View Single Post
Old 11-22-2006, 12:35 PM   #219
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Erick Mead wrote:
It is and I'd be happy to. Kokyu tanden ho is a point where David has the harder side of the argument, becasue it is a highly learned skill. But aiki is not kokyu tanden ho alone, although they aid one another immensely.
Without the basic skill involved in *correct* kokyu tanden ho, there can be no aiki. The idea that they "aid" each other falls far short.
Drunken boxing forms (in whichever of the several schools), from my observation, is a case in point. It is premised on natural unresisting movements of the drunkard (not too far afield from the toddler, perhaps). Lots of angular momentum and weight transfer. Virtually no kokyu tanden technique evident. Loads of aiki going on, though.
Kewl. Except that "Drunken Boxing" is not a real martial art; it's a display art that was made up. Sort of like "Duck Boxing" and a few others. So your analysis of it and the deep principles of it.... well....
The putative six spring theory does not, as I understand Mike's position, involve any necessary external movement. It is necessarily resistive, since springs don't operate any other way, a point that MIke did not deign to answer in regard to nonresistive principles of aiki. It is highly trained, from all accounts, and so is definitely "unnatural" in that sense.
Why don't we just leave this one at "you don't understand my position" and move on? You'd have to know what "jin" actually is.
Even if some practitioners make connections between them, I have not read that Shioda ever did, and what these exercises claim to do I see working on Shioda's principles, not those that Mike describes. But he and I differ on our understanding of what mechanics are actually involved, so there you go. Einstein was wrong about quantum mechanics, too.

I do not in any way equate Shioda's approach with any version of nei jin or the mechanics (as I understand them) typical of the nei-jia schools. (As an aside, Shioda's kihon dosa paradigm does however fit the "rapid cycle" OODA paradigmatic training regime, earlier mentioned, FWIW)

In fact, I think Shioda has the better of the argument in terms of what is actually happening from what I have seen and felt in the pushout exercise, as opposed to what Mike describes. Having tried the same exercises according to the principles I have seen demonstrated, I say what I know and have felt and have seen.
Have you ever stopped to think it through that the implication in what you're saying is that Ki and Qi are two different things? Do you understand the magnitude of interrelated phenomena that are involved in qi/ki? It's no simple thing, except to a westerner or someone else with only a superficial idea of the terms they're tossing about.

So far, I've asked twice for specifics in relation to posture or even ki/qi, but you haven't replied.

Tohei, BTW, encourages people to "extend ki" at all times. Problem is, he doesn't really explain how to do it. Worse yet, in relation to your own argument, "extending ki" correctly involves pure "six directions" training. Maybe Tohei doesn't really do Aikido, either?


Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote