Baseline skillset

Raul Rodrigo wrote: If I were to take a stab at it, it seemed that his fingertips came up under and inside the "sphere" of my grab; somehow this popped my elbows into the air, and then at that point I was so light that the slightest flick of his hands would knock me away. There were none of the large movements we normally see, eg, torso leaning forward, or elbows dropping to get underneath them my grab. There was no feeling of ordinary muscular strength in the forearms; i've done this long enough that i can tell whether tori is deriving power from his elbows, his shoulders, his biceps, etc. It was as if at the very moment of contact, he was already underneath my center--and that was all he needed. Don't know if this helps any. R

Well, if this was a punch and not a grab, would there be only one response to make? Certainly not. So why then is it so surprising that one may respond to this in different ways as well? There are several things to consider in this situation. How did you grab his hands, pressure on top or below, pulling or pushing, where was your balance at the point you grabbed his hands, where was his balance, were you applying strength, etc.

And these factors(and more) influence where the connection is made, i.e. the top, bottom, sides of one's wrist. Now the better one gets at this, the less time and effort it will take to unbalance uke. And it would appear that nage does almost nothing when, in fact, he is just doing everything really, really well. Why would one need spiraling hands, leaning, elbow fiddling, etc. when uke's center has already been penetrated?

Just a few thoughts,
Eddie

Eddie deGuzman wrote: ...So why then is it so surprising that one may respond to this in different ways as well? There are several things to consider in this situation.....these factors(and more) influence ....Why would one need spiraling hands, leaning, elbow fiddling, etc. when uke's center has already been penetrated?

Imagine for a moment that you're a complete noob... OR better yet, you need to explain this to a complete noob... would a simplistic basic exercise to get you (or them) to step 1 be helpful? Or would a semi-detailed consideration of the myriad factors involved be expected?

What does penetrate uke's center mean? I dunno... I'm a simple person... I like things simple... I rather have lots of little simple things than one big complex issue... if ya catch my drift...

FWIW... it doesn't make a difference how you are being grabbed... it works exactly the same way... This is the CORE of what we're trying to get at...

Eddie, I've been training ten years and yes, i do know there are many ways of doing this. I can do quite a few of them myself. I do more variations of this movement than most of the yudansha i train with. Kuribayashi's version stands out because of the mysteriousness of it. that was what i was trying to get at. and as ignatius points out, we are trying to get to the baseline skill at the bottom of this. Do you have anything useful to add in this area?

Ignatius Teo wrote: Imagine for a moment that you're a complete noob... OR better yet, you need to explain this to a complete noob... would a simplistic basic exercise to get you (or them) to step 1 be helpful? Or would a semi-detailed consideration of the myriad factors involved be expected? What does penetrate uke's center mean? I dunno... I'm a simple person... I like things simple... I rather have lots of little simple things than one big complex issue... if ya catch my drift... FWIW... it doesn't make a difference how you are being grabbed... it works exactly the same way... This is the CORE of what we're trying to get at...

True, but I thought we had veered into why the gentleman in question was able to topple the other gentleman without making extraneous gestures/actions. Actually I agree with your earlier post on connection in that once the connection is made and proper extension/breathing/posture, etc. exist, then it doesn't require, for example, elbows digging deep or wrist turning.

If seated kokyu is THE exercise to develop the substance beneath the skill, then certainly we have to examine it and explain it in more straight forward terms. Yet, as I'm sure you know, it still is not that simple. How far of a noobie have you regressed to? The concept of what one perceives to be aikido and its goal in response to an attack should be addressed. Even doing this, there will be a myriad of individual beliefs. Even one's frame of mind coupled with the instructor's will have an impact on how a beginner reacts to being grabbed.

But...One sits in seiza, allows one's hands to be grabbed, and with as little effort as possible attempts to topple the attacker. That's pretty much what's going on and simple enough. But if you want to have it explained further, and we all want that, then it starts to get complicated. Non-use of muscular power, good posture, extension, breathing, connection, awareness of uke's grab, center, relaxation, etc. And then there is all of the visual imagery out there, flowing water, a rock(which I believe you mentioned much earlier), etc. to help guide one to the correct feel. And all of these things take some time to sink in. Too long for most of us. I don't have a quick fix answer, and I lack words to describe it, and I don't understand it all to begin with. Any enlightenment and I'm for it. Any exercises to help me work it all out, give it to me. Any theory as to how all of this works, I'll read it. Cool video, I wanna see it!

As to the question of how or where one is grabbed, I beg to differ. There are a number points along the circle of my wrist and one is enough to form the connection. With so many points to choose from, shouldn't one point be tactically better than the rest...theoretically, of course?
Thoughts?
Eddie

Raul Rodrigo wrote: Eddie, I've been training ten years and yes, i do know there are many ways of doing this. I can do quite a few of them myself. I do more variations of this movement than most of the yudansha i train with. Kuribayashi's version stands out because of the mysteriousness of it. that was what i was trying to get at. and as ignatius points out, we are trying to get to the baseline skill at the bottom of this. Do you have anything useful to add in this area?

Raul, I can add that it doesn't seem that mysterious to me, or at least not any more mysterious than kokyu in general. I will also note, however, that I did not see/feel what happened. Any video to comment on, or something similar to what you experienced? That would be useful to add.

Aikido...cool stuff, ain't it!
Eddie

Ignatius Teo wrote: Imagine for a moment that you're a complete noob... OR better yet, you need to explain this to a complete noob... What does penetrate uke's center mean? I dunno... I'm a simple person... I like things simple... I rather have lots of little simple things than one big complex issue... if ya catch my drift... FWIW... it doesn't make a difference how you are being grabbed... it works exactly the same way... This is the CORE of what we're trying to get at...

Michelangelo famously said that sculpting a statue was very simple. You just take a chisel and remove everything that is not statue.

He did not wield a chisel differently than the lowest stonemason's apprentice. He simpy knew exactly what he was aiming for and had was able to consistently hit the mark.

The problem is not one of differential technique but of refinement of perception, sensitivity and precision.

And lots of busted rock and many marble chips later ...

Eddie deGuzman wrote: If seated kokyu is THE exercise to develop the substance beneath the skill, then certainly we have to examine it and explain it in more straight forward terms.

kokyu-ho, whether standing (on one leg/2 legs) or seated (seiza/cross-legged/one butt cheek off the floor), makes no difference... It is A way.... one of many.... this is what we're trying to get at and examine and explain in straightforward terms....

Problem is... some people are missing the point and getting sidetracked into off-topic discussions about some other stuff pertaining to how wrists should rotate, and getting mired in the technicalities of how the waza is like this or that... etc. etc.

One sits in seiza, allows one's hands to be grabbed, and with as little effort as possible attempts to topple the attacker. That's pretty much what's going on and simple enough. But if you want to have it explained further, and we all want that, then it starts to get complicated.

Is it that simple really??? How does one not use muscle power? More pertinently, shoulder power? Define "good posture"? If "good posture" is sitting up straight, how is it possible to do it cross-legged, sitting on one butt cheek, whilst scratching your other butt? Define "extension"? Breathing...? How? Why can this be done breathing in, out or holding the breath? What purpose does imagery serve? If I imagine reaching out to embrace a Playboy PlayMate, would that work? Why?

As to the question of how or where one is grabbed, I beg to differ. There are a number points along the circle of my wrist and one is enough to form the connection. With so many points to choose from, shouldn't one point be tactically better than the rest...theoretically, of course?

Theoretically? Practically it makes no difference.... that imaginary PlayMate could be holding anywhere any which way - even as high as up the forearm, or even restraining my elbows....or hands on shoulders.... if you understand how kokyu-ho can be applied in any and all of those situations, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Erick Mead wrote: Michelangelo famously said that sculpting a statue was very simple. You just take a chisel and remove everything that is not statue. He did not wield a chisel differently than the lowest stonemason's apprentice. He simpy knew exactly what he was aiming for and had was able to consistently hit the mark. The problem is not one of differential technique but of refinement of perception, sensitivity and precision. And lots of busted rock and many marble chips later ...

I dunno Erick... the stonemason down the road has a pretty good replica of David standing in the paddock, which he carved out of sandstone using a mini-chainsaw....

Oh, the problem is not a difference in technique... or that one has a more refined technique, thru refinement of feel, perception, sensitivity and precision... that, merely is a result of constant refinement of practice.

So, essentially, what you're saying Erick, is just keep practising and one day you'll get to be like Michaelangelo? Hmmmm.... practising what?

You're still missing the point... the problem is learning how to wield the chisel and mallet correctly in the first place.

Ignatius Teo wrote: kokyu-ho, whether standing (on one leg/2 legs) or seated (seiza/cross-legged/one butt cheek off the floor), makes no difference... It is A way.... one of many.... this is what we're trying to get at and examine and explain in straightforward terms.... Problem is... some people are missing the point and getting sidetracked into off-topic discussions about some other stuff pertaining to how wrists should rotate, and getting mired in the technicalities of how the waza is like this or that... etc. etc. Is it that simple really??? How does one not use muscle power? More pertinently, shoulder power? Define "good posture"? If "good posture" is sitting up straight, how is it possible to do it cross-legged, sitting on one butt cheek, whilst scratching your other butt? Define "extension"? Breathing...? How? Why can this be done breathing in, out or holding the breath? What purpose does imagery serve? If I imagine reaching out to embrace a Playboy PlayMate, would that work? Why? Theoretically? Practically it makes no difference.... that imaginary PlayMate could be holding anywhere any which way - even as high as up the forearm, or even restraining my elbows....or hands on shoulders.... if you understand how kokyu-ho can be applied in any and all of those situations, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

In a sense, things are that simple. Basketball...there's the ball, there's the hoop, throw the ball in the hoop. Simple, yet not so simple. The more you play, the better you get. But of course we're not all going to make it into the NBA, but it's still fun to play. You asked me to make it simple so I did.

As to all the questions you posed to me, let's just erase them from the equation and see how well we do aikido hunched over, scratching our butts, dreaming of playmates and holding our breaths(that last two being a set).

I understand the point, to not worry about endless techniques and focus on the underlying connection they all have. I get it. But the more everyone discusses it, the more I think that what we are all trying to describe, in itself, IS a technique and it involves many things. Mike started this all off with a stance that favored the rear leg and connecting uke with the floor, friction coming into play. Is this not technique? As much as seated, standing, one-legged, one-cheeked kokyu is also a technique?(But seriously, will you teach that way? I might come to your class if the playmate was there, though. ) Body mechanics, physics, natural movement, it all seems to come into play, but is not anything we conciously do to improve our aikido, in essence, a technique for us to understand, assimilate and improve?

I entered this thread hoping to find words to describe what it is we do because I wasn't taught through words. I spoke no Japanese when I got here. I was thrown, and attempted to throw. Pretty much as simple as that. But over time, through guidance, and despite my own need to overanalyze, I learned something. We may not agree on what to call it or how to do it or why amazing things happen. It is what it is. Like a chair you call a stool, it's still something to sit on.

As I stated earlier, I lean towards Mike's explanation of things. Yet of all things said thus far, I still haven't heard anything that explains what's going on in the background of technique that a complete noobie will grasp. Perhaps you can just describe it to us, as you would a complete noobie, and we will all instantly become enlightened. I don't expect you to be able to do that, nor anyone else. Whether I understand kokyu or not is really not the point, as far as I am concerned. I'm willing to listen. We all have different experiences and are at different points on the road of understanding/ability. I appreciate your insight, though, as I do everyone's.

Cheers,
Eddie

Ignatius Teo wrote: Problem is... some people are missing the point and getting sidetracked into off-topic discussions about some other stuff pertaining to how wrists should rotate, and getting mired in the technicalities of how the waza is like this or that... etc. etc.

Point is, basics have to start at some point that is more easily grasped by a beginner. Thus, gross overt movements of proper form, like those of the wrist, progressing to the forearm and to the shoulder and to the spine and hips are easier to see and to adjust in gross scale, for the beginner. The shape of the movement is there, and is the saem whether my point of connection is the wrist, elbow, shoulder, chest or hip.

You all approach the teaching methodology for such basics from a different, and less conventional perspective, it seems to me. I don't agree with it, but the basic goal in the movment seems much the same (exlcuding again the resistance part) .

The exercises conintue to have relevant lessons even at more advanced levels because they are laboratories for study of variations of movement and nuances of contact at a scale where the interactions that can be unpacked and expanded for study and then packed up again for practical applications.

Ignatius Teo wrote: .... that imaginary PlayMate could be holding anywhere any which way - even as high as up the forearm, or even restraining my elbows....or hands on shoulders.... if you understand how kokyu-ho can be applied in any and all of those situations, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

Of course, trying to get beginners to understand the fundamentals that allow kokyu tanden ho to function from the shoulder grab or anywhere else for that matter, requires a simplfying assumption and a training scenario to expand the rterms of reference to a scale of comfort. It is not intuitively obvious to the beginner (if it were, then Aikido would have limited martial value to begin with). We create "handles" or perhaps the better image is from music -- "frets"-- to later dispense with them, because not every one gets the application of pure body "English" at the precise dynamic locaitons necessary to control the opponent's structure straightaway.

Eddie deGuzman wrote: In a sense, things are that simple. Basketball...there's the ball, there's the hoop, throw the ball in the hoop. Simple, yet not so simple. The more you play, the better you get. But of course we're not all going to make it into the NBA, but it's still fun to play. You asked me to make it simple so I did.

How do you just "throw" the ball? What's the difference between using kokyu/jin to throw the ball and simply throwing the ball? Is there a difference?

Erick Mead wrote: Point is, basics have to start at some point that is more easily grasped by a beginner. Thus, gross overt movements of proper form.....You all approach the teaching methodology for such basics from a different, and less conventional perspective, it seems to me. I don't agree with it, but the basic goal in the movment seems much the same (exlcuding again the resistance part) .

Therein, I think, lies the problem... without any rudimentary body conditioning routine, the beginner is thus thrown in at the deep end of.... form and technique. Recall that Ueshiba M required students to have a foundation in another martial art before accepting them.

The problem is everyone glosses over the "warm up" exercises to get to the "meat" of the class - waza, waza and more waza.... when the real "beef" is in the "warm ups".

How many here actually do those "warm ups" outside of aikido classes? What sort of body conditioning do you use to develop "strength"?

Eddie, I cant figure out if you're telling me that you know what happened and its no big deal. ("Its not mysterious to me.") Or that you don't know and are as mystified as the rest of us. Your posts seem to be going in both directions at the same time. Or maybe i am dense.

Ignatius Teo wrote: Therein, I think, lies the problem... without any rudimentary body conditioning routine, the beginner is thus thrown in at the deep end of.... form and technique. Recall that Ueshiba M required students to have a foundation in another martial art before accepting them.

And the secrets are in the techniques -- he said that, too.

Ignatius Teo wrote: The problem is everyone glosses over the "warm up" exercises to get to the "meat" of the class - waza, waza and more waza....

Speak for yourself. Not here. Warmups are not really for "toning" the body anyway, so much as setting the limit governors on connection for the whole practice, so that each student feels in every joint the limits of the structure for that day, and feels in their own body the internal connections that he or she will be externalizing with the partner. We beat on the arms, legs and body to feel the internal atemi connection also. That is the point of the warmups, to draw attention to the sensations of the body in the various types of connection.

If you aren't going carefully enough to feel what is happening then you aren't learning anything. Note: I did not say slowly -- I said carefully. Nothing about aikido -- or any budo for that matter -- lends itself to empty-headed repetition. That's why I am still doing it. Sometimes the engaged dynamic teaches what the exercise simply cannot.

There are fairly immediate limits to the usefulness of training the fundamental motion of bicycling without actually being on a bike. In fact some of the more important fundamentals, like the nature of dynamic balance, you simply cannot learn on a static trainer or by "conditioning" spinning exercises for your legs to move the feet in ever more precise or efficient circles of the pedals.

Ushiro Sensei, whom you all point to as a guide from the 2006 summer camp, echoed my analogy in his comments leading to that training event:

Ushiro Sensei wrote: In the same way that you only truly appreciate the utility and enjoyment of riding a bicycle once you have mastered it, it is only when you are able to freely use the techniques contained within kata that you come to appreciate the profound nature of the kata themselves. However, unlike our bicycle analogy, because the kata are not purely physical constructs they are substantially more difficult to internalize.... Just as the multiplication tables form the foundation of basic arithmetic, kata form the foundation of bujutsu and budo. Only through repeated practice of these foundational elements can we arrive at an understanding of their essence. In turn, it is only from that point that we can begin to explore concrete applications.

http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=690

Frank Doran Sensei quoted Yagyu Jubei in his commetns for the same event

Fank Doran wrote: -- Principle and Technique are firmly tied together. At the very heart of every technique lies a basic principle. Look beyond technique and discover the principle that gives it life. -- Technique is the hammer that drives the principle into our consciousness. Without technique - the principle has no way to express itself - it is just an idea.

And lastly, Ikeda Sensei

Ikeda Sensei wrote: The attitude of many people studying martial arts seems to be that it is enough to train only techniques and not the fundamental martial spirit that vitalizes them. When a large number of techniques and movements are understood only intellectually, the application of those techniques is diminished. Budo that is informed by purely cerebral understanding has a tendency to become a 'fantasy' budo. ...as we age our muscle strength wanes, ... The underlying principle of budo is that no matter how old one gets, one should be able to deal with a person of greater strength using the techniques and spiritual mastery one develops through training. The fact that the budo we are practicing does not lead in that direction or prepare us for when we get older tells us we are practicing something very different from the original martial arts.

I am very comfortable with my arc along this spectrum as laid out by Ikeda Sensei -- in terms of my increase of ability and comfort in dealing with much greater strength -- at the same time that I begin to see my physical capacity waning. I must conclude therefore that I am doing something right.

Ignatius Teo wrote: The problem is everyone glosses over the "warm up" exercises to get to the "meat" of the class - waza, waza and more waza.... when the real "beef" is in the "warm ups". How many here actually do those "warm ups" outside of aikido classes? What sort of body conditioning do you use to develop "strength"?

I think we have to specify what "warm ups" would apply to say that was true. If I'm thinking about my current warm up routine I'd agree with your statement since by design my teacher is doing specific things to help condition us to improve our kokyu abilities. However, in other dojos I've been part of in the past, the warm up routine did not nearly as much contribute to that and was done more for the purpose of just warming us up and stretching us out for the keiko session. However, if one's teacher has designed "warm up" exercises to condition us to improve our kokyu abilities I totally agree that we need to be aware of that and feed on the "beef" as you put it rather than just focusing on the waza part of our training.

Erick Mead wrote: Quoting Ushiro Sensei... Just as the multiplication tables form the foundation of basic arithmetic, kata form the foundation of bujutsu and budo. Only through repeated practice of these foundational elements can we arrive at an understanding of their essence. In turn, it is only from that point that we can begin to explore concrete applications.

There's nothing wrong with his statement...."kata [i.e 型 - mold/model/pattern of behaviour, NOT 形 (katachi) - shape/form] form the foundation of bujutsu and budo. Only through repeated practice of these foundational elements can we arrive at an understanding of their essence. In turn, it is only from that point that we can begin to explore concrete applications [i.e. waza].

You seem to be confusing kata 型 - a "behaviourial" model with 形 - the shapes or forms that such "behaviour" is manifested with waza 技 - technique (i.e. applications of such "behaviourial" patterns 型 within the shapes and forms of 形 ).

My question is "what are the foundational elements?"... and "what is the essence?"... to me, this "essence" is the baseline skills we are talking about....

Ignatius Teo wrote: My question is "what are the foundational elements?"... and "what is the essence?"... to me, this "essence" is the baseline skills we are talking about....

Incidentally, to get it on the record, someone sent me a copy of a breathing technique Tohei espoused in the 70's, I think. I actually have the book from which the technique(s) were copied, but I glossed over them in re-reads because they're surrounded by the "Ki of the Universe" stuff (which I don't quibble with; it comes from a legitimate early view of Ki/Qi... I'm just not interested in that perspective so I tend to ignore it). Anyway, I missed it and conversations with experts in Tohei's methods indicated that the breathing was more for mental stuff, so I missed that one until it was pointed out to me.

Tohei offers "Tohei Style Breathing Methods" which are (at least 2 of them) legitimate power-building gungs. The only problem is that he's not fully explicative about them so most people would just copy "deep breathing" and external stretching movements.

Oh... and although it's not obvious, the "Sanchin Kata" that Ushiro Sensei teaches is actually related to the breathing exercises and movements that Tohei teaches.... the underlying principles are the same.

Just to offer a perspective (an inescapable one to anyone with the background), the kokyu/jin stuff and the ki/breathing-exercises stuff are inextricably intertwined. There is a reason why "kokyu", though essentially the jin-forces, is also the breathing-skills-forces. One is the support of the other and therefore one of those strength-skills is bound up in the developmental level of the other.

So the "baseline skills" I'd suggest for any listing would include the sort of breathing training that Tohei suggested in his earlier book(s). Like the mind-manipulated forces, though, you can't just learn it from copying the poses of Tohei in books... you need someone to show you.

Anyway, my 2 cents FTR.

Mike

mike...

to which book are you refering?

thanks!

jeff.

Apologies, Jeff... I meant to put it in my message:

Ki in Daily Life
ISBN. 0-87040-436-9 Published in 1978 by Ki no Kenkyukai distributed by Kodansha International

Best.

Mike

Since I've had very little to do with "Tohei's Style Breathing Methods", I'll pass on commenting. What was interesting to me was the comparative "softness" of Ushiro sensei's sanchin, compared to, say the Goju guys that I've trained with from the Miyagi-Higaonna line. And what's up with the shime - where they smack the practitioner in various places???

Perhaps a question would be how is kokyu in aikido different or similar to say, punching and kiai-ing in horse stance???

Ignatius Teo wrote: There's nothing wrong with his statement...."kata [i.e 型 - mold/model/pattern of behaviour, NOT 形 (katachi) - shape/form] form the foundation of bujutsu and budo. Only through repeated practice of these foundational elements can we arrive at an understanding of their essence. In turn, it is only from that point that we can begin to explore concrete applications [i.e. waza]. You seem to be confusing kata 型 - a "behaviourial" model with 形 - the shapes or forms that such "behaviour" is manifested with waza 技 - technique (i.e. applications of such "behaviourial" patterns 型 within the shapes and forms of 形 ).

I confuse nothing of the kind, nor could you possibly. The article was only provided in translation (and used 'kata,' not 'katachi'). It did not provide any kanji of the original but only Neville Nason's translation. I suggest you ask him. Of course, maybe he really meant 肩 sz

Ignatius Teo wrote: My question is "what are the foundational elements?"... and "what is the essence?"... to me, this "essence" is the baseline skills we are talking about....

The point of all three quotes, from their respective positions, is that budo is suffering from respective different tendencies to monism Both tendencies need reintegration. On the one hand, some karate has tended to go all physical toward striking in losing the cerebral strategic/philosophiical elements of its non-striking controls (Ushiro). On the other hand, some Aikido has tended to go toward the philosophical/ cerebral losing grounding in the concrete world of effective technique (Ikeda). Doran speaks to the need for reunifying both elements as parts of an irreducible whole, citing Yagyu Jubei Notably O-Senei also said in Budo Renshu, that Yagyu Jubei was a watchword for aikido and the required unificaiton of mind and body intraining.

My criticism is that the way to reintegrate body and mind from the soft cerebral form of aikido is not backwards -- but irimi. We should rejoin the concrete nature of practice with a rigorous intellectual exposition of the physical mechanisms of rigorous practice.

O-Sensei, Budo Renshu wrote: If you reach the point of accumulating a certain amount of enthusiastic practice, when the real figtht comes, you will see the fallen form of the enemy there, beforeyou even raise a hannd... You should train with the belief that when you are enthusiastic the techniques come in this way

Raul Rodrigo wrote: Eddie, I cant figure out if you're telling me that you know what happened and its no big deal. ("Its not mysterious to me.") Or that you don't know and are as mystified as the rest of us. Your posts seem to be going in both directions at the same time. Or maybe i am dense.

Forgive me Raul if I made it seem like it was no big deal. It wasn't my intention. Keeping it simple for a noobie per eyrie's request was something of a different subject.

What I meant is that from what I understand of the description you gave, it sounded like the kokyu waza we do in the dojo every class. It's just that some people are better at it than others. But to say it clearly, yes, I think I can do what I believe you described.

But to describe how I do what I do without using the vocabulary that I am familiar with is difficult. It's like saying describe air without using the words oxygen, gas, breathe, etc. Perhaps someone else can do that. Fine, it's just an analogy and it doesn't really matter. As was the basketball comment.

And this is not to say that kokyu is an easy thing to do. It's not. I've been at this for while too. I just lack a way to describe it. I am interested in what Mike has to say about the Chinese arts and their way of explaining energy/forces/etc. A link to some supplemental reading would be nice. English books are a little hard to come by here.

Have a nice weekend,
Eddie

Well Erick... perhaps you should take Frank Doran's advice....

Fank Doran wrote: Look beyond technique and discover the principle that gives it life.

Because that is precisely what we're trying to do, amidst your interjections and tangential arguments...

Perhaps it maybe true that "technique might be the hammer that drives the principle into our consciousness. and without it (technique), the principle may have no way to express itself". But the time and place for that is on the mat. Yes, it (principle) may just be "an idea", but it is a idea that begs further exploration - off the mat. Which is what some of us are trying to do here, using the appropriate medium.

If you aren't interested in discussing the idea on its own merits, then perhaps you should take your hammer and go bang some nails... since it is quite obvious that you have NO IDEA what the principle is that we are talking about anyway....

Ignatius Teo wrote: What was interesting to me was the comparative "softness" of Ushiro sensei's sanchin, compared to, say the Goju guys that I've trained with from the Miyagi-Higaonna line. And what's up with the shime - where they smack the practitioner in various places??? Perhaps a question would be how is kokyu in aikido different or similar to say, punching and kiai-ing in horse stance???

From memories of the wooden floor, I recall sanchin as an attempt to unify the mind and body and become rooted and immovable. The smacking/hitting/kicking is an attempt to knock them off balance or show that their body is not working in unison. Perhaps similar to pushing on Mr. Sum in various places and angles.

Cheers,
Eddie

Eddie deGuzman wrote: ...But to describe how I do what I do without using the vocabulary that I am familiar with is difficult. It's like saying describe air without using the words oxygen, gas, breathe, etc. Perhaps someone else can do that. Fine, it's just an analogy and it doesn't really matter. As was the basketball comment.

When I was much younger, my brother taught me how to shoot hoops... in 5mins... he demonstrated and explained how to use the ground as a springboard... how to use the elbow as a lever... how to transfer the throw from ground to elbow to fingers to hoop.... in 5mins I was getting the desired lift in the ball that I didn't have before. Sure my aim sucked at first, but half an hour of practice later, I sucked a little less...

So.... why can't kokyu-ho or any other "technique" be explained in the same way?