Mike Sigman wrote:
Asides aside, my point was *still* the questioning of why vagaries are constantly being used instead of factual discussions.
1. Protection of material regarded as proprietary.
2. Intentional creation of mystique.
3. Firm belief in a pedagogical method that develops intuitive or inferential knowing out of training without the provision of an analytical framework to students along the way.
4. Unwillingness to acknowledge cultural borrowing.
5. "Fuzzy understanding." This may include practitioners who have genuinely developed such skill through a process that is osmotic or inferential.
Mike Sigman wrote:
Insofar as, for instance, "kokyu", I know pretty exactly why the term for 'breath' is used to describe this power which has jin as its essence. I've laid out enough of the reason before (it, like many other things from me and many others, now resides in the archives for future generations to read). There is a bit more to it which is crucial, but I've never pretended to tell all I know, even though I have taken pains to tell exactly how many basic and checkable things are done. I would be tickled to death to see other people contribute in the same vein with factual how-to's and less "feels good". I agree If a beginner has a map that shows him where to go look for the treasure, that's a lot more valuable than vague directional hand-waves from people who have never been to where he wants to go.
When we get to statements like "this power that has jin as its essence" we get to just the kind of "essentialist notion" that makes me very leery of misplaced reductionism. In this specific instance, while I'm open to the strong probability that study of the very well developed Chinese theory and method of developing "jin" is an excellent tool for the development of a significant subset of the skills encompassed by "kokyu," I would also argue that similar study of the fundamentally Indic theory and method of "AUM/AUN" is also required to get the full sense of "kokyu" as used by the founder of aikido, and while there's certainly some overlap, there are also some areas that "AUM/AUN" covers that "jin" doesn't.
So I study both and honor fundamental conditions like reason 1 where that was a basic prerequisite condition under which information was shared.
As I've said in the past, I think that competent authorized instruction in several basic mikkyo practices is useful.
You've said much the same thing about competent instruction in certain CMA.
I'm not competent or authorized to teach either, but I do think that those who sincerely seek that kind of instruction can find it.