View Single Post
Old 06-26-2008, 02:42 PM   #35
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
Re: Aikido™ and Aiki…do. Where are we at?

Shaun Ravens wrote: View Post
In my opinion only Abe Sensei is qualified to teach O-Sensei's misogi.
Are you saying that Abe Sensei learned his Misogi-no-gyo from O-Sensei?
Mike likes to talk about Tohei, Shioda, O-Sensei and the like with quite a bit of authority. Interestingly, he never met any of them.
Excuse me... can you give me a cite for this "quite a bit of authority"? No, wait, there's a couple of people who like to characterize things I've said and then who go quiet when asked for a cite. So let's not re-hash the proven. But when you make an assertion like that, Shaun, you shouldn't get excited when called out.
But according to the rules of Mike, he didn't really need to. While I would agree with him on some basic level, I disagree with him completely about most of the conclusions he has unfortunately jumped to. .
Well, great, Shaun. Why don't you state what you have a problem with and support it with a logical rebuttal, etc., instead of vague character attacks? Give us and example of a statement I made, then tell us what you think is wrong with it and why. This is a logical step, believe it or not, in a lot of debate in the civilized world.

Reading your comments on Misogi-no-gyo, you've dropped some of the completely wrong comments about breath and breathing from a couple of years ago, but the rest of your assertions seem to be the old "I can't tell you because it's a secret; give me a call and we'll set up a meeting at my dojo". In reading your recent posts, you seem to still set yourself up as an expert, but you give no credentials other than "some secret stuff Abe told me". That's fine, but if I set myself up as some sort of expert like that, I'd expect people to question me. Yet you take offense.

The way I read some of these posts is that someone wants to represent themself to the world as something of an expert and yet they face-savingly want to get some information. Dan's motives appear to be *completely* different from mine, so let me be clear that I separate myself from him or what he knows.

Me personally, I consider these skills to be fairly deep and worth serious discussion of the facts, the how-to's, different approaches to the basis skills, and so on. That happens to be pretty much the only way I'm going to do it. Am I going to play some sort of fake-Hagakure etiquette or play-Budo games, trying to make the topic some role-play aspect? No. Is that going to hack off a few people who are deeply into role-play or other absorptions? Of course.

But what happens is that the more clinical thinkers will get involved in a no-nonsense approach and discussion. They will also see the justification for some of the questions I ask when I question some of the role-play assertions. So if you want to keep worrying about some imagined personal contention between you and me or me and a very few other people, please feel free to do so. Frankly, when you start a critical and clinical discussion of facts, how-to's, etc., I think you'll find that all your personal problems with me tend to go away. The problem seems to happen when you claim facts or an approach or a status but you can't support it with facts. So try a few hard facts.... I've mentioned probably the best entre' baseline several times, if you'll go back and read my posts.


Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote