View Single Post
Old 07-02-2007, 10:04 PM   #1169
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
Re: Baseline skillset

David Orange wrote: View Post
Someone mentions their teacher, they're namedropping, they don't mention the teacher, they're hiding. They don't give credentials, they have none. They ask for your credentials, it's character assassination.
Emmmm.... do you think that you and I are the only people who read this thread and Dan's previous posts? I asked where he learned something... not what his credentials were. Something he represented as "Japanese". In your haste to make bad noises, you're getting a little whippy.
As to silk reeling, I understand that it's a central method of many Chinese arts. It has even been said that it's essential for all Chinese martial arts. I know that it's developed from the physical movement used by Chinese silk makers and was adopted into and developed by Chinese martial artists--much as kokyu (breathing) was developed into a refined skill in Japanese arts.
Silk Reeling is a form of movement with qi/ki and jin/kokyu-power. That's all it is. In other words, your guess that there are specific, refined movements peculiar to Chinese martial arts indicates that you don't understand ki and kokyu, even though you use the terms. Go back to my example of karate having kokyu and Aikido having kokyu. There are karate people and Aikido people who have no idea what that means, so they take a superficial appearance, belief in their own style being unique, etc., and postulate to the world about the great "differences".... similar to what you're publicly doing. Yet, go ask Ikeda Sensei why he's discussing kokyu with the karate expert, Ushiro. Ikeda understands there's no real difference. Reeling silk is just a variant of the same process and it does NOT come from the movement of Chinese silk makers, for chrissake. Your whole commentary about silk reeling and "refined Chinese principles" is a fignewton of your imagination.
And before you have an aneurysm, don't take that as the full summation of my knowledge of kokyu, though it is about all I know about silk reeling--except that it is a unique movement and very precise. It's a highly refined element of Chinese martial arts that I said exemplifies "a" skill that did not come into the Japanese arts unless, I said, you can show me a Japanese art that incorporates it.
Who cares? The movements in Aikido employ pulling silk, which is just a variant of ki/kokyu as is reeling silk.
You have not done that. You pirouetted all over Chris' assertion that his style has it and did a grande jette past Dan's assertion that he was taught it in daito ryu, but all you could provide was vague speculation that "some" koryu may have had it in the past, which satisfied your level of intellectual inquiry.
OK, so all they have to do to respond to my side of the discussion is provide some details of how it works, right? Some people might just say, "I don't know", but that seems to be declasse' on this list.
But then, you "got" what Draeger "failed" to get in all his years in Asia with all the Japanese and Chinese masters he knew. You've done better by touring the US and attending a seminar here and there.
Actually, a LOT of people now have "got" what Draeger and a number of the earlier martial-arts buffs didn't get in regard to this very narrow subject, but a very key subject... in a number of martial arts. But that's called progress. Unless you want to postulate that Draeger et al represented all there was to know about relatively shallow, technique-oriented Asian martial arts? Is that your position?

Let me note that you tried to respond with only a couple of facts, and those were misunderstandings about reeling silk. Is that all the facts you have, to support your assertions? Not even any simple "how to's", etc.? You made the assertion. I questioned it. You devoted posts to denigrating me in response, trying to mask your lack of knowledge and to curtail questions. You're used to speaking unquestioned to a bunch of open-mouthed students, I suppose? Why not just accept that if you make a public assertion it's open to public question and that slandering the questioner is not generally the best response.


Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote