View Single Post
Old 03-15-2009, 06:12 AM   #16
philippe willaume
philippe willaume's Avatar
Location: windsor
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 317
United Kingdom
Re: The speed of a technique

George S. Ledyard wrote: View Post
Hi Mark,
Ushiro Kenji's new book Karate and Ki might be of interest. This is the level on which he functions and he has a lot to say about it. Quite a bit of the book was very difficult, a reflection that I am not quite "there" yet. But there's an awful lot that made sense to me and I think would be of assistance in developing a vocabulary to describe this stuff.

My good friends Josh Drachman and Marc Abrams are Aikido folks who also train with Ushiro Sensei and the did the translation into English along with one of Ushiro Sensei's Japanese students. It was very difficult as we in America do not have a good set of terminology for talking about the "energetics" of this stuff. (The Russians are much better as they have been much more open to this kind of thing and do energy work in their martial arts and healing, etc.)
Well we could argue that it is described in old European fencing/wrestling manuals. In occident we tend to present thing with either how we mentally feel or describing the net result. That is usually described with timing and distance and “fuellen” (feeling).

For example when you deflect a strike with your own sword all you need to do is really get you sword there by cutting downward (ie just throwing the poing not a typicical tashi chop-slice) and then you will have all the time in the world to move. You have cut all his direct line of attack. He will have to move his body if he wants to hit you and you have at least one direct line of attack. That line of attack will depend of the pressure he gives us.

You do not fight, you do not defend, and you just put your sword there almost cutting an empty space. because you are there already, You can move forward or back.
If you move back he will have to follow you because you can still extend or change through.
If you go forward he will have to defend or get hit

If we translate that to open hand, it is the use ki-no-nogare you are leading him, if you move back. And it you go forward it is the use of atemi.

Because for training purposed we are too far to fight against an organised opponent we have that notion of people over committing, or trying to grab our wrist for no real reason. But it is really the same as if we were fighting with sword, just from a distance that is not really “realistic” but convenient pedagogically.

Now call it vor, narch fullen, true time, true place, extending your ki or your intent
I really believe that it is two ways to describe the same thing, just from a different angle.


Last edited by philippe willaume : 03-15-2009 at 06:17 AM.

One Ringeck to bring them all and in darkness bind them,
In the Land of Windsor where phlip phlop live.
  Reply With Quote