View Single Post
Old 11-22-2006, 09:17 AM   #211
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Erick Mead wrote:
I do not deny the points Mike raises about internal arts (even while differing on our understadnig of the precise mechanics of them), they are just not aikido in the way he describe them and their use, and the way in which the nei-jia are typically explained to function..
Wow, Eric. You may want to re-write that sentence. You appear not to understand that there is a difference between "nei jin" and "nei jia", which sort of shoots your argument in the foot from the get-go.
While I have no problem with "Ki tests" etc. as means to discover and explore different modes of coherent movement, they are not aiki either. I have seen everything from Saito's tightness and flow to Tohei's frighteningly dissmissive throws. I have felt version of these from students in their lineages. I have seen (and felt) modes of body carriage as different in their own ways as the Tohei lineage is different from Yoshinkan.
Gee. I wouldn't know where to start to debate this, Erick. It's sort of like, to you, the relationship of Chinese to Japanese martial arts, all the allusions Ueshiba made to classical discussions of Chinese nei jin, etc., don't exist. You're simply making assertions.
They are all aikido. They are NOT working on the same principles as the nei-jia. The aspects of carriage and movement could not be more different. Yoshinkan (no offense) body carriage is far divorced from prescriptions of nei-jia and internal power, however it is underestood in mechanical terms. However, it, like Tohei's art, all works as aikido.
Can you give us something specific, instead of general assertions? Try explaining what you mean about posture, for instance.
It is a comfort knowing that Mike is around to clarify what we really mean.
I frankly have no idea what you "really mean", Erick. As I told you in a thread some months ago, you pretty obviously don't understand what internal power, ki, etc., are... so I tend to disregard your assertions in that area. In terms of what the classical meaning of "natural" is, I stand by my statement and if you want to make a heavy-enough wager, I'll be glad to find some references stating the well-known fact that "natural" refers to "natural laws" and not intuitive movement, etc.
I don't know nuthin' 'bout no jin mechanics. (Well, I do, but I don't need to in this instance, and they have little to do with aikido, per se.) I do know about mechanics. Power is the capacity to do work. Aiki is premised on the opponent providing all the power he or she desires to commit. That power has to have resistance in-axis to do external work, however, otherwise it is just creating addtional internal momentum, i.e. -- more potential energy, not actual energy coverted to work.

Nei-jia, however you understand it mechanically, is about internal power, creating implied momentum (springs, Mike???), if you will, that counters external momentum of attack. That is resistive in principle ("rooting," "grounding," "neutralizing"), even if internally focussed, or whetehr it is viewed as an instrumental and passive channeling of ground resistance.

It is, therefore, not aikido. Aikido is not resistive.
Put this one in the archives, Erick. You just made a series of ludicrous statements showing that you have no idea about internal strength, which is ki/qi, which a supposed Aikido teacher should know. I.e., your statements suggest heavily that you're teaching something to some students that is not the Aikido with Ki that Ueshiba taught.
Aiki is about work -- but not about my power, internal or otherwise. It is about HIS power, and it is about my selection of mechanics to convert all fo his added momentum to actual work, typically, in impacting the ground. These are mechanics that translate that power into a differential axis in which the axial control that the opponent has committed behind that power is no longer connected to it, robbing him of the ability to further direct that momentum he created with his power.

I convert that momentum mechanically, perpendicularly (juji), taking it onto a different axis in which he has not established any control. If he exerts power on that new axis in an attempt to wrest back that control, well, ... away we go again, all the while departing his center, movign from axis to axis to axis, as he surrenders his power by continuing to express it against no resistance.

Coming at the problem direct, but going sideways. Back to David's point about the naturalness of aiki movement -- Aikido is a sophisticated game of tag. Or tag is cradle training in budo. Or both.

Here's wishing you joy in battle.
Hmmmm... that doesn't seem to be what Sunadomari, Inaba, Shioda, Tohei, and others are talking about. Perhaps you've evolved beyond them. Instead of a general rant using unsupported statements, try to explain what you mean. Maybe start with posture. Frankly, you appear to have no idea of what "internal strength" means and surely you don't think that Taiji is "resistive", do you? Yet it uses "internal strength"... as do all CMA's. You're simply lost.


Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote