Mike Sigman wrote:
I don't cavil with any of your points, Fred, I'm just suggesting specifically that we should be able to do better in these forums. The reason we can't, for the most part, is, in my opinion, #.6, people don't really know the subject and they're reduced to pretending they do rather than openly, as a group, searching out the information for the good of their art. Fine. I can show you easily and convincingly the logic behind the statement, though, and I offer to do so. Isn't that a step forward? No, they're all inter-related. Even "OM" (the original Indian version of "AUM") has a relationship that is easy to show as part of "jin". BTW, I hope you understand that these methods to developing power in Chinese martial arts also use/used sounds and breathing techniques. When I say "essentially jin", I'm comfortable in including all the peripheral aspects into the central argument.
I'll openly concede that my knowledge of CMA is limited, but that's a matter I'm (very) slowly rectifying. As for showing the logic of your statement, go for it, I'm all ears.
On CMA training methods using sounds and breathing methods, sure. But there's more to it than that, some of which I know was once available in Buddhist circles in China. How and where those additional elements might have persisted is an open question, but I'm open to hearing about that too.
As for OM/AUM/etcetera.....to even begin to understand the full set of relationships implicit in that system, a skeletal understanding of the Sanskrit syllabary is a prerequisite, and that is neither Japanese nor Chinese, though the knowledge found its way to both places.Kukai insisted that Chinese Characters are an inferior mode of representing thought and language which distort meaning as much as they convey it, in part because ideograms don't convey sounds or the interrelationships between sounds in the way Sanskrit/Siddham structure does at every level.