Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Non-Aikido Martial Traditions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-04-2007, 01:27 PM   #1226
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Hopefully the air is clear and the pissing contests are over.
This is certainly not what I'm doing. I am surprised at this, since it stilll only involves waist / stretched spine movement. The twist is fine, but there is a "more" complete aspect to that idea of twisting you have that will tie together and involve far more connections in the body. I think it is easy enough to think of just -what- are you twisting and just -what- is connected-to -what? Oddly enough it involves your breath (in/yo ho) and just what it is doing to those "held fingers"...way out there. It sure as hell aint to let your arm go and move your middle. Thats why I said earlier before all the crap hit the fan that there was a move invloved way to accomplish what I think you are trying to do. At least in my limited expereince. That idea or model won't come near to filling the arms and extremities or being near as powerful as it can be. The framework and structural aspects are fine and will certainly move and up-end many MA'ers. I suppose it becomes a question of -if person a. has that aspect reaally developed thay can kick butt, but it doesn't mean there isn't a way to add to it. There is a softer,( and much harder to do) ...yet more flexible and powerful way to add to that framework /stetched power. At least in my view.
Actually, I made it abundantly and redundantly clear that my illustration was only to give an idea and was not complete. However, you appear now to be saying something like "Oh year, there's stretch after all, it's just not done like in your example". I agree completely, but you didn't agree at first. Regardless of how you do it, there must be extension/stretch by some means or there can be no connection. Period. Knowing that, go back and look at your previous post where you blew such things off. You appear to be changing your position.

Incidentally, the "pull" in "pulling silk" is the same pull in "reeling silk" and that's the actual extension I'm talking about. "Silk" is often used as a metaphor for "fascia"... anyone who has looked at fascia, etc., can understand why.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2007, 01:55 PM   #1227
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
Er..... that quote actually says the reverse of Mochizuki being dumb, so that's no good for an example, is it? Now back to the question... you accuse me of calling someone stupid. I asked for support.

Mike Sigman
Mike, you are amazing. How is, "What you're saying implies that Mochizuki was too dumb to realize that you didn't get it." the reverse of calling him dumb? Anyone? Does anyone see that?

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2007, 03:21 PM   #1228
jss
Location: Rotterdam
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 459
Netherlands
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Christian Moses wrote: View Post
Mike, you are amazing. How is, "What you're saying implies that Mochizuki was too dumb to realize that you didn't get it." the reverse of calling him dumb? Anyone? Does anyone see that?
Reductio ad absurdum. [en.wikipedia.org]

Last edited by jss : 07-04-2007 at 03:25 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2007, 06:31 PM   #1229
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Christian Moses wrote: View Post
Mike, you are amazing. How is, "What you're saying implies that Mochizuki was too dumb to realize that you didn't get it." the reverse of calling him dumb? Anyone? Does anyone see that?
You're serious, aren't you? You don't understand that that sentence refers to someone else saying something that implied Mochizuki was dumb. I think I see the problem with why you and I continually miscommunicate, Chris.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2007, 07:46 PM   #1230
Thomas Campbell
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 407
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
[snip] I.e. let's not use anything Wu Tu Nan says as credible. He was a liar and a charlatan.Yeah, well, the insistence that the Yang style used chousi jin was widespread until the late 1970's early 1980's and it's in a lot of books that way. Sometime in the 1980's someone in the Yang-style realized that if you claim only chousijin you're openly indicating that you don't have full and complete qi and jin because the full "natural" movement will always be with reeling silk, not the pulling silk. So the Yang family publicly stated that they use reeling silk, in the 1980's.

(Personally, I think that within the actual family, they always did. Originally, the Yang founder was not given permission to teach reeling silk, so the Yang style was always incomplete and only used the pulling silk).

But regardless, all of these things are always just variations of the basic ki/qi principles and the basic jin/kokyu principles. Always. The idea that somehow the Japanese arts and the Chinese arts are "different" is the sort of ignorance that continues to keep good western students in the dark.

Best.

Mike
Well, Mike, I don't know what any tales that Wu Tunan may have told about his age have to do with his point about the historical use of "chousi" referring to the unbroken internal connection in movement rather than a specific type of rotational/winding movement like chansijin. I personally find the distinction helpful, in training and in understanding taijiquan theory. Wu's remarks quoted and translated by Louis Swaim don't relate to your historical depiction of Yang taiji's attempt to distinguish itself by claiming its distinctive practice of chousijin.

I also don't think that we know what the "Yang style founder"--I'm assuming you're referring to Yang Luchan--was permitted to teach, nor to whom.

I'd prefer to focus on commonalities and distinctions of training methods in the present moment. Your illustration is useful--as you said--as a starting point. Dan talks about the twisting, and says there is more to it than the spine and arm structure and extension, a "softer yet more flexible and powerful way," intimately tied in with the breathing. Now, to me, the logical way to make progress and encourage fruitful dialogue wouldn't be to talk about where someone was a year ago on an Internet forum and changes of position--but rather follow up and ask Dan to describe in a little more detail the connection between breathing and "adding to that framework/stretched power" . . . in his view. Which is what he started to offer there, I think.

This was after all originally a thread not about conceptual theology, but about how-to--the "baseline skillset."
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2007, 08:50 PM   #1231
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
Actually, I made it abundantly and redundantly clear that my illustration was only to give an idea and was not complete. However, you appear now to be saying something like "Oh yeah, there's stretch after all, it's just not done like in your example". I agree completely, but you didn't agree at first. Regardless of how you do it, there must be extension/stretch by some means or there can be no connection. Period. Knowing that, go back and look at your previous post where you blew such things off. You appear to be changing your position.
Well here they both are. My direct answers unedited. I didn't say "oh yeah there's stretch....... after all."
In fact I said "it is included" in my two replies.
I think my posts are clear enough and I haven't changed my mind one whit. I just think you misunderstood what I wrote in all the other hubub that was going on. Or maybe not..

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Er...No. To me thats more or less framework. What I would show someone new to all this- day one. A straight, stretched posture doesn't play as big a part later. I am thinking more of eminating out from center, and pushing/following/pulling a facial chain throughout the body. To folks it feels flexible and feels rigid and at the same time remaining sensitive. And the breath (in/yo ho) has a lot to do with it. Its far more difficult then basic aiki-age, jin/kokyu framework you describe. I was surprised to hear a term "full" from a Chinese teacher. And it is good term for breathwork. From discussions I have had with Rob what I do is different from what he does. Slack is a difficult concept. There are any number of ways folks display it in movement. But stretching out-and using spine-work- while fine- is but a first step. A good one- but only one. I think there are other things to focus on. Honestly I think they're deeper things..
Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Seems to me you're on frame, posture and stretching out. Which is fine. It involves tendon/ fascia too. I am far more concerned with slack in fascia and breathwork.as a continuous pliable current throughout the body and mainpulated in the body for a sense of "fullness" as a friend would say. The spine and framework connections is fine, but I'll take the mass of the center connected to everything else. Funny, other then showing new guys I don't think much about force vectors in what I am concentrating on right now. It takes care of itself. Oh well, I don't do Chinese stuff or know how they train.
See ya

Last edited by DH : 07-04-2007 at 08:56 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2007, 09:03 PM   #1232
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Hi Tom
Talking about details on the internet is not something I am interested in doing. I have left that up to many of you.
IMO It really doesn't seem to have been very successful. I am already pulling back, losing interest and going back to closed doors. I really don't have anything to gain, and the grief and wierd personalities really isn't worth my time.

Last edited by DH : 07-04-2007 at 09:12 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 09:19 AM   #1233
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
You're serious, aren't you? You don't understand that that sentence refers to someone else saying something that implied Mochizuki was dumb. I think I see the problem with why you and I continually miscommunicate, Chris.

Mike
OK, Mike, here's the deal. Let's agree that imply means one of two things: 1) to involve by logical necessity or 2) to express or indicate indirectly. The second definition would require some intention on my part. I can assure you that it was not my intention to imply that the head of my ryuha was dumb. So we're stuck with the first definition. Let's look at what was said, (linky)

" Just last night while practicing the uchi no kata version of our ukenagashi, I was stuck by how the whole thing works the exact same body dynamics that Rob had demonstrated during part of his Seattle workshop. When I started using what I'd learned from Rob everything clicked, but to do the movement correctly became much harder (if that makes any sense). Now I don't believe Mochizuki Sensei held anything back from us when he taught us this kata. In fact, it was the very specific nature of his teaching that led me to make the comparison and feel confident that I was merely seeing what was already there, not adding some new component. He was not holding back from me, but rather making sure that the shell of understanding was in place, and it was up to me to fill in."

That was the entire amount of information available to you. It is impossible with that amount of information for it to be a "local necessity" that Mochizuki Sensei be "dumb". There are too many factors that you simply could not know. It was rude and a wild leap of ‘logic.' Interestingly, only 7 days later, you posted this, (linky)

"It was only in retrospect (after I had a few of these skills) that I realized that my Okinawan karate teacher on Okinawa had shown me some of these skills. Since my perspective was based only on what I knew of the western understanding of strength, force, etc., I simply did not see what he showed me and hence I would have gone off and been a lost soul teaching external karate, if I'd chosen to go that route."

Now I ask you, do you think it is reasonable and *logically necessary* that your Okinawan karate teacher be considered "dumb" based on what you wrote? I don't. I called you on it there, and you felt it was so absurd when *I* said it, that you said, "I give up. I lose interest on these public forums."

Happy digging Mike, I'm sure you'll be able to come up with some reason why it's OK for you to say what you do, and not OK for me. Prove me wrong man, and just admit that you were out of line.

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 10:48 AM   #1234
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote: View Post
I disagree. Just as you wouldn't throw a beginner into the deep end and yell "Now swim!", I don't see why a discussion on baseline skillset should be anything other than baseline principles.
Well, because aikido, specifically, has been mentioned repeatedly and many times the claim has been made that the specific body skills (which have never been specifically named) "are" aiki.

I say I keep my balance and cause the other guy to fall down. That's about as baseline as you can get but the criticism is that I don't explain "how" I do that.

On the other hand, the "explanations" given are not really more precise. So the topic naturally weaves around and I'm not the only one weaving it.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 10:58 AM   #1235
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
...the insistence that the Yang style used chousi jin was widespread until the late 1970's early 1980's and it's in a lot of books that way. Sometime in the 1980's someone in the Yang-style realized that if you claim only chousijin you're openly indicating that you don't have full and complete qi and jin because the full "natural" movement will always be with reeling silk, not the pulling silk. So the Yang family publicly stated that they use reeling silk, in the 1980's.
So...you're saying that because (as you said, "Aikido uses silk pulling," it's really not sophisticated to the same level as the silk reeling....

Interesting....since that's exactly what I said. The reeling silk is highly refined and sophisticated and it's not found in Japanese martial arts.

So we do agree.

What a surprise.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
...all of these things are always just variations of the basic ki/qi principles and the basic jin/kokyu principles.
But above, you just said "...if you claim only chousijin you're openly indicating that you don't have full and complete qi and jin because the full "natural" movement will always be with reeling silk, not the pulling silk." So there is a major difference between the two and a lack of reeling silk in Japanese arts would necessarily be a major difference (precisely the kind of difference I described) between Japanese and Chinese arts.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
...The idea that somehow the Japanese arts and the Chinese arts are "different" is the sort of ignorance that continues to keep good western students in the dark.
Or maybe it's "experts" who continually contradict themselves and will say anything to try to make others appear 'wrong'.

You take the cake, dude.

David

Last edited by David Orange : 07-05-2007 at 11:11 AM.

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 11:56 AM   #1236
Thomas Campbell
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 407
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Hi Tom
Talking about details on the internet is not something I am interested in doing. I have left that up to many of you.
IMO It really doesn't seem to have been very successful. I am already pulling back, losing interest and going back to closed doors. I really don't have anything to gain, and the grief and wierd personalities really isn't worth my time.
hey Dan:

That is completely your choice, and I understand your position. My post wasn't specifically directed at you. I was just trying to suggest a more productive way that Mike S.--or anyone--might have carried on the dialogue at that point.

Thanks for responding.

cheers,

Tom
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 12:42 PM   #1237
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Thomas Campbell wrote: View Post
hey Dan:

That is completely your choice, and I understand your position. My post wasn't specifically directed at you. I was just trying to suggest a more productive way that Mike S.--or anyone--might have carried on the dialogue at that point.

Thanks for responding.

cheers,

Tom
Hi again Tom

We were just talking about this in the dojo the other day. It really does get weird here doesn't it. Over the years I most certainly have talked about things;both some of the ways to do certain things and some times the results and given descriptions. It's pointless to describe actual details that even folks who come and train here have difficulty with one-on-one. I can talk about lets say, central pivot all the day long. So what! I have yet to meet guys who can do it well after several trips here. I have discussed breath-power, I even have given some descriptions explaining --why- an internal mechanic works several times. Rob quotes one somewhere, that incorporates some of the attributes above; spine, connection through upper center, central pivot, etc. And thats the easier stuff. So why write it and have folks tell me "we do that too" when they turn out to "not have a clue."
I guess my point is David is wrong when he says Mike, Rob and I haven't made any attempt at describing things. Yes I tell people they don't get it. But there are ways to tell folks they don't get it, while being civil and respectful. If you want to. It's a difficult position to be in, because we are right. Period. But it sure is more pleasant knowing you're right anyway, and then choosing to be nice. Blunts OK too. But why not nice? I don't like making enemies, I'd rather make friends. Everyone who comes here-and this is written by every, single visitor- has enjoyed themselves and laughed through all the strain.
So why put up with all the noise here,
when its so much fun................ here.

Last edited by DH : 07-05-2007 at 12:52 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 01:09 PM   #1238
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
But it sure is more pleasant knowing you're right anyway, and then choosing to be nice. Blunts OK too. But why not nice? I don't like making enemies, I'd rather make friends.
Quoted for truthiness, mojitos are still on me whenever you make it out here...

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 01:21 PM   #1239
jss
Location: Rotterdam
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 459
Netherlands
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

I don't know why, but let me take a shot at writing what I think has been said/implied/whatever. (So disclaimer: this is my interpretation.)
Quote:
Christian Moses wrote:
Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
It was only in retrospect (after I had a few of these skills) that I realized that my Okinawan karate teacher on Okinawa had shown me some of these skills. Since my perspective was based only on what I knew of the western understanding of strength, force, etc., I simply did not see what he showed me and hence I would have gone off and been a lost soul teaching external karate, if I'd chosen to go that route."
Now I ask you, do you think it is reasonable and *logically necessary* that your Okinawan karate teacher be considered "dumb" based on what you wrote?
Chris, you are right that this is basically the same thing as with you and Mochizuki, but let's make this about Mike and his teacher first. (And let's see if Mike sticks to his claim when it's about him, ok? )The teacher showed Mike something and Mike failed to understand. Afterwards there are two possibilities for the karate teacher:
1) He sees that Mike fails to grasp it, but doesn't do anything about it. He thinks: "You're not that important to me. I have been kind enough to show you some of the real stuff; if you don't understand, that's your problem. If you were my son and heir to my lineage, I'd actually do my best to give you detailed instruction. But since you're just some Western student, you're lucky I even showed you the real stuff."
2) The teacher is too dumb to see Mike fails to grasp it. And that's the reason no further instruction is given. The teacher thinks Mike understands and why teach stuff that is already understood?

So if Mike posted the story quoted above and claimes his teacher did his best to teach him everything (i.e. was not deceptive), the only conclusion would be that the karate teacher is dumb.
Now Mike doesn't believe that if his karate teacher is smart enough to figure out the internal body skills, it's possible he's too dumb to recognize these skills in someone else. So by reductio ad absurdum, the teacher is being deceptive. And that just happens to confirm plenty of other stories about the way the Asians teach their martial arts. Which is a second argument (apart from the reductio ad absurdum) for the thesis: the karate teacher is being intentionally deceptive.

Same thing with you and Mochizuki. You admitted there were holes in your knowledge, so there are three possibilites:
1) The holes cannot be taught. Not true: Rob can teach the holes.
2) Mochizuki chose not to teach you the holes. Confirms known facts about Asian teaching methodology.
3) Mochizuki thought he taught you the holes, but was too dumb to see he didn't. Impossible: you do not get that kind of skill without being able to recognize them in someone els.

IMO, this is Mike´s argument. And there are several ways to try to rebut it, so please be my guest. 'Cause judging by some of the posts you and Mike have made, such a discussion will prove to be quite interesting.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 01:45 PM   #1240
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Joep Schuurkes wrote: View Post
Same thing with you and Mochizuki. You admitted there were holes in your knowledge, so there are three possibilites:
1) The holes cannot be taught. Not true: Rob can teach the holes.
2) Mochizuki chose not to teach you the holes. Confirms known facts about Asian teaching methodology.
3) Mochizuki thought he taught you the holes, but was too dumb to see he didn't. Impossible: you do not get that kind of skill without being able to recognize them in someone els.
Sorry, but there are a lot more than three possible explanations. Particularly when you consider that I don't study directly under him, and have only seen him on 3 separate occasions. The first two times I spoke only a smidgen of Japanese, the last time (the time in question) was the only time when I both knew the basics of the kata in question and spoke *some* Japanese, barely enough to mostly get by and I was the person with the best English to Japanese skills. We worked on the kata (with 4 other people from my dojo) for 20 minutes total. Now, this is all information that was not available to Mike when he made his comments. His comments, like many others, were made with huge assumptions, and constitute faulty logic. This is not a case of reductio ad absurdum, this is a case of being rude and jumping to conclusions. Unless Mike feels that anyone who could not communicate detailed intricate internal mechanics to someone else in 20 minutes through pantomime should be considered "dumb." Do you feel that's a reasonable expectation? No, for something to really imply something else, the way Mike is using the word, it must be the *only* logical explanation, not a possible explanation of many. If I say that I am holding less than 10 items in my hand, I do not imply that I am holding 2 cookies, that is an assumption, and I would be foolish to jump ahead that far even though, logically I *could* have two cookies in my hand, given what I said. It is far from the *only* logical conclusion that one could come to.

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:12 PM   #1241
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Thomas Campbell wrote: View Post
Well, Mike, I don't know what any tales that Wu Tunan may have told about his age have to do with his point about the historical use of "chousi" referring to the unbroken internal connection in movement rather than a specific type of rotational/winding movement like chansijin. I personally find the distinction helpful, in training and in understanding taijiquan theory. Wu's remarks quoted and translated by Louis Swaim don't relate to your historical depiction of Yang taiji's attempt to distinguish itself by claiming its distinctive practice of chousijin.
Hi Tom:

Well, I've seen, heard, and read about Wu, what's he's written, etc., etc., over many years. I'm very familiar with him. He's one of these guys that, because of a focused partisanship, cannot be trusted to tell you the truth, even if he does so occasionally. So I simply filter Wu Tu Nan out of reasonable consideration. He was known to make up a lot of things, so it just becomes impossible to assign "truth" or "fiction" to whatever he says. I know hundreds of anecdotes about Wu and I don't have any partisan like or dislike to him.... it's just not worth the time to spend the time trying to figure out which part of his remarks are accurate and which are fiction.
Quote:
I also don't think that we know what the "Yang style founder"--I'm assuming you're referring to Yang Luchan--was permitted to teach, nor to whom.
According to Chen Xiao Wang, Yang LuChan was an indentured servant to the village drugstore owner. (This is pretty much agreed to by everyone). Yang LuChan was allowed to study Taiji, even though he was an outsider and he became the #3 student of his generation, under Chen Qing Ping. When his "owner" came into his 80's (Yang was in his 40's) the owner decided to set Yang Lu Chan free because the owner's health was failing and he didn't think it would look right to leave a household in which there would be 4 wives and one male manservant. Yang was set free and given the OK to teach Taiji in order to make a living (Yang was illiterate and had no viable commercial skills). However, his master told him that silk reeling could not be taught to outsiders.

Interestingly enough, if you read Wu Tu Nan's books, there is a quite different story which includes the idea that Yang's Taiji does not come from Chen's Taiji, and there are many other comments that differ with the story above. Unfortunately, Wu's accounts have been decimated in the last decade or so by the actual Yang family publicly admitting that Yang's Taiji is taken directly from Chen's Taiji. So all those stories told by Wu and the others in an effort to set the Yang style (Wu Tu Nan did the Wu style, but at one time it was actually considered to be completely under the Yang domain).... all those stories now do nothing but discredit the tellers, including Wu Tu Nan.
Quote:
I'd prefer to focus on commonalities and distinctions of training methods in the present moment. Your illustration is useful--as you said--as a starting point. Dan talks about the twisting, and says there is more to it than the spine and arm structure and extension, a "softer yet more flexible and powerful way," intimately tied in with the breathing. Now, to me, the logical way to make progress and encourage fruitful dialogue wouldn't be to talk about where someone was a year ago on an Internet forum and changes of position--but rather follow up and ask Dan to describe in a little more detail the connection between breathing and "adding to that framework/stretched power" . . . in his view. Which is what he started to offer there, I think.

This was after all originally a thread not about conceptual theology, but about how-to--the "baseline skillset."
I don't disagree with you, Tom. My point, which I considered more important for the nonce, is that people need to get over this idea that there are different principles involved in Japanese arts, Chinese arts, Okinawan arts, Indonesian arts, and so on. It's important because knowing that all of these arts, despite their variations, are part of a whole picture. That means that ALL of these arts give us information, not just a select few. Once people realize they have a wide source of information rather than just a limited, restricted, secretive, single source... they're miles ahead and to the good.

Insofar as what Dan was hinting at, I know generally what he's trying to hint at and I'd just say "there's even more to it than that" with a wink and a nod...... but I think the more complex aspects are way outside of the purview of a basics discussion. The point I made that a slight extensive connection is basic and necessary.... even a neophyte will know that's true if they watch the erect posture of meditating priests, skilled Aikido experts (notice how straightly they hold themselves and move), and many other clues like spreading the fingers and so on.

Best.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:19 PM   #1242
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Christian Moses wrote: View Post
Happy digging Mike, I'm sure you'll be able to come up with some reason why it's OK for you to say what you do, and not OK for me. Prove me wrong man, and just admit that you were out of line.
Prove you wrong? I asked for proof of the assertion by you that I called your ryuha guy "stupid" and you can't come up with it. You've been proved wrong. Period. Now you're trying to make some extended wasted conversation that interprets what was meant versus what was comprehended... about something else. You've already been proved wrong but you can't just admit it and move on.

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:27 PM   #1243
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
Prove you wrong? I asked for proof of the assertion by you that I called your ryuha guy "stupid" and you can't come up with it. You've been proved wrong. Period. Now you're trying to make some extended wasted conversation that interprets what was meant versus what was comprehended... about something else. You've already been proved wrong but you can't just admit it and move on.

Mike Sigman
I rest my case. If anyone else thinks that Mike has proved me wrong here, please clue me in. I don't see it. Unless he'd like to split hairs between "stupid" and "dumb" (they are listed as synonyms however, so that would be a pretty thin case).

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:31 PM   #1244
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Thomas Campbell wrote: View Post
That is completely your choice, and I understand your position. My post wasn't specifically directed at you. I was just trying to suggest a more productive way that Mike S.--or anyone--might have carried on the dialogue at that point.
So, several post dedicated to simple personality attack by David (and this goes back to the beginning on E-Budo with David initiating exactly the same crap) aren't worth mentioning, but "productive ways that Mike S." could do things better are worth an off-topic post and mention of my name again?

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:34 PM   #1245
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Christian Moses wrote: View Post
If anyone else thinks that Mike has proved me wrong here, please clue me in. I don't see it. Unless he'd like to split hairs between "stupid" and "dumb" (they are listed as synonyms however, so that would be a pretty thin case).
Chris, I don't see where Mike said that your teacher was dumb. He said that your statement implies that your teacher is dumb. He wasn't critiquing your teacher, but your statement:

""Pooh. What you're saying implies that Mochizuki was too dumb to realize that you didn't get it."

FWIW.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:40 PM   #1246
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
So, several post dedicated to simple personality attack by David (and this goes back to the beginning on E-Budo with David initiating exactly the same crap) aren't worth mentioning, but "productive ways that Mike S." could do things better are worth an off-topic post and mention of my name again?
Mike, the whole thing with you and me started because you came into the conversation on e-budo in your inimitable know-it-all-and-I'm-also-better-than-you attitude and started making comments about me. Otherwise, I would never have addressed you. Your name meant nothing to me then, so why would I even have addressed you?

You are really the only person on these boards that I get pretty harsh with anymore--some because they quit posting, but others because they became more diplomatic and mostly because I prefer give-and-take conversations on the whole. My approach is to address people the way they address me--usually a little nicer and more patiently than they address me--until they prove that they're intent on being donkies. But as many, many people (apparently on many, many message boards) have noted, you just like to start crap with people, so you never run out of snappy responses to your statements. You do seem to take it a lot harder than you think other people should take your statements, too.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:42 PM   #1247
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Deleted for being useless!

Last edited by DH : 07-05-2007 at 02:45 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 02:53 PM   #1248
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
David Orange wrote: View Post
Chris, I don't see where Mike said that your teacher was dumb. He said that your statement implies that your teacher is dumb.
Exactly why I brought up the definition for "imply". For what I said to have actually implied that Mochizuki was dumb, there could be no other reasonable explanation for the scenario that I presented. I do not feel that anyone could make that argument, there simply was not enough information available.

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 03:00 PM   #1249
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Christian Moses wrote: View Post
Exactly why I brought up the definition for "imply". For what I said to have actually implied that Mochizuki was dumb, there could be no other reasonable explanation for the scenario that I presented. I do not feel that anyone could make that argument, there simply was not enough information available.
Well, it seems to me he wasn't attacking your teacher, but you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2007, 03:04 PM   #1250
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
David Orange wrote: View Post
Well, it seems to me he wasn't attacking your teacher, but you.

David
No, that's impossible, he doesn't do that sort of thing.

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Handmade Aikido Gifts - Handmade functional ceramic art with aikido themes



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aikido Transmission and Class Size Kevin Leavitt General 30 03-02-2007 09:14 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:57 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate