View Single Post
Old 10-07-2011, 09:22 AM   #9
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
Re: Focal points for solo training

Ernesto Lemke wrote: View Post
Hello Azriel,
I apologize if my reply discouraged any further exchange. I have great sympathy for your attempt but in a sense you opened up a possible can of worms. I think this may be the first time anyone attempted to describe some of the exercises Dan offers on a public forum. Seeing as he is reluctant, dare I say adamant, in not offering any online "how to's" with those unfamiliar with his approach, you may find very few people may respond other then maybe per PM.

I guess it may also possibly muddy the waters when you receive comments, feedback, sincere as they may be, from those who are unfamiliar with Dan's approach. Even if they are in pursuit of IT themselves via other routes. This is not to say there cannot be any exchange, but as long as people differ on the meaning of terms like "spiraling", "winding" "opening/closing" etc. it tends to get hard to get any decent exchange going.
But again, I sympathize with your desire to learn more. I guess I'm kinda with Dave on this. You lucky bastard!!!

Thanks for sharing how IT has it's place in your dojo. I didn't mean to imply wanting to know "how it's done", more how the approach to incorporating IT was accomplished. So from what I understand, there is one class that exclusively focuses on IT, and then a ‘regular' aikido class that highlights, features those same IT elements within, I guess, aikido waza.
If you don't mind me asking, is taking the IT classes considered obligatory? I am sure Gleason Sensei considers IT fundamental but one only needs to take a look at the types of discussions on Aikiweb over the years when it comes to the topic of IT/IS/IP/Aiki etc. to see how little consensus there actually is. From believers to non-believers and everything in between. I can see how folks with no innate desire to want to pursue IT will find it difficult to see how others consider IT so fundamental.

My interest lies not so much in your dojo or Gleason Sensei per se (though I admit I'm curious). It's just that part of this ‘silent revolution' imparts the choices people are making/need to make/needed to make when IT became such a profound aspect of their budo pursuits. Gleason Sensei's choice seems to be having two distinct types of classes (though of course in reality they feed eachother). Others, like myself, are currently working almost exclusively on IT, but my goal is to find some balance during class. Whether that means starting with IT exercises and then work on waza I have yet to find out. Since I have my own dojo and we are only with five people it's not so much of a problem. It's something on my mind with the future in mind when new trainees come and enter expecting aikido, not those gruelsome, tedious, no-instant-succes type of drills. I can really see how Tokimune Takeda said his people didn't want to do that stuff.
Maybe that's just the nature of the IT beast. I dunno. In this day and age, with all the possibilities to exchange thoughts with people around the globe, there's no harm in exploring ways in which people are looking for solutions to deal with this, is there?
Thanks for sharing.
Hello Ernesto
Azriel is eager to discuss new tools, but his descriptions are flawed.
I think you pretty much pegged my views on sharing anymore. When I see people describe methods that are contrary to others methods it needs to be discussed with a few things in mind.
Accuracy in descriptions
Reasons for doing things
Possible pedagogy
Effectual results

One example would be spiraling and body axis. We all know the famous disagreements between same-side body axis crowd and then when I showed up stating the lines cross the body. Later in discussions with reeling silk I thought it comical since I have now met and discussed this with Master Class Chen guys who posited the same thing, only to read an amateur, former Chen guy going back to the same side three axis theory. It made no sense.
You can read a bit of the same side discussion here which states categorically that the lines do not cross the body, as opposed to a more classic approach where the spiral does indeed cross the body line as seen in Koryu and Daito ryu, on the Japanese side of things and Taiji and bagua on the Chinese side of things as seen here in the opening drawings by a student of Feng Zhiqiang. None of the lines are an accurate, detailed, portrait but they convey the idea.
This of course coincides with Anatomy trains demonstrating the spiral in excised tissue off the human frame that indeed crosses the body front and back. If we are to consider that breath training infuses the connective tissue; tendon/ fascia and blood, then one needs to consider that the breath- activating and pulling, winding, stretching, and pushing tissue- would then be spiraling across the body- as is consistent with Morihei Ueshiba's description of breath spiraling up and down, the correct Chinese model, and Weapons. It is also consistent with Chen Fake's admonitions about double weighting and the use of opposite side support.

I am not here to start wars or arguments. When I initially saw these discussions years ago I thought it would be great to enter in again, only to discover that they were plagued with the same agenda driven, factionalism, insulting invective, and the stealing of information without giving credit and then accusing the one you stole the information from as being the one who got it from you.
So I bailed on offering any more details. I have the statements, seminar hand outs and video that predate my involvement, then the changed material after I started discussing central axis and opposite hand and foot and opposing spirals that were never even brought up for discussion prior to my arrival.
Later, as it always does, clarity entered the picture as exposure through hands-on and video revealed that those who borrowed the information were obviously still "working it" as displayed in their flaw ridden movements. I have even suggested some people pull their videos as what they were doing was widely condemned from qualified Chinese teachers as flawed for the exact same reasons I outlined and was slammed for offering.

Until the discussions are honest, sincere and avoid insults and threats, I am not taking part in any more details. It's nicer, more calm and definitive to discuss and review oppossing views on martial movement in person. I don't mind strident disagreement-we don't all have to agree- as long as there are real world powerful and able people behind those opinions. Anything else is sort of non-starter. Theory is theory. I think some of you have been had, with this idea that everyone agrees to one model in China. It's pure B.S., but in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king. Its why I keep pointing away from here for people to read, meet and widen their exposure to more input. Go explore and then decide. You might find some interesting and curious people...and maybe even make some great friends on the way.

Last edited by DH : 10-07-2011 at 09:35 AM.
  Reply With Quote