View Single Post
Old 11-29-2006, 07:47 PM   #280
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
I simply object to bragging.... that's not "derision". Insofar as different approaches, etc., I've said that is common.
So you do feel that Dan is doing something in common with you?

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Heck, look at Ushiro... what he does is not the same usage of kokyu that Ueshiba used. Why is this a hard concept to grasp?
It's not hard to grasp at all. But he's doing karate...so you would expect it to be different. I just don't agree with the idea that we should replace real aikido kokyu with real karate kokyu.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Really, this is an absurdity. Look at Ki and Qi... do you think these are 2 different things and that all the Japanese martial arts use different things called "ki" and all the Chinese martial arts use a number of things that are called "qi" arbitrarily?
Of course not. Ki and qi are essentially the same. However, just as the Japanese and Chinese develop different types of work and develop different ways of living, dressing, playing, making music and everything else, it should be clear that they developed two very different ways of expressing qi other than mere pronunciation of the word. Just as all alcohol is fundamentally the same, ki and qi are the same thing. But Japanese sake and Chinese soju are very different types of white liquor. And so the martial arts use qi very differently.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Ask someone like Abe or Inaba or whoever.... this idea that the Chinese qi things are different from the Japanese ki things, including "kokyu", is ludicrous except in a conversation where the level of understanding is very low.
Sorry, but I've had too much personal experience to accept that. I've felt technique from hundreds of people and there is a distinct difference in what I've felt from Chinese stylists that I never experienced from any Japanese stylist. It's not the same, especially at higher levels.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
So that effectively dismisses the term "kokyu ryoku" if you're correct, eh?
It doesn't dismiss the term. Kokyu Ryoku is power expressed through a mind and body integrated via the breath. As Ikeda Sensei said in the article, it is "power through kokyu," not "power of kokyu." But like I pointed out to Ellis earlier, if you want to define kokyu ryoku as "power of kokyu," then you have to define sei ryoku as "power of sei," (power of correctness) which should show you that that's not the correct usage. Even though there is power in correctness, the real power is "through" correctness.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
And incidentally, "Kokyu" uses "breath", but not in the way a lot of people think.
Of course, but why focus on the common misunderstanding? I only want to discuss these things in the correct usage.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
However, the *essence* of kokyu strength is jin. This is pretty straightforward and would make a great bet, if someone wants to bet on or against the obvious.
The essence of kokyu is integration of the mind and body through the breath. There would be a relation between jin and kokyu, but not equality.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
"Ki" can really be several things, but I've explained that a number of times before.
The problem is that you are off on your explanations because of a biased belief that the Japanese and Chinese ways are equatable and that you can explain both ways through a rough approximation of Western scientific thinking--both premises being flawed. So while ki can be expressed in many ways and can take many forms, it still is only one "thing".

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
There is Ki that would be more or less the fascia stuff. There is ki that would be the mental manipulation of forces (that's the 'jin'). There is Ki that is "pressure" or "air pressure". But they're taken as a wholistic "ki" thing and the parts are more or less inextricable when you look at the whole.
And that's why I always say you can't divide them into martial/metaphysical or any other dichotomy outside the whole.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
For instance, the pressure/fascia/jin things are all part of the complete "kokyu" term.... but the essence is still the jin, or at least it's the most tangible part of the whole force/skill.
See, that problem of equating the "essence" with "the most tangible part" is where you lose my support. I liked your description of feeling the "suit" of fascia beneath the skin and I've been thinking about that, especially in relation to the push-out exercise. But I won't accept "the most tangible" as "the essence" even if it makes it easier to talk about it.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
And 'jin' is considered to be "the physical manifestation of ki" and it involves this mental manipulation of forces; i.e., the "intent", the "yi".
No argument there. Maybe because you stuck to Chinese concepts within a Chinese framework. It's when you try to lay that over well-defined Japanese concepts that it comes off as if you're trying to say soju = sake.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
What you need is for someone to lead you through the whole of it and you'll suddenly see it, David. It's fairly obvious when it's shown to you.
I do like your descriptions of things Chinese but your efforts at correlating them to the Japanese ways are not so skillful.

Best to you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote