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

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General

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

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-28-2006, 08:35 PM   #276
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
...if you read through the posts, you'll find that Dan, Mike and Rob are pretty much on the same page when it comes to talking about this stuff.
Well, Mark, they do seem to be talking about similar phenomena, but Mike constantly derides Dan, so he doesn't seem to think they're doing the same thing. Second, Mike has much more CMA background than he has aikido. And Akuzawa's background also seems to be more Chinese than aiki-oriented, so I'm still not sure that this isn't something that's being adopted from Chinese arts and applied to Japanese arts--not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think it's part of the original nature of the Japanese arts and so it's mistaken to say that "this" is what's missing from Japanese budo.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
Read the entry on Aikido Journal about Ushiro. It's all internal stuff.

And from Ikeda sensei:

"The kind of power through kokyu that Ushiro sensei has been teaching...."


If you can argue with Ikeda against all this, I'd certainly like to be there. I felt Ikeda and he's very good. If he thinks that that our kokyu should be changed ... I'm nowhere near a level to argue that point.
Well, that's a couple of more points, Mark. Please note that Ikeda sensei said "power through kokyu." To me, this reinforces what I have said--that kokyu, itself, is NOT power and certainly not an "issued" power. You achieve power "through" kokyu, which is to say through integrating mind and body via the breath.

I'm also not sure what you think I would argue with him about. I don't think he would have told Mochizuki Sensei that his kokyu needed to be changed and that is what I know as kokyu. Real kokyu needs not be changed. False kokyu needs only be made into real kokyu, if that's what you mean. I can't see Ikeda Sensei saying that the kokyu of Morihei Ueshiba was wrong. What's wrong is the modern idea of kokyu.

Note also, how Ushiro Sensei developed his power: kata and kumite. He mentioned nothing about special exercises outside kata and free fighting. Clearly, the fighting is, to him, a very essential aspect of developing that special power. In Mochizuki Sensei's dojo, it was kata and randori--with heavy resistance and weapons. I think Ushiro Sensei is more likely to agree with my points than with some of the others that have been expressed, so I don't see myself arguing with him or Ikeda Sensei, either.

Also, please note that Ushiro Sensei spoke explicitly of "ki" as a matter of intent, and that its most important function is mind-to-mind, before any contact is made. If this were a physical thing, developed from the fascia or alignment of ground paths, how could it affect people at a distance with no contact?

Quote:
From the Article wrote:
"In order to address this limitation, it is necessary to find something that is not based on physical power - something not visible to the eye, something that controls the opponent even before contact is made. This is ki. If one can cultivate ki, then one can utilize it in all aspects of life, says Ushiro shihan.
.....
"Ushiro shihan states that ki solves everything. Ki is neither strength nor timing, but energy that spreads out from the hara to the entire body. Furthermore, there are levels of ki; from the most elementary, to levels that have no limit. All budo training begins from the starting point of learning to bring out this ki.

"Exactly how can one nurture ki? Ushiro shihan cultivated his ki by repeatedly practicing kata, and by the practice of free sparring.

"True ki emerges through practice. Ki is not just automatically there. Through the practice of free sparring, when your body cannot escape, your heart and mind cannot escape, when you notice that you can enter your opponent without being overcome, then ki begins to emerge. The necessary basis for entering is kata. However, it is not that kata comes first, nor is it that sparring comes first. Each must complement the other in order to begin to feel and develop ki."

But the greatest factor in cultivating ki is everyday, real-world practice, says Ushiro shihan. He not only practices budo but he also runs a successful company. As an electronics developer and researcher, he works with major entities such as Panasonic, Mitsubishi, Sony, NEC, Sharp, and even NASA. He has developed numerous integrated circuits based upon his own patents. He has amassed an extraordinary amount of business experience. The severity and competition in the business world is on an entirely different plane than that of competitive sports. Ushiro shihan practices and preserves the foundations of budo, by reminding himself of his experience in that strict, demanding, real-world business environment, even amidst our relatively peaceful modern times. He believes that is the way budo training in the modern world should be."
So ki is not primarily a product of mechanical alignment of the body but of involvement with life and traditional arts are very good for developing it.

Sounds like another guy I'd like to meet.

Best wishes.

David

Last edited by David Orange : 11-28-2006 at 08:48 PM.

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

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2006, 08:53 PM   #277
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Well, Mark, they do seem to be talking about similar phenomena, but Mike constantly derides Dan, so he doesn't seem to think they're doing the same thing.
I simply object to bragging.... that's not "derision". Insofar as different approaches, etc., I've said that is common. Heck, look at Ushiro... what he does is not the same usage of kokyu that Ueshiba used. Why is this a hard concept to grasp?
Quote:
Second, Mike has much more CMA background than he has aikido. And Akuzawa's background also seems to be more Chinese than aiki-oriented, so I'm still not sure that this isn't something that's being adopted from Chinese arts and applied to Japanese arts--not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think it's part of the original nature of the Japanese arts and so it's mistaken to say that "this" is what's missing from Japanese budo.
Really, this is an absurdity. Look at Ki and Qi... do you think these are 2 different things and that all the Japanese martial arts use different things called "ki" and all the Chinese martial arts use a number of things that are called "qi" arbitrarily? Start the chain of logic anywhere you want.... it's all the same complex subject. Ask someone like Abe or Inaba or whoever.... this idea that the Chinese qi things are different from the Japanese ki things, including "kokyu", is ludicrous except in a conversation where the level of understanding is very low.
Quote:
Well, that's a couple of more points, Mark. Please note that Ikeda sensei said "power through kokyu." To me, this reinforces what I have said--that kokyu, itself, is NOT power and certainly not an "issued" power. You achieve power "through" kokyu, which is to say through integrating mind and body via the breath.
So that effectively dismisses the term "kokyu ryoku" if you're correct, eh? And incidentally, "Kokyu" uses "breath", but not in the way a lot of people think. I've said that before. However, the *essence* of kokyu strength is jin. This is pretty straightforward and would make a great bet, if someone wants to bet on or against the obvious.
Quote:
(snip more "me and Mochizuki" stuff)Also, please note that Ushiro Sensei spoke explicitly of "ki" as a matter of intent, and that its most important function is mind-to-mind, before any contact is made. If this were a physical thing, developed from the fascia or alignment of ground paths, how could it affect people at a distance with no contact? (snip) So ki is not primarily a product of mechanical alignment of the body but of involvement with life and traditional arts are very good for developing it.
Actually, I see where some of your errors are creeping in. "Ki" can really be several things, but I've explained that a number of times before. There is Ki that would be more or less the fascia stuff. There is ki that would be the mental manipulation of forces (that's the 'jin'). There is Ki that is "pressure" or "air pressure". But they're taken as a wholistic "ki" thing and the parts are more or less inextricable when you look at the whole. For instance, the pressure/fascia/jin things are all part of the complete "kokyu" term.... but the essence is still the jin, or at least it's the most tangible part of the whole force/skill. And 'jin' is considered to be "the physical manifestation of ki" and it involves this mental manipulation of forces; i.e., the "intent", the "yi".

What you need is for someone to lead you through the whole of it and you'll suddenly see it, David. It's fairly obvious when it's shown to you.

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 05:30 AM   #278
Tom H.
Location: Rhode Island
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 72
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Well, Mark, they do seem to be talking about similar phenomena, but Mike constantly derides Dan, so he doesn't seem to think they're doing the same thing.
A while back I had pegged this stuff as Chinese, and was surprised to find someone with a Japanese background like Dan having it. After having met both of them, I'm pretty sure they are talking about a lot of the same things.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 06:28 AM   #279
MM
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,996
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Mike has much more CMA background than he has aikido. And Akuzawa's background also seems to be more Chinese than aiki-oriented, so I'm still not sure that this isn't something that's being adopted from Chinese arts and applied to Japanese arts--not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't think it's part of the original nature of the Japanese arts and so it's mistaken to say that "this" is what's missing from Japanese budo.
Hi David,
Your point is very well taken. So much so that it is one of the main reasons that this stuff hasn't been accepted very well in the Aikido world. It is coming from outsiders.

If any of this stuff had come from inside an Aikido organization, guess what ... we'd *still* have the same discussions going on now. Just a bit different in that it would be various schools defending their way of training/teaching/whatever from another school. Aikido is so splintered that to change the whole, one must change a multitude of parts. Er ... getting off subject here ... anyway, yes, this stuff is coming from outside the Aikido world.

It's understandable that people will say, hey, why do you think what your doing is missing in Aikido? Kind of presumptuous, don't you think? Well, yeah, in a way. But, not necessarily wrong, though. Once you get a feel for it, you realize that what they're doing can really be classified as "aiki". But it's an aiki that's done a different way than most Aikido schools practice.

And here is where people sometimes get bent out of shape. No one is saying that the current Aikido training is worthless and should be scrapped. Takeda and Ueshiba certainly had techniques that they taught. We still learn those techniques. But, what is being said is that there is another way of having "aiki" and there is a training program that is more efficient in gaining this internal skill. If you're doing Aikido, you still need to know and understand the techniques of the system. Ueshiba never dropped them, so why would we?

I don't know how you've trained, David. You may have learned some of this stuff, but coming from Mochizuki sensei, you may have been taught different terms. Dunno. One of these days, I'll make it down your way and we can get together and have some fun.

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Well, that's a couple of more points, Mark. Please note that Ikeda sensei said "power through kokyu." To me, this reinforces what I have said--that kokyu, itself, is NOT power and certainly not an "issued" power. You achieve power "through" kokyu, which is to say through integrating mind and body via the breath.
Everyone is different. I've found that the English language can be easily translated into many definitions. For example, your last sentence. To me, I can take that as an internal skill. Mind and body integrated via the breath. It certainly captures some of the exercises I've been trying to do. But, you didn't mean it that way. So, through words, we come to various meanings. It happens all to often. I guess that's why seminars were invented. To get a feel for everyone's interpretation.

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 07:47 PM   #280
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
I simply object to bragging.... that's not "derision". Insofar as different approaches, etc., I've said that is common.
So you do feel that Dan is doing something in common with you?

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Heck, look at Ushiro... what he does is not the same usage of kokyu that Ueshiba used. Why is this a hard concept to grasp?
It's not hard to grasp at all. But he's doing karate...so you would expect it to be different. I just don't agree with the idea that we should replace real aikido kokyu with real karate kokyu.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Really, this is an absurdity. Look at Ki and Qi... do you think these are 2 different things and that all the Japanese martial arts use different things called "ki" and all the Chinese martial arts use a number of things that are called "qi" arbitrarily?
Of course not. Ki and qi are essentially the same. However, just as the Japanese and Chinese develop different types of work and develop different ways of living, dressing, playing, making music and everything else, it should be clear that they developed two very different ways of expressing qi other than mere pronunciation of the word. Just as all alcohol is fundamentally the same, ki and qi are the same thing. But Japanese sake and Chinese soju are very different types of white liquor. And so the martial arts use qi very differently.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Ask someone like Abe or Inaba or whoever.... this idea that the Chinese qi things are different from the Japanese ki things, including "kokyu", is ludicrous except in a conversation where the level of understanding is very low.
Sorry, but I've had too much personal experience to accept that. I've felt technique from hundreds of people and there is a distinct difference in what I've felt from Chinese stylists that I never experienced from any Japanese stylist. It's not the same, especially at higher levels.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
So that effectively dismisses the term "kokyu ryoku" if you're correct, eh?
It doesn't dismiss the term. Kokyu Ryoku is power expressed through a mind and body integrated via the breath. As Ikeda Sensei said in the article, it is "power through kokyu," not "power of kokyu." But like I pointed out to Ellis earlier, if you want to define kokyu ryoku as "power of kokyu," then you have to define sei ryoku as "power of sei," (power of correctness) which should show you that that's not the correct usage. Even though there is power in correctness, the real power is "through" correctness.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
And incidentally, "Kokyu" uses "breath", but not in the way a lot of people think.
Of course, but why focus on the common misunderstanding? I only want to discuss these things in the correct usage.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
However, the *essence* of kokyu strength is jin. This is pretty straightforward and would make a great bet, if someone wants to bet on or against the obvious.
The essence of kokyu is integration of the mind and body through the breath. There would be a relation between jin and kokyu, but not equality.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
"Ki" can really be several things, but I've explained that a number of times before.
The problem is that you are off on your explanations because of a biased belief that the Japanese and Chinese ways are equatable and that you can explain both ways through a rough approximation of Western scientific thinking--both premises being flawed. So while ki can be expressed in many ways and can take many forms, it still is only one "thing".

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
There is Ki that would be more or less the fascia stuff. There is ki that would be the mental manipulation of forces (that's the 'jin'). There is Ki that is "pressure" or "air pressure". But they're taken as a wholistic "ki" thing and the parts are more or less inextricable when you look at the whole.
And that's why I always say you can't divide them into martial/metaphysical or any other dichotomy outside the whole.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
For instance, the pressure/fascia/jin things are all part of the complete "kokyu" term.... but the essence is still the jin, or at least it's the most tangible part of the whole force/skill.
See, that problem of equating the "essence" with "the most tangible part" is where you lose my support. I liked your description of feeling the "suit" of fascia beneath the skin and I've been thinking about that, especially in relation to the push-out exercise. But I won't accept "the most tangible" as "the essence" even if it makes it easier to talk about it.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
And 'jin' is considered to be "the physical manifestation of ki" and it involves this mental manipulation of forces; i.e., the "intent", the "yi".
No argument there. Maybe because you stuck to Chinese concepts within a Chinese framework. It's when you try to lay that over well-defined Japanese concepts that it comes off as if you're trying to say soju = sake.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
What you need is for someone to lead you through the whole of it and you'll suddenly see it, David. It's fairly obvious when it's shown to you.
I do like your descriptions of things Chinese but your efforts at correlating them to the Japanese ways are not so skillful.

Best to you.

David

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

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 07:50 PM   #281
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Tom Holz wrote:
After having met both of them, I'm pretty sure they are talking about a lot of the same things.
How would you compare the experiences of training with both of them?

Thanks.

David

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

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 08:06 PM   #282
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Really, this is an absurdity. Look at Ki and Qi... do you think these are 2 different things and that all the Japanese martial arts use different things called "ki" and all the Chinese martial arts use a number of things that are called "qi" arbitrarily?

Of course not. Ki and qi are essentially the same. However, just as the Japanese and Chinese develop different types of work and develop different ways of living, dressing, playing, making music and everything else, it should be clear that they developed two very different ways of expressing qi other than mere pronunciation of the word. Just as all alcohol is fundamentally the same, ki and qi are the same thing. But Japanese sake and Chinese soju are very different types of white liquor. And so the martial arts use qi very differently.
So basically, on alcohol you get drunk because it only works one way with the human body, David. Same way with ki/qi... it only works one way. To argue that sake and soju are different aspects of alcohol is to miss the obvious.
Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Ask someone like Abe or Inaba or whoever.... this idea that the Chinese qi things are different from the Japanese ki things, including "kokyu", is ludicrous except in a conversation where the level of understanding is very low.

Sorry, but I've had too much personal experience to accept that. I've felt technique from hundreds of people and there is a distinct difference in what I've felt from Chinese stylists that I never experienced from any Japanese stylist. It's not the same, especially at higher levels.
David, this is completely wrong and I can demonstrate it. Even the "demo's" of qi abilities are the same in Chinese and Japanese. Every demo Tohei and Ueshiba did has an obvious counterpart in China. You simply are missing the obvious, no matter what you think you know of Aikido. How do you explain Ueshiba's demo's being pretty much exactly the same as the Chinese coincidence in every case? Coincidence?
Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
So that effectively dismisses the term "kokyu ryoku" if you're correct, eh?
It doesn't dismiss the term. Kokyu Ryoku is power expressed through a mind and body integrated via the breath. As Ikeda Sensei said in the article, it is "power through kokyu," not "power of kokyu." But like I pointed out to Ellis earlier, if you want to define kokyu ryoku as "power of kokyu," then you have to define sei ryoku as "power of sei," (power of correctness) which should show you that that's not the correct usage. Even though there is power in correctness, the real power is "through" correctness.
David, you don't understand what ki and kokyu power really are. In other words, you don't understand the Yin-Yang of Qi and Jin. I can't help you here. The jin forces combined with the "breath" forces of the fasicial "qi" development are "kokyu". But you should know that if you're an expert in Aikido. I shouldn't have to explain the obvious.
Quote:
David Orange wrote:
The problem is that you are off on your explanations because of a biased belief that the Japanese and Chinese ways are equatable and that you can explain both ways through a rough approximation of Western scientific thinking--both premises being flawed. So while ki can be expressed in many ways and can take many forms, it still is only one "thing".
I give up. You seem to want to forget the almost complete dependence in Japanese lore and cosmology on the Chinese way of doing things.... including in the Kojiki. Not "equatable"????? This is crazy.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Last edited by Mike Sigman : 11-29-2006 at 08:09 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 09:03 PM   #283
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
If any of this stuff had come from inside an Aikido organization, guess what ... we'd *still* have the same discussions going on now. Just a bit different in that it would be various schools defending their way of training/teaching/whatever from another school. Aikido is so splintered that to change the whole, one must change a multitude of parts.
Mark, I've experienced that for many, many years. There is such a wide variety of approaches to aikido that it becomes almost impossible to discuss it with people of another style. I go places and see people flying wildly through the air when the tori has merely gestured. And you hear all kinds of ridiculous statements about the deadliness of certain responses to attacks when you know that the speaker couldn't really do it. So it's not surprising that people (especially widely experienced martial artists) would think that something is missing in aikido. It was certainly a consistently devastating combat art before the war.

Many people try to excuse the modern stuff with simpering explanations of how O-Sensei "perfected" the art as he aged. They say "its' not about fighting," but they won't drop the trappings of a "martial art" and approach it as pure misogi. So people both inside and outside aikido are confused as to what, exactly, it is.

But I have had the perspective of other arts for a long time. Our system incorporated karate, judo and jujutsu from 1976 on and I started tai chi training in about 1979 and bagua in 1988. I found certain things common among them, but I also found that certain key aspects do not really overlay the Japanese way.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
No one is saying that the current Aikido training is worthless and should be scrapped.
A lot of it should be scrapped, though. As you said, it's not a unified world. There is definitely some pure swishery being passed off as aikido these days. And then there are those who try to make up for that by just being violent with aikido-style movements, thinking they're "rediscovering" aiki-jujutsu.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
But, what is being said is that there is another way of having "aiki" and there is a training program that is more efficient in gaining this internal skill. If you're doing Aikido, you still need to know and understand the techniques of the system. Ueshiba never dropped them, so why would we?
Well, Ueshiba did drop a lot of things that were in aikijujutsu and my attitude is that if something is missing in aikido, it's to be found in aikijujutsu. This is not to say that you can't gain a tremendous benefit from learning other arts and appreciating how they work and how they are applied. But I think it does a disservice to both sides to blend the parts that don't really belong together.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
I don't know how you've trained, David. You may have learned some of this stuff, but coming from Mochizuki sensei, you may have been taught different terms.
Mochizuki Sensei's terms don't even work with other styles of aikido. He used traditional jujutsu nomenclature for all the techniques. I still have to check to make sure which technique sankyo and yonkyo actually relate to. I just try to use those names as a courtesy to people who only know those terms. Sensei called them yuki chigai (or kote mawashi) and te kubi otoshi, if I have the right techniques in mind. Instead of irimi nage, he said mukae daoshi. Instead of ikkyo, he called it robuse. And instead of omote shiho nage, he said mae shiho nage. Omote and ura meant an entirely different thing for him than just "in front" and "in back."

But a lot of what I read about on these threads, he never discussed in words. My Dutch friend, Edgar Kruyning, however, says that "Tanden training was not usually discussed directly or separately, but it was the core of all the training (in aikido, judo, karate, jujutsu and sword)." He has trained not only with Mochizuki Sensei, but with Sugino and Otake in katori shinto ryu. He's ranked in KSR and represents it in the Netherlands. And I don't think there's anyone on these boards who can push him around (or whom he can't push around and put on the ground, for that matter). But I'm not him, so I don't put him up for that kind of challenge.

What I will say, though, is that we developed a lot of things with no terminology at all. When I think of what's described and compare it to what I feel when I do techniques, a lot of it sounds familiar, but because of the terminology, I don't try to say I either know or do it. And some things, such as Dan describes, I would say I can't do. However, in certain circumstances, in a natural encounter (not a set-up situation), I might actually pull them off. I recently had a big old football player come to my class and it was interesting to see how much effect I could have on him.

And I have done some of the push-out exercise and found it interesting. My neighbor has had a good bit of JKD training and I got him to do a moment of the push-out exercise with me recently. I was surprised at how much power I had with him, considering how little I've done it. He wanted to bend his knees, but I didn't feel the need. I was concentrating, as Tim Fong said, on spreading the force through the whole body--but that's how you do kokyu ho.

So it should be clear that I have nothing against broadening my perspective or experiencing new arts or new ideas. I just don't like people thinking they can renovate an art in which they don't really have very deep experience. For instance, I wouldn't dream of telling tai chi people that they need to do aikido-style tai sabaki instead of roll-back kinds of receiving forces. And I don't accept that a lot of the core Chinese concepts equate to or are even compatible with certain core Japanese arts. That's disrespectful to both sides.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
Dunno. One of these days, I'll make it down your way and we can get together and have some fun.
Sounds good.

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote:
Mind and body integrated via the breath. It certainly captures some of the exercises I've been trying to do. But, you didn't mean it that way.
But I did. I just don't accept that it equals "jin" as Mike says.

Best to you.

David

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

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 09:14 PM   #284
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
For instance, I wouldn't dream of telling tai chi people that they need to do aikido-style tai sabaki instead of roll-back kinds of receiving forces.
Oh, yawn. You can't distinguish between tactics/stregegy and core strengths... worse, you think that "rollback", a la Cheng Man Ching, is some shibboleth of Taiji. It's equivalent to someone saying that all attacks in Aikido are met with "turning".

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 09:28 PM   #285
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
So basically, on alcohol you get drunk because it only works one way with the human body, David. Same way with ki/qi... it only works one way. To argue that sake and soju are different aspects of alcohol is to miss the obvious.
But the qualities of the buzz are very different between sake and soju. Or take sake and Japanese shochu. Very different effects, though similar. But it's not mere coincidence that Japanese work and lifestyles, food, clothing, music and everything else express very different approaches to the world, and so do their martial arts. And my very point was that I have experienced remarkably different effects from Japanese and Chinese martial artists. The effects are not the same.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
David, this is completely wrong and I can demonstrate it. Even the "demo's" of qi abilities are the same in Chinese and Japanese. Every demo Tohei and Ueshiba did has an obvious counterpart in China. You simply are missing the obvious, no matter what you think you know of Aikido. How do you explain Ueshiba's demo's being pretty much exactly the same as the Chinese coincidence in every case?
Not at all. The Chinese do things that make people pop up off the ground and fly backward several feet. The Japanese always do some kind of throw. I've never seen any Japanese (including Ueshiba and Tohei) throw anyone like a tai chi man who lets the attacker push on his forearm, then bounces him up and backward. Ueshiba and Tohei, Mifune et al, always throw.

On the other hand, I've never seen a Chinese do the unbendable arm, the jo trick or the unpick-up-able body and I've never seen Japanese demonstrate 'iron vest' things with swords or take spear points to their throats. The ki/qi demos, in fact, are one of the most obviously different aspects of the two cultures.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Coincidence?
No co-incidence at all. They're completely different.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
David, you don't understand what ki and kokyu power really are. In other words, you don't understand the Yin-Yang of Qi and Jin. I can't help you here.
I concluded that you can't help me. You may understand what some of the Chinese concepts are, but you are really mistaken when it comes to the Japanese "counterparts" including kokyu.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
The jin forces combined with the "breath" forces of the fasicial "qi" development are "kokyu". But you should know that if you're an expert in Aikido.
I can relate to what you're trying to say there, but it's not entirely accurate.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
I shouldn't have to explain the obvious.
And you shouldn't try to explain things when you have a basic misconception about them.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
You seem to want to forget the almost complete dependence in Japanese lore and cosmology on the Chinese way of doing things.... including in the Kojiki.
Well, the US is almost entirely derived from England. But there are other influences and we end up not really very much like the Brits at all. So the Japanese. They have heavy influence from the Koreans and also from the Russians. And then they were isolated so long. They developed their own very unique sword and sword arts. And aikido is very different from tai chi and even bagua. If what you're saying were true, the Japanese would use a straight sword and their arts would look like Chinese sword arts. But they don't, either on the surface or within. There are similarities, but the emerge and mature quite differently.

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Not "equatable"????? This is crazy.
Yes. They are similar but not equal and not really all that similar. One big difference is that the Chinese artists tend to live longer and they tend to be much more flexible and softer at old age than the Japanese. How do you explain that?

Best to you.

David

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

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 09:32 PM   #286
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,508
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Oh, yawn. You can't distinguish between tactics/stregegy and core strengths... worse, you think that "rollback", a la Cheng Man Ching, is some shibboleth of Taiji. It's equivalent to someone saying that all attacks in Aikido are met with "turning".

Mike
And you say Dan "brags." But at least Dan talks about what he can do. You are busy telling everyone else what they don't know and what they can't do. And the meaning is that you do know it and you can do it. How is that better than bragging? (Hint: it's not.)

David

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

"Eternity forever!"

www.davidorangejr.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2006, 09:44 PM   #287
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
But the qualities of the buzz are very different between sake and soju.
Oh stoppit, David. It all metabolizes into aceta-aldehyde, except of course, in people with Oriental Flushing Syndrome. [quote]Not at all. The Chinese do things that make people pop up off the ground and fly backward several feet. The Japanese always do some kind of throw. [quote] This is absurd. You obviously don't know anything about Chinese martial arts or even karate, I guess.
Quote:
I've never seen any Japanese (including Ueshiba and Tohei) throw anyone like a tai chi man who lets the attacker push on his forearm, then bounces him up and backward. Ueshiba and Tohei, Mifune et al, always throw.
Gee.... ever seen a Sumo guy or a karate guy?
Quote:
On the other hand, I've never seen a Chinese do the unbendable arm, the jo trick or the unpick-up-able body and I've never seen Japanese demonstrate 'iron vest' things with swords or take spear points to their throats. The ki/qi demos, in fact, are one of the most obviously different aspects of the two cultures.
This is what I've been trying to tell you, David. You don't even know basic things.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 06:32 AM   #288
Tom H.
Location: Rhode Island
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 72
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
How would you compare the experiences of training with both of them?
Thank you for asking. I want to get a disclaimer out early so no one thinks I'm talking with any authority yet. Mike and Dan, and Rob would all be able to comment on what little ki/kokyo skill I have, and I'll personally add that I have only three months of formal martial training. And I've never been in a fight. And I can't bench much more than the empty bar . The only thing I've got going for me is that Rob has seen me go from *nothing* to *maybe something, sometimes* after three months of sporadic solo work.

I also wouldn't say I've trained with anyone. I've met them all, and tried to ask with an open mind, "show me what and how I should train to get started".

With all of that, I found the three of them open, friendly, intelligent, and strong. They have different frameworks they use to understand the internal stuff, but much of the physical skills are *exactly* the same. It kind of surprised me, really. If you want to know how they compare to each other or to what you can already do (whether aikido, taiji, karate, bjj, boxing, etc), I encourage you to meet them yourself with an open mind. It's easy for two people to talk past each other. It's possible to do something similar in person, but a little harder.

Last edited by Tom H. : 11-30-2006 at 06:41 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 07:38 AM   #289
TAnderson
Location: Arlington, VA
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 25
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
Not at all. The Chinese do things that make people pop up off the ground and fly backward several feet. The Japanese always do some kind of throw. I've never seen any Japanese (including Ueshiba and Tohei) throw anyone like a tai chi man who lets the attacker push on his forearm, then bounces him up and backward. Ueshiba and Tohei, Mifune et al, always throw.
Actually, there is video footage of Ueshiba performing just such a technique but its from a push on the knee instead of the forearm. I am not sure which video series it is from but I am sure someone out there does.
Quote:
David Orange wrote:
On the other hand, I've never seen a Chinese do the unbendable arm, the jo trick or the unpick-up-able body and I've never seen Japanese demonstrate 'iron vest' things with swords or take spear points to their throats. The ki/qi demos, in fact, are one of the most obviously different aspects of the two cultures.
Again, I have seen video that contradicts this. I have also in person felt this so.....

I hope some people throw up video links because there is sufficient footage out there that contradicts these statements.

Tim Anderson
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 08:33 AM   #290
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

There are Japanese systems that "make people pop up off the floor and fly several feet backward" too. It's just not mainstream -- you don't see dojo on every block with that curriculum because the arts tend to be old bujutsu.

It is quite likely that these methods were obtained by Japanese people from Chinese sources a long time ago. It's too sophisticated to just pop up spontaneously, and the Chinese have a long history of such things. The Japanese practitioners since have adapted the methods to suit their particular environments, but the fundamentals don't change.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 08:34 AM   #291
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Tom Holz wrote:
They have different frameworks they use to understand the internal stuff, but much of the physical skills are *exactly* the same.
Nice post, Tom. I think that the *basics* must be the same. The variations, add-ons, etc., will be there, though, so there can be quite a difference between 3 people whose basics are the same. As many people noted, Ushiro knows how to use kokyu power, but the way he does it, the number of variations, etc., will distinguish what he does from, say, Tohei.

But the point to focus on is that the basic skills are pretty fixed.

Regards,

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 08:37 AM   #292
George S. Ledyard
 
George S. Ledyard's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Eastside
Location: Bellevue, WA
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,639
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Tim Anderson wrote:
Actually, there is video footage of Ueshiba performing just such a technique but its from a push on the knee instead of the forearm. I am not sure which video series it is from but I am sure someone out there does.

Again, I have seen video that contradicts this. I have also in person felt this so.....

I hope some people throw up video links because there is sufficient footage out there that contradicts these statements.

Tim Anderson
Actually, Saotome Sensei has an amazing pulse shoulder movement he does from Ryo Kata Dori. I've seen him shoot his uke back a good five feet. Shioda Sensei could do this pulse forwards or backwards... in his biography it recounts a time when he was garbbed from behind with Ryo Kata Dori and his pulse was so strong it knocked the uke out.

George S. Ledyard
Aikido Eastside
Bellevue, WA
Aikido Eastside
AikidoDvds.Com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 08:39 AM   #293
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Cady Goldfield wrote:
There are Japanese systems that "make people pop up off the floor and fly several feet backward" too. It's just not mainstream -- you don't see dojo on every block with that curriculum because the arts tend to be old bujutsu.

It is quite likely that these methods were obtained by Japanese people from Chinese sources a long time ago. It's too sophisticated to just pop up spontaneously, and the Chinese have a long history of such things. The Japanese practitioners since have adapted the methods to suit their particular environments, but the fundamentals don't change.
Wait a minute. Some of you guys need to get out and get a better feel for mainstream Chinese martial arts, not "the major CMA's that I've seen on the telly, etc.". Taiji is popular in the West and it's a moneymaker, so you see more of it *in the West* that you will see in China. "Popping people into the air" is something that catches a lot of westerners attentions, but it's not that big of a deal and it certainly wouldn't be my choice of things that are "common in Chinese martial arts", as much of them as I see. I.e., these types of remarks are simply ill-informed.

FWIW

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 08:42 AM   #294
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
George S. Ledyard wrote:
Actually, Saotome Sensei has an amazing pulse shoulder movement he does from Ryo Kata Dori. I've seen him shoot his uke back a good five feet. Shioda Sensei could do this pulse forwards or backwards... in his biography it recounts a time when he was garbbed from behind with Ryo Kata Dori and his pulse was so strong it knocked the uke out.
That would be a good technique for people to develop, IMO. Get out there and practice it!

MIke
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 08:48 AM   #295
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Mike,
I don't recall saying that this was "common" in Chinese martial arts or that it is "common" today, only that they were the likely source for the Japanese at one point. I'm talking a thousand or more years ago. Japan was heavily influenced by powerful China for millennia, and there was cultural exchange on all levels, from music and art to medicine and fighting skills. The fighting skills and medicine may go back even further than other aspects of culture, with individual contact rather than mass public encounters.

Not much remains of anything, today. Given the Maoist revolution and WWII, I'm surprised we have anything at all now.

The skills are scattered in small pockets. I liken their perpetuation to the tiny factions of religions or ethnicities, most of whose members have largely assimilated into larger cultures. The traditions are carried on and survive through that miniscule handful.

Last edited by Cady Goldfield : 11-30-2006 at 08:50 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 09:05 AM   #296
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,502
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Tim Anderson wrote:
Actually, there is video footage of Ueshiba performing just such a technique but its from a push on the knee instead of the forearm. I am not sure which video series it is from but I am sure someone out there does.
It was described earlier as a "thigh push." David Skaggs clipped it out as an adjunct to my mechanical analysis of the video you mention.

He excerpted my analysis in toto and added the clip here:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpo...5&postcount=78

The direct link to the video is here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...78502048697656

Last edited by Erick Mead : 11-30-2006 at 09:16 AM.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 09:15 AM   #297
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,502
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
George S. Ledyard wrote:
Actually, Saotome Sensei has an amazing pulse shoulder movement he does from Ryo Kata Dori. I've seen him shoot his uke back a good five feet. Shioda Sensei could do this pulse forwards or backwards... in his biography it recounts a time when he was garbbed from behind with Ryo Kata Dori and his pulse was so strong it knocked the uke out.
I wonder if it is analogous to the O Sensei "chest push" earlier discussed: It is here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...67163735577821

My mechanical analysis of that is here:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpo...6&postcount=96

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 09:31 AM   #298
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
David Orange wrote:
And Akuzawa's background also seems to be more Chinese than aiki-oriented, so
Not that it matters, I thought I'd set the record straight...
Ark's influence is primarily Japanese Koryu.
The Chinese influence was just him reverse engineering Chinese training methods and he found they meshed perfectly with the core training methods he got from the afore mentioned Koryu.

It really is all the same when you boil down to it
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 09:35 AM   #299
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote:
I wonder if it is analogous to the O Sensei "chest push" earlier discussed: It is here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...67163735577821

My mechanical analysis of that is here:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpo...6&postcount=96
I think George's story is indeed analogous to O-Sensei's chest push in the video clip. I think you missed in your analysis, though. O-Sensei maintains a connection to the ground at all times via simple, straightforward jin. As the incoming force begins to reach his hand, O-Sensei bounces down than then up so that the is an upward-angled, ground-based force meeting uke's incoming (more or less horizontal) force. Meeting such a force, uke is propelled up and back and his angle of attack actually means that his own force adds to the forces pushing him away. This is a common stratagem. It doesn't take any rotational movement to explain it. It just takes a little relaxed jin through O-Sensei.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 09:38 AM   #300
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: The learning of natural movement

Quote:
Tom Holz wrote:
Thank you for asking. I want to get a disclaimer out early so no one thinks I'm talking with any authority yet. Mike and Dan, and Rob would all be able to comment on what little ki/kokyo skill I have, and I'll personally add that I have only three months of formal martial training. And I've never been in a fight. And I can't bench much more than the empty bar . The only thing I've got going for me is that Rob has seen me go from *nothing* to *maybe something, sometimes* after three months of sporadic solo work.

I also wouldn't say I've trained with anyone. I've met them all, and tried to ask with an open mind, "show me what and how I should train to get started".

With all of that, I found the three of them open, friendly, intelligent, and strong. They have different frameworks they use to understand the internal stuff, but much of the physical skills are *exactly* the same. It kind of surprised me, really. If you want to know how they compare to each other or to what you can already do (whether aikido, taiji, karate, bjj, boxing, etc), I encourage you to meet them yourself with an open mind. It's easy for two people to talk past each other. It's possible to do something similar in person, but a little harder.
I thought it worthwhile to quote from Hong jun shen. Mindful that his observation was regarding a "single" arts use of internal skills.

"Some people believe that taijichuan skills and techniques are all the same. Whatever one master teaches should also be taught by others. Otherwise, the master will be regarded as incompetent. In fact this is a misunderstanding in Taiji chuan. Every skillful expert will have his own techniques, characteristics and understandings. It is normal to see variations in the techniques between different martial art experts. This is because everyone has his own unique physical condition and a different psychology……….
If one's techniques are exactly the same as the master, his gong-fu will not have reached a high level…."

If he can say these things about a single art (thought it is a complex one) imagine the further complexities of different arts and different countries. Unless of course you are of the persuasion that your art has it all.
He goes on to cite what any serious JMA adept will know-Shu-Ha- Ri. The point of understanding and personal journey and experimentation. Where the jump off point comes is anyones judgement. In old Japan it happened far quicker than today

As for Tom's opinion, is it any wonder that Tom and others who have felt these things finds similar physical results from different expressed methods to get there? Whether we are rebounding force, changing force, what have you, and how we are changing in it in us is the same or not-the results may be surprisingly similar. We just don't know yet.
My point being they can be expressed individually in different arts, but the body work remains the same. But the uses, expressions and skills can get complex and must be trained over years. As for "other uses? Hong mentions even Chen fake brought in and practiced applications from other martial arts.

Here? No one here is an expert to my knowledge. No one here claims to be anything but researchers. That we each, have our own understanding, is understandable. Not everyone is as skilled as the other. While some are, some are not as well. In truth the search for the skills that We have been discussing are the finest skills known. As a skill set, they can be used in anything. And it still doesn't mean anyone person can fight with them. But then again it is not worth much to "hide" behind fighting-skill sets either.
After years of agonizing sweat, many find it difficult to put things down and start fresh.
I hope the true students don't and are still looking.

Cheers
Dan

Last edited by DH : 11-30-2006 at 09:45 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Aikido of Northern VA Seminars - Doran-sensei in Northern Virginia, March 2015



Reply


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

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aikido in Amsterdam, Terry Lax style... tiyler_durden General 11 11-03-2008 09:31 AM
Women and Everybody Else in Aikido George S. Ledyard Teaching 113 03-16-2008 08:27 PM
For Ted Ehara - Boundary of your aikido? billybob General 123 12-18-2006 05:52 AM
Dilution of aikido eugene_lo General 40 02-07-2006 12:22 PM
Omoto-kyo Theology senshincenter Spiritual 77 12-04-2005 10:50 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:14 PM.



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