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 > Training

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 02-09-2008, 06:55 PM   #26
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I am familiar with the six harmonies
1. hand to foot
2. elbow with knee
3. hip with shoulder
4. (Yi) Mind
5. (Li) Body
6. (Chi) Energy
Well, you posted two sets of "harmonies". The first three being the external requirements that help to create the bodies "frame" in the beginning, and the second being internal harmonies.

The first three are pretty straight forward.

The second three... 5. "Li" doesn't even mean "Body" -> it's "strength".
I think the version you were trying to shoot for was
Xin with Yi, Yi with Qi, and Qi with Li(actually "jin")
Some version of the harmonies will arbitrarily replace the parts with "blood/circulation" etc. Doesn't matter since they generally mean the same thing physically.

Alright...nit picking over.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Double weighted is real simple for me. 50% - 50% weight distribution on each foot.
Why would you say that 50-50 weight separation is a "bad thing"? I can think of one reason why it could be wrong, but again, it would only be due to the use of inefficient body mechanics being used. (specifically with how an incoming load settles in the body). If the load is distributed properly in the body, having 50-50 weight separation is the "same" as 70-30 or 90-10.

<snip video>
I'd say that while I see a lot of the first set of harmonies in your video, I don't see any from the second. You're using a coordination on the saggital plane, effected through the legs and hip girdle (on a smaller scale of course, I see why you call it small circle), but it's still fundamentally based on the first set of harmonies. It's weight transfer, small,compact weight transfer at that, but I still don't see any physical "connections" in the body being used.
I see harmonization/coordination, but no actual connection throughout the body, which is what has to be present, before the "internal harmonies" are even mentioned.

Another clue that we're talking about completely different things is "six directions".
I assume you've been doing lots of zhang zhuang, qi qong exercises etc...
Six directions (sometimes called eight directions), refers to 3 sets of opposing forces which cause the body to stay in constant equilibrium. Its a trained skill, and basic to all internals (there's definitely no "here's my take on it" for this one, either its there or its not).
You have up to down (everyone pretty much knows this one), extending through the head and relaxing down, front to back, and side to side. Basically a piano wire of relaxed "tension" holding the body together.

But then again, I could be wrong, video does lie

Here's an interesting thought problem. It looks like you're all about progressive resistance training, so I assume you've done some grappling/ground work as well.

Person A) mounts person B).
Person B) is under Person A), with his hips controlled. Very nasty position to be in (Every UFC jock's favorite GnP position).
Strictly from a "laboratory" view, do you think it's possible for Person B to effect Person A with a strike that has a respectable amount of power?
For the moment, let's disregard the fact that your face would STILL probably be rearranged even if you could land a couple of shots from the bottom of the mount

(Btw, all this will tie back into the statues, the development of their body etc etc)

Maybe Mike or Dan would like to comment later.

Last edited by Upyu : 02-09-2008 at 06:58 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2008, 07:53 PM   #27
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Like I said earlier in other posts, I really do not chase chi anymore. I have not read any of the new literature that is out on Nei Gung or other esoteric practices. I find that relaxing and using intent can just about do anything you need. If things get too complex, we often miss the simple essence of a thing. I do not have to talk about balancing organ energies, I just feel it naturally in meditation. My teachers in CMA were deep in results and, luckily, lighter on the chinese paradigms.

I do have several methods of punching from the ground that can seriously hurt internal organs. Some I learned from CMA teachers. Other I simply reverse engineered. They are, however, much worse when standing. They often scare me because the rheostat in my body is not quite sensitive enough to judge just how much Jing I am putting into someone. I am not into building bad karma for no reason.

What say you post some of your movement?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2008, 08:42 PM   #28
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I have not read any of the new literature that is out on Nei Gung or other esoteric practices. I find that relaxing and using intent can just about do anything you need. If things get too complex, we often miss the simple essence of a thing. I do not have to talk about balancing organ energies, I just feel it naturally in meditation. My teachers in CMA were deep in results and, luckily, lighter on the chinese paradigms.
Um...it's not "new". It's pretty much standard stuff and doesn't take all that long to figure out.

I'm not talking about "balancing organ energies", but rather pure body mechanics, of an unusual nature. That's it. I'm not big on the chinese paradigms myself, but I do think one should at least be able to describe what goes on in the body.

Same goes for the problem I presented...
actually I've already outlined a lot of the basics that we work from here on aikiweb. If you do a search for "training for martial movement" you should be able to pull up the article. Granted those are only scratching the surface and a couple of years old.

Video:
I don't have any recent ones, and this is all stuff from almost 2 years ago: http://www.youtube.com/user/Upyu

if you subscribe there's other videos I can share that're in the private section.

If I get time I'll try and film some new stuff.

Feel free to critique what you see. (Only fair considering I've said a lot of smack about you)
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2008, 09:53 PM   #29
Tom H.
Location: Rhode Island
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 72
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Robert John wrote: View Post
Coiling throughout the body pretty obvious, and muscular development in certain areas are dead giveaways about the way that particular person trained.
I'm also fascinated by the fact that he doesn't have the belly that older interal guys seem to grow, e.g. Chen Xian Wang (taiji) and Bo Jia Cong (yi chuan). Not sure if it's different training approaches, conditioning over multiple decades, or just plain age.

And any videos you want to put up would be swell :-)
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2008, 10:28 PM   #30
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

no, it is not new. But each generation puts their flare on it.
my readings came from Cheng Man Ching, William Chen, Hung I Shiang, Hsiu hong Shi, Robert Smith, Mantak Chia,Yang Jwing Ming, and Wai Fong Doo. Funny, Doo Wai used to call "the microcosmic orbit" the "microcosmetic orbit" but his stuff still worked.

I like my formula , The mind leads the body and chi follows. For me that translates Yi - li - chi. Another fellow a few posts ago wanted to used a different sequence, Yi - chi - li. I do not know how that would work unless he was chasing the chi hoping it would somehow make his body/strength move.

I also like your movement. I, too, am hard to throw if I choose not to get thrown and few strikes can set me up for a throw. In fact, few strikes hurt me. I think relaxation with good posture and remaining single weighted makes that work more than searching for some Tibetan construct. I like using terms from physics. So did William Chen.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2008, 10:58 PM   #31
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I like my formula , The mind leads the body and chi follows. For me that translates Yi - li - chi. Another fellow a few posts ago wanted to used a different sequence, Yi - chi - li. I do not know how that would work unless he was chasing the chi hoping it would somehow make his body/strength move.
Are you referring some posts by Mike S.?
The sequence does make sense (personally), but we'd have to clarify what each means by Chi/qi whatever. In the latter case, Qi refers to a physical component in the body. Its an additive.

I'm glad you like your formula, but can I suggest that you at least change the word "li"? "Li" means strength Look it up. (The character is 力)
No biggie, I understand what you're trying to say though.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I also like your movement. I, too, am hard to throw if I choose not to get thrown and few strikes can set me up for a throw. In fact, few strikes hurt me. I think relaxation with good posture and remaining single weighted makes that work more than searching for some Tibetan construct. I like using terms from physics. So did William Chen.
Well I should think few strikes hurt you! Especially with your experience.
Bouncing back strikes etc to the body can be fun, but its definitely more challenging for me since I have a smaller build than most. (Can't resort to the uber Dantien power at least yet, lol)

Several things though, you still haven't elaborated on why you think having a 50/50 weight distribution is "bad."
As far as I see it, as long as the incoming force is distributed in your frame, and you aren't "bracing" off of the ground, then where your weight is distributed doesn't matter as much. You're still free to move however you want. It only becomes a problem if you use the legs to brace yourself.

Do you mind explaining the mechanics of the "internal strikes" you deliver? I'm definitely all ears.

As far as the "mount" example goes, it's just a simple example of sourcing the power from the ground.
Hips can't move, but the feet are still free to add some stability/ power through the arch in the legs (to provide stability for the frame while you're on the ground), couple that with a path from the small of the pack out to the arm, and your arm punch should feel a lot heavier than it looks.
If you have a connection from opposite arm to leg conditioned in, that can be used to add some power as well.
(And that's not even adding adding torque between the upper and lower centers inside the body to the equation etc)

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I like using terms from physics. So did William Chen
Actually I've found that trend in most CMA guys that can "do" it. They tend to have an innate grasp of statics, which is an easy way to describe some of this stuff.

To be honest, the only descriptions I've seen from you so far are "small circle", "double weighting" etc. Terms that are far from being descriptive from a "phyiscs" sense.
I saw you mention Centrepital vs Centrifugal in the videos, maybe you want to expound a little on that?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 01:44 AM   #32
Tim Fong
 
Tim Fong's Avatar
Dojo: Aunkai
Location: California
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 175
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Robert John wrote: View Post

To sum up, one is "A", one is "Un" ("ha" and "heng" in chines) -> these refer to the specific sounds.
Rob,
Not to nitpick, but...

It's probably better romanized as "a1" and "hong1." Although, sometimes, the exhale is pronunced "e1" as in "em1mi2tuo2fo2", i.e. "Buddha preserve us." I was bored so I looked up hong1 in my 辭源 (Etymological Dictionary) [Beijing, 商务印书馆, 1996 (sorry, don't know the English name), 1996]and this is what it said:
梵文經咒中多用吽字。佛教密宗密言十七字之一。
Which I'm translating as: Many Sanskrit scriptures use the word hong1. This character is one of [the first?] 17 characters used by Buddhist esoteric sects [alt. secret religions/shingon] and secret speech.

My Chinese pretty much sucks so if someone has a better translation, please correct me.

Last edited by Tim Fong : 02-10-2008 at 01:48 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 01:53 PM   #33
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
no, it is not new. But each generation puts their flare on it.
Hmmmm.... not if they know what they're talking about. It's actually pretty solidly laid out. It's like trying to tell some professional acupuncturist that you don't need to use the same theory he does because everyone gets to put their own spin on it.... only someone who didn't know acupuncture would buy into it.
Quote:
my readings came from Cheng Man Ching, William Chen, Hung I Shiang, Hsiu hong Shi, Robert Smith, Mantak Chia,Yang Jwing Ming, and Wai Fong Doo. Funny, Doo Wai used to call "the microcosmic orbit" the "microcosmetic orbit" but his stuff still worked.
Ah. Those are great names in American Tai Chi.
Quote:
I like my formula , The mind leads the body and chi follows. For me that translates Yi - li - chi. Another fellow a few posts ago wanted to used a different sequence, Yi - chi - li. I do not know how that would work unless he was chasing the chi hoping it would somehow make his body/strength move.
This has got to be a leg pull, guys. Nobody is seriously this far off base.

FWIW

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 04:10 PM   #34
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

John and Mike,

Lets avoid I Li Chi for a moment then and just call the sequence in simple English.

How about: The mind directs the body mechanics and mechanical force follows.

We will be talking about "dynamics"…. Not "statics".

I have a multitude of ways to use intent and mechanical advantage to create maximum force. I will explain more deeply one of them.

Robert Smith wrote under the pen name of John Gilbey for a while. Two books… One was something like "Secret Fighting Arts of the World". They were meant to be funny but each chapter had a kernel of real truth in them as well. One chapter was called the "dinky little punch". It was a shortened version of Pi Chen, the first movement in Hsing-I. That chapter makes a great study (if you have some time to to read it) and is the one punch I will describe.

Maximizing Momentum

In Hsing-I it is almost impossible to do safe contact sparring without compromising (hindering) mechanical force/momentum. Unhindered momentum is like a freight train, or as the old song goes, I'm a steam roller baby, I'm gonna roll right over you. That freight train may hit you at only 4 miles an hour but it's mass will still destroy just about every organ in your body. I think that is why internal (Tai Chi, Hsing-I and Paqua) Chinese boxers display their skill with the Tai Chi-style "uproot". It displays mechanical force and momentum without injuring someone. When you strike with this uprooting force or whether you just uproot someone, the guy should go flying 10-20 feet…. Especially if you have an "uber dantien (hara)". The strike is really anti-climatic except in a fight.

As already said, my distance is different than what you (john) are doing. They say fighting a man is like taking a walk. They also say you should walk through the person like he is not there. If you see the opponent as a barrier, momentum and mechanical force is stymied by your mind and different leverages occur within the body mechanics because your mind doubts its ability to blow through the object. Thus Hsing-I is often referred to as "mind-Form boxing". From my experience, it uses the sequence I am referring to.

No Mental Barriers
There is no surface hitting when a freight train blows through you. To do the kind of sparring you are doing in the videos is to do "tappy-tappy" to each other in a boxing or medium range. Chen Tai Chi- style whipping might help at this range, but I personally prefer to close distance while gaining momentum with my lower body, then I place a lead hand on you to (1) destabilize your spine, (2) reduce your base and (3) place you at the edge of your balance. Then my punch follows, into the cavity I have created by destabilizing your spine. Watch Cheng Man Ching or Hung I Shiang uproot someone. There is no stoppng it. If you attached an imaginary plum bob to his inseem, Watch how it drifts from one leg, past the inseam through the other leg when they attack you by walking through you.

I like this method because it does not require speed. I can move at the pace of the attacker using Aikido-style irimi/blending with little over-commitment or degradation of force. Then my lead hand can do aikido while my rear hand does the Hsing-I punching. I can also change strategies and styles within ¼ second.

Direction of Force
Bruce Lee used to stress that Wing Chun (and JKD) had three angles of wrist direction at the moment the punch struck flesh. Driving upward would do less damage and uproot an opponent, Driving straight would do more damage, but driving down would penetrate and do the most damage. That is because the opponent's legs cannot collapse fast enough. The resistance in the legs provided enough resistance for the punch to penetrate better. I use this format once I have an opponent in an unstable position. I can uproot, or down root the next push or punch. You hit the ground pretty hard once the force blows through the resistance in your legs. But the resistance and the instability provide a medium that has no iron vest. I do not care how much training you have done on the abdomen.

Ed Parker of American Kenpo fame had this type of punch. So do Brian Adams and Parker Linekin (Kenpo teachers and training buddies of mine). Both are over 60 years in age but don't let that fool you. They can punch you on one side of your body and it feels like a shotgun blast went through you and came out as a gaping hole on the other side.

Grounded Momentum
Many fighters use the rear leg to push while transferring weight. It both raises their center of gravity (even if only by ¼ inch) and does not allow them to control the weight shift. You do not uproot much in your videos John. That is why I say you move well under pressure. You stay disciplined and grounded where the shoot fighter does not. By sinking or bending with the back knee, the front leg extends and is placed on the ground without any weight on it. No weight shift has occurred yet. Then, the front knee pulls your center forward. You can stop the weight shift at any time with complete control. Now you can change angles and direction at any time while entering into the fray.

Contention and Getting in The Way of the Forces in Physics

"Top of the Mountain"
In reviewing your sparring video against the Shoot fighter, you said yourself "I'm way to upright, which bites me in the ass a couple of times, but all in all its good to look back on what worked and what doesn't." When our legs are extended (no bend in them) you rightly diagnose that more momentum is hindered. Our leverage is stymied. When your legs are extended in a locked position, momentum really starts at the waist and is mainly an upper body thing. This is one of the curses of being 50%-50% or 70%-70% weighted.

Minimizing Oscillation
Here is a second curse. Let's look at how momentum is directed with body mechanics. When we fight at the tappy-tappy distance, and have wide or double weighted stances, our lower body also creates a wide corridor when it moves forward. Momentum has a natural oscillation. When you shift weight, you create two invisible walls (a corridor) for momentum to travel through. Which would be better, a 1.5 foot corridor or a 6 inch corridor. Given equal water pressure, more force will come out the smaller water hose. Your punches have a decent corridor even though you have isolated much of your lower body's forward momentum.

Spiral Leverage degenerates at the pelvis when the force of the two legs meet.

It seems that you are using the internal (Fa Ging) "whip" to compensate for not being up close and personal like the 1" style punching described in that "Dinky little punch". The guys at the old "Lair of the Green Dragon" used method this to break bricks. They hid their fa ging motion inside their spine and joints by making the circle very small. They intentionally did their brick breaks from about 3 feet distance do they could prove to "naysayers" that "closeness of centers" and "body drop" was not the force they used to break the bricks. I use this method for some limited purposes as well.

The whip begins at the feet, goes through the legs, is directed by the waist and ends up in the hand, elbow, shoulder or whatever you are hitting with. The problem is that with wide stances that are 50-50 or 70-30, two spirals of energy are started; one through both soles of the feet and going through each leg. Then the two momentums clash at the hips and lose much of their force when they travel up the spine. With a single weighted stance, one spiral of energy travels up the line all the way to the strike. There is little "contention" or conflict.

Many folks try to increase the momentum by whipping the spine at lumbars 4 and 5. This will ruin your back. It will tear the connective tissue at your fascettes, weaken the stabilizer muscles in your lower back, and may create rupture of a disk.

As far as mechanical advantage, the "two legged" fa ging whip is no comparison to "single weighted" freight train. It can sting, it can break a rib (or a brick). It may have some effect on an organ. The freight train can take out multiple organs. The double weighted whip is like a bullet the freight train is like a sledge hammer. Over time, either one can break a coconut suspended in the air in a net (nothing to support it with counterforce). (The suspended coconut break was Wai Fong Doo's ultimate test of your power). The bullet needs speed where the sledgehammer can move slower because it has mass. Now when I was a cop, I responded to an irate guy who had been shot 3 times by a .32 caliber. He had adrenal dumped and some thought he was so mad he was unstoppable. If you usw the double weighted whip, make sure you have the force of a 9 mil or a .45.

John's1.5kicks have a wide corridor (about 3 feet). His pelvis and leg mass combined with the whip has some damaging capability. But look at the photo of Hung I Shiang doing a front thrust kick in Robert Smith's "Chinese Boxers Master's and Methods". Imagine his torso coming at you and his foot connecting when his pelvis is about 1.5 feet from your pelvis. His extension will go about two feet past your spine….A steam roller baby…

His corridor is small even though he is a large man (compared to his height). He is doing a step through with his front thrust kick. His corridor is small because he remains grounded and single weighted.

Returning to My sequence (I-Li-Chi)

No manner of chi development or direction will travel effectively past poor body mechanics. Thus the mind has to direct the body. When the body moves efficiently and when the mind does not hesitate to go through the "barrier" that an opponent presents, all manner of chi is at your disposal. The universe will supply it without you having tgo over define it. In fact, if you try to over define it (chi), you might shackle or otherwise hinder it with the mental images that the words produce. Simple enough, do not chase the chi. Use the mind to direct the body and chi will follow.

On a sidebar note, since about five years ago, the acupuncture points in the human body are actually moving a bit. At least that is what I was told by some very sensitive practicioners.

Perhaps our disagreement is just about words. certainly no call to accuse someone of being a sham.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 06:24 PM   #35
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Lets avoid I Li Chi for a moment then and just call the sequence in simple English.
Actually, Chris, exactly what the chi is in relation to strength is fairly straightforward, but it appears to not be what you think it is... hence the confusion. You've basically made the statement that the chi is what follows and I have a problem understanding any other way you could arrive at that point unless you have the wrong idea about what chi is. However, *you're* the one that made the statement. You're either making a joke, you don't understand what chi is, or you need to clarify exactly what you mean. Something along those lines. Because you're the one that made the statement; not anyone else.
Quote:
How about: The mind directs the body mechanics and mechanical force follows.
That's not what qi is, though, so your statement is still hanging out there.
Quote:
Robert Smith wrote under the pen name of John Gilbey for a while. Two books… One was something like "Secret Fighting Arts of the World". They were meant to be funny but each chapter had a kernel of real truth in them as well.
This is even worse. Robert Smith was a writer. He didn't know what qi was and he pretty much broadcast that by what he wrote. He certainly was no expert in Xingyi. He was only on Taiwan between 2 and 3 years... his pronouncements on various Chinese martial arts don't make him an expert. The point being that when you pull up a source like some of the ones that you have mentioned (I'm assuming as some sort of appeal-to-authority argument), it doesn't do a lot for your debate points. Why not argue the issue that you made rather than go off on tangents?
Quote:
On a sidebar note, since about five years ago, the acupuncture points in the human body are actually moving a bit. At least that is what I was told by some very sensitive practicioners.
More experts, but sensitive ones!
Quote:
Perhaps our disagreement is just about words. certainly no call to accuse someone of being a sham.
I just looked.... can't find where anyone called anyone a "sham". But maybe by making such a point we can get off the issue and get into personalities? I'm basically not interested. Why not just say you were making a joke, talking about something you didn't really know about, or some approach like that, rather than try to deflect the responsibility to someone else? The bit about the mind, qi, strength is very straightforward, easy to demonstrate, and is also found in numerous classical writings. It's not a matter of "here's my take on it".

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Last edited by Mike Sigman : 02-10-2008 at 06:26 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 06:29 PM   #36
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
John and Mike,

Lets avoid I Li Chi for a moment then and just call the sequence in simple English.

How about: The mind directs the body mechanics and mechanical force follows.
Woot! That's the kind of talk I was going for. Thanks Chris
We will be talking about "dynamics"…. Not "statics".

I have a multitude of ways to use intent and mechanical advantage to create maximum force. I will explain more deeply one of them.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Robert Smith wrote under the pen name of John Gilbey for a while. Two books… One was something like "Secret Fighting Arts of the World". They were meant to be funny but each chapter had a kernel of real truth in them as well. One chapter was called the "dinky little punch". It was a shortened version of Pi Chen, the first movement in Hsing-I. That chapter makes a great study (if you have some time to to read it) and is the one punch I will describe.
I used to love that book!
Couple of quibbles I have about Robert Smith is that while he was a great documenter of boxing styles...I definitely never gave what he wrote much thought with regards to his analysis/description of "how-to's".
Actually we do Pi-chuan here in Tokyo...actually more like all we practice from Hsing-i is Pi...which can be a "#$"# and a half if you've been doing it for 30 min straight.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I think that is why internal (Tai Chi, Hsing-I and Paqua) Chinese boxers display their skill with the Tai Chi-style "uproot". It displays mechanical force and momentum without injuring someone. When you strike with this uprooting force or whether you just uproot someone, the guy should go flying 10-20 feet…. Especially if you have an "uber dantien (hara)". The strike is really anti-climatic except in a fight.
I agree

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
As already said, my distance is different than what you (john) are doing. They say fighting a man is like taking a walk. They also say you should walk through the person like he is not there. If you see the opponent as a barrier, momentum and mechanical force is stymied by your mind and different leverages occur within the body mechanics because your mind doubts its ability to blow through the object. Thus Hsing-I is often referred to as "mind-Form boxing". From my experience, it uses the sequence I am referring to.
But there's a catch to that kind of thought.
Most boxers will tell you to "blow through" the other side. Muay thai trainers will tell you to kick 6 inches through the other side.
Problem with that is that you end up disconnecting the body in an effort to overcommit.
Instead of that, for training purposes anyways, I always have an equal amount "pulling me back" as I commit my weight forward.
Never seen you strike so I can't comment. But I remember seeing you overcommit your weight in the forward direction in one of your videos (during a throw I think), Which resulted you in temporarily losing your balance. Assuming you always have an equal "tension" in your body pulling you back, you're always in an equalized state. (Fully committed without being commited).

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
No Mental Barriers
There is no surface hitting when a freight train blows through you. To do the kind of sparring you are doing in the videos is to do "tappy-tappy" to each other in a boxing or medium range.
I understand where you're getting at. I think I mentioned it in one of my videos, but my partner complained I was hitting "way to hard", even though the strikes only look like their "tappy tappy". Actually at one point, in a seperate sparring session I added just a bit of connection from the rear leg to my lead jab, nailing my sparring partner (amateur kickboxin champ) in the eye. Went down like a sack, the back of his eye(inside) hurt for over a week.
In these sessions I'm pretty much only looking for movement, alignment, and working on balance. Nothing more.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Chen Tai Chi- style whipping might help at this range, but I personally prefer to close distance while gaining momentum with my lower body, then I place a lead hand on you to (1) destabilize your spine, (2) reduce your base and (3) place you at the edge of your balance. Then my punch follows, into the cavity I have created by destabilizing your spine. Watch Cheng Man Ching or Hung I Shiang uproot someone.
Er Cheng Man Ching...? I dunno, he's got some great lower body connection that he uses from the push...but if you ask me its still pretty sloppy. Look at the over commitment he does in a couple of vids against rank beginners. Hung I Shiang is a different story
That aside...the think you describe pretty much only works against someone that doesn't have a connected body I think.
You're describing lower body weight transfer, pure and simple.

I think there's a lot more that could be done with the legs to generate more effecient force. One way is using the front leg, pass it in a saggital circle to the rear, to execute a cross ( since the rear hand is already hooked up to the front foot).

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
but driving down would penetrate and do the most damage. That is because the opponent's legs cannot collapse fast enough. The resistance in the legs provided enough resistance for the punch to penetrate better. I use this format once I have an opponent in an unstable position. I can uproot, or down root the next push or punch.
Right but how? If you ask me, there's more than a couple ways to do it "simply", while there's another way that can't really be seen on the outside

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post

The whip begins at the feet, goes through the legs, is directed by the waist and ends up in the hand, elbow, shoulder or whatever you are hitting with. The problem is that with wide stances that are 50-50 or 70-30, two spirals of energy are started; one through both soles of the feet and going through each leg.
But only if they're disjointed/unconnected. If both legs are connected, say like a bridge, then this is definitely not the case.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Many folks try to increase the momentum by whipping the spine at lumbars 4 and 5. This will ruin your back. It will tear the connective tissue at your fascettes, weaken the stabilizer muscles in your lower back, and may create rupture of a disk.
That's just dumb, and shows no understanding of connection
(People that whip their spine I mean)

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
John's kicks have a wide corridor (about 3 feet). His pelvis and leg mass combined with the whip has some damaging capability. But look at the photo of Hung I Shiang doing a front thrust kick in Robert Smith's "Chinese Boxers Master's and Methods". Imagine his torso coming at you and his foot connecting when his pelvis is about 1.5 feet from your pelvis. His extension will go about two feet past your spine….A steam roller baby…
Are you referring to these kicks?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nk-HLVl9LNo
Man I should update those vids.... soo oold ^^;
Anyways, I'm definitely not whipping anything in these vids. All I'm doing is maintaining a connection to the sole of my supporting leg and directing it forward. Walking forward if you will. (Especially in the front kick)

There's a lot I could add to it, slamming the middle down into my supporting leg as I kick, open/close of the body, etc, but it was just an illustration of "equllibrium", and what "true mass" really is.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
No manner of chi development or direction will travel effectively past poor body mechanics. Thus the mind has to direct the body. When the body moves efficiently and when the mind does not hesitate to go through the "barrier" that an opponent presents, all manner of chi is at your disposal. The universe will supply it without you having tgo over define it. In fact, if you try to over define it (chi), you might shackle or otherwise hinder it with the mental images that the words produce. Simple enough, do not chase the chi. Use the mind to direct the body and chi will follow.
Ok...
I could be wrong, but I *think* I have a good grasp on where you're coming from.
And I'd say with 90% certainty from your statement above that you're missing a huge portion in terms of body mechanics.
You got a good frame, good weight transfer, even connection on the saggital plane to a certain degree.

But nothing you've described (in words or the video) shows that you know how to manipulate your middle (particularly with regards to slamming the middle down into the feet), or using the open/close of the body to effect a hit. If you could find someone that knows how to do these things I think you could add a substantial amount of power to your strikes.
The way you described the "whipping" pretty much shows, I think, that you don't understand the "open/close" of the body. It's this sudden open/close that gives "Pi", and actually almost all strikes in CMA its power.

And that's without getting into actual whole body connection in a "store/release" fashion.

This relates directly to "Chi". It is "definable", since you have to be using something in the human body. Plain and simple. Since you can't define it, you don't use it. No shame in it. Personally I can't make much use of it since it isn't strong enough yet, but it does have the potential to be a huge additive down the line. (Assuming I persist in breath training ^^; )

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Perhaps our disagreement is just about words. certainly no call to accuse someone of being a sham.
Well, disagreement is one thing, but you are "wrong" about the words, lol
Seriously, I'd at least get the wording straight.
There's iron clad physiological logic behind why it's Yi->Qi->Jin/Li (Li as in strength) is the way it is.

Oh and "Jing" is sperm essence....definitely use "Jin"
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 09:08 PM   #37
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

I have to admit that I am a bit saddened by your statement, Mr. Sigman, regarding Robert Smith. It seems that there is just "No Country for Old Men"... especially the pioneers that opened the world of Asian martial arts that you now benefit from.

In McMurtry's Book, "Streets of Laredo", I believe, Captain Call meets the new generation of Texans who did not know him and had no idea what the Comanche wars were like.

Then I remembered arguing with Doo Wai about how he defined things in contrast to Mantak Chia. After all I had paid good money to train with both of these guys. Why couldn't they use common terms? Why is it Noi Gung in Hung's world and Nei Gung in another? Why is Jing called Ging in two different writings by two different masters? Why did the microcosmic orbit mean nothing to tai Chi Master Liang? Why did one guy insist that I tie weights to my scrotum and breate where the other guy said meditation can benefit better? Why did Doo use P-rock suspended in a net while Hsiu and Hung used a bathtub filled with water and a cinder block with a wet towel over it?

Doo Wai told me not to chase the Chi. I would not listen. Mike Patterson Sr. told me the same thing. I was lucky to train with him (and his son) since he had lived in Taiwan and trained with Hsiu Hong Chi for 10 years while building bridges there. I did not listen.

Old Man Liang in San Diego said the same thing when he taught us Tai Chi in the park. William Chen also said it when I asked him a form of the same question in New York in 1990.

None of them would define Chi for me. They called it "intrinsic energy", "life force". Nevertheless, all of them, including Robert Smith could do things that defied the average martial artist's expression of power.

I must have really tried their patience. I chased chi for about 10 years. In that time, 1970-1980, I never saw a good definition of Chi from these guys. But I did learn how to develop the power.... Not from dissecting and defining chi, rather from employing good body mechanics.

Well, I left out a key factor in my explanation of body mechanics my last post. I did it on purpose. The question I offer you is, "What mechanical function causes someone to get uprooted"? "Can it be done without touch?" "Can it be done with little force when you do touch?"

So if you two guys can define chi so concretely, please now offer me something allot more concrete. Explain how the uproot occurs.
Or better still, show me a video of it and support it with your explanation.

Mr. Sigman, we have not seen you move. Would you take on this challenge and enlighten this old man?

"The Tao that can be defined is no longer the Tao."
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 10:05 PM   #38
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Chris, Mike Sigman can speak for himself.

However, I cannot resist interjecting as I just spent yesterday and today working with him.

I don't know the first thing about Chinese martial arts, but I will tell you that Mr Sigman is the first person I have ever trained with that could not only talk about what I have seen him talk about here on aikiweb and elsewhere, but also demonstrate it, not just a little, but very well.

I have seen him move and I have felt him move, it is very enlightening.

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 10:09 PM   #39
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
So if you two guys can define chi so concretely, please now offer me something allot more concrete.
Mike is more qualified to answer that question since I mainly deal with developing Jin. Suffice to say that it involves developing use of fascia, and gaining control of some regions that you'd otherwise have a hard time controling. Hence the breathing exercises. It exercises the fascia running through the entire body. Later you can abandon the breathing and control it seperately.
The feeling is like being wrapped in saran wrap. There's something that "tugs" across your entire body.
Funnily enough, my own teacher mentioned this development separately from Mike.

One thing you might want to consider is that while a lot of the people mentioned were able to demonstrate some of the things used in Internals...its quite possible they just didn't have skill or understanding in the other part.

Mike Patterson's record is impressive, he definitely had some skills, but watching the vids, its pretty apparent he's missing some stuff.
Fighting skill and body skills are separate. So it's possible to have a guy that has a full repetoire of qi/jin skills but can't fight worth crap
Doesn't mean that there's nothing to learn.

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Explain how the uproot occurs.
Or better still, show me a video of it and support it with your explanation.
Actually Mike's already posted numerous diagrams on this, so see if you can't look at his post history and dig something up?
You'll probably want to look at the "Baseline skillset thread"

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Mr. Sigman, we have not seen you move. Would you take on this challenge and enlighten this old man?
Um...
If you ever get the chance, just go and meet the guy. Video does not do this "old timer's" power release any justice at all
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 10:27 PM   #40
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

I thank you for your attempt John.

Personally, when I was 25 years old, I thought similar. I also thought it would take me many years to achieve a good uproot.

These days I have learned how to teach the uproot in about 10-15 minutes. I must be doing something right.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2008, 10:36 PM   #41
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Thanks kevin,

There is little in his profile to go by.

Robert Smith is a hero of mine. He paid his dues in the CIA as a Asian specialist. He paled around with Don Drager. And in his old age, he still teaches Tai Chi. He's got allot of years on the mats.

For those who have not read, "Martial Musings", Robert Smith reviews his life with aplomb. He never loses his respect for others but you can see how sad he is about how commercial Tai Chi has degraded that which he has devoted his life to. One of my favorite examples is when he says, "In order to teach Tai Chi you gotta have a neon sign." Perhaps that was Gilbey talking. He is definitely the "old school" kind of guy that I have seeked out throughout my career as a student.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 02:09 AM   #42
Upyu
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 591
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I thank you for your attempt John.

Personally, when I was 25 years old, I thought similar. I also thought it would take me many years to achieve a good uproot.

These days I have learned how to teach the uproot in about 10-15 minutes. I must be doing something right.
Hi Chris,

I agree it doesn't take many years to do uprooting.
I can show people how to "uproot" in about the same amount of time There's a lot to be done to most people in terms of basic alignment, body posture, and basic body mechanics.

One way of showing the uproot (which honestly I don't focus too much on, since I don't think it has too much martial useage), involves
a) stabilizing the upper cross/middle dantien (the point in the chest and in the middle behind the scapula)

b) creating an "arch" in the legs to connect the lower body

c) get the person to understand how to have a load "settle" in to the body, and have the frame of the body suspend the load. This includes working the middle/dantin/illial psoa regions

d) finally, get them to understand the concept of creating a "groundpath" from the foot to the point of contact, taking the load into the rear foot, store it, then bounce it back into the person giving you the "load"/pushing you. (<- the easy way to learn this I stole from Mike )
There's a couple of tricks you can add to this, like bouncing your middle into your rear leg to create a rebound effect.

Anyways, my point is that, teaching the uproot is more a "mechanic" than a true "skill" persay. The stuff Mike is getting at requires specific conditioning, and only gets stronger with age.
Think of it as an "additive" to stuff you already know, and can also allow you to do even funkier stuff once it's stronger.
The only reason I feel I'm qualified to say this is because I'm starting to get access to mechanics that I could never do 4 years ago, simply do to inadequate conditioning. It's not a "a kinda sorta feel it" type of thing but rather "damn...that "#$t actually can move in the body, kewl!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 10:38 PM   #43
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
I have to admit that I am a bit saddened by your statement, Mr. Sigman, regarding Robert Smith. It seems that there is just "No Country for Old Men"... especially the pioneers that opened the world of Asian martial arts that you now benefit from.

In McMurtry's Book, "Streets of Laredo", I believe, Captain Call meets the new generation of Texans who did not know him and had no idea what the Comanche wars were like.

Then I remembered arguing with Doo Wai about how he defined things in contrast to Mantak Chia. After all I had paid good money to train with both of these guys. Why couldn't they use common terms? Why is it Noi Gung in Hung's world and Nei Gung in another? Why is Jing called Ging in two different writings by two different masters? Why did the microcosmic orbit mean nothing to tai Chi Master Liang? Why did one guy insist that I tie weights to my scrotum and breate where the other guy said meditation can benefit better? Why did Doo use P-rock suspended in a net while Hsiu and Hung used a bathtub filled with water and a cinder block with a wet towel over it?

Doo Wai told me not to chase the Chi. I would not listen. Mike Patterson Sr. told me the same thing. I was lucky to train with him (and his son) since he had lived in Taiwan and trained with Hsiu Hong Chi for 10 years while building bridges there. I did not listen.

Old Man Liang in San Diego said the same thing when he taught us Tai Chi in the park. William Chen also said it when I asked him a form of the same question in New York in 1990.

None of them would define Chi for me. They called it "intrinsic energy", "life force". Nevertheless, all of them, including Robert Smith could do things that defied the average martial artist's expression of power.

I must have really tried their patience. I chased chi for about 10 years. In that time, 1970-1980, I never saw a good definition of Chi from these guys. But I did learn how to develop the power.... Not from dissecting and defining chi, rather from employing good body mechanics.

Well, I left out a key factor in my explanation of body mechanics my last post. I did it on purpose. The question I offer you is, "What mechanical function causes someone to get uprooted"? "Can it be done without touch?" "Can it be done with little force when you do touch?"

So if you two guys can define chi so concretely, please now offer me something allot more concrete. Explain how the uproot occurs.
Or better still, show me a video of it and support it with your explanation.

Mr. Sigman, we have not seen you move. Would you take on this challenge and enlighten this old man?

"The Tao that can be defined is no longer the Tao."
I dunno, Chris... we seem to be ships passing in the night here. I asked for specifics about "chi" and I keep seeing names being dropped as some sort of badge. Frankly, I'm open to discussing facts, how, when, and where, but our cracker-barrel opinions of various "names" probably won't resolve much of anything. At least I tried.

Regards,

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2008, 07:50 AM   #44
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

mike I will be happy to dust off my old volumes and check my language in relation to the what was written on chi, ging, Jin and all of the other stuff you want to challenge me on.

Right now I am 2000 miles from my library working on a project.

The point of this string of conversations was originally about methods of training aikido flow. I have a simple point to make. Everything I do includes an uproot. The basic Tai Chi Uproot can be done without hands or with a light touch. It ain't theory to me.
it makes my aikido as well as my pugilism most effective. I use it so that I do not have to escalate things when handling low intensity confrontation. It is a vary humane strategy to lightly disrupt someone's balance and stability while you whisper in their ear.

I do not chase the Chi. To me, chi is everywhere, always has been and always will be. Highland Scotts warriors used it as easily as Chinese warriors. It is available to everyone without special language or paradigm.

If you use a method that is specific, good for you. Follow your bliss.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2008, 07:56 AM   #45
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Highland Scotts warriors used it as easily as Chinese warriors. It is available to everyone without special language or paradigm.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2008, 11:46 PM   #46
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Mike,

I returned home and this evening reviewed my library to answer the issues you presented. First, allow me to say:

Irenics is always better than polemics when sharing ideas and speaking about things that span history and many cultures. Words simply get in the way and exegetes can go on forever without building positive bridges in communication. As a trained theologian (Princeton Theological Seminary, 1984), I have tried to avoid hair-splitting conversations that generate more heat than light.

Having read some of your interviews on the internet, I can understand (1) that you do not care for teachers who "oversimplify" a subject. In your interview with In Young, for instance, you say:

Quote:
Actually, one of my teachers uses terms that I don't like because they're too reductionist: where I will refer to Peng strength, a lot of times when he and I are doing things, he will say "Oh, yes, bring the leg strength here," and I balk at just "leg strength": he's more simplistic than I am!
http://www.iay.org.uk/internal-stren.../interview.htm

If Robert John wanted to critique me for using the word "body" instead of "strength" for Li, my indiscretion is probably the result of teaching movement for the last 7 years at zoos, water works, fire departments, police departments, university science labs, parks, hotel and university housekeeping and landscape departments. If I use the word "strength" with these non CMA folks, they would try to employ muscle (strength) rather than efficient body mechanics.

Thus I am guilty of over simplification and the exegetes are technically correct. But my end product is to be able to teach sophisticated concepts in a very short time. That is a win in my book. All teachers should try to shorten the learning curve.

Regarding the critique and challenge of my sequence Yi -- Li -- Chi, here was my exact source:

The mind (i) commands, strength (li) goes along, and internal energy (chi) follows.

Michael Minick, The Wisdom of Kung Fu (Warner Paperback Library, NY, NY 1974), page 129.

I fully understand how Tai Chi and Chi Gung practitioners attempt to develop human chi Ren Chi) with a variety of exercises spanning from the purely mental exercises that Cheng Man- Ch'ing preferred through the mental/physical fusions that Mantak Chia's system teaches.

My Hsing-I, on the other hand uses my simple formula. The mind directs the body and energy follows. You can be specific and call it Jen or what Mike Patterson used to call Geng, but these are just specific expressions of Chi (energy).

According to Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming, Hsing-I is an internal style of Gongfu in which the mind or thinking determines the shape or movement of the body"

Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming, The Roots of Chinese Qigong (YMAA Publication Center, Roslindale, MA) p.301.

And Yang-Style Tai Chi Mastert Wu Yu-seong (1812-1880), student of Yang Lu-Chan (1799-1872), stated, "PERMEATE THE BODY with Chi so that it may be pliable, AND THUS FOLLOW THE DIRECTION OF THE MIND. Minick, p.129

Surely this part of our disagreement is just semantics.

Mike, you took exception to my statement, "it is not new. But each generation puts their flare on it."

You replied, "Hmmmm.... not if they know what they're talking about. It's actually pretty solidly laid out…… This has got to be a leg pull, guys. Nobody is seriously this far off base."

I suspect that we could both agree that Yang Jwing-Ming has developed a systematic approach to studying (1) the history, (2) traditions and (3) scientific analysis of Chi. He understands Mandarin and Cantonese. He has trained in Chi Gung, Kung Fu and Tai Chi since he was a teenager. He has an earned degree in engineering. He has a PhD. In physics. He has devoted himself full-time to building bridges between Qigong practice and scientific analysis. Regarding the definition of Chi, he says :

Quote:
…so far, there is no one scientific definition of Qi which is accepted generally by Qigong practitioners and Chinese medical society. The way people define Qi varies, depending upon their individual background and experience. The way people define Qi varies, depending upon their individual background and experience. Some people think Qi is an electrical energy, others believe that it is a magnetic energy, and many others believe that Qi is heat or some other type of energy. However, anyone who has carefully researched the historical background of Qi would not define it by any one of these narrow definitions.
Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming, The Roots of Chinese Qigong, p.6.

And later:

"At this time, there is no clear explanation of the relationship between all of the circulatory systems and the Qi circulatory system."

Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming, The Roots of Chinese Qigong, p,24

In his glossary, he defines Qi like this: universal energy including heat, light, and electromagnetic energy. A narrower definition of Qi refers to the energy circulating in human and animal bodies. A current popular model is that the Qin circulating in the human body is bioelectric in nature.

Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming, The Roots of Chinese Qigong, p,293.

So, you took issue with my statement that different generations put a different flare on it. But to me, Chi is like the Big elephant. Several blind men are touching it. Each touches a different part. Thus they get a different experience. Such is the nature of Hermeneutics (how we understand meaning in language) and Semiotics (how we en-space ourselves and define the en-spacement with signs, symbols, and metaphors, i.e. the building blocks of language.

In Yang's history of Qi, (Chapter Two) he acknowledges that even Chinese history of Chi development has three distinct periods. The first period approached it as a medical issue. (1122 BC to 206 BC), religious development of Qi practice (206 BC to 502 AD) and finally martial practice using Qi (502 AD to 1911 AD). Each period had its own fusions with Indian and Tibetan practices. Each period had limited distribution of written documents explaining the practices. Each period had the practices limited to aristocracy and monasteries. I am sure that both standard terminologies and practices were far from homogeneous.

Yang himself states , "...a large portion of the knowledge was kept secret until the last twenty years." Ibid. P. 10.

Yang even accepts that other cultures develop Chi. He says:
"Many people believe that Qigong is a product only of China, India or other oriental countries. As a matter of fact, internal energy cultivation has also been common in the western world, usually within the context of religion…. The practice of such disciplines allows the energy in the body to become balanced, bringing health and strength to some and even in some cases, seemingly supernatural powers." Ibid. p.5

I have personally lived in a Hindu Ashram (age 14-16), studied and even emulated the lives of the desert fathers and the Celtic Saints, and found my own form of mystic faith through various meditations -- all of which employed Chi.

As I said, I know something of the Ren Chi that you speak about that resides in the body. I understand how this Chi can be manipulated by the mind and by using various physical yoga's. But Yang even admits that Chi naturally seeks its own balance if we just relax our bodies and calm our minds. Ibid. p.4

The calm mind-relaxed body method is my bliss. Yours is the Chinese Qigong method. Go you! Follow your bliss. One size does not fit all.

Mike, I respect you for muddling through all the "secrets" that were held so tightly in both Chinese as well as Japanese societies. Few people have that tenacity and courage. But you are not the first one to do it. And there are many folks who have done it that you may not know by name.

Parker Linekin, my training partner, is one of them. Much more than I as I left the complex Qigong systems in the 1980's while I decided to study what some Chinese would call, "Ren Shi" or the study of how energy can be used to understand universal connections between heaven, earth and humans (past, present and future). Besides martial arts, therein lays my avocation.

In closing, just a word from Chuang Tzu since Taoism is so integrally linked to the experience of Qi in China:

Quote:
…..the manifestation of right and wrong is what diminishes the Way… the sage endeavors to get rid of bewildering flamboyance. For this reason, he does not use things for himself, but lodges in commonality. This is called using lucidity.
Victor H. Mair, Wanderings Along the Way, (Bantam Books, NY, NY, 1994) pp. 18,19

Let's all get along and focus on irenics rather than polemics.

Cordially,

Chris Parkerson
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2008, 08:04 AM   #47
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

You consistently use a form of "argument by authority", Chis. You like to name "names" as an example of why you are right, instead of simply laying out the facts of your argument and any functional support for those facts.
Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Quote:
If Robert John wanted to critique me for using the word "body" instead of "strength" for Li, my indiscretion is probably the result of teaching movement for the last 7 years at zoos, water works, fire departments, police departments, university science labs, parks, hotel and university housekeeping and landscape departments. If I use the word "strength" with these non CMA folks, they would try to employ muscle (strength) rather than efficient body mechanics. [not to mention grand references to yourself and what you've done.
Regarding the critique and challenge of my sequence Yi -- Li -- Chi, here was my exact source:

The mind (i) commands, strength (li) goes along, and internal energy (chi) follows.

Michael Minick, The Wisdom of Kung Fu (Warner Paperback Library, NY, NY 1974), page 129.
Who is Michael Minick? The famous saying is "The heart leads the mind, the mind leads the qi, the qi leads li (or jin)". If you understood what chi was, you'd realize that Minick's statement is absurd; it's not a matter of anyone's opinion, it's how things work and it can be shown very easily. So your opinining about how qi works, "chasing the chi", etc., all came from something you read in a book????????
Quote:

I fully understand how Tai Chi and Chi Gung practitioners attempt to develop human chi Ren Chi) with a variety of exercises spanning from the purely mental exercises that Cheng Man- Ch'ing preferred through the mental/physical fusions that Mantak Chia's system teaches.
You think Mantak Chia and CMC used different methods? Why do you think that? Give me an example.
Quote:

My Hsing-I, on the other hand uses my simple formula. The mind directs the body and energy follows. You can be specific and call it Jen or what Mike Patterson used to call Geng, but these are just specific expressions of Chi (energy).
JIn and Ging are the same thing: Mandarin vs Cantonese.
Quote:
According to Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming, Hsing-I is an internal style of Gongfu in which the mind or thinking determines the shape or movement of the body"

Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming, The Roots of Chinese Qigong (YMAA Publication Center, Roslindale, MA) p.301.
So? What does that mean? You tell me, since you claim to do Xingyi. How does the mind use the chi in a strike like Beng Chuan?

My point is that if you're going to set out these sorts of pronouncements, you need to be careful, particularly if you spend a lot of time trying to establish yourself in the eyes of the list as an expert. So far you've made a very bad error about how things work and rather than learn from it, you're still trying to argue it .... but only by authority. Why not try to explain how it works?????? If you really know these things, how it works should be simpler than "well, I read it in a book".
Quote:
And Yang-Style Tai Chi Mastert Wu Yu-seong (1812-1880), student of Yang Lu-Chan (1799-1872), stated, "PERMEATE THE BODY with Chi so that it may be pliable, AND THUS FOLLOW THE DIRECTION OF THE MIND. Minick, p.129
That's still "mind leads qi", though, and not the strength leads the qi.
Quote:
I suspect that we could both agree that Yang Jwing-Ming has developed a systematic approach to studying (1) the history, (2) traditions and (3) scientific analysis of Chi. He understands Mandarin and Cantonese. He has trained in Chi Gung, Kung Fu and Tai Chi since he was a teenager. He has an earned degree in engineering. He has a PhD. In physics. He has devoted himself full-time to building bridges between Qigong practice and scientific analysis. Regarding the definition of Chi, he says :
I'm not sure why you're jumping into more argument by authority, again. I know Jimmy Yang. Met him in 1982/83. I also know guys like Ming Der Lu and George Hu who studied with Yang when he was a kid on Taiwan. Why do you think Yang Jwing Ming is an expert? Because he wrote some books? Do you know what he studied and how long he studied? I do. Why don't you just debate me with the functional part of how these things that "you know" actually work?

Regards,

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2008, 12:44 PM   #48
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Better still, talk goes nowhere.
lets just get some coconuts and break them together in a spirit of friendship.

Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2008, 09:22 PM   #49
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Quote:
Chris Parkerson wrote: View Post
Better still, talk goes nowhere.
I've noticed. What you've gotta learn to do is simply go silent when there's an awkward question; pretend you never heard it and don't post for a few weeks. Then come back up like nothing ever happened. If you're really good, you can convince yourself that no one has ever noticed this odd sort of behavior. I've seen it done on this very forum, so don't think it's a ridiculous strategy!!!

Regards,

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2008, 08:40 PM   #50
Chris Parkerson
Dojo: Academy of the Martial Arts
Location: ohio
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 740
United_States
Offline
Re: Freeform Bokken Drills to Develop Aiki Flow

Mike, You have said:

Quote:
What you've gotta learn to do is simply go silent when there's an awkward question;
Mike, it is certainly not my style to duck or hide and your questions are simply not awkward. Funny, though, you have gone silent on two of my questions…

(1) So if you two guys can define chi so concretely, please now offer me something allot more concrete. Explain how the uproot occurs. Or better still, show me a video of it and support it with your explanation. Mr. Sigman, we have not seen you move. Would you take on this challenge and enlighten this old man?

(2) Lets just get some coconuts and break them together in a spirit of friendship.

You also said:
Quote:
My point is that if you're going to set out these sorts of pronouncements, you need to be careful, particularly if you spend a lot of time trying to establish yourself in the eyes of the list as an expert.
I hfeel no need to establish myself. I am completely happy as I am. If a few people wish to join me in training, it is done without hierarchy, it is done with joy and laughter, it is done for free. It is done, I hope with a sophisticated simplicity where both myself and my partner develop the lesson and the learning together.. My payment is the fellowship. Perhaps some of these judgments you pronounce against me are merely a Jungian mirror, i.e. you are projecting onto me what your own image shows you.

Secondly, It would seem that if this is truly a discussion, parity would be part of the deal. But, somehow, I think this is more like an inquisition and you are the Pope. It reeks of insincerity.

You seem to want to debate yet you will not accept appeals to (1) my personal experience, (2) appeals to my teacher's authority and what they taught me or (3) appeals to written authorities that agree with me. Even if I cared to debate, it seems I would not know where to go to begin a discussion. debating breeds contention. I much prefer harmony. Irenics rather than polemics.

Nevertheless, to show you that your questions are not awkward for me, I will answer the following one:

Quote:
You think Mantak Chia and CMC used different methods? Why do you think that? Give me an example.
I will use my own verbose style and spell Chinese terms as I remember them.

Mantak Chia, CMC (via Bill Funsion, student in the CMC tradition), Mike Patterson, Doo Wai) all used different methods.

I will approach these experiences as a timeline to press the point on how I came to following my specific path.

Bill Funsion (CMC-Style Tai Chi) 1974-1986

My training in CMC-style Tai Chi (37 movements) was at the hands of Bill Funcion. He was a federal agent who had recently been moved to Southern California. He was a student of one of CMC's top students. Bill brought his teacher to our dojo in my second year of training (1975) at Parker Linekin's Academy of the Martial Arts. I was 21 years old and in great shape from surfing about 6 hours a day. I was the first to volunteer to be "bounced" by the this Tai Chi Master. He hardly moved at all. His two forefingers were all that touched me. I was in a wai-gong-style Kenpo forward bow. I remember the feeling of a light electrical shock. Then I was airborne and on my rear. I had travelled about three feet off the ground and about 15 feet backwards. I remember afterwards that my neck must have been tight because I got a whiplash out of it.

Though I had trained with Master Liang and Parker Linekin in Yang and Wu styles for a year, I began also learning from Bill privately at his home. The only payment was for me to take his son places when he was on TDY. Our training in Nei Gung consisted of a very Taoist approach to moving Chi. The idea was to let nature do most of the work. We used primarily mental imagery, light perineum puckering (reminded me of "Kegel exercises"), and no forced breath or gut-wrenching muscle constrictions. Kind of weird for a 21year old guy that surfed, pumped weights and managed a health spa in the summer. We concentrated on how energies felt and debriefed them regularly. He never told me how it was supposed to feel. He just had me concentrate on (1) the soles of my feet, my legs, my spine, my arms, and the palms of my hands. Sometimes we traced the lines with our fingers to gently lead the path.

Mike Patterson, Sr. (Hsu Hong Chi's Hsing-I) 1976-1978??

I began training under Mike Patterson Sr. somewhere around 1976 if I remember correctly. A buddy who had lived in Taiwan and trained with Hung I Shiang had taken me to him. A case of Corona in hand and a willing spirit, I was accepted into his garage-dojo. Mike Patterson used aggressive perineum puckering to literally drive (or suck) sexual energy, earth energy and heavenly energy through the microscopic orbit. It was a blending of hard and soft. We focused on Fa Ging as developed through Tien Kan (Heavenly Stem Linear Pa Kua) exercises, White Crane exercises, bouncing ourselves off a vertical post to feel the coordinations needed for fa Ging, and doing a strange form of Pi Chen by pulling a karate belt that was tied to a large spring and suspended in his garage's ceiling. We breath packing ( 2 directions) and mental imagery to guide our chi up and out the hands with each movement in our linear forml. We would pucker the perineum before and after each move. Often, we would train our "Iron Vest" by striking our solar plexus while advancing in a Hsing-I stance while exhaling and doing the perineum pucker. We used mental imagery to attack the attacking fist with our torso. A real Tuff-guy training method. I can still take a pretty good shot in the solar plexus. Of course, cleansing meditations followed these kind of practices.

I also did iron palm with him using a bathtub, a cinderblock and a wet towel. We used our internal breathing as meditation before, during and after the iron palm. We did our training at the same time of morning every day and used sexual abstinence to assist.
I was told how to perform a Nei Gung that included hanging weights around my scrotum while performing my breathing exercises. I was warned not to do it longer than 4 months at a time and do it at the same time of day in the early mornings (4:00 am). The weights would swing as I breathed. Slippage was painful, but the internal pulling, stresses and stretching was certainly good Nei Gung and more aligned to the young testosterone-driven ways of youth. Of course, celibacy was mandatory. I was a fan of Patterson's Chi development style as late as 1986.

Mantak Chia (1984-1987)

Mantak Chia's was the most elaborate and I can only suspect that is because, by his own words, it was Tibetan as much as it was Chinese…. a fusion of the two that I am sure was not systematized as you claim, until he fused them.

We began with relaxing the body and the internal organs through breath and mental imagery. He allowed us to sit with an erect spine and a curved arch as long as our scrotum was free of any pressure. His system used the puckering of the perineum to literally drive or suck (depending on the imagery you used) sexual energy, earth energy and heavenly energy through the microscopic orbit and settling them into the Dantien. From there, we used the "six healing sounds" and "fusion of the five elements" (five major organ systems) to further "balance organ energies" by using vibration and more mental imagery. Aside from the health benefits, the martial purpose of this exercise was to create layers of Chi around the walls of the organs so that they had protection against blunt trauma. (IMO Patterson's weight were just a harsher method of obtaining the same results.)

The feeling was, however different than Patterson's method. I would describe my experience of this as having a balloon blown up around an organ and then another balloon blown up around the first balloon. Perhaps a little like getting a collagen shot in the lips. (A buddy in the Department of Justice who was a Tibetan White Crane Master had done a similar Tibetan with his iron palm training. His hands had actual chi bumps in them that acted as buffers when he hit things….and boy could he hit things.)

Pong energy was developed by lightly pushing against your training partner on all parts of his torso, legs and arms. Iron shirt was developed with breath and muscle pressures and light dit bu sam performed with bamboo and hand slapping. That is as far as I went with him.

Wai Fong Doo (1985-1987)

I began getting cross currents in training method once I met Doo Wai. Parker Linekin and Brian Adams, (and yes, the notorious Jim Lacey) had been training with him for some time. He has better credentials than anyone I had met in the internal arts. His family was a prominent medical family for centuries. His ancestor, Doo Tin Yin assisted Fung Do Duk when the Shaolin Temple in Fukien was destroyed. During his stay with Doo Tin Yin, he taught his kung Fu to the family. The Doo family method as taught by Doo Wai was simple and quite Taoist. It was primarily a form of breath packing. The videos he has on YouTube show me that he has not changed his percentages or sequences since I trained with him. But the Fa Ging he displays in these newer video streams do not do him justice. In his prime, he was a Fa Ging "machine gun" popping every punch with quick, never-ending whipping and thrusting motions. I remember making a joke to one of my friends saying, "Now that is truly the sound of one hand clapping".

But why was his system so simple? I suspect that real Taoists just allow nature to do most of the work. He taught a similar Dit Bu Sam to me using bamboo to tap the chi. We used P-rocks suspended in a cloth sack to train iron palm....no hot water to aid the chi flow as the patterson's did. I used herbs like Dot Da Jow and Dai Chi Jow to work their magic in bringing Chi to the bones as well as healing and toughening the bones.

As I have stated before, Doo's test was to break coconuts. I never was able to bust a suspended one. Jim Lacey was able to do this. I think Vincent Peppers did as well. But I could and often have broken coconuts with my heel-of-palm and a backstop.

I began to prefer the simplicity of the Taoist systems as taught by Doo Wai and as I remembered them from my young training under Bill Funsion's CMC. Nowdays, I do the simple way as I really prefer to allow natural forces do what they naturally do….without contention and without chasing chi. I had come full circle.

Now you have said,

Quote:
So? What does that mean? You tell me, since you claim to do Xingyi. How does the mind use the chi in a strike like Beng Chuan?
Be nice. There are many people who do Hsing-I and I do not just "claim" to do it. You said earlier that you were not calling me a "fraud". Then why say such a thing? What form of fear so motivates you to be so disingenuous?

In conclusion: I am convinced that trying to explain how the mind uses Chi is your path… not mine. Any explanation are based on traditions and theory unless you can use a "scientific method", In other words,

(1) isolate it "in-vitro",
(2) measure it with scientific equipment,
(3) reproduce the experiment at will and upon demand
(4) write an APA style hypothesis
(5) and present it for peer review.

Of course, there is another way. Simply demonstrate it. Doo Wai's method was to break the coconut. You accuse me of being silent, well, you were interestingly silent on this question. Can you break the coconut? If defeating Nikkyo and bouncing someone with pong is your test, so be it. I can do that. Can you do it with Sankyo? Isn't that much harder? Now there is a test. How about Shiho?

One final question… If the mind leads chi, are we talking about the conscious mind or the sub-conscious mind? If the body can draw Chi subconsciously in order to perform what the person needs and wants, why can't Chi Gung be done without all the pomp and circumstance?

If a construction worker handles a jack hammer for two years, can his hands be permeated with chi just like in Iron Palm? I think so. Definitely so.

If you must have an immediate "healing" under duress, can your body do it? Yes.

Can a woman lift a car under the stress of saving her child? Yes.

My path is to simply allow Chi to do its thing. I affirm you in your path. Will you affirm me in mine?
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Budo Bear Patterns - Sewing pattern for Women's (and Men's) dogi.



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
Bokken and jo set from Aikiwood Jennifer Yabut Weapons 13 11-07-2009 12:46 PM
Culture of Martial Mediocrity? L. Camejo Training 160 02-03-2006 01:25 AM
What Makes a Technique an "Aikido" Technique? akiy Techniques 55 11-02-2005 02:01 PM
bokken comparison (long post) linvincible Weapons 11 08-23-2005 02:30 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:54 AM.



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