sources. However, if you had that same experience, albeit from your own sources, and that had been your only experience of the art form, wouldn't you find it strange, as did I, when you encountered comments like (aiki-bunnies, aikido doesn't work, is aikido a martial art…etc, etc.)? Furthermore, had you had experienced aikido in said manner, what you might envision your most recent epiphany, having occurred years before, might have led you to in terms of your understanding of the art as it might very well have revealed itself?