Ki Usage and O-Sensei: A Question

Mike Sigman wrote: Watching Stan Pranin associate Systema, jiu-jutsu, etc., with the Aiki-Expo is quite interesting to me... basically, I'm all for show-and-tell's between the martial styles, but I think that continuing to learn how to cook and enjoy prime, aged-sirloin is worth more effort than just acquiescing to hunger and switching to a bowl of hash. Regards, Mike Sigman

LMAO!!!

Yeah, the show-and-tell's have been interesting and fun
but the subtext has been quite revealing however not surprising given the editorial direction of AJ.

Mike Sigman wrote: Watching Stan Pranin associate Systema, jiu-jutsu, etc., with the Aiki-Expo is quite interesting to me... basically, I'm all for show-and-tell's between the martial styles, but I think that continuing to learn how to cook and enjoy prime, aged-sirloin is worth more effort than just acquiescing to hunger and switching to a bowl of hash. Regards, Mike Sigman

Some of what Stan is doing is simply providing an event that will appeal to the largest number of AJ people. Based on past threads I'd say that there are a ton of people who are doing Aikido and are training in BJJ or some such ground fighting art. The addition of a BJJ teacher isn't surprising.

As for the Systema, I've talked at length to Stan about these guys. He really believes, as I do, that these guys are doing, in terms of principle, what we should be doing and often aren't. I have traineddirectly with Vladimir on several occasions now and he can do stuff with energetics that you'd swear was fake if you weren't standing there watching him do it. I am sure that, if you went back to Takeda Sensei's and O-Sensei's generation, you would have found that many of the old guys knew far more than has been handed down. Kisshomaru simplified the art to some extent. His son is continuing the process. When I have trained with some of the folks from the Yanagi Ryu and people like Toby Threadgill Sensei, I get a sense of what has disappeared. The Russian guys have a systematic method for training kokyu power that doesn't require an Aikido person to change his technique one iota of he doesn't wish. They have an atemi waza method that is based on internal energy which is totally compatible with Aikido and , in my opinion, was probably part of the art when it was still Daito Ryu. Finally, the level of relaxation which allows them to let technique just happen is one of the best exeamples of Take Musu Aiki I have seen.

If Aikido, as it is being transmitted, were complete and contained everything in terms of knowledge that its antecedents had, it wouldn't matter so much. But so much of Aikido is almost totally lacking in "aiki", contains no systematic training in atemi waza, has only the most simplistic exposure to kokyu training (depends on style), etc. It's not a matter of creating a "hash". It's a matter of taking the principles of our own art to their limits. I've trained with many, if not most, of the top teachers in Aikido and whereas there is a vast amount of knowledge there, there are also great gaps. Whether that is because they have chosen not to teach some things they know or whether they aren't familiar with some of the areas themselves, the fact is that they aren't being taught or taught at a deep level.

I am not one to ignore someone who has attained an extremely high level of mastery in the principles that I am studying just because he calls his art something different. If you've trained with these guys yourself and have decided that there's nothing there for you, then that's that. But if you haven't trained directly with Vladimir or Ryabko then you are not basing your opinions on an informed basis. Thes guys are awesome. They would justify going to the Expo all by themselves.

George S. Ledyard wrote: As for the Systema, I've talked at length to Stan about these guys. He really believes, as I do, that these guys are doing, in terms of principle, what we should be doing and often aren't. I have trained directly with Vladimir on several occasions now and he can do stuff with energetics that you'd swear was fake if you weren't standing there watching him do it. I am sure that, if you went back to Takeda Sensei's and O-Sensei's generation, you would have found that many of the old guys knew far more than has been handed down. [snip] But if you haven't trained directly with Vladimir or Ryabko then you are not basing your opinions on an informed basis. Thes guys are awesome. They would justify going to the Expo all by themselves.

I have no doubt that Vladimir et al are "awesome". In fact I just got off an email exchange with one of his students.... but that student feels that the body mechanics are not really much different than is find in normal jiujutsu and the like. Let's take the worst-case approximation and assume that your view that you are just beginning to get some of these things is correct. I.e., you, like most people in Aikido, weren't really aware of the Ki and Kokyu stuff, not to the depths to realize how important it was. I don't personally know Stan Pranin, but let's assume for the sake of discussion that his awareness and skills in Ki and Kokyu things is "minimal", also. If you both believe that systema is "doing what you should be doing in Aikido", I'm a little apprehensive. What if you're wrong? What is logically going to be the route of your Aikido if you head off in the wrong direction after you've already decided that your current Aikido lacks something? How about this.... ask Vladimir to do the jo trick or one of the other ones? If he's doing the same thing, he should be able to do a reasonable approximation (I say that because I feel pretty sure that O-Sensei did some focused exercises to increase his ability on the jo trick, but someone with reasonable kokyu skills can come close).

But if he can't really do them, then I'd suggest that sure he's probably a remarkable martial artist, but there are remarkable martial artists who can do unusual things in a number of arts. I've personally seen a number Taiji, Xingyi, Bagua, etc., practitioners who couldn't get any bona fide information about Qi and Jin resort to using Shaolin training methods so they too would have "unusual skills". Some of them learned some pretty nifty neigungs and gained power, etc., but they didn't really learn how the internal martial arts did similar things and now they've so ingrained the wrong habits that they'll never learn the real stuff.

But, don't mind me.... I'm just laying out thoughts in an interesting discussion.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

What if you're wrong? What is logically going to be the route of your Aikido if you head off in the wrong direction after you've already decided that your current Aikido lacks something?

Well, one could say the same thing about taking a fully chinese approach to 'ki' and using that to supplement lost knowledge. One could even say that going back to Daito ryu and their use of 'aiki' might be going astray...what if what Ueshiba did was something new...something he added? In that case, whatever you find in Daito ryu, how ever good it may be, you *still* won't be reproducing what Ueshiba did...

I think at some point people and arts are going to diverge, merge, go astray, change, adapt whatever...and as long as people are honest about it, I'm fine with that. George is honest about it...to a much greater extent than many, that's for sure!

Ron

Ron Tisdale wrote: Well, one could say the same thing about taking a fully chinese approach to 'ki' and using that to supplement lost knowledge. One could even say that going back to Daito ryu and their use of 'aiki' might be going astray...what if what Ueshiba did was something new...something he added? In that case, whatever you find in Daito ryu, how ever good it may be, you *still* won't be reproducing what Ueshiba did... I think at some point people and arts are going to diverge, merge, go astray, change, adapt whatever...and as long as people are honest about it, I'm fine with that. George is honest about it...to a much greater extent than many, that's for sure!

Hmmmm.... I disagree. First point: There is no "Chinese approach to ki"... it's a set of singular skills, in the sense that Tibetan throat singing is a basic set of skills albeit with some variations in different regions. The basic rules apply. There is no other harmonally enhanced singing like throat singing that produces the same results... there are no other ki-like skills that aren't ki skills. Period. There are simple variations (but they're limited) and gradations of skills.

Secondly, we *know* for a fact that O-Sensei used Ki skills... there is film footage of him doing so. While we're not sure what was in Daito-Ryu when Ueshiba studied, it's not relevant to the discussion because we're talking about what was done in Aikido... and there are enough surviving original uchi-deshi to settle that point. In fact, rather than a few westerners decide among themselves "we're missing something and this must be it", my suggestion would be to go ask some of the uchideshi for advice on whether Systema uses the same Ki and Kokyu power that was used in Aikido. That would seem to be the prudent thing to do, if someone is a purist. Of course these are just my thoughts and have nothing to do with any emotional investment on my part. People in Aikido can do what they want to do and call it anything they want.

One personal comment I might add here is that I joined Aikido in the early 1970's because I saw *back then* that it involved some unusual method of generating strength, at least in the Hombu-Dojo visiting dan that I met. I left Aikido because I found that almost no one in western Aikido knew how to do these things and I reasoned they came from the Chinese arts (but information there is hard to get, also). When I sort of checked back in the mid-1980's with Aikido and practiced a little, I found there was almost complete rejection of the idea that any of these black-skirt wearing studs could be missing any part of Aikido and all I heard was ego-centric trivialization of the idea. Many of those sceptical people are now gone or have spent years in Aikido without having grasped the magnitude of the physical Ki skills.... they missed it. Now there is a generation where some people are beginning to see the involvement of the physical Ki skills and are beginning to search around for it.... the ice is breaking. In this generation there are already some Aikidoists who are beginning to apply these physical skills to their Aikido, so this generation will have some successes and a number of people who again missed it. Looking back from the future, there may be a case of "Oh him.... yeah, he was well known in western Aikido, but he was one of the ones before the use of Ki power became common so his stuff lacked it." It's a negligible and assumptive anecdote, but we're already seeing the same thing happen to a number of "Tai Chi Teachers", "Bagua Teachers", etc., in the Chinese arts. From a private conversation I had with one Aikido sensei recently, I think the first signs are showing in the Aikido world. I think George smells the coffee and he's attempting to do something about it, unlike most people, so think of my comments to him as encouraging and not disparaging, BTW.

FWIW

Mike

Oh, I certainly didn't think you were disparaging him...if you were, you'd be perfectly up front and blunt about it...

I think we may just have to disagree on the different approaches issue...but you know much more in this area than I, so I'm probably stepping out on a limb there. As for what the uchideshi have to say...some talk much more about 'aiki' than 'ki'...I'm still not settled on THAT debate...and probably won't be for some time.
Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale wrote: As for what the uchideshi have to say...some talk much more about 'aiki' than 'ki'...I'm still not settled on THAT debate...and probably won't be for some time.

Well, I admit that all these discussions have really given me a very different perspective on the impression I had about Ki, etc., in Aikido, who knew what, the presence in different arts, and so on. I'm getting a very different picture of the actual history than I had say a month ago.

Insofar as the "ki" and "aiki" debate among the uchideshi, I'm still not totally clear, but my impression is that the "strengths" issue was not an open discussion, it was not openly taught, and different people got different amounts of information about the use and applicability of these strengths, among the original uchi-deshi. That's my current view.

Regards,

Mike

I tend to agree...whether its ki or aiki...its a very mixed bag in terms of what people know, what they're willing to teach if they know, etc.

Hey, I just like to train...

Ron

Michael Holm wrote: You should do what you like to do Why did you go to the dojo ? ...

My sensei urged me to go to get exposure to practice in the advanced class. He accompanied me and formally introduced me to the dojo.

Michael Holm wrote: ...Normally if I visit another dojo its to see their point of view, not to show my point of view...

Agreed. I didn't show my point of view at all. I was just trying to keep up with the higher ranks. One solidly built black belt was directed to practice with me by the senior sensei and he actively resisted all my techniques. We got into strength contests with every technique which was a first for me. I think the sensei selected him specifically for this to test me and to tire me out. It was all in good fun. After a while, when I figured out how to use ki in conjunction with brute strength and started to control the black belt a little, he started to laugh like I was getting what he was trying to teach me.

Michael Holm wrote: ...What happened after wards, did the Sensei slap you, laugh, look angry/happy ?

When the sensei invited me to grab his shoulder, this was during concurrent practice and not when he did a demonstration in front of the whole dojo. He would move around and interact with different pairs as they practiced together. I didn't want to "dive" or play along but I also didn't want to come off as an arrogant gaijin who tried to show he was better than the Sensei. I tried to feel where the force should have been sending me and sort of went with it. The sensei chuckled and merely told me to relax.

I speak very little Japanese so I wasn't understanding anything that was being said.

George S. Ledyard wrote: On this issue of ki and kokyu... One of the things that I see stands in the way of really relaxing in Aikido is the amount of tension we introduce into our movement because we are trying to make our technique look like what the Sensei just demonstrated. In order to be really relaxed you have to get rid of your thoughts about what you want the outcome to be and let the technique become what it wants, to be so to speak. Yamaguchi Sensei said that no technique should take more effort than the weight of your arms resting on your partner. I have found that I am beginning to be able to do this to some limited extent but I have to be willing to allow the technique to become whatever is appropriate based on the subtle or not so subtle changes in the energy I get from uke...

You've articulated the concept in probably the best way I've read/seen/heard yet. My Sensei always tells me to relax and "forget about technique". I think that's what his Sensei was trying to teach everyone as well.

For any technique to require no more than the weight of your arms resting on Uke, there has to be a commitment from Uke to a certain degree. If coming at Nage with a shomen uchi, Uke has to move forward and actually put some force, however minimal, behind the strike. I suspect that in practice, too many Uke move towards Nage, raise our hand and stop in a shomen uchi pose, waiting for the technique to happen. At this point, technically there is no force being introduced by Uke. How could an Aikido technique work here?

Any summary or brief explanation of Aikido explains that the art uses an attackers force against them - it's such a core element of Aikido and maybe we (at least I) forget it in everyday practice.

This is something I will work on.

George S. Ledyard wrote: Anyway, I think their training methods bear some scrutiny. The extent to which I have played with them, my Aikido was always better afterwards.

I bought the new Systema Hand to Hand Dvd, watched it a few times, thought about it a lot and noticed an immediate improvement in my Aikido. I HIGHLY recommend it to any Aikido practioner.

Charles

I've thought about the below comments a fair amount and also discussed them with some very longterm Aikido practitioners who are friends of mine (one of them is also a friend of Ledyard's, BTW):

George S. Ledyard wrote: [snip] As for the Systema, I've talked at length to Stan about these guys. He really believes, as I do, that these guys are doing, in terms of principle, what we should be doing and often aren't. I have traineddirectly with Vladimir on several occasions now and he can do stuff with energetics that you'd swear was fake if you weren't standing there watching him do it. I am sure that, if you went back to Takeda Sensei's and O-Sensei's generation, you would have found that many of the old guys knew far more than has been handed down. [snip] When I have trained with some of the folks from the Yanagi Ryu and people like Toby Threadgill Sensei, I get a sense of what has disappeared. The Russian guys have a systematic method for training kokyu power that doesn't require an Aikido person to change his technique one iota of he doesn't wish. They have an atemi waza method that is based on internal energy which is totally compatible with Aikido and , in my opinion, was probably part of the art when it was still Daito Ryu. Finally, the level of relaxation which allows them to let technique just happen is one of the best exeamples of Take Musu Aiki I have seen. If Aikido, as it is being transmitted, were complete and contained everything in terms of knowledge that its antecedents had, it wouldn't matter so much. But so much of Aikido is almost totally lacking in "aiki", contains no systematic training in atemi waza, has only the most simplistic exposure to kokyu training (depends on style), etc. .... I've trained with many, if not most, of the top teachers in Aikido and whereas there is a vast amount of knowledge there, there are also great gaps. Whether that is because they have chosen not to teach some things they know or whether they aren't familiar with some of the areas themselves, the fact is that they aren't being taught or taught at a deep level. I am not one to ignore someone who has attained an extremely high level of mastery in the principles that I am studying just because he calls his art something different. If you've trained with these guys yourself and have decided that there's nothing there for you, then that's that. But if you haven't trained directly with Vladimir or Ryabko then you are not basing your opinions on an informed basis. Thes guys are awesome. They would justify going to the Expo all by themselves.

The above comments are good, IMO. The problem is that they involve a number of separate issues and the ones that readily pop to my mind are:
1. Power (i.e., what is real kokyu and how is it done).
2. Relaxation: what it is and why so many Aikidoka are not relaxed.
3. Full Aikido knowledge: who has it and why was does it appear to vary from uchi-deshi to uchi-deshi.
4. Are the people who honestly know all the "Real Stuff" (TM) really teaching it?
5. Is the impressive (at least to G.L. and some others) power displayed in Systema the same power that was used in Aikido? I.e., is it a viable alternative source for information that is difficult to come by in traditional Aikido training?
6. Do most people in Aikido even care about the above discussions or are they unconcerned with what Aikido really was because they're happy with their current, possibly-incorrect-but-who-cares-as-long-as-I-get-to-wear-a-hakama-and-be someone-in-a-dojo, view?

The idea of "a lot of the teachers don't show what they know, if they know it" comes up a lot in various conversations. A lot of westerners realize now that culturally, no matter how friendly someone is,( a Japanese, Chinese, Indonesian, whatever) that does not necessarily mean that he shows all he knows. In fact, as I've posited before, I feel strongly that O-Sensei didn't show all he knew to his own Japanese uchi-deshi, forcing many of them to get lessons on Ki, etc., on the outside. So George's comments are pretty valid, as far as I'm concerned.

The idea of relaxation, kokyu, ki, reaction, etc., are all intertwined. Most of the Aikido people I know have a stilted, too-stiff way of moving and despite a lot of discussion about "moving from the center", most of them move from the shoulders. The fact at you can learn to push or pull someone sort of driving the middle does NOT mean that you have learned how to move from the middle in the correct way of not using the shoulders. That big mistake in thinking (that you've got it when all you did was hit a piece of it) is why a lot of people make one small step and never get any further toward actually using the middle in all movements rather than in just a limited few movements, IMO.

Does Systema contain the information we're talking about in Aikido in re kokyu, ki, etc. I haven't seen it, but I haven't seen Vladimir (as George has, etc.) either. All I can do is offer my opinion based on years of experience and having seen some Systema that it doesn't. I'll back that opinion up with a $10,000 bet, though, and I think I can make a compelling physical case to prove my point and collect.

Do most westerners in Aikido care about this rather important topic? I don't think so, but maybe I'm wrong. Maybe for most people Aikido is indeed what you make of it.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Ron Tisdale wrote: I tend to agree...whether its ki or aiki...its a very mixed bag in terms of what people know, what they're willing to teach if they know, etc. Hey, I just like to train...

But if you only know a limited amount due to "what people know, what they're willing to teach if they know, etc.," the question is valid about "what exactly are you training"?

It's interesting to mull over what people knew, when they knew it, and are they teaching it, but the other side of the coin that I always think about is how few westerners are really curious about some of the training things in Ki or in "Abe Sensei swings a heavy suburi-bokken" or "why did Tohei focus on those weird things... was he being silly or did he know something I don't know?"... and so on. I.e., there is a remarkable lack of curiosity in many martial artists and they're there just to blindly follow what someone else tells them to do. I think it's the root reason why an Aikido friend of mine commented that many of the Japanese teachers don't really teach... they don't see a lot of curiosity or a lot of results; they see too many socially-oriented lemmings. Maybe he has a point?

Mike

I'm training aikido...at the level I'm currently capable of discovering. Maybe if I'm persistant and keep training, I'll discover some of these other things, maybe not. I'm open to it...and if we can ever get together in person, I'll ask you to show me (I've been convinced for sometime that I *don't* do the things you speak of, at least not anywhere near consistantly, and I have no problems admitting it).

You have to remember...a lot of us would just as soon put on a white belt and train just as hard...as long as we can train. I don't really do it for the 'ki'...I certainly don't do it for the self defense (a glock would be *much* cheaper, even with the training courses), I don't do it for the funny pants or the belt. I do it because I enjoy it.

The japanese are famous for letting students 'steal' the technique...that's the culture. I knew that when I bought the package. No worries here...As for lemmings...well...they really don't jump off cliffs in hoards, doncha know...

Ron

Ron Tisdale wrote: You have to remember...a lot of us would just as soon put on a white belt and train just as hard...as long as we can train. I don't really do it for the 'ki'...I certainly don't do it for the self defense (a glock would be *much* cheaper, even with the training courses), I don't do it for the funny pants or the belt. I do it because I enjoy it.

Well, I sort of see it, Ron. However, regardless of what many people end up doing Aikido for, there is an emphasis in the anecdotes on the power of O-Sensei, Ki, and related things that you can't honestly separate out.... because they're all tied together. You're saying to me that you're doing it for the hard training, not the Ki, not the self-defense, but that begs the question of why you can't train hard, if that's all you want, at other things, too. A "Do" or "Dao" is a whole Way, not a fragment of a Way. But I understand what you're saying, sort of.

Regards,

Mike

but that begs the question of why you can't train hard, if that's all you want, at other things, too...

Not really (as far as begging the question)...I do train at other things too...I'm just not as public about them The yosh is not known for 'ki training'....but they do stress moving from the center, balance, breath, centerline, suburi, aiki, and a lot of the things that are said to lead to 'the japanese understanding' of ki/aiki. That's why I pay attention to your discussions, train with a friend from time to time in push hands, take what opportunity I can to train in Daito ryu, and work very hard at something that is very difficult for me personally (relaxing). Frankly, I'm not out to justify my keiko...I'd rather just do it. With the right timing and effort, the 'other stuff/levels' will come.

First lesson of keiko...patience.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale wrote: ...The japanese are famous for letting students 'steal' the technique...that's the culture... Ron

That's not Japanese, that's Chinese. A common phrase when learning Tai Chi, especially by Americans.

Must be both...I know for sure my teacher isn't chinese...

6. Do most people in Aikido even care about the above discussions or are they unconcerned with what Aikido really was because they're happy with their current, possibly-incorrect-but-who-cares-as-long-as-I-get-to-wear-a-hakama-and-be someone-in-a-dojo, view?

I choose option 7.
I think that while developing ridiculous kokyu power (like being able to do the jo trick) would be wonderful and interesting at parties -- and valuable in a real life martial situation -- no doubt; I tend to see it more as one of the false starts that O-sensei was took to an extreme before he concluded that he didn't need that much power to do aikido at its highest level. That's part of the path, especially when developing a system.

Here is a list of Japanese terms used to describe the stages of development in aikido:

First stage: Agatsu -- Self Mastery or "Correct Intention" - gets the mind in order -- in harmony with universal function.

Second stage: Masakatsu - harmonizes our body, our entire being, with universal order. This is shin-shin toitsu, mind-body unification.

The final stage: Katsu hayabi - puts the ki that unifies mind and body into harmony with universal order. There is no difference between oneself and anyone else.

Basically, if I am in the right place, at the right time, doing the right thing, I shouldn't need a whole lot of extra power. Having a whole lot of extra power by developing the second stage to an extreme would be nice and interesting, but not *my* main goal. When O-sensei explained for us to do what he doing towards the end of his career as opposed to what he used to do, we generally just think he meant - no need to do all of that pre-war hard style atemi-happy aikido, and go straight to grandpa-like movement. Maybe to some degree, but I think he *also* meant that taking that second level to such an extreme was unnecessary.

Rob

Rob Liberti wrote: 6. Do most people in Aikido even care about the above discussions or are they unconcerned with what Aikido really was because they're happy with their current, possibly-incorrect-but-who-cares-as-long-as-I-get-to-wear-a-hakama-and-be someone-in-a-dojo, view?

Bingo.

I choose option 7. I think that while developing ridiculous kokyu power (like being able to do the jo trick) would be wonderful and interesting at parties -- and valuable in a real life martial situation -- no doubt; I tend to see it more as one of the false starts that O-sensei was took to an extreme before he concluded that he didn't need that much power to do aikido at its highest level. That's part of the path, especially when developing a system. Here is a list of Japanese terms used to describe the stages of development in aikido: First stage: Agatsu -- Self Mastery or "Correct Intention" - gets the mind in order -- in harmony with universal function. Second stage: Masakatsu - harmonizes our body, our entire being, with universal order. This is shin-shin toitsu, mind-body unification. The final stage: Katsu hayabi - puts the ki that unifies mind and body into harmony with universal order. There is no difference between oneself and anyone else. Basically, if I am in the right place, at the right time, doing the right thing, I shouldn't need a whole lot of extra power. Having a whole lot of extra power by developing the second stage to an extreme would be nice and interesting, but not *my* main goal. When O-sensei explained for us to do what he doing towards the end of his career as opposed to what he used to do, we generally just think he meant - no need to do all of that pre-war hard style atemi-happy aikido, and go straight to grandpa-like movement. Maybe to some degree, but I think he *also* meant that taking that second level to such an extreme was unnecessary.

Ah... I think you're missing part of the main point, Rob. While I, as a westerner, may have the view that Ki and Kokyu power are supplemental strengths to martial arts, that is not what O-Sensei and many easterners think. They consider all the "harmony", "universal order", etc., to be missing if you don't have the Ki and Kokyu things. Ki and Kokyu are the "natural" powers that harmonize with the universe, Rob... you got it exactly backwards about the importance. Notice how the Ki training, etc., is tied into religion and if you want to learn it the deeper stuff comes through religious sources. In other words, your comments about extra power miss the importance of the Ki and Kokyu power and their place in O-Sensei's art. It was crucial. If it was just a toy, he would have taught everyone how to do it. He hid it. It was the core of the important part of Aikido, just as it's the hidden core, difficult-to-get-information-about part of most credible Asian arts. All the "mind-body" bits are part of the natural universal mechanism... the throws, blending, etc., are the superficial skin. You have the priorities reversed.

FWIW

Mike

Rob,

I like # 7 with the caveat that time is not relevant (or an all encompassing kind of relevant, but then we get into a metaphysical discussion and I'm lost).

I have read this discussion with interest...even sent a couple emails off to Mike.

Mike? You still out there reading this? You have taken some good pokes at the dogma of the aikido church...I would be interested in how you came to some or your conclusions/realizations....I have a vague feel for some of your learning path....some aikido, chinese martial arts...etc.

I would like to better understand the context of your learning and how you came to your insights....and it doesn't count if you tell me you could share "but then you would have to kill me" .

Best Regards.....and thanks to you and Rob (and everyone else) for some interesting and thought provoking reading.

Mark

Mark Mueller wrote: I would be interested in how you came to some or your conclusions/realizations....I have a vague feel for some of your learning path....some aikido, chinese martial arts...etc. I would like to better understand the context of your learning and how you came to your insights....and it doesn't count if you tell me you could share "but then you would have to kill me" .

Hi Mark:

I look at most of these things with 2 thoughts in mind: "How does it work?" & "What's the Big Picture?". It takes a while to get enough data to see the big picture, but there are clues everywhere, if you look. First of all, the prevalence of discussion about Qi/Ki in Asian martial arts should signal that there is some commonality, immediately, but most people get into a "we is best" mindset and focus on how their art is different rather than how it is similar to other arts. Of course, the fact that most people only focus on one art or just a few arts as seen by the western perspective makes it similarly obscured.

If you get away from the conceit that Aikido (or any other martial art) is the be-all, end-all of martial arts, you'll find that it has a lot of similarities that cross-connect it with ju-jitsu and other "soft" arts, "avoiding conflict", Ki, "harmonizing with the universe's basic rules", etc. The giveaway is, as I said, the commonality of Ki/Qi, breathing techniques, etc., through all the Asian martial arts... that should clue us that there is a common thread and unless all those generations of Asians were stupid, there's something very important about the Ki, Kokyu, etc., aspects or all the arts wouldn't use it. I get a chuckle about the people who consider it some small "parlor trick" sort of stuff..... they need to dig deeper and quit focusing on the black culottes.

Once you begin to learn the basics of Ki, kokyu, etc., and you look back at expert sources of other martial arts (I'm not talking about what you see in the typical McDojo), you see the same basis in breath-training, Ki, etc., when you probably didn't see them before [you certainly never saw them if you relied on amateurs like western teachers to represent "The Real Thing" (TM). ]

So my perspective on these Asian martial arts, is the commonality (of Ki, Kokyu and a few other things), not the differences. I see 3 main things:

1.) Variations in how to develop Ki, Kokyu, etc. (from harsher to very soft).

2.) Different body tricks to augment the common basics (use of hips versus dantien, use of back bow, body quivering, power "from the back", reeling silk, etc., etc.)

3.) Different techniques and strategies in the martial arts ("no conflict", "attack the center", "blend with his motion", etc., etc., etc.).

How I got to this viewpoint was through a lot of years of martial arts, but by avoiding all the religiosity, rah-rah macho, etc., and focusing on "how the heck does this weird strength-thing work", I suddenly saw what should have been obvious... the commonality. I didn't see the commonality because I, too, focused too much on "my style", Japanese culture, Chinese culture, and how each thing was special as opposed to looking at how each thing was really part of one big thing.

FWIW

Mike

Mike Sigman wrote: that is not what O-Sensei and many easterners think.

Let's be fair, you cannot know what O-sensei thought.

I certainly consider all the "harmony", "universal order", etc., to be missing if you don't have the Ki and Kokyu things as well. I also agree that Ki and Kokyu are the "natural" powers that harmonize with the universe. I am very clear that there was a degree of importance of the Ki and Kokyu power and their place in O-sensei's art. I certainly agree that it was crucial. And of course I agree that all the mind-body bits are part of the natural universal mechanism... the throws, blending, etc., are the superficial skin.

My point is that developing kokyu power to the degree required to do the jo-trick is probably unnecesary to doing aikido.

Other students of O-sensei don't do the jo-trick and O-sensei promoted them to grand mastery levels. Maybe they just hid the parlor tricks, but that seems unlikely.

I conceed that I might have it exactly backwards about the importance. I'm not O-sensei nor a grand master promoted by him in his art so I don't *know*.

There are certainly degrees of superficiality, and there exists the case that something important was taken to an extreme. I simply do not agree that the degree of developement of that power - required to do things like the jo trick - was crucial to aikido.

I see no harm in developing these skills further, so I'm always interested in your posts about them.

Rob

Rob Liberti wrote: Let's be fair, you cannot know what O-sensei thought.

In the particular case of Ki, Kokyu and the rest, I'm on pretty safe ground in knowing what he thought because I know that's the general thought in regard to Ki, etc., in Asian martial arts. I.e., when you look closely at it, most of what O-Sensei voiced actually reflected some fairly general ideas within the martial and religious communities, so it follows that he thought in those same general frameworks.

[snipsky]My point is that developing kokyu power to the degree required to do the jo-trick is probably unnecesary to doing aikido. Other students of O-sensei don't do the jo-trick and O-sensei promoted them to grand mastery levels. Maybe they just hid the parlor tricks, but that seems unlikely.

Well, in terms of promoting people to grand mastery, let's dispense with that immediately. Once O-Sensei promoted that woman dancer to 10th Dan, the meaning of his dan grades plummeted to zero. So we can deduce little about whom he promoted and why.

Secondly, in regard to the jo trick, I take both sides of every argument and I argue it to myself in an attempt to see things more clearly.... so I have to note that I am NOT an expert in any martial art (not at the level I would call "expert) and it MAY be that to do Aikido correctly, that much development is needed. For what I generally do, that much power would be a waste of my time, so I refuse to spend it, at the moment.

FWIW

Mike

Mike Sigman wrote: How I got to this viewpoint was through a lot of years of martial arts, but by avoiding all the religiosity, rah-rah macho, etc., and focusing on "how the heck does this weird strength-thing work", I suddenly saw what should have been obvious... the commonality. I didn't see the commonality because I, too, focused too much on "my style", Japanese culture, Chinese culture, and how each thing was special as opposed to looking at how each thing was really part of one big thing. FWIW Mike

So was there an "AHA" moment that gave you some insight? I have always worked from the practical side and avoided the mythology associated with Aikido.....under the assumption that "aikido" was my "laboratory" and that if I ran the experiments enough under the "controlled" aspects of my environment then observation, refinement and practice would give me the insights I was looking for....and that hopefully my intellect would allow me to apply this to the context outside the dojo.....and it seemed to work in application to my interest in boxing....and it seems to help in my new interest of horses.

The next question is "Have you developed a practical method of demonstrating, teaching and helping others develop these skills"? I guess this is really the question I have been dancing around...it sounds as if this is what you are suggesting.....but I can't find where you come right out and say it.

Regards,

mark