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 > Open Discussions

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 11-29-2005, 08:52 PM   #51
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Peter Rehse wrote:
That's a whole new thread. I'm just not convinced that the Ki expressed in Ki tests and the like reflects the Ki in Aiki which I think is more of a mental construct. But that's an opinion I've expressed and been taken to task for before.

The old meaning of Aiki is described as two sword masters standing absolutely still waiting for an opening. In this case there is no contact. Again in my opinion, the sensitivity to your opponent defines the aiki techniques.
I don't know of any "old meaning" that says that. Aiki literally is a blending of forces and it's done on a far more subtle level than most people realize, not the "blending with a technique" that is so coarsely passed off as "aiki do". Try this from an Aikido Journal interview with Minoru Inaba:

Even though you focus the energy in your lower abdomen, you will not be able to move the energy to the area where you need it right away. You have to think about how you are going to move it. You have to think about two things, gathering and filling up the power, and then moving the power to where the opponent will attack. Also if you have a weapon, you have to project energy through the weapon. If you understand this point, you'll know how to train and what you need to develop. At the same moment you meet your opponent, you focus on your abdomen (hara) and project your ki where you need it. The result will be that you will shut down your opponent's power. I understand that as the power of "aiki."
Quote:
Dragging the thread back to its first off topic tangent I tend to agree that the kanji is a very strong anchor between the two languages. Same kanji tends to have analogous meanings in both languages. There may be cultural nuances and there are several examples of added meanings but I suspect Ki/Chi is not affected very much by the former or the latter. For the Chinese martial linguists out there I have a question. Among the various Chinese martial arts does Chi have a uniform meaning or does the debate rage there too? I'll bet it rages.
"Chi" can mean "air".... but if you're a martial arts "expert" who "teaches" and you insist that is the meaning, then you are a lost soul indeed, Peter. The "debate rages" only among the amateurs, as far as I know. The aspects of Chi (Qi) are pretty well established from the moderate levels on up. I.e., let's not suppose a "debate rages" at reasonable levels of expertise just because it rages at lower levels.

FWIW

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2005, 09:41 PM   #52
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,319
Japan
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
I don't know of any "old meaning" that says that. Aiki literally is a blending of forces and it's done on a far more subtle level than most people realize, not the "blending with a technique" that is so coarsely passed off as "aiki do". Try this from an Aikido Journal interview with Minoru Inaba:
The quotes are always interesting and AikidoJournal is a great source of them. Shishida Fumiaki is a Professor of Budo History at Waseda Daigaku. http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=626

I can't remember if it was him who told me this directly or I read it elsewhere but in any case the relevant point is below.


Aiki, the core concept of aikido, can be traced back to martial arts literature of the Edo era. According to Toka Mondo (Candlelight Discussion), written by the master of Kito-ryu Jujutsu in 1764, aiki means that two fighters come to a standstill in a martial arts bout when they have focused their attention on each other's breathing. Many other authors in the 1800's gave similar definitions. However, the volume entitled Budo-hiketsu Aiki no Jutsu (Secret Keys to Martial Arts Techniques) published in 1892 gave a new definition of the term. It says that aiki is the ultimate goal in the study of martial arts and may be accomplished by "taking a step ahead of the enemy." According to the volume, the prerequisites for such a preemptive move are to read the enemy's mind and use a battle cry. Unfortunately, no details on specific exercises have been recorded.


He goes on to say.


It is no longer possible to reconstruct the precise definition of aiki in the Daito-ryu school of jujutsu. This is primarily because Takeda closely guarded his technical secrets, as earlier martial arts practitioners had done, and chose not to transcribe his teachings in written form. However, Nenokichi Sagawa, one of Takeda's closest followers, mentions that it was mentioned sporadically in Takeda's 1913 notebook, "Exercise aiki". This suggests that Daito-ryu Jujutsu practitioners had used the term aiki and practiced techniques developed through this concept even before they changed the name of their school to Daito-ryu Aiki Jujutsu. Nevertheless, Takeda's failure to leave a clear-cut definition of aiki led to ambiguity in Ueshiba's interpretation, although Takeda still appointed Ueshiba to the important post of acting instructor. Later, as Ueshiba's school grew, his disciples and followers added some new meanings to aiki to compensate for the ambiguity. Since the term is composed of a combination of two Chinese characters-ai (unification) and ki (spirit or mind: they decided that aikido is a way to become one with the universe or harmonize with the movement and rhythm of nature.
.

Needless to say I don't consider Aiki a blending with technique or teach that Ki means air in a martial context. But you knew that right?

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2005, 10:00 PM   #53
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Peter Rehse wrote:
Aiki, the core concept of aikido, can be traced back to martial arts literature of the Edo era. According to Toka Mondo (Candlelight Discussion), written by the master of Kito-ryu Jujutsu in 1764, aiki means that two fighters come to a standstill in a martial arts bout when they have focused their attention on each other's breathing. Many other authors in the 1800's gave similar definitions. However, the volume entitled Budo-hiketsu Aiki no Jutsu (Secret Keys to Martial Arts Techniques) published in 1892 gave a new definition of the term. It says that aiki is the ultimate goal in the study of martial arts and may be accomplished by "taking a step ahead of the enemy." According to the volume, the prerequisites for such a preemptive move are to read the enemy's mind and use a battle cry. Unfortunately, no details on specific exercises have been recorded.[/i]
I don't have a quarrel with either one of those definitions, per se, because I immediately got rid of the "focused their attention on each other's breathing" and replaced it with "focused their attention on each other's 'ki' ('kokyu' would also fit). In other words, the idea of the neutralizing melding of forces at a high level is still there, if you see my point. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that it's another case of a translator misleading you because his own understanding wasn't complete. Inaba's idea of "aiki" is actually the same thing, but it's very highly explicative and applicable to actual Aiki usage. And it's the same thing Sunadomari says. But you don't see it, do you? Your later quotation referring to how it is nature's harmony is actually talking about the same thing, too. It's right in front of you.
Quote:
Needless to say I don't consider Aiki a blending with technique or teach that Ki means air in a martial context. But you knew that right?
No, I didn't know that. I know your views on kokyu, which are archived, and of course anyone understanding the relationship between kokyu and ki can extrapolate what you know fairly easily.

It's a nice quote, but for sheer substance and useful information, I would recommend people look up the interview with Inaba http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=107 and go to that section I quoted from. It's very blunt, very true, and very useful.

Regards,

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2005, 11:58 PM   #54
David Yap
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 561
Malaysia
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Peter Rehse wrote:
Aiki vs Tenki vs Genki - does ki mean the same thing in any of these compounds?

There are a large number of meanings of Ki in the Japanese language with context and its place in a compound being quite important. Really don't know if this is also true in Chinese but I suspect it is.
Hi Peter,

As a Chinese (Cantonese to be specific) but not neccesarily a Chinese scholar, I agree that the character/kanji "Ki" or "Chi" or "Qi" or "Hei" is seldom used in isolation. The same goes for all the characters.

This is not like the "O" we breathe but correctly the O2 we breathe in, the CO2 we breathe out, the H2O we drink, the CO that kills our brain cells, the pungent SO2 that we smell, the C12H22O11 that we consume.

David Y
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 12:33 AM   #55
David Yap
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 561
Malaysia
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Ian Dodkins wrote:
snip...I suppose pretty much everyone (inc. the original poster) is getting a bit bored with this now!
Not at all, Ian.

I've already found out that the book "Ki in Aikido" is out-of-print. Looking at the whole picture, I believe the arguments are over two or more different things. I'm amused rather than bored. I think the arguments are:

Is the "Ki" in a JMA same as the "Chi" or "Qi" in CMA? Everyone agrees that it is, in the same context.
Then, is the "Ki" in aikido same as the "Ki"/"Chi" in both JMA/CMA?
Or, is the argument over the intrinsic "ki" the enery or the philosophical/spiritual "ki" as in Aiki-Do?
Or is it all of the above or none of the above?

Amused or confused?

David Y
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 06:38 AM   #56
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
David Yap wrote:
Then, is the "Ki" in aikido same as the "Ki"/"Chi" in both JMA/CMA?
And if someone thinks it's not, could they give something other than just an assertion or a vague comparison/allusion/metaphor, etc., based on the fact that they are a "teacher" and they said so????



Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 07:23 AM   #57
roosvelt
Location: Ontario
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 177
Canada
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Peter Rehse wrote:

Among the various Chinese martial arts does Chi have a uniform meaning or does the debate rage there too? I'll bet it rages.
No. There is no arugument in CMA about what is Chi. They only aruge which style method is the best to get Chi stronger, faster and safer.

Chi is something real and you can feel it and test it.

If you pull a truck with your body, it doesn't demonstrate that you know how to use Chi. If you can pull a truck with your iron crotch, you surely know how to use Chi. If you break 5 bricks in a stack, it doesn't demonstrate that you know how to use Chi. But if you only break the brick in the middle of the stack every time, you surely know how to use Chi. If you bench press 200lb, it doesn't demonstrate that you know how to use Chi. If you lift it with your pinky, you sure know how to use Chi.

A person who knows Chi can test another person by pushing hands in low level. It's said a person can tell anohter's Chi without touching in high level. I don't know how. But I'm told if you're in that level you'd know.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 07:43 AM   #58
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
At the same moment you meet your opponent, you focus on your abdomen (hara) and project your ki where you need it. The result will be that you will shut down your opponent's power. I understand that as the power of "aiki."
I think from the quote above, Peter's quotes, and other discussions (including the new book on Sagawa Sensei), it's pretty clear that the term 'aiki' is what was specific to Daito ryu, and to much of aikido as well. It has been noted in the past that Tohei Sensei went outside to get his interpretation of 'ki', and used that for his aikido. I've said basically the same thing as Chuck about 'aiki' being the focal point, and not just 'ki'. There is a clear historical record of this, even in the material Mike quoted.

Tatsuo Kimura makes it pretty clear that his understanding of 'aiki' shifted over time through keiko and the guidance of Sagawa Sensei. If I remember correctly, he also draws a distinction between 'ki' as used in some styles of aikido, and 'aiki'.

Now, perhaps Chuck pushed the distinctions a bit too far later in his post, but what I see him speaking for is context. Personally, I think this quibbling over semantics not very usefull, but the quotes it has brought out are extremely usefull (some of which actually support Chuck's main point, if I understand him correctly). And the reference to Koryu isn't an appeal to snobbery...it has been pretty clearly established that the history of the use of the word 'aiki' in Japanese martial arts is rooted in the koryu, as established by some of the quotes above.

Has anyone else read Tatsuo Kimura's book about his training with Sagawa Sensei? Can someone give a good description of the Sumo exercise mentioned? I've seen it of course, but I'd be most interested in a clear description of the correct posture and movements.

Best,
Ron

Last edited by Ron Tisdale : 11-30-2005 at 07:47 AM.

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 08:28 AM   #59
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Ron Tisdale wrote:
I think from the quote above, Peter's quotes, and other discussions (including the new book on Sagawa Sensei), it's pretty clear that the term 'aiki' is what was specific to Daito ryu, and to much of aikido as well.
Ron, you may want to do a Google search and some outside reading on "aiki" before you make a statement like that. IMO.
Quote:
It has been noted in the past that Tohei Sensei went outside to get his interpretation of 'ki', and used that for his aikido. I've said basically the same thing as Chuck about 'aiki' being the focal point, and not just 'ki'. There is a clear historical record of this, even in the material Mike quoted.
Ron, "Aiki" is just a way to use one of the variants of ki. It is not something only found in Japanese martial arts, it is also found in Chinese martial arts. Chuck attempts to imply that there is a separation of ki usages and meanings which necessitates someone only being an expert in Japanese martial arts (preferably "koryu") before they can comment on these things. It's an attempt to trivialize anything other than his own view... AND most importantly, he gives no supporting facts, only pompous assertion.
Quote:
Tatsuo Kimura makes it pretty clear that his understanding of 'aiki' shifted over time through keiko and the guidance of Sagawa Sensei. If I remember correctly, he also draws a distinction between 'ki' as used in some styles of aikido, and 'aiki'.
Strange, just the word "aiki" tells you it is different from "ki", Ron! However, Ki is the basic element of "aiki". You can't "aiki" unless you really have Ki. The question is how this "compound" is any different from the manipulation of jin and qi in Chinese martial arts.... it's not! But if someone wants to argue it is, let's see the supporting facts and discussions. So far, all I see are opinions and feelings and misunderstandings of translations presented as facts. I'm asking for more.
Quote:
Now, perhaps Chuck pushed the distinctions a bit too far later in his post, but what I see him speaking for is context. Personally, I think this quibbling over semantics not very usefull, but the quotes it has brought out are extremely usefull (some of which actually support Chuck's main point, if I understand him correctly).
OK Ron, then if you understand Chuck's main point, then explain it with some facts about how there is a difference between the Japanese and Chinese usages of Ki. I'm glad to see you stepped up.
Quote:
And the reference to Koryu isn't an appeal to snobbery...it has been pretty clearly established that the history of the use of the word 'aiki' in Japanese martial arts is rooted in the koryu, as established by some of the quotes above.
Pooh... Chuck already has a reputation as a "Koryu Wanker"; let's don't be silly and argue the obvious. Go pull a number of his back-posts and watch how often he brings it up.

When you say "it has been pretty clearly established", I immediately grab my wallet tightly, Ron. ;^) Look at writings from the Koryu that are obviously borrowed from Chinese Buddhist martial and religious thought. I.e., if a whiff of "aiki" can be found in the Koryu, that doesn't mean it's of Japanese origin by any means at all. The concept that is being called "aiki" is not unique to Aikido, Daito-Ryu, Jiujitsu Ryu, or Japan, Ron. Consider the implications! I'm asking for a substantive discussion of exactly where there is a difference, as Chuck, Rob, and now you seem to believe. No vague allusions. No "here's my opinions and feelings, which are very strong and I'm an instructor"... none of that. I keep asking for facts and I haven't seen ANY compelling facts indicating that Ki and Chi are "apples, oranges".
Quote:
Has anyone else read Tatsuo Kimura's book about his training with Sagawa Sensei? Can someone give a good description of the Sumo exercise mentioned? I've seen it of course, but I'd be most interested in a clear description of the correct posture and movements.
We've been having an excellent discussion of some of that on the QiJing List and Rob John has made some significant remarks. Let's hope he can be induced to mention some of it here, for the edification of those who are really interested.

All the Best.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 01:03 PM   #60
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
Ron, you may want to do a Google search and some outside reading on "aiki" before you make a statement like that. IMO.
9x% of such a search turns up BS. The rest are references to Daito ryu, Aikido, Koryu. Both yawara and weapons based koryu. And it's pretty obvious in what way its being used here.

Quote:
Ron, "Aiki" is just a way to use one of the variants of ki.
You and I basically agree.

Quote:
It is not something only found in Japanese martial arts, it is also found in Chinese martial arts.
You and I basically agree.

Quote:
Chuck attempts to imply that there is a separation of ki usages and meanings which necessitates someone only being an expert in Japanese martial arts (preferably "koryu") before they can comment on these things.
Chuck said no such thing. I do think the apples and oranges comment was going a bit far, but stressing the use of 'aiki' as opposed to just 'ki' is perfectly appropriate for the context of this conversation. You constantly insist on these devious readings of people's words. Fine. You run with it, baby. I don't buy it for a second.

Quote:
It's an attempt to trivialize anything other than his own view...
I most emphatically disagree. He did no such thing. That is only your assertion, your interpretation of his words. Welcome to it, but it doesn't bind me, or Chuck.

Quote:
AND most importantly, he gives no supporting facts, only pompous assertion. Strange, just the word "aiki" tells you it is different from "ki", Ron!
Right, which is all I am saying. Nothing more. So we can move on now, right?

Quote:
However, Ki is the basic element of "aiki". You can't "aiki" unless you really have Ki. The question is how this "compound" is any different from the manipulation of jin and qi in Chinese martial arts.... it's not!
Well, that's what we are exploring. You've already come to your conclusions, and I tend to think personally that you are probably right. But my base is not in the chinese martial arts...so I'm focusing on the use in Daito ryu and associated arts. That's all.

Quote:
But if someone wants to argue it is, let's see the supporting facts and discussions. So far, all I see are opinions and feelings and misunderstandings of translations presented as facts. I'm asking for more.
Well, that might be the problem right there. You think someone wants to **argue** it. Personally, I don't. Do you have anything of value as to the sumotori exercise? That would be a usefull discussion for me, which is why I asked the question. The rest is just arguing, semantics, and drivel to me.

Quote:
OK Ron, then if you understand Chuck's main point, then explain it with some facts about how there is a difference between the Japanese and Chinese usages of Ki.
I don't think that was Chuck's main point. I think his main point was 'aiki' as opposed to just 'ki'. And I gave my thoughts in the previous post, and in other posts on other threads.

Quote:
I'm glad to see you stepped up. Pooh... Chuck already has a reputation as a "Koryu Wanker"; let's don't be silly and argue the obvious. Go pull a number of his back-posts and watch how often he brings it up.
Pooh yourself. You constantly attibute motivations and cast aspersions [like koryu wanker] around. But as much as you know about chinese arts, and modern japansese arts, I've yet to see you show any knowledge what-so-ever about koryu. So I'll go with the 'wankers', when it comes to koryu, thank you. Oh, pull up some of your posts...see how often you bring up ki. See how often you challenge people to define it, to use it in a sentance, blah blah blah. From now on, can we call you a 'ki wanker'?

Quote:
When you say "it has been pretty clearly established", I immediately grab my wallet tightly, Ron. ;^) Look at writings from the Koryu that are obviously borrowed from Chinese Buddhist martial and religious thought. I.e., if a whiff of "aiki" can be found in the Koryu, that doesn't mean it's of Japanese origin by any means at all.
What was it Regan used to say...'well there you go again'. This is not an attempt to divorce the roots of pretty much all of Japanese culture from Chinese culture. It is not an attempt to play the culture game and say that Japanese is better than Chinese. ***I never said that***. In terms of this discussion, and specifically aikido, aiki has the context I gave it. Does it go further back, into some chinese origin at some point? Well, how obvious! Now, can we get back on track?

Do you have anything to say about the sumotori exercise?

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 01:16 PM   #61
Adman
 
Adman's Avatar
Location: St. Louis
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 139
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Hi Ron,

Until we hear from someone like Rob John, maybe this link will help:
How to train sumó

thanks,
Adam
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 01:31 PM   #62
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Thanks Adam! Most usefull!

Best,
Ron

PS Just added to my favorites!

Last edited by Ron Tisdale : 11-30-2005 at 01:37 PM.

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:05 PM   #63
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Ron Tisdale wrote:
9x% of such a search turns up BS. The rest are references to Daito ryu, Aikido, Koryu. Both yawara and weapons based koryu. And it's pretty obvious in what way its being used here.
It's not obvious to me that there is any great difference in all those, Ron. So tell me how they're different.
Quote:
Chuck said no such thing. I do think the apples and oranges comment was going a bit far, but stressing the use of 'aiki' as opposed to just 'ki' is perfectly appropriate for the context of this conversation. You constantly insist on these devious readings of people's words. Fine. You run with it, baby. I don't buy it for a second.
What devious reading are you talking about, Ron? Did he say that Ki and Qi were apples and oranges or not????????????????? If he did, then why are you saying "devious reading"?????
Quote:
Well, that's what we are exploring. You've already come to your conclusions, and I tend to think personally that you are probably right. But my base is not in the chinese martial arts...so I'm focusing on the use in Daito ryu and associated arts. That's all.
So..... tell me how the use in Daito Ryu, associated arts, etc., is different from what is used in Chinese martial arts, Ron. That's the claim by Chuck which you indicate that you understand. That's what I'm asking for, in the light of Chuck's assertion. Set me straight if you think my reading of his claim to a difference was "devious".
Quote:
Well, that might be the problem right there. You think someone wants to **argue** it. Personally, I don't. Do you have anything of value as to the sumotori exercise? That would be a usefull discussion for me, which is why I asked the question. The rest is just arguing, semantics, and drivel to me.
Wait a minute... look at it from my side for a second... Chuck makes a stupid assertion, I call for support of that assertion, and you put it on me for wanting to "argue it". Do you see how absurd this looks? You're trying to fault me personally... yet you make not even a tiny call for Chuck to clarify. This is the sort of "round up the wagons" crap I'm talking about that exists in the Aikido world. Let's see a call for Chuck to explain himself... but wait, since we know he can't do it, let's defend the fort.
Quote:
I don't think that was Chuck's main point. I think his main point was 'aiki' as opposed to just 'ki'. And I gave my thoughts in the previous post, and in other posts on other threads.
So there is no "aiki" in Chinese martial arts, eh? BTW, did you notice how Inaba Sensei's comments were tossed in favor of what Rehse thought he already knew, using a certain mistranslation? Want to comment about his favored translation?
Quote:
Pooh yourself. You constantly attibute motivations and cast aspersions [like koryu wanker] around. But as much as you know about chinese arts, and modern japansese arts, I've yet to see you show any knowledge what-so-ever about koryu.
I've shown that the "Koryu" heavily use Chinese Buddhist martial training and ideas.... something that I doubt is in any of the archives of AikiWeb. Yet, when the "Koryu Wankers" continue to insist that their arts are the wellsprings of "true Japanese martial arts", that Chinese relationship is pretended to not exist. If Chuck and the other Koryu guys want to play that they have an in to the real secret Japanese stuff, they're standing naked in church. It doesn't fly. In other words, the thing I'm doing wrong here, for the main, in these posts is to tell some of the role-players that the "I've got a secret" stuff won't fly and to put up or shut up.
Quote:
So I'll go with the 'wankers', when it comes to koryu, thank you. Oh, pull up some of your posts...see how often you bring up ki. See how often you challenge people to define it, to use it in a sentance, blah blah blah. From now on, can we call you a 'ki wanker'?
Hey.... I admit it. I talk a lot about something most of the posters on this forum don't have a clue about. Isn't it weird how that makes me a "bad guy" for calling the bluff of people who should know far more than me about these things and a lot of them take money "teaching"? Who's got the moral high ground... the "koryu wankers" or the "ki wanker"? At least I'll back my statements.
Quote:
Do you have anything to say about the sumotori exercise?
I could, Ron, but it gets complicated. Rob John and I and Terry Chan and others have talked about it. Essentially, it appears unavoidable that the sumotori exercise is derived from Chinese or Indian practices from a longer time back than is going to be comfortable for a lot of researchers (including me) to deal with... for complicated reasons I don't want to go into here. What that exercise actually trains is related to my question in a previous thread about where some of these guys were getting a certain type of power. I think I see where they got it now. I also understand the "A - Un" breathing as being the "heng -ha" breathing of Chinese Buddhist martial ancestry. So yeah... there's a complicated and important thing that is being trained in that exercise; something *again* where I'm caught with my pants down because I hadn't really thought that the Japanese arts had this thing nor did I think that they'd had it for such a long time. Yeah... that one you should chase, Ron.

FWIW

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:10 PM   #64
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Adam Bauder wrote:
Until we hear from someone like Rob John, maybe this link will help:
How to train sumó
Does anyone have another source available of Shiko in which there is audio for me to hear the breathing? Thanks.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:19 PM   #65
roosvelt
Location: Ontario
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 177
Canada
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Ron Tisdale wrote:


Do you have anything to say about the sumotori exercise?
OK. Suppose the sumotori exercise teach you about KI. What are you going to do? Find books about sumotori to read? Find a sumo teacher in your city? I think it'll be very hard to do either.

I think you missed Mike's point. I don't know MIke, so you have ask him to answer you.

But I think Mike's point is that it's a lot easier to learn Ki/Chi from CMA because it's been written about for so long (over four thousand years) and the books is readily available (just search qigong in amazon), and it's easy to find a CMA master in major city. Once you learned Ki/Chi, you can apply it in Aikido directly.

Some one disagree with Mike's view. They think the Chi you learn from CMA can't be used in Aikido as Ki. I think even respectful George S. Ledyard hold this narrow minded view.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:28 PM   #66
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Well, that one I am chasing, thank you, and will continue. And you just made my point about how far back you have to go sometimes for these connections. Which is why it's perfectly appropriate to contain the topic within reasonable boundries, as you yourself just did.

Quote:
So..... tell me how the use in Daito Ryu, associated arts, etc., is different from what is used in Chinese martial arts, Ron. That's the claim by Chuck which you indicate that you understand. That's what I'm asking for, in the light of Chuck's assertion. Set me straight if you think my reading of his claim to a difference was "devious".
Again, a perfect example of the devious readings...I NEVER SAID THAT. What I said was that I understand his speaking of 'aiki' vs 'ki', and I clearly stated why (Tohei, etc.). That's all. This is a perfect example of how your joy in debate trivializes the value of your contributions (I've made it crystal clear that I do think you have valuable contributions). But we always get sidetracked with your agenda of:

Quote:
to tell some of the role-players that the "I've got a secret" stuff won't fly and to put up or shut up.
YOU decide who the role players are, YOU decide when and where you'll bash them, and frankly, it get's tiresome. Why not just give your ideas and let them stand on their own, without the polemics? Personally, I think those ideas are strong enough, which is why I've been reading them for about 10 years now. Haven't gotten all that far, but I'm still trying.

On the translation side...please note that both translations are from aikido journal. Can you read japanese? So how do you know that one is a mistranslation, and not the other? Or is that an ASSERTION?

And now I'm leaving the debate, so post on, while I go train.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:37 PM   #67
dj_swim
Location: STL
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 56
United_States
Offline
Please eliminate the madness!!

Admin, please move all the snatchiness about the meaning of Ki into this thread:

Cyber-Slap-Fighting

So that we can have an unspoiled thread about Carols books.

Thanks!

-Doug
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:44 PM   #68
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Roosvelt Freeman wrote:
OK. Suppose the sumotori exercise teach you about KI. What are you going to do? Find books about sumotori to read? Find a sumo teacher in your city? I think it'll be very hard to do either.

I think you missed Mike's point. I don't know MIke, so you have ask him to answer you.

But I think Mike's point is that it's a lot easier to learn Ki/Chi from CMA because it's been written about for so long (over four thousand years) and the books is readily available (just search qigong in amazon), and it's easy to find a CMA master in major city. Once you learned Ki/Chi, you can apply it in Aikido directly.

Some one disagree with Mike's view. They think the Chi you learn from CMA can't be used in Aikido as Ki. I think even respectful George S. Ledyard hold this narrow minded view.
My point has never been that it's easier to learn, better to learn, etc., in the Chinese martial arts, Roosvelt. My point is that there is the same Ki usage in both cultures among the more skilled martial artists. I personally don't have any favorite place to look. Some of the Japanese exercises are quite good and I use some of them... but once you understand the basic principles, you look for the ones that will train the most with the least amount of time and complexity and you use it. You don't worry about whether it is Chinese or Japanese since the same basic principles apply.

And I agree.... there are a lot of "high ranking" Aikido and Koryu types that are essentially playing "my style is best" and who think the principles in Aikido, etc., are unique. They're not. Yet some of those same people, knowing that something is missing, will look to Karate, Systema, etc., etc., instead of looking deep into their own art. Have they become that disillusioned or have they become that convinced of the extent of their own knowledge?

Regards,

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:49 PM   #69
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Ron Tisdale wrote:
YOU decide who the role players are, YOU decide when and where you'll bash them, and frankly, it get's tiresome.
Ron, go back and look at Chuck's post. Notice the bit indicating the high ranking guys who know so much. Let me ask you why you haven't called him on that bit of arrogance.

I think it's YOU that gets side-tracked with the herd mentality.... and that's what's slowing Aikido, western Karate, etc., down. And that's an opinion, FWIW.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:52 PM   #70
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Roosvelt Freeman wrote:
OK. Suppose the sumotori exercise teach you about KI. What are you going to do? Find books about sumotori to read? Find a sumo teacher in your city? I think it'll be very hard to do either.

I think you missed Mike's point. I don't know MIke, so you have ask him to answer you.
Ah, no...I didn't miss his point at all. But you have. It's just as hard to find a QUALIFIED teacher in CMA as in JMA when it comes to these internal aspects. That's just how it is. So you do the best you can, you research, you read, you get out of your sandbox and look around. In a way, it's very much like koryu...just because there's not a lot of it around, doesn't mean its not in your neck of the woods. It just may be hard to find though. We already have a usefull clip just from me asking a question.

And my appologies to Carol and the other readers for getting drawn into the side topics.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 02:59 PM   #71
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Notice the bit indicating the high ranking guys who know so much. Let me ask you why you haven't called him on that bit of arrogance.
Ok, I just went back and read his posts on the first two pages. I saw NOTHING about high ranking guys who know so much. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

That would be why I haven't called him on it. Now, I only reread the first 2 pages...maybe he has a post somewhere else where I missed it. Please quote him verbatim.

And if I'm the bane of aikido, then we have nothing to worry about.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 03:00 PM   #72
SeiserL
 
SeiserL's Avatar
Location: Florida Gulf coast
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,888
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Gentlemen, IMHO, part of Aiki is to enter, blend, and redirect.

This thread has been highjacked and appears to be heading down the same old futile road, Mike's.

And what does this have to do with Carol's books?

Lynn Seiser PhD
Yondan Aikido & FMA/JKD
We do not rise to the level of our expectations, but fall to the level of our training. Train well. KWATZ!
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 03:03 PM   #73
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Ron Tisdale wrote:
And my appologies to Carol and the other readers for getting drawn into the side topics.
How is it a side-topic? It's ALL about ki, kokyu and how to do it. I think the thread died when a couple of people basically indicated that the books didn't tell you *specifically* how to do things and they were predictably trashed for saying the obvious. It doesn't matter that her well-intentioned book really DOESN'T tell you how to do Ki things, it's more important in some of the dominant segments of Aikido to play "AikiSpeak" games and pretend the Love and Kindness is what makes Aikido... and many people hold that view of Aikido. Why were those few who spoke out dismissed and trashed, Ron? I'm sure if it had been me that had trashed them you would have taken up their cause.

Until you ask more questions about Aikido than you do about my posting style, you'll never get off first base. Go back and look at Rob John, full of information, and how he's been received by the Aiki community. Oh.... and try to do it without trashing him or his posting style; that would be my recommendation.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 03:16 PM   #74
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Chuck Gordon wrote:
Well, IMHO, ki in aikido is sort of a misnomer and overstatement. The ki in aikido is part of a compound, aiki, that uses the term ki, but not the same way the Chinese systems use 'chi'.

However, due to influence of Tohei and others, the idea of ki in aikido has gotten popular and is an exploration in an of itself. However, the ideas, theories and practices of ki in aikido aren't quite the same as chi in Chinese systems.

If you want to learn about ki or aiki in aikido, do aikido. If you want to do ki aikido, get into a good ki aikido school and study hard. Too bad George Simcox is gone. He was one of the very few aikidoka who 'got' ki.

If you want to dig deeper, take a look at Daito Ryu.

If you want to learn about chi, do Chi Gung or something of the sort.

If you want to learn about aiki, grab a sword and get into a good koryu dojo.

Ki, chi? Apples, oranges.

YMMV.
OK, Ron.... you, Chuck, and Rob haven't explained that second sentence about how The ki in aikido is part of a compound, aiki, that uses the term ki, but not the same way the Chinese systems use 'chi'. How is it different?????????? Despite shifting to "my posting style", none of you has done it. You can't.

Then he says: "However, the ideas, theories and practices of ki in aikido aren't quite the same as chi in Chinese systems." I called. No one answered. They say I "misread". How is the ki in Aikido different from the qi in Chinese martial arts????? It's not me with the reading problem, Ron.

Then, to continue building his house of cards, Chuck says that in order to learn about Ki in Aikido you have to go to an Aikido school... i.e., the implication is that if you're not of or from or a qualified person in an Aikido school you can't understand Ki, right? That is an arrogance.

FWIW

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 03:16 PM   #75
SeiserL
 
SeiserL's Avatar
Location: Florida Gulf coast
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,888
United_States
Offline
Re: Books on Ki by Carol Shifflet

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote:
How is it a side-topic?
Quite simply, because it not about the book or what she tried to offer. IMHO, she did a great job. Aikido will never be learned from a book or a tape, but they can help those of us who are open to other's ideas. (Was that too Aiki-speak?)

We all look forward to your book on Aikido so we can be enlightened.

Lynn Seiser PhD
Yondan Aikido & FMA/JKD
We do not rise to the level of our expectations, but fall to the level of our training. Train well. KWATZ!
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



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
Article: Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes by Michael J. Hacker AikiWeb System AikiWeb System 13 12-05-2005 03:47 PM
Chinese Influences on Jujutsu/Aikido Ellis Amdur General 46 06-24-2005 06:33 AM
Basic elements of Aikido Mary Eastland Spiritual 109 06-15-2005 08:09 PM
Ueshiba + Chin-Na? feck General 15 05-18-2005 08:34 PM
Article: Thoughts on Bugei Studies by Karl Friday AikiWeb System Training 28 04-27-2002 05:21 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:25 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 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