Fred Little wrote:
I plead guilty to not having read Want Yang Ming in a decade, and thank you for the correction on the date of his life, which my dim recollectionI led me to confuse with the date of his revival.
Aw heck, you get a full pardon for having read him at all... or really even, for anything other than a blank stare at the mention of his name ...
I guess the point I am making here is actually the one Wang also made. Our conceptions and actions are of one piece.
To say we know without acting on that knowledge or practicing it is to demonstrate the illusory (false and seducing) nature of that assertion as "knowledge" in the first place. I find this tight interlacing in O Sensei's expression of his knowledge with the expression of actions in the art. It is far from being a parroting of the principle of the unity of knowledge and action. It is an exceedingly fine example of its detailed application.
This is the heart of the teaching and application of musubi -- eliminate the boundary between the external and the internal -- yin and yang. That is why Mike is overreaching the yin-yang aspects, because exploiting duality is precisely NOT what the art is about.
The disconnect or the unwillingness to realize connections between the things we know and things we do, are troubling and a source of disharmony, both internally and externally. They are one thing -- only falsely distinguished. In musubi, I need not know what my enemy plans or "knows" he will do to formulate my strategy in advance -- he does it and, at that moment, he is not truly capable of knowing or planning anything beyond what he is actually doing, or else he has ceased to actually do it and is occupied in doing something else.
The only question is whether I am in connection with his action by sharing in that action and therefore sharing immediately in his knowledge of it -- or disconnected and ignorant of both knowledge and action.
The internal power pushing tests described by Dan, Mike Rob and others demonstrate this problem. They wish to be pushed -- but do not wish to be pushed. The cognitive dissonnace is written on the face of the problem. The internal and external are set conflict. There is no unity -- only conflict. That the conflict is not overt is irrelevant. Can anybody spell p-a-s-s-i-v-e a-g-r-e-s-s-i-v-e?
As a result, if he really does not wish to be pushed, if I achieve musubi, why would I ever push him? We just stand there. Aikido is operating perfectly and absolutely nothing is happening, not merely the appearance of nothign happening. For more aikido to happen he needs to decide something and act on it and I'll gladly join in. I'll wait....