JW

Hi Carsten, that's the thing, as far as I understand there is no particular "way of qi gong," meaning it is not the name of a tradition but rather the name of a tool found in many different traditions. Any given Chinese tradition may use qigong, and I am not saying that these traditions are the same as each other - just that none of them are called simply "qi gong." My point is just that qigong is a tool that is used in many traditions, one of them being aikido. I personally think this is correct (in terms of namings and terms etc) but I will not assert here that it is.

Agree completely there. Since O-sensei did not teach be explaining, the students were left to draw their own conclusions about how to do things correctly. I don't think he intended anyone to mimic movement. "I'm teaching you how to move your mind! [not your feet]"
So, long story short, I think O-sensei showed internal training methods (which I am calling "qigong" as a general term), I believe he did them the way you are describing (he "knew how to do this"), and the resulting situation involves many different lineages trying to put the pieces together subsequently.

To remedy my thread drift and get back on topic, I would say that my aikido training is composed of:
1. Strengthening the "accomodation capacity" of the ki of my body, by sustained handling of force loads.
2. Unifying the body into a single "swath of ki" that reaches across the whole body. (Trained by standing and moving while trying to minimize "gaps")
3. Controlling that unified body with central control (exercises that emphasize relaxing the periphery while maintaining the ability to produce unified force throughout a motion)

Basically use the intent to manage a body that has increasingly stengthened "ki," so as to produce a vertical bridge that my center is embedded in. Oh boy I must be loony.