Internal Power (AIKI?)-- Players and Haters

Michael Varin wrote: Well, that's a nice lttle story, but I'm not sure it points to the conclusion that you say it does. Obviously, Ken Shamrock didn't say that.

ROTFL! Thanks! That was great. I won't argue the point, just hope you keep an open mind about things.

Michael Varin wrote: How is "aiki" used in a sword fight? How does it benefit the user?

I'd love to post something here, but, unfortunately, I'm a bit out of my league. I'm working on getting better, but that's years down the road, I think. Maybe someone who has more experience can chime in. I know, personally, I've crossed swords, sticks, and knife with someone who has aiki and it's an eye opener to say the least.

Let's see from my flirtations with Japanese sword - a primary objective is to control the center line and cut the other guy first. Based on what's been discussed so far, gee I have no idea how training IS would help you fo that better ...

Really?

Mark Murray wrote: I'm told that aiki to aiki is an entirely different thing than aiki to non-aiki. But, even then, I think it's still more about what you're doing internally.

Well I can't argue with that...for a couple reasons

I've been seriously working on ki/kokyu skills for approximately two years. What I mean by "seriously" is that I've received specific instructions on training exercises from several high level people. And have been following their recommendations and instruction.
1. One of the most important trainings I've been doing is what is called spear/pole shaking.
2. I just went to Japan, and spent several practices with the Toda-ha Buko-ryu dojo. I've been away 20 years, we have a new soke and the Tokyo dojo has it's own shihan.
3. We have a number of moves in which one deflects/attacks the enemy by "knocking down/knocking up" their weapon. Rather than striking from some separation - the customary way - I was able repeatedly have our two weapons touching and without any wind-up, pull-back or discernible movement, pulse/fling their weapon aside and continue in to a cut that they could not stop.
4. There is always the "danger" of accommodation, due to following the kata pattern - but my training partner, the other shihan, a very big guy, who is also proud of his involvement in another koryu, said that he doubted I could do that if he had a bokken. We tried, our weapon's touching. He locked down his muscles - yet I "flung" his weapon up into his face and cut him in the same motion. He tried again with the naginata, and it was just as easy.
6. Then, for fun, I tried something I'd never tried, but having seen Kuroda Tetsuzan do something similar in a video, I wanted to see what would happen. Linking naginata with one student, I did downward pulse/drops and upward pulse/like flinging snow. I whispered to people off to the side ("neck" and do the move and his neck would come forward, "hara" and do the move and he'd collapse at the waist.). (This is an aspect that is referred to as "jin"). The guy I was working with could not hear what I said, so it was not "suggestion"

A couple of points:
a. These people were not colluding - they were, in fact, defending what our previous sensei had taught them, because I was showing something different and they wanted proof that what I was doing worked.
b. As I said at the beginning, I could show/explain this easily - I'm not even going to begin try to explain here - other than to say it included a ki/kokyu connected body, use of the hara as director of the force, and "ground path" (TM). Seriously, if I meet with anyone reading this, I'll be happy to show what little I know - because I'm still scratching at the surface. I'm not holding back. It does not change the form. It does not require me to assume a special posture, or architect a specific "ki-trick" exercise. It's like shifting from a gas guzzling "muscle car" to a Tesla.
c. the best part of this. Our new soke is young - 40 years old, and very much junior to me and the other shihan in the Tokyo dojo. He stopped me and my training partner and said, "Nitta sensei did not teach it that way." I said, "I know. She didn't teach me that way either. This is something I've been working on. I saw the possibilities in the kata and this is what I've come up with." He said, "Well, I don't know if they used to do things this way in the old days, or if you've found this. But it's far better than what we are doing." And he stopped the class, told everyone to gather around and asked me to demonstrate it, one by one, on each member of the dojo, and then asked if I would show the exercises I used to develop the ability I had. <That is a man worth following - he cares about getting stronger, not about his "position">

As for explanations, I've nothing to contribute that is new, as everything I've learned has come from the "usual suspects."
Having worked with Mike Sigman, Dan Harden, Akuwawa and several high level teachers of Chinese internal training, I know what I know and what I don't. I started out as a 1 on the 10 scale. I give myself a 2.3, at best. These people are far above me - at least so far I still have a long way to go. But given that the question is if this has any relevance to weapons training, yes, beyond a doubt. It is not at all about being immovable, withstanding blows. The idea that aiki cannot help you because one cannot withstand a sword blow is utterly off the mark of how aiki or ki/kokyu can help your weapon's work.

Best
Ellis Amdur

Mark Murray wrote: ROTFL! Thanks! That was great. I won't argue the point, just hope you keep an open mind about things.

Mark,

Oh, yeah. My mind is totally open.

Again, none of my postings should be read as discrediting internal strength in any way, and I hope that no one thinks I am trying to stop people from going down that path. I am actually very interested in meeting a few of you guys one day. I'm still trying to connect with Mike Sigman.

Budd Yuhasz wrote: Let's see from my flirtations with Japanese sword - a primary objective is to control the center line and cut the other guy first.

OK. We agree on this.

But still no answer to the question.

Ellis Amdur wrote: We have a number of moves in which one deflects/attacks the enemy by "knocking down/knocking up" their weapon. Rather than striking from some separation - the customary way - I was able repeatedly have our two weapons touching and without any wind-up, pull-back or discernible movement, pulse/fling their weapon aside and continue in to a cut that they could not stop.

I have seen this done. I can do this fairly well myself, and I have trained with a couple of guys who can do this very well.

Ellis Amdur wrote: But given that the question is if this has any relevance to weapons training, yes, beyond a doubt.

That really wasn't the question. All of this must have relevance to weapons, because these guys hardly cared about empty-handed stuff.

Ellis Amdur wrote: The idea that aiki cannot help you because one cannot withstand a sword blow is utterly off the mark of how aiki or ki/kokyu can help your weapon's work.

I'm simply asking questions within the "aiki = internal strength" framework. I was hoping to further the discussion, but answers remain hard to come by.

Ellis,

You seem like you have quite a bit of experience with Japanese weapons, as well as researching these ideas, and lately, internal training.

In many, if not most, weapons engagements (not talking about kata) someone is going to make their attack prior to there being any physical contact between the opponents' bodies or their weapons, for example tips of swords touching.

Again, how does aiki apply? Is it only the effect on your opponents weapon/body when you deflect or, as I imagine, when you cut him down? Must there be contact to use it?

Does it help you move more quickly, deceptively, or appropriately? Does it help you perceive your opponent's attack?

Also, do you believe aiki = ki = kokyu = internal strength? If not how do you think about these terms and what they represent?

Mark Murray wrote: ROTFL! Thanks! That was great. I won't argue the point, just hope you keep an open mind about things. I'd love to post something here, but, unfortunately, I'm a bit out of my league. I'm working on getting better, but that's years down the road, I think. Maybe someone who has more experience can chime in. I know, personally, I've crossed swords, sticks, and knife with someone who has aiki and it's an eye opener to say the least.

I am by no means an expert in this area as well, but I do have some experience and training I can share here. I was going to mention that a couple of the koryu folks may have move to say, and I see that Ellis has already jumped in, and maybe Toby will also.

Currently, I do not do much weapons work other than some Jo waza. However, in the early days of the Ki society, we did aiki jo and ken. It was not much on paired practice, but more on the solo exercises where the objective was to make the weapon part of you. In Tohei's mind and body coordination perspective, the weapon was simply an extension of you. As you moved from center (or hara) the weapon moved as well. It was literally a part of your body and not some inanimate object. Once you accomplished that objective, you would be amazed at the sensitivity and level of control you could achieve with the ken (or jo) I used to practice the ken by practicing full speed striking a parted curtain in my barracks room that only had an opening slightly wider than the ken (like less than a 1/4 inch) without touching or moving the curtain - you just can't do that unless the ken is part of you.

Anyway, as Ellis alludes to in his post, the weapon is you and it moves as you move your center as long as you are moving in a mind and body coordinated fashion with aiki.

Also, I am sure the experienced weapons folks who are reading all these posts about aiki and weapons are simply saying to themselves: "So, what is your point? anyone who truly knows their weapons, knows that to be effective, you must be connected"

Greg

Michael Varin

Ellis, You seem like you have quite a bit of experience with Japanese weapons, as well as researching these ideas, and lately, internal training. In many, if not most, weapons engagements (not talking about kata) someone is going to make their attack prior to there being any physical contact between the opponents' bodies or their weapons, for example tips of swords touching. Again, how does aiki apply? Is it only the effect on your opponents weapon/body when you deflect or, as I imagine, when you cut him down? Must there be contact to use it? Does it help you move more quickly, deceptively, or appropriately? Does it help you perceive your opponent's attack? Also, do you believe aiki = ki = kokyu = internal strength? If not how do you think about these terms and what they represent?

How would "aiki" not apply? Any influence you have on another person is due to two things: Your psychological and physical organization and his, for one; and their reactions to their perceptions of you. The more connected my body, the more under my control. The more connected my body, the more I can devote attention (neurologically mediated) to what he is doing. The sum is the more I can control his impressions of me, the more I can read him, move/act in a way that is under my control, and know what he has to do next. Or, as Ueshiba said, "Aiki is a method of making people do what you want."
Kamae means "stance." At different levels,, a) I tighten my body, and brandish a fist or sword and you know what I'm going to do. b) I tighten my body and brandish a fist or sword and you THINK you know what I'm going to do, but I've got myself, internally, organized differently, so I don't do what you expect c) I give you nothing (note: Self-portrait of Musashi)

The difference between contact and none is that people may move and organize wonderfully when not also having to deal with/compensate with force directly applied to their body. A blind man cannot fight at a distance, Zatoichi notwithstanding, but he may be a demon if he can touch you. And by the way, all the kenjutsu in the world is irrelevant until contact is made. (empty handed, as well).

Now, you may be asking something different - if there is an energy that allows me to affect someone at a distance, as in a kind of DragonBall energy (TM) - never seen it, don't believe it. I honestly do not even waste a moment thinking about it.

Finally, I really don't find that the nomenclature wars help my training in the least. So I no longer pay any attention to those discussions. I have specific instructors who teach me specific things and, to the best of my ability, practice them and then see if I can do the specific things they can do to me to someone else. When they call it something, I use the same term, so we can communicate. Beyond that, yawn.



Ellis Amdur

Ellis Amdur wrote: 1. One of the most important trainings I've been doing is what is called spear/pole shaking.

Sensible. "Rubber pencil". Have you reconsidered the videos of chinkon kishin
?

Ellis Amdur wrote: 3. We have a number of moves in which one deflects/attacks the enemy by "knocking down/knocking up" their weapon. Rather than striking from some separation - the customary way - I was able repeatedly have our two weapons touching and without any wind-up, pull-back or discernible movement, pulse/fling their weapon aside and continue in to a cut that they could not stop.

Check. Jo and bokken, but -- check.

Ellis Amdur wrote: 4. There is always the "danger" of accommodation, due to following the kata pattern - but my training partner, the other shihan, a very big guy, who is also proud of his involvement in another koryu, said that he doubted I could do that if he had a bokken. We tried, our weapon's touching. He locked down his muscles - yet I "flung" his weapon up into his face and cut him in the same motion. ... 6. Then, for fun, I tried something I'd never tried, but having seen Kuroda Tetsuzan do something similar in a video, I wanted to see what would happen. Linking naginata with one student, I did downward pulse/drops and upward pulse/like flinging snow. I whispered to people off to the side ("neck" and do the move and his neck would come forward, "hara" and do the move and he'd collapse at the waist.). (This is an aspect that is referred to as "jin").

This I am working on, though in fairness you have much more work in weapons of all sorts than I can possibly claim, in which to apply to the problem. I have the down/neck lead aspect with the bokken without too much problem -- your "up" seems harder with the bokken, I suspect naginata has an advantage in that its length and flex would magnify the action. Perhaps I should try it.

Ellis Amdur wrote: A couple of points: a. These people were not colluding - b. As I said at the beginning, I could show/explain this easily - I'm not even going to begin try to explain here - other than to say it included a ki/kokyu connected body, use of the hara as director of the force, and "ground path" (TM). .... As for explanations, I've nothing to contribute that is new, as everything I've learned has come from the "usual suspects." Best Ellis Amdur

If you will set aside your preconceptions about my ideas, for a moment, I can help explain. Everybody has spinal reflexes triggered by golgi tendon organs and gamma motor neurons. They run in a single nerve from muscle to spine and back. They exist to protect the structure from action that is more swiftly destructive than the voluntary motor system can protect us from. They are linked sympathetically from upper to lower .

Every structure is weakest in shear; Every vibration is basically a rolling shear (that 'rubber pencil' -- or your naginata -- every sword cut too, FWIW) ; every structure is most vulnerable to a shear oscillation at its resonance frequency. To avoid what it senses as imminently destructive --the body reacts above a certain threshold immediately to pulses at its resonance ~10 hz -- not coincidentally -- the frequency of furitama and tekubi furi.

In one phase, "down" as you say, it fires extensors in the legs kicking him up and leading his head forward; in the opposite phase, it fires flexors, dropping him.

You may take it or leave it, but that is what is happening.

Erick - With respect (and I do mean respect), what you write makes no sense to me. I am not writing that it is senseless. It is similar to my poor son, a mechanic, trying, for one-half increasingly frustrated hour, to explain in a way I could understand, what volts and amps really are.
<don't try - please - it makes my head hurt>

All I care about is if the exercises I'm doing make me stronger. Metaphors seem to help me grasp things. Explanations beyond that don't help me at all. Which is why I rarely respond to your posts. Not only do they not help me, I am, personally not interested intellectually in the answers (that applies to a lot of other people's explanations of this stuff as well).

I repeat what I said at the beginning - with respect (and incomprehension and no desire to change that).
Ellis Amdur

Ellis Amdur wrote: what volts and amps really are. <don't try - please - it makes my head hurt>

volts is the height of the waterfall. amps is the amount of water going over.

Ellis Amdur wrote: It is similar to my poor son, a mechanic, trying, for one-half increasingly frustrated hour, to explain in a way I could understand, what volts and amps really are.

Heck, Ellis... There's an easy (and headache-free) way to explain this... Pretend that I am the guest of honor at mugging... Volts is how big my attackers are, amps is how many of them are coming at me, and, just for good measure, watts is just how bad they are likely to kick my ass...

And the first one of you who suggests how important it is for me to stay grounded, well, I beat you to it...

And now for something completely different -- in all fun and silliness ...

It's just shocking how these jokes are amping up. I don't know watts the matter with wanting to stay grounded in the discussion. I guess I could just flow with the current and stray off topic. Or I could jolt people out of their senses with puns of power. Nah, that'd probably turn off most people. Better to plug away at the topic. Maybe we could just flip the switch and go back to the topic?

Mark Murray wrote: And now for something completely different -- in all fun and silliness ... It's just shocking how these jokes are amping up. I don't know watts the matter with wanting to stay grounded in the discussion. I guess I could just flow with the current and stray off topic. Or I could jolt people out of their senses with puns of power. Nah, that'd probably turn off most people. Better to plug away at the topic. Maybe we could just flip the switch and go back to the topic?

Too much idle time on your hands this morning?

Ellis Amdur wrote: Erick - With respect (and I do mean respect), what you write makes no sense to me. I am not writing that it is senseless. It is similar to my poor son, a mechanic, trying, for one-half increasingly frustrated hour, to explain in a way I could understand, what volts and amps really are. <don't try - please - it makes my head hurt>... I repeat what I said at the beginning - with respect (and incomprehension and no desire to change that). Ellis Amdur

Fair enough. It is like a car. There are things going on in the engine and transmission and suspension that one can unwrap and tweak to very good purpose. Or, one can push the accelerator and change gears with great art and skill -- and go see the mechanic when it the accelerator she won't go and the brake she won't stop... On balance, the car cannot be improved without a decent mechanic, and it cannot be driven without a decent driver. Some want to do both; some want to focus on one to the exclusion of the other.

I will say that a good driver finds things in the car that need a lot of tweaking ; and a good mechanic can find things to tweak to make the car do things the driver hasn't anticipated.

Just finished up a wkend workshop w/ Mike Sigman. My goals www modest: to come away with a few exercises for solo training along w/ his feedback so I'd have a sense of how to feel when I'm doing them right, when not.
What I found is that many of the *forms* I've learned as part of warmups or exercises in different aikido dojos would be useful exercises for these skills IF I/we were coached in what kind of intent and focus to bring to them--ie, better *content* to the form.
The closest I've experienced to this, and my exposure to it has been very limited, is what Chuck Clark does.
Good stuff; I have lots to play with.

Janet Rosen wrote: Just finished up a wkend workshop w/ Mike Sigman. My goals www modest: to come away with a few exercises for solo training along w/ his feedback so I'd have a sense of how to feel when I'm doing them right, when not. What I found is that many of the *forms* I've learned as part of warmups or exercises in different aikido dojos would be useful exercises for these skills IF I/we were coached in what kind of intent and focus to bring to them--ie, better *content* to the form. The closest I've experienced to this, and my exposure to it has been very limited, is what Chuck Clark does. Good stuff; I have lots to play with.

As someone has said somewhere, "Hidden in plain site" you just opened your first door to IS... good luck!

Greg

Cool, Janet - practice the dickens out of the stuff so the next time you get hands on time people are blown away!

Greg Steckel wrote: As someone has said somewhere, "Hidden in plain site" you just opened your first door to IS... good luck! Greg

Oops , the the king of typos strikes again again ( I have been dealing with a lot of radio tower sites lately)

Mark Murray wrote: ... Or I could jolt people out of their senses with puns of power. ?

h i l a r i o u s
yes. in fact you did.

Mark Murray wrote: It is what allows one to be the center of a maelstrom of energy from one's self and from uke/attacker.

very very interesting

Mark Murray wrote: Or ... my spine is straight in the middle of me. When energy comes in from some point, say my wrist, then I have the appropriate spiraling energy going not only with that energy but also opposite it while maintaining multiple vectors of opposing spirals all around me.

come on now. you dont mean literally? :]

When I move, I am moving my feet from my mid-lower-spine connection and not my quad muscles so that I negate any dedicated weight shifts (loading the opposite foot for the step).

how do you stabilize the hip-to-hip load on the backside of the body? how on earth do you connect strongly across the lower back in foot-to-hand connect? </end rant of delirious questions foamed to mouth>

The grabbed hand may move, but it does so connected to my centrally held body, which includes my opposite hand so that I negate any localized, dedicated muscular contractions in my arms or shoulders. It is my mind, my intent, and my focus which creates appropriate and subtle changes within my body to keep all of this going.

that is really cool. the hand-to-hand connection sounds like it must be defining for the torso/upperbody. is it?

It is my trained body which allows me to handle more and more energy which in turn allows my mind to create stronger and cleaner intent and focus. I am motion in stillness and stillness in motion.

more amazingly written stuff dude. it is quite a picture that you paint.

And of course, after about 3 seconds, I lose it all. Or when I implement the motion part. But, hey, that's better than the 0.1 second of a year ago.

very very interesting.
Josh

Ellis Amdur wrote: I have specific instructors who teach me specific things and, to the best of my ability, practice them and then see if I can do the specific things they can do to me to someone else. When they call it something, I use the same term, so we can communicate. Beyond that, yawn.

Fair enough, but this almost ensures that online discussions and general knowledge of the subject will suffer.

Ellis Amdur wrote: Any influence you have on another person is due to two things: Your psychological and physical organization and his, for one; and their reactions to their perceptions of you. The more connected my body, the more under my control. The more connected my body, the more I can devote attention (neurologically mediated) to what he is doing. The sum is the more I can control his impressions of me, the more I can read him, move/act in a way that is under my control, and know what he has to do next. Or, as Ueshiba said, "Aiki is a method of making people do what you want."

Ellis Amdur wrote: And by the way, all the kenjutsu in the world is irrelevant until contact is made. (empty handed, as well).

These two statements are inconsistent, and the latter makes it sound like you lack any substantial understanding of the martial arts.

Ellis Amdur wrote: Now, you may be asking something different - if there is an energy that allows me to affect someone at a distance, as in a kind of DragonBall energy (TM) - never seen it, don't believe it. I honestly do not even waste a moment thinking about it.

No. I don't care about fire-balls either.

Michael Varin wrote: Fair enough, but this almost ensures that online discussions and general knowledge of the subject will suffer.

The online discussions have been doing pretty badly already with everyone using the same terminology, and they do little to help general knowledge anyhow.

These two statements are inconsistent, and the latter makes it sound like you lack any substantial understanding of the martial arts.

The statements are not inconsistent, nor does Ellis lack understanding of the martial arts. You cut your opponent, that's contact. You don't make contact, you can't cut your opponent. Further to the point, the idea(l) of cutting your opponent once and ending the fight is one without substantial understanding of kenjutsu, at least. None of the koryu kenjutsu schools I know of make ichigeki-hissatsu a centerpiece of their practical combat paradigm. Edged-weapon fights are rarely so clean as to end with one blow. An enemy who is bleeding out still has the time (and probably the adrenalin) to continue attacking, so the schools I know of teach being in a position to a) cut while avoiding further attacks, and b) follow up their successful cuts with more cuts, sometimes with some grappling involved, to ensure the enemy goes down and stays down.

Just about the only way to take out the enemy with one cut involves severing the head or a leg, and in that case, you need to be able to deliver great amounts of power without over extending yourself, while finishing in a position to respond quickly and strongly against additional threats. That kind of body skill is exactly what Ellis is talking about.

Boy, if someone like Ellis lacks "any substantial understanding of martial arts," then then the rest of us are really in trouble.

Michael actually said, "the latter makes it sound like you lack". FWIW, I didn't take his post that he meant Ellis had no substantial understanding.