PDA

View Full Version : What is Ki?



Pages : [1] 2

Nadelman
5th January 2006, 18:22
I am interested in knowing what the opinions are about what Ki or Chi actually is, and how people use it and teach it in their different styles of Martial Arts, or religion.

Neil Hawkins
5th January 2006, 23:33
Well this thread should get some interesting replies, Ki (Chi or Qi) is one of those undefinable things that is much misunderstood, by all (including me!)

I appologise up front for my mixing of Japanese and Chinese terms, I started in the Japanese arts, but do some Tai Chi as well and it all gets jumbled in my head.

My definition is "Ki is the universal energy, it is in all living things and is composed of in and yo (Yin and Yang) the positive and negative energies."

Ki is the "life blood" that enables us to function. It is the basis of Chinese medicine which aims to try and keep the yin and yang in balance which promotes health and long life. Ki is supposed to have six major functions in the body; protect the body from disease; support and sustain all movement; support body transformations; retain fundamental substances, organs and fluids; and maintain normal body heat.

The Chinese also believe that there are six diferent kinds of Chi in the body, each is responsible for a different function; Source Chi is the Ki you were born with and forms the fundamental energy, generated in the kidneys it allows movement; Organ Chi controls the activities of the organs (Chinese have slightly different concept of organs than westerners, but I won't go into that now); Channel Chi is responsible for moving or transporting via the meridians; Nourishing (Blood) Chi allows the blood to feed the cells and transport waste away from the cells; Protective Chi circulates just below the skin and protects against disease and regulates body temperature; and Ancestral Chi is the force that transports Protective and Nourishing Chi around the body.

Various martial arts claim to use Chi, I know it has been emphasised in most of the Japanese arts I studied. But my Tai Chi instructor tells me that 'you don't use Chi, it's just there' it allows us to move strongly, and you can generate it through training and clean living (for some reason sex is bad for Chi) but you don't actually 'use' it when you fight. The Tai Chi practicioners say that you use Jin when fighting, which can be loosly translated as strength, but is more accurately fortitude.

Although the source of Jin is strength, it is not the same as we usually think of strength. Strength is a static force, Jin is dynamic. When the body is relaxed and sunk, the Jin is gathered and concentrated by the mind and can be released at will in various forms to a particular part of the body. Jin can be fast or slow, hard or soft, tight or loose, stiff or springy, delayed or explosive. The powerhouse of Jin lies in the Tanden (point below the navel), released through the waist or Hara. Its energy is permeated throughout the body by the free flow of the chi. Hence the jin is intimately related to the breath and chi flow.

So it is Jin that the Karate guys use when they punch, not Chi.

I hope you're suitably confused now, because I know I am!

Regards

Neil

Nadelman
6th January 2006, 14:25
Can Ki be channelled?

kenkyusha
6th January 2006, 19:37
(for some reason sex is bad for Chi)
Just the fun bit at the end (at least for men). Because the Kidneys are thought to control sexual function (and are also the holders of jing), 'release' is considered bad.

There are any number of taoist sexual manuals though... many of which detail methods for having sex of all sorts, both partnered and solo (weight hanging, 'Stretching the Dragon Tendon', etc.) sorry for the threadjack.

Be well,
Jigme

BTW, where is Neil Yamamoto? He can tell you what ki is :D

Neil Hawkins
7th January 2006, 00:43
So that's why that guy tows the truck around with his 'old fella'! :)

As for whether Ki can be channelled, I think you can concentrate it or at least certain types of it. For example if you are ill or fighting an infection the Protective and Blood Chi can be concentrated in the area. But I don't think it can be conciously controlled by all but a very few Taoist Monks.

Jin (Jing) can be channelled, when a person is thrown away during push hands, or when a punch impacts with devastating penetration, it is the Jin which causes the reaction.

Of course I can't do it, except by accident!

The other interesting thing about Ki is that it is not a purely eastern concept, the Indians call it Prana, the Ancient Greeks called it Ephemera (where we get the word ephemeral from), there are also similar substances mentioned in nearly every race and people from all over the world. Usually referred to as the 'breath of the gods' and a fundamental element to human life.

It seems that the Romans and later the Christian religion did away with it in the Western World. Though there are some references in the Old Testament, I believe, it pretty much disappeared in the West until we started becoming interested in the East.

I think a lot of it comes down to the way we look at things, the Chinese like the ancients in the West would look at a whole and draw conclusions about what was happening in the micro, whereas the newer western mind breaks things down to the micro and then draws conclusions about the whole. That's my un-educated theory anyway.

Regards

Neil

Joseph Svinth
7th January 2006, 04:01
See also Brian Kennedy's discussion at http://ejmas.com/jalt/jaltart_kennedy_0201.htm . For those of you in a hurry, the summary is this:

QUOTE

I am not in a position to give the definitive answer as to which framework is the "true" one for chi, and the only conclusion I will put forward is that:

* Chi as life force is the most widespread and traditional explanation.
* Chi as biomechanics is the most provable explanation from a scientific perspective.
* And, regrettably, ignorance is the most common use of the term.

END QUOTE

Brian Owens
7th January 2006, 07:12
I am interested in knowing what the opinions are about what Ki or Chi actually is...
Ki is an energy field created by all living things.
It surrounds us...penetrates us. It binds the Universe together.

Oh, wait; that's The Force.

My belief is that there is no such "thing" as Ki/Chi/Qi/Prana.
Rather, I believe that through training our bodies become strong and flexible, and we learn techniques for moving our own bodies and controlling our opponents' bodies in the most efficient manner.

What we perceive as a mysterious force is just a combination of focused intention and good kinesthetics.

But that's my opinion, and others are entitled to theirs.

Cufaol
7th January 2006, 16:27
Well, I'm afraid that there's a little more to it all than just kinesthetics. Ever heard about quantum physics? Or the String-theory? In fact, it is very well possible that there's such a thing as Qi/Ch'i/Ka/Prana/The force/Watheveryounameit. The only problem is that most of it is bound is stuctures/formations, who form fields. hence, you can't manipulate them. That is also why you can't lift a stone with just your mind. However, we all posses an amount of 'free energy'. This can me used/controlled/manipulated. That's what we do when we move, talk, act.

maybe it's time eastern and western science got together and sorted out the facts from the myths... This is ofcourse happening to some extend already, but there's still a long way to go.

Cheers, C.

Nadelman
7th January 2006, 18:48
Very interesting article.

http://www.mariomckenna.com/what_is_ki.html

Here is an excerpt:


Murakami sensei’s answer to cultivating and benefiting from “ki” is a simple one, to focus the mind by singularly concentrating on the task at hand. Again, Western scientific research corroborates Murakami sensei’s belief that argues that a sharp focused attention to the activity or task at hand is essential to entering “flow” or getting your “ki” moving (Goleman, 1995). But this is not as easy as it seems and requires quite a lot of discipline to get passed that initial hurdle. The mind has a tendency to wander and become distracted easily. If you don’t believe me, try the following rudimentary exercise used in Zen. In a quiet location, sit opposite a wall in a comfortable position either cross-legged or in seiza (you can use a zabuton or cushion). Keep your back perfectly straight and focus your gaze towards the wall, slightly downward. Your eyes should be relaxed, but not closed! Now, slowly breathe in through the nose to a count of one and slowly exhale through the nose to a count of one. Try to complete this cycle 20 times. Easy you say? Just wait. You must not have ANY distractions. If your mind starts to think about something else besides the rhythm and the counting of breaths, go back to zero and start again. If you get to five or six and start thinking, “Gee this is easy”, go back to zero! You are absolutely allowed no extraneous thoughts. When I first learned this simple exercise, I thought I had a fairly good concentration level. Boy was I wrong. I spent most of the day going back to zero because my mind kept distracting me! I’d get to 19 and think, “I’m almost finished!”, then I’d realise my mind is wandering again. Damn! Back to zero!

Once you can do this simple exercise, try doing it while you practice kata. You will be surprised at the results as “ki” or “flow” creates its own feedback loop and produces a state devoid of emotional baggage, save the pleasure it generates.

Brian Owens
8th January 2006, 09:55
Well, I'm afraid that there's a little more to it all than just kinesthetics.
I disagree.

If you had said, "I believe there's a little more to it all than just kinesthetics" that would have been one thing, but when you say, "...there is a little more to it all than just kinesthetics" I have to say, "Okay. Prove it."


Ever heard about quantum physics? Or the String-theory?
Yes, I have. (In fact, I've more than just "heard" about them.) Care to tell us how they relate to this discussion?

In my experience (and I'm not neccesarily saying that's the case here), people who vaguely invoke words like "quantum mechanics" to explain mysterious phenomena without further qualification often are folks who wouldn't know Max Planck from walking the plank, Albert Einstein from a beer stein, Niels Bohr from a wild boar, nor Werner Heisenberg from an iceberg.

And, yep, them's fightin' words. I've thrown down the gauntlet; let the games begin!

How do "quantum physics" and "string theory" relate to the questions, "What is ki?" and "Can Ki be channelled?"?

Cufaol
8th January 2006, 20:08
1. for the sake of honesty, I'm not a physicist.
2. Okay, you were right about the kinestetics, in a way. In the end it boils down to kinesthetics, but what I meant to say was that it is a little bit more complicated than that. Focus has a lot to do with it for instance.
3. IMO, Ch'i is nothing more than the energy on which our universe has evolved. After all, since science discovered that atoms etc are really energy-masses, I think we have definite proove of ch'i. Now, before you all start bashing my ****: That doesn't mean we all have crazy powers. it means that we are just energy masses, bound together in tight formations. That's all ther is to it. The only suprising fact is, that while Western has needed over 2000 years to discover this, Sanskrit and Chinese phylosofical texts (over 2500 years old) already give rudementary intuitive reflections about this energy based universe.
4. While we are on subject, could you possibly explain me what the M-theory is about? I get the fact that scientists are trying to combine both gravity and quantumphysics through the String-theory, but as said before, I'm not a scientist. I'm just interested in physics.

Well, I guess that's it. I hope this satisfies your questions mr. Owens.

Regards, C.

riko seishin
8th January 2006, 22:24
After reading this thread I remembered something Max Plank said,(oh by the way he was a quantam physicist, and my knowledge is more japanese on this subject):

" All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force. We must assume that behind this force is the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter."

Granted, this is more refferring to a superior being, but it amazes me that a scientist of the most precise kind, concludes that their is a "matrix of all matter." And To me this is basically the idea if ki. A force that provides balance, yin and yang, in the universe.

I hope this will not take this thread on a tangent, instead maybe it will give only more knowledge to those who seek it.

Nadelman
9th January 2006, 04:18
Kabballah (Jewish Mysticism) discusses the concept that everything (rocks, trees, tables, etc) has a "spark" of G-d in it, and that G-d supports the entire universe, constantly recreating the universe ever (zillionth? for lack of a better description) of a second, over and over again. Through meditation (i.e. saying a blessing or literally "elevating") on something, we release this "spark" and reconnect it to G-d, thereby elevating it to a higher level (again, for lack of a better term) and thereby elevating ourselves through its use.

Does this sound like a similiar concept to what I hear described in the East (far east...)?

Brian Owens
9th January 2006, 11:14
...2. Okay, you were right about the kinestetics, in a way. In the end it boils down to kinesthetics, but what I meant to say was that it is a little bit more complicated than that. Focus has a lot to do with it for instance.

...a combination of focused intention and good kinesthetics.
Well, we're not so far apart on this after all.


...4. While we are on subject, could you possibly explain me what the M-theory is about? I get the fact that scientists are trying to combine both gravity and quantumphysics through the String-theory, but as said before, I'm not a scientist. I'm just interested in physics.
Well, it's a little bit off topic, but since there has already been mention of various kinds of energy possibly being what the ancients called Ki, then I guess I can touch on it briefly.

Newtonian Mechanics does a great job of explaining how things work on our normal, observable, plain of existence. Unfortunately, when we start talking about the very, very small -- subatomics -- the Newtonian fundamentals break down.

Quantum Mechanics does a good job at explaining much of the subatomic universe, but it, too, breaks down in places. Its zero-dimensional framework has too many uncertainties built in.

String Theory, by utilizing a one-dimensional model, is able to overcome many of the problems encountered in the particle theory. Unfortunately, it, too, breaks down at some point.

So String Theory was expanded to include ten-dimensional superstrings and 26-dimensional bosonic strings. Then, even more types of "strings" were added.

Still, there were problems.

So another theory, the M-Theory, was proposed by Edward Witten in 1995. But it's still very much in the hypothetical realm. It has been suggested that the M stands for "Membrane." Witten has said it could be Membrane or it could be Magic. Others say it should mean "Monsterous" because it's an attempt to pull together Newtonian Mechanics, Einsteinian Relativity, Quantum Theory, String Theory, Unified Field Theory, etc. into one great big, monsterous, universal theory of everything (and thus a suggestion that it be officially changed to "U-Theory").

And that's way out of the scope of this thread (and well beyond my understanding).

Cufaol
9th January 2006, 11:53
Right. Thanks for the explanation mr. Owens. I appreciate it.

Back on the topic: I was wondering about this the other day, and I came up with this; What if this 'KI' is a form of energy science has jet to describe/discover. After all, there are probably dozens of theories, hypothesis and so on that are yet to be discovered.

I don't know about 'Ki', but I have experienced a certain state of harmony when training. My partner and myself had the same rythm on that very moment, and it was really very 'flow'-like. We just came up with the right technique and the right movement at the correct time. I have to say, it was really great.

Cheers, C.

yoj
9th January 2006, 12:29
Ki is like duct tape, it has a light side and a dark side, and it holds the universe together.

hope that helps.

dbotari
9th January 2006, 16:38
Ki is like duct tape, it has a light side and a dark side, and it holds the universe together.


I think yoou are referring to "the Force". :)


May it always be with you!

Dan Botari

yoj
9th January 2006, 16:42
damn, I've been had!

kimiwane
11th January 2006, 18:28
My belief is that there is no such "thing" as Ki/Chi/Qi/Prana.
Rather, I believe that through training our bodies become strong and flexible, and we learn techniques for moving our own bodies and controlling our opponents' bodies in the most efficient manner.

What we perceive as a mysterious force is just a combination of focused intention and good kinesthetics.



But you're limiting the concept to martial arts--"through training our bodies become strong and flexible, and we learn techniques for moving our own bodies and controlling our opponents' bodies in the most efficient manner".

Ki in itself needs no such expression. It is strongly present in every child born, from the moment they are born. It does not have to be developed in technique.

In short, "ki" is the difference between a living person and a corpse. In that way, it is "the life force". With it, you live, without it, you are dead.

Another thing that must be noted is that the "chi" of "tai chi" is NOT the same as the "ki" of "aikido".

The "chi" of "tai chi" is called "kyoku" in Japanese (tai chi chuan = tai kyoku ken in Japanese). It has a completely different meaning than "ki" as in "aiki" or "kiai". That "chi" or "kyoku" means "universe" and not "life force".

"Ki" in that sense, can be more closely compared to "feeling". Some words to consider:

kimochi = feeling ('holding' ki)
kimochi ii = "feeling good"
kimochi warui = "feeling bad"
kibun = also "feeling" (your "portion" of ki)
yaruki = desire to do something
kigaeru = change your mind
kichigai = "different mind" or "crazy"
genki = "original" ki, or "healthy spirit"
byouki = sick spirit (sickness)
tenki = "heaven spirit" or "the weather"

The list goes on and on. The main meaning of "ki" is so thoroughly dispersed into the environment and everyday life that it literally does permeate everything.

So terms like "kiai" and "aiki" should be understood more like "attitudes" or "feelings" as in "cut with a strong feeling of TUT-TUT!!" (Musashi, paraprhased from Go Rin no Sho).

"kiai", then, would mean "a feeling or attitude of dominating the opponent" while "aiki" would mean "a feeling or attitude of blending with the opponent" even though both forms of ki have the "feeling" or "attitude" of positively controlling the situation--never of letting it accidentally bumble along into whatever might happen.

So, yes, ki is real but, like Zen, it's "nothing special" and we can get more of it by "not-doing" or by paying attention to very mundane matters than by focusing on the 'ki' itself and trying to generate it like a coal-fired electric plant.

Best wishes to all and thank you for letting me lay out these ideas for your consideration.

kimiwane
11th January 2006, 18:33
In my experience...people who vaguely invoke words like "quantum mechanics" to explain mysterious phenomena without further qualification often are folks who wouldn't know Max Planck from walking the plank, Albert Einstein from a beer stein, Niels Bohr from a wild boar, nor Werner Heisenberg from an iceberg.

Heisenberg???

Isn't he the guy that sunk the Titanic!!!!?????

kimiwane
11th January 2006, 18:45
...the M-Theory, was proposed by Edward Witten in 1995. But it's still very much in the hypothetical realm. It has been suggested that the M stands for "Membrane." Witten has said it could be Membrane or it could be Magic. Others say it should mean "Monsterous" because it's an attempt to pull together Newtonian Mechanics, Einsteinian Relativity, Quantum Theory, String Theory, Unified Field Theory, etc. into one great big, monsterous, universal theory of everything.

I says it stands for "Mmmm-mmmm-good Theory".

But seriously, thanks for that explantion.

Still, I think these ideas do relate to "ki" because ki is the underlying energy matrix from which all "forms" arise.

I have said that "ki" is merely the difference between living person and a corpse.

It is life energy, itself. It has to have a body in which to express itself, but when it has departed, that body turns to ooze and foul odors.

But every living function from breathing to digesting to passing gas requires, uses and expresses universal "ki". Babies have it and old ladies have it. There are words for every condition of it (good, strong, original, stale, poison, light, heavy, dark, etc.).

What it is NOT (to my knowledge) is something that can be brewed up and concentrated and channeled across a room through the empty air to affect a person at a distance. However, it can pass from person to person through the eyes or the voice (kiai). All that really is, though, is just 'noticing' the other person's ki.

But look at this idea: you decide you've had enough of your teacher's guff and you're on your way to punch him in the nose, even though he is a fierce fighter, himself. So you're walking along to attack this guy and just as you come around the corner, THERE HE IS!! Suddenly face-to-face with you and looking you right in the eye!

Might you fall or be "knocked" down by the sudden shock of meeting his undisguised spirit before you meant to?

Frankly, any of it can be "explained" by kinesthetics, but some things are not adequately explained in that way.

My opinion.

Brian Owens
12th January 2006, 03:57
But you're limiting the concept to martial arts.
Of course I am. All conversations are limited, and are expressed within certain confines.

I chose to converse in the context of Budo, because the question itself originated on a Budo forum.


In short, "ki" is the difference between a living person and a corpse. In that way, it is "the life force". With it, you live, without it, you are dead.
My belief is a bit different.

I believe that the diference between a living person and a corpse is that the former has many interrelated neurochemical and electrical reactions occurring that the latter does not.

I don't think those reactions are what most people are talking about when they talk about ki.

kimiwane
12th January 2006, 17:32
Of course I am. All conversations are limited, and are expressed within certain confines.

I chose to converse in the context of Budo, because the question itself originated on a Budo forum.

But that's sort of like limiting a discussion of "air" to matters of "airplanes".

Or to limit a discussion of "what is electricity" to "static discharge".

Ki is an independent energy in all living things, whether they do martial arts or not. Saying that it's the difference between a living person and a corpse is wrong, actually, because even a rock has ki.

Ki is just the energy of life in its many forms.


My belief is a bit different.

I believe that the diference between a living person and a corpse is that the former has many interrelated neurochemical and electrical reactions occurring that the latter does not.

I don't think those reactions are what most people are talking about when they talk about ki.

Well, it's usually not what they're talking about when they talk about "life," either, but it applies to both.

I gave many examples above of uses of the word and concept of ki. The Japanese use it for every kind of mundane daily situation. Every little girl is full of ki, every baby and old lady. Martial arts don't even have that much to do with it, except arts like aikido. Karate uses kiai, but generally doesn't address things like 'punching with ki' and certainly not 'throwing ki balls' or such fantasies.

'Ki' itself is formless and unlimited. Forms of ki, such as aiki and kiai, sakki, tenki and such are all passing phenomena against the background of pure, formless ki.

yoroshiku

Trevor Johnson
13th January 2006, 01:42
For those of you who don't know me, I'm a grad student going into neurobiology, with an extensive research background.

The problem with personal experiences of ki is that they're not measurable. Not to say that they don't exist, but one of the things that nobody's taking into account is their own brain, which is constantly reworking the things that we sense into a framework which we call reality. For example, you see far more mirages than you realize. Very often, before the image reaches your conscious perception, it's reworked to make sense, and you don't see the ship floating above the water, or the shimmering image on the horizon. Your brain edits it out.

Thus, guys, I hate to say it, but individual perceptions are a poor basis for statements about the fundamental nature of the universe. That's why scientists experiments must be repeatable, to correct for that, as well as being a basic honesty check. It's also why we build instruments to measure for us, because our own senses lie so dreadfully at times.

Thus, this force may exist, but so far, I'm hearing handwaving and individual perceptions being knit in with scientific theory to form something not believable. It's not that ki may not exist, it's that our own brains may be lying to us, and are certainly far more complex than the mere consciousness of our direct experience. If anyone can come up with an experiment that can prove any such thing as ki exists, and it can be repeated by any scientist and get the same results, then go to it! It's a Nobel for sure, guys! Personally, I don't think we'll be able to do those experiments for another century or so. And yes, that is indeed taking into account the exponential rate of acceleration of scientific knowledge.

Further, if you want to comment on the basic structure of the universe, and the physics theories and paradigms that relate to it, may I suggest that you read T. S. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions? It will help you to understand science in a way that few except expert scientists do.

Joseph Svinth
13th January 2006, 03:30
There is also this interpretation, from a bibliographic essay by Professor Bodiford that will be posted to EJMAS in February 2006 or thereabouts.

QUOTE

Mencius (multiple translations)

After Kaibara's Yojokun, the next most influential text is Mencius. In print, D.C. Lau's translation (Penguin, 1970) is recommended. Online, the most common translation is James Legge's. See, for example, http://www.galileolibrary.com/ebooks/as04/mencius_page_28.htm. Legge was an excellent Sinologist whose translations can still be read with much profit, but his translation renders the vocabulary as if it is discussing abstract qualities. For example, what Legge translates as "passion nature," Lau simply transliterates as qi. Anyway, the original Chinese can be read as if it is providing concrete instructions on how to train. See, for example, the discussion of how to cultivate fearlessness in chapter 2, part A, sections 1-21.

1. Kung-sun Ch'ow asked Mencius, saying, "Master, if you were to be appointed a high noble and the prime minister of Ts'e, so as to be able to carry your principles into practice, though you should thereupon raise the prince to the headship of all the other princes, or even to the imperial dignity, it would not to be wondered at. In such a position would your mind be perturbed or not?" Mencius replied, "No. At forty, I attained to an unperturbed mind."

Note that the "unperturbed mind" mentioned here is translated as "unmoving mind" in English renditions of Takuan Soho's famous treatise on Fudochi Shinmyo roku. Takuan was not writing about a Zen approach to swordsmanship, but commenting on Mencius's Confucian approach. Regarding this point, see my essay "Zen and Japanese Swordsmanship Reconsidered" in Budo Perspectives, edited by Alexander Bennett, Auckland: Kendo World Publications, 2005, pp. 69-103.

This section continues through the assertion by Mencius that:
11. "I venture to ask," said Ch'ow again, "wherein you, Master, surpass Kaou." Mencius told him, "I understand words. I am skillful in nourishing my vast, flowing passion nature."

"Vast, flowing passion nature" is ki, and it is the key to attaining an unmoving mind, the key to fearlessness, and the key to defeating any foe. Before ca. 1900, Japanese martial artists studied Mencius to learn how to cultivate or nourish their own ki so that it would become vast and flowing. See, for example, Takuan's essay on the unmoving mind (Fudochi shinmyo roku) and Yagyu Munenori's equally famous essay on "Our Family's Tradition of Swordsmanship" (Heiho kadensho).

END QUOTE

Asura
17th January 2006, 00:08
Not to burst anyone's bubble...
But the explanation of "Ki" "Qi" "Chi" (In a bujutsu/martial) context is much simpler than many might think.

Suffice to say my personal take is that it's a myriad of physical factors that you can strengthen in the human body and when tied together was labeled as "Ki".

I mean...seriously you expect the old guys to go and say, oh yea expand the fascia like this, you use the muscle but not in the way you might think, expand the tendons, rely more on your bone structure, connect the upper and lower bone stuctures, while making sure you gain control and strengthen the diaphram enough that you develop a "pressure" suit/webbing that stretches across the body which eventually accounts for a contradictory/equalizing force(six directional) to develop which in turn creates a superior sense of balance which also just happens to generate enormous force in strikes (without windup)? ;)

It's a lot easier to just say...it's "Ki" and get it over with :rolleyes:

Btw, Ki essentially referred to any phenomenon they couldn't put a label on at the time ;)

Joshua Lerner
17th January 2006, 00:54
There is also this interpretation, from a bibliographic essay by Professor Bodiford that will be posted to EJMAS in February 2006 or thereabouts.

QUOTE

Mencius (multiple translations)


1. Kung-sun Ch'ow asked Mencius, saying, "Master, if you were to be appointed a high noble and the prime minister of Ts'e, so as to be able to carry your principles into practice, though you should thereupon raise the prince to the headship of all the other princes, or even to the imperial dignity, it would not to be wondered at. In such a position would your mind be perturbed or not?" Mencius replied, "No. At forty, I attained to an unperturbed mind."

This section continues through the assertion by Mencius that:
11. "I venture to ask," said Ch'ow again, "wherein you, Master, surpass Kaou." Mencius told him, "I understand words. I am skillful in nourishing my vast, flowing passion nature."

END QUOTE

The Mencius is a great text, and I'm surprised to find it brought up in the context of a discussion of Ki/Qi, because it is usually ignored. The only disagreement I have with Prof. Bodiford's use of these quotes is that he left out the most fascinating part of that chapter. Here is an abridged and slightly altered version (based on David Hinton's excellent translation) of the same chapter he mentions, but with the really salient parts left in place -

(My apologies to sinologists who will notice that I've mixed up pinyin and Wade-Giles; I did it to avoid confusion between "Qi" the political state and "Qi"/energy) –

Kongsun Chou said, "Suppose you became Prime Minister in the state of Ch'i and put Dao into practice, making the sovereign of Ch'i an emperor without peer – would you feel moved, or not?"
Mencius replied, "My mind has been utterly still since I was forty."
"Is there a way of stilling the mind?"
"There is. The Will guides the Qi, and the Qi fills the body. So for us, Will comes first, Qi comes second. That is why I say, Keep a firm grasp on your Will, but never tyrannize your Qi."
At this, Kongsun Chou said, "If you say for us, Will comes first, Qi comes second, how can you also say Keep a firm grasp on your Will, but never tyrannize your Qi?"
Mencius replied, "When the Will is whole, it moves Qi, and when Qi is whole, it moves the Will. When we stumble and hurry, Qi is affected, but that in turn moves the Mind."
Kongsun Chou said, "May I ask what makes you excel and flourish so?"
Mencius replied, "I understand words, and I nurture the Qi-flood."
"May I ask what you mean by the Qi-flood?"
"That's hard to explain," replied Mencius. "It is Qi at its limits: vast and relentless. Nourish it with fidelity and allow it no injury – then it fills the space between Heaven and Earth. It is the Qi that unifies Duty and Dao. Without it, we starve. And it is born from a lifetime of Duty: a few token acts aren't enough."
Mencius continued. "You must devote yourself to this Qi-flood without forcing it. Don't let it out of your mind, but don't try to help it grow or flourish either. If you do, you'll be acting like that man from the state of Song who worried that his rice shoots weren't growing fast enough, so he went around pulling at them. At the end of the day, he returned home exhausted and said to his family: I'm worn out. I've been helping the rice grow all day. His son ran out to look and found the fields all withered and dying. In all beneath Heaven, there are few who can resist helping the rice shoots grow."

- I've always thought of this passage as a perfect set of instructions for meditation and qigong/neigong, especially the part I put in italics, but I haven't come across anyone else who thinks so until recently. I think it was Mike Sigman, over on the Aikido Journal website, who posted a link to a series of essays by a Taijiquan/Yiquan practitioner in Portland named Gregory Fong. In several of the essays, he notes that the idea in developing power in Yiquan is based on the idea of "don't make it happen, but don't forget what you are doing." To me, he is saying what Mencius is saying.

None of which actually helps to explain what Mencius *really* meant when he used the word "Qi". But it is a great part of the text nonetheless.

Asura
17th January 2006, 01:08
To me, he is saying what Mencius is saying.

None of which actually helps to explain what Mencius *really* meant when he used the word "Qi". But it is a great part of the text nonetheless.

As far as I've experienced it's a cycle really, you go through periods of intense "figuring" out where you tax yourself mentally and physically (in a different way), where you strengthen those "parts", then you have to let the subconscious take hold, and do them naturally without thinking too hard(nagasu). Doing too much of either doesn't produce results. It's a fine line to walk, but once you find it, walking that line is at once easier and harder (just had to throw a contradiction in there ^^; ) than most might think.

kimiwane
17th January 2006, 23:08
Btw, Ki essentially referred to any phenomenon they couldn't put a label on at the time ;)

That's not a worthy statement to make in this kind of forum.

Thanks.

kimiwane
17th January 2006, 23:30
I don't think it's helpful to try to analyze or even attempt to define ki in scientific terms.

Can you analyze and quantify elan vitale?

How about "inspiration"? Can you prove anything about it scientifically?

"ki" is a descriptive term for the "life energy", the "elan vitale", the "inspiration" of a living person in the world as we know it, in which trees pull air from the sky and send it down through their roots into the earth, in which the tree's leaves rot to form the dirt that feeds the tree, in which the squirrel finding his food "grooms" the tree that provides that food while he climbs and knocks off dead twigs and bits of bark. It is an interconnected system in which very little can be changed without breaking the whole system down.

The Japanese have described people and the world in terms of subtly different forms of ki for hundreds of years. Are we to say that because we "cut" the idea into little pieces that we can fit into our analysis machine, and we get nonsense answers back, that "ki" does not exist? I think the best we can say there is that science can neither describe, define, measure or prove or disprove the existence of ki. Our attempts to do so tell us more about the limits of our scientific method than about tha nature of ki.

And a big part of the problem is people latching onto "forms" of ki as being "ki" itself. So you mention ki and they think "ki balls" or "force fields out of my palms". And then they try to prove that scientifically. It's like arguing whether Jesus exists based on arguments about wine making. That won't get you anywhere useful.

All Chinese medicine is based on emprical observation of the human body and nerve system, resulting in the theory that the life energy moves through the body in consistent pathways. "Science" cannot detect this energy. Well, it could not detect electromagnetic fields just a few decades back. It has only recognized radioactivity for a few decades. The air was around us all the time, but "science" only learned to make airplanes fly through it very recently in historical terms.

The Chinese were healing people with "chi" applications when the West was using stone scalpels.

But if we must insist on looking at everything through scientific eyes, then please analyze Pablo Picasso's "inspiration" for us and tell us the chemical or electrical components that separate him from Bill Burbus, who teaches painting to old ladies at the Craft Hut.

Again, let's get back to how the Japanese USE the term instead of how anime fans have come to think of it.

Ki is used to describe a person's emotions, physical feeling, state of mind, their relation to a fighting opponent, their enthusiasm, the weather, radio waves, electricity and pretty much every phenomenon in the human world.

Let's get away from "ki balls" and "long distance knockouts," "telekinesis through ki power" and all that cartoon stuff.

If "ki does not exist", how do we explain the weather, which Japanese call "tenki" (same "ki").

How do we explain electricity, which the Japanese call denki (same "ki")

or pleasant emotions (kimochi ii) (same ki)?

If you want to analyze something scientifically, first, be clear about just what you're analyzing.

Asura
18th January 2006, 05:12
I don't think it's helpful to try to analyze or even attempt to define ki in scientific terms.

If "ki does not exist", how do we explain the weather, which Japanese call "tenki" (same "ki").

How do we explain electricity, which the Japanese call denki (same "ki")

or pleasant emotions (kimochi ii) (same ki)?

If you want to analyze something scientifically, first, be clear about just what you're analyzing.

Um... actually I was only reffering to Ki,Qi as its defined martially.

So I guess you could say I was "anaylyzing" those components which make up "martial" ki, which is very definable, and makes sense from a physiological standpoint. The physics behind the "martial" ki is much more complex than the ma=F that everyone tries to use.

I think you're over analyzing the issue really.

I never said Ki didn't exist. Ki is a word that humans created, and as such it simply describes a phenomenon observed by people, nothing more nothing less.


And the earlier statement I made, was made in earnest. Both Chinese and Japanese would use those words to describe phenemonon they couldn't exactly explain yet. They refer to "Food Qi", "Air-Qi", Gasses as being "Qi" etc etc. Of course the understandings get revised over the years, but the name ends up sticking. ;)


At this point tenki simply means weather, denki "just" means electricity, and "kimochii no ki", only refers to that particular emotion ("feelin gooood" hehe).

あんまし深く考えるなって ;)

Rob

kimiwane
18th January 2006, 14:56
Um... actually I was only reffering to Ki,Qi as its defined martially.

There's the problem. You can't separate "martial" ki from weather ki, emotion ki, health ki or anything else.

The Western error in approaching ki is to understand it only in separated form. Belief that there is a "martial" ki that is somehow different from a baby's ki is what leads to the wild anime fantasies of what ki can do, and what its fundamental nature is.

The fundamental nature of ki is nature. Thinking that martial arts are a manufactured, externally invented system that the human body takes on and adjusts to supports the idea that ki is a mysterious force or that it's a label to paste on things the backward Asians failed to understand.

It's not a science and it's not a hokum pseudo-science. It can only be correctly discussed in the terms of its true nature as described by the people who have been discussing and healing with it for thousands of years.

After all, the thread is not "What is 'martial' ki?" It's "What is ki?"

And all the various forms are all just ki. You can't separate them from the ocean. They appear and disappear like the phenomena of the weather.

respectfully,

Asura
18th January 2006, 22:50
There's the problem. You can't separate "martial" ki from weather ki, emotion ki, health ki or anything else.

The Western error in approaching ki is to understand it only in separated form. Belief that there is a "martial" ki that is somehow different from a baby's ki is what leads to the wild anime fantasies of what ki can do, and what its fundamental nature is.



It's interesting you say that, so I'm going to try and relate from my half asian side(having lived a good portion of my life over here in japan). I'd say that the "truth" of the matter lies somewhere in between. There's a lot of westerners out there that get mislead by the "asian" description and way of describing things, thinking perhaps like you do that they refer to some overriding energy etc.
And while some may believe this (the taoists certainly like to take it literally, tho they're a minority) the reality is that for most of us asians, the existence of Tenki is simply weather, Denki is electricity, and sometn somten Ki is generally a gas, in essence all seperate "Things". (This is my asian side talkin, NOT my western side )



The fundamental nature of ki is nature. Thinking that martial arts are a manufactured, externally invented system that the human body takes on and adjusts to supports the idea that ki is a mysterious force or that it's a label to paste on things the backward Asians failed to understand.


No, actually I'd say the fundamental "nature" of Ki is that it's a word used to describe something. Humans "created" martial arts, and there's nothing wrong with that, it doesn't mean the Asians were backward or failed to understand it either. They understood Qi within their context and mapped out the "results" so to say. (And their understanding within that context was extremely advanced and modern science is still playing catchup)

Think of it this way, take the early earth-centric view of the solar system. To some degree it worked, and indeed the Greeks mapped out to a large degree the "result" of the real system at work.
That doesn't mean that that was the "real" system at work.
Of course unless you still believe everything revolves around the earth.

Same with Ki :)

Back to the martial Ki, (I'm sorry this IS the e-budo forum so let's discuss it within the martial context first :p )

I've seen and felt some incredible stuff from high level people, and had in the back of my mind, a lingering thought that perhaps it was tied to the "abstract" concept of Ki that so permeates certain portions of western martial circles.

But time and time again, I kept on being shown otherwise. In fact there's many high level Chinese "internal" masters that will (if they consider you their inner door students) NOT feed you the "Qi" explanation, and instead say, "yes, bring the 'leg strength' here!" (an extreme oversimplification tho! lol) and explain everything in very concrete terms.
Even Sagawa of Daitoryu(Who would be a prime example I think, considering the almost inhuman skill level he had, throwing olympic judo peeps around in his late eighties) said in his book that the "ki" explanation of things were done by those that were "chuutohanpa", or only "half accomplished" and that everything he did was based within the realm of normal human phsyiology/physics, but that he just had a level of understanding of those factors that most probably wouldn't get because they didn't know how to train their body. (Oddly enough, the chinese have a similar saying about the half accomplished :p )

If I wasn't able to manifest to a degree those same skills that get a blank "deer in a headlights" look from the average MAist, then maybe I'd still have the notion in the back of my head that perhaps "more" was at work.

As it happens, it's NOT an abstract concept, but rather a bundle of separate components that you physically feel, and together as whole make up one over riding physical "feel" that you can direct. Using the western paradigm to explain concepts might only serve to confuse someone who's training to get "it", but that doesn't make it any less explainable in that format.

If you want me to get into specifics I could, but it'd take at least 4 more pages if you wanted me to describe components involving fascia (by the way if you look into it, you'll find that the fascia covers to a T, the "Qi" meridians ;) ), membranes, spinal movement, explanation and understanding of the effecient use of the human skeletal structure(which by the way is a corner stone of any internal martial art, wonder why that is), how the diaphram is tied to the fascia, the strengthening of said fascia and tendons through "contradictory exercises", the resulting control of subsystems that you normally wouldnt be able to control, etc etc etc.

The fact that it CAN be described in a western manner doesn't make the body skill any less hard to gain(nor any less cool ;) ).

Simply put, those that can "do" can explain pretty concretely what's going on in their body. If they don't, then it means one of two things, either a) they aren't really as high level as you might think, or b) they're being a bitch and trying to pull the wool over your eyes purposely. (Both chinese and japanese are notorious for this, even among themselves )

So I guess my question for you is, if you're going to make the statement that martial "ki" is no different from say Ten"ki" or Den"ki", then are you one of those that can "do", or are still speaking from a context where you can't yet "do" ? ;)

Peace! ってかそんなのグタぐタ言ってるようならなら鍛練しな、w。能書きばっかり言ってる人こそこういう事言うからな、悪いけど  :rolleyes: 現実はもっと厳しいぜぃ~

Rob

kimiwane
18th January 2006, 23:51
the reality is that for most of us asians, the existence of Tenki is simply weather, Denki is electricity, and sometn somten Ki is generally a gas, in essence all seperate "Things".

Well, I don't want to try to out-Asian you, being from the US and with ancestors from Germany, but these things are as "separate" from one another as stalks of bamboo. Separate above the surface, but all of a single root system below.

So I'll restate that. The many forms and appearances are separate manifestations of something unseen. Because we "see" them in separate identities does not mean that they are actually separate things. Ki is the underlying root system and tenki, denki, little girls and boys, old men and women, feelings, aiki, kiai, sakki, are all just passing manifestations of that underlying unity.


No, actually I'd say the fundamental "nature" of Ki is that it's a word used to describe something.

No, ki is not fundamentally a word used to describe something: it is the something that the little syllable "ki" describes. What is it describing?

When Japanese tell each other "ki wo tsukete" ("be careful"--for those who don't speak Japanese), is it just an empty saying? Do they not actually mean "activate your ki" or "turn on your mind"? Do they mean "turn on something we don't know what it is"?


Think of it this way, take the early earth-centric view of the solar system. To some degree it worked, and indeed the Greeks mapped out to a large degree the "result" of the real system at work.
That doesn't mean that that was the "real" system at work.
Of course unless you still believe everything revolves around the earth.

Same with Ki :)

I don't see the comparison at all. Unless you're saying that "ki" does not really exist...


Back to the martial Ki, (I'm sorry this IS the e-budo forum so let's discuss it within the martial context first :p )

Well, this is the Meditation forum, actually, on a budo forum. So unless you want to deal with all meditation only in "martial" terms...


I've seen and felt some incredible stuff from high level people, and had in the back of my mind, a lingering thought that perhaps it was tied to the "abstract" concept of Ki that so permeates certain portions of western martial circles.

But time and time again, I kept on being shown otherwise. In fact there's many high level Chinese "internal" masters that will (if they consider you their inner door students) NOT feed you the "Qi" explanation, and instead say, "yes, bring the 'leg strength' here!" (an extreme oversimplification tho! lol) and explain everything in very concrete terms.

Mochizuki sensei never explained anything to anyone in terms of "ki", except in some occasional comments, mostly of a humorous nature. He was a direct student of Morihei Ueshiba and 10th dan in aikido. So you might think he would explain things as "ki" this and "ki" that, but he seldom did. Where he did speak of it, he said, "Ki is something very simple. It is inspiration."

[qutoe]Even Sagawa of Daitoryu(Who would be a prime example I think, considering the almost inhuman skill level he had, throwing olympic judo peeps around in his late eighties) said in his book that the "ki" explanation of things were done by those that were "chuutohanpa", or only "half accomplished" and that everything he did was based within the realm of normal human phsyiology/physics, but that he just had a level of understanding of those factors that most probably wouldn't get because they didn't know how to train their body.[/quote]

Mochizuki sensei would have agreed entirely. But if 'ki' is basically ignorant bs, why is the art called 'aikijujutsu'? Aiki, kiai, sakki would all become meaningless noise if they did not describe something real. Kiai is a dominating approach to the opponent. Aiki is a receptive approach to the attacker. Both approaches will take decisive control of the opponent's body. These are old methods of combat. Are they just meaningless words?

So ki is an integral part of martial arts, but to understand it, you cannot look only at the martial forms such as aiki and kiai. If you do, you will think they're some artificially generated power like electricity, that you could somehow generate in a power plant if you only knew what it was made of.

And there's where you find your chuutohanpa--people who think ki is something you have to generate and find from somewhere other than everyday life.

[qutoe]As it happens, it's NOT an abstract concept, but rather a bundle of separate components that you physically feel, and together as whole make up one over riding physical "feel" that you can direct. Using the western paradigm to explain concepts might only serve to confuse someone who's training to get "it", but that doesn't make it any less explainable in that format.[/quote]

Well, there's a lot of chuutohanpa in that field, too. How many people have come up with "scientific" explanations for all manner of things when they aren't scientists, don't understand the scientific method and DON'T understand ki.

It would be like my trying to analyze you by studying the posts of the people who reply to you. If you don't even know what "ki" is, how can you even discuss it in "scientific" terms? We've seen mentions of string theory, electrochemical reactions and so on. But who can put chemicals and electricity into a dead body and get life? Who can mix the chemicals and electricity and produce a test tube baby? Only nature can do this and the products of nature are always full of ki.

The Chinese and other Asian cultures have developed their knowledge of ki and qi over thousands of years. The best I have seen anyone do is try to analyze some 'aspect' of ki. And you cannot isolate any aspect of it.


The fact that it CAN be described in a western manner doesn't make the body skill any less hard to gain(nor any less cool ;) ).

The western manner cannot even identify ki. Yes, you can talk about body alignment, fascia, space in the joints, etc., but you can put a dead body in those positions and nothing happens.


Simply put, those that can "do" can explain pretty concretely what's going on in their body. If they don't, then it means one of two things, either a) they aren't really as high level as you might think, or b) they're being a bitch and trying to pull the wool over your eyes purposely.

Again, that does apply to martial technique, but 'martial' aspects of ki are only a tiny part of it. And I reitterate, the exclusive focus on "ki" in martial technique leads to a very distorted and fanciful idea of what ki is and what it does.


So I guess my question for you is, if you're going to make the statement that martial "ki" is no different from say Ten"ki" or Den"ki", then are you one of those that can "do", or are still speaking from a context where you can't yet "do" ? ;)

You seem to think that I explain martial arts in terms of ki. How is that? My repetetive statement is that the forms and manifestations are only appearances of ki and not the essence. I do not use ki to describe any martial arts technique. I use proper movement to illustrate it (to the limit of my abilities).

I don't say tenki and denki and aiki and kiai are no different. I say all the various forms are different, like stalks of bamboo, yet all the same because they are all manifestations of the same source.

As for "can do" or "can't do," I don't think that way.

I just "do".

I will let others debate the rest.

Thank you for your earnest comments.

Joshua Lerner
19th January 2006, 00:01
Hi Rob,


There's a lot of westerners out there that get mislead by the "asian" description and way of describing things, thinking perhaps like you do that they refer to some overriding energy etc.

In the interest of clear and accurate thinking, I'd have to say that it is as easy to be mislead by the "western" description of things. One example -


If you want me to get into specifics I could, but it'd take at least 4 more pages if you wanted me to describe components involving fascia (by the way if you look into it, you'll find that the fascia covers to a T, the "Qi" meridians ;) ), membranes, spinal movement, explanation and understanding of the effecient use of the human skeletal structure(which by the way is a corner stone of any internal martial art, wonder why that is), how the diaphram is tied to the fascia, the strengthening of said fascia and tendons through "contradictory exercises", the resulting control of subsystems that you normally wouldnt be able to control, etc etc etc.

The fact that it CAN be described in a western manner doesn't make the body skill any less hard to gain(nor any less cool ;) ).

The idea that internal skill is related to the fascia and tendons is very interesting, and very appealing to a western-minded audience, and used very often by people who are consciously trying to avoid talking about Qi, but it makes no sense to me at all.

Fascia is, without a doubt, a fascinating (pun intended) organ that is much more than just a type of physiological shrink-wrap. Yes, it generates an electrical charge when pressure is applied to it, it is possibly related to both the acupuncture meridians and the San Jiao/Triple Warmer, etc. And being an acupuncturist, I have both a professional and personal interest in the subject. But talking about it as a source or conduit of internal strength is misleading and fuzzy. In what way is it related? How do you know? How are you separating the function of the fascia from the function of all the other connective and muscle tissue? Aside from vaguely equating the word "fascia" with certain body sensations that don't really correspond to what you normally considered "muscular", what is that based on?

Use of the word "tendon" is the same. Both in Chinese and Russian systems, everyone is always talking about "strengthening the tendons." But that makes no sense. Any activity that uses muscles strengthens the tendons. As far as I know, you cannot strengthen the tendons without also strengthening the muscles, and vice-versa. If you know otherwise, please contradict me, because I find the subject fascinating and am always looking for new information.

To say that internal strength comes from the tendons is to imply that if you tried these things without developing "tendon strength", your muscles would detach themselves from the bones. Because that is what tendons do - attach muscles to bones. If the tendons are weak, the muscles pull away from the bones. They passively transfer kinetic energy. Without the muscles pulling on them and the bones anchoring them, they do nothing. If someone has information on how internal work involves the tendons more than it does the muscles and bones, I'd be very interested to hear about it.

I think I understand *why* people use these images - internal work involves creating certain sensations in the body that we can't correlate to muscular work as we usually think of it. So we grab on to whatever explanation feels or sounds right. I think there is also an element of expediency at work here - if you tell someone that they should be training their tendons or fascia instead of their muscles, it is a way of short-circuiting their instinctive/unconscious bias towards muscling through things. But misusing western concepts isn't any different, at least to me, than misusing Asian concepts.

Now having said all of that, I *do* agree with the idea that everything involved in internal work is ultimately explainable using the modern physiological model. But we have to be very careful with language. For instance, Karel Koscuba, a British Yiquan teacher ( www.yiquan.org.uk ) has a few essays where he describes the purpose of standing excercises as being to train the postural muscles (aka the stabilizer muscles) as opposed to the mobilizers. The feeling of Qi, according to him, is the feeling of the stabilizers firing without the mobilizers, since the stabilizers are normally not under conscious control or awareness, when we start to control and feel them, we get that tight or tingly feeling close to the bones.

One further side-note: a friend and I were discussing this, and we came to the conclusion that when the Chinese talk about "tendons" in this functional context, they are actually referring to the stabilizer muscles. They probably realized that there was a way to produce strength that didn't rely on normal muscular flexing, and as meat-eaters, they knew that there is this very tough stuff attached to muscles that isn't the muscle itself. And they had no reason to come up with the idea that muscles can be either postural or mobilizer, so that's probably where the idea that the tendons are a source of strength came from.

I think this is a much better description than "tendon strength" of at least *one* aspect of internal work, but again, without actual scientific evidence that that is precisely what is going on, it remains only an appealing image. It may be a useful image, and it may turn out to be an accurate description, but it is still basically an appealing image that we use because it vaguely corresponds to the sensations we get when we practice.

Apologies for the long post. It's been on my mind alot recently . . .

Asura
19th January 2006, 00:15
The western manner cannot even identify ki. Yes, you can talk about body alignment, fascia, space in the joints, etc., but you can put a dead body in those positions and nothing happens.


That would be because he's dead and you can't move all the various components?

That argument is a bad one since you can't either prove nor disprove your point. Giving the dead body the proverbial "shock" of life, and if you were able to control all those components in some way, I think you could get "something" to happen :p

Seems like you're trying to say that Ki is the universal "essence", which is fine, whatever makes you happy right? ;)

What I'm trying to say is, I doubt the majority of accomplished "azians" with their 1000+ year plus involvement in these matters necessarily think like you. Especially the accomplished ones. So really you're applying only your understanding of "ki". Not the generally accepted notion (among the accomlished, not the rabble of chuutohanpa ;) )

Josh:

Good point, I've been talking about the fascia related stuff for a while, and it makes sense from what I've been able to feel myself. But like you say it can't be proved, so we'll leave the conclusion of that to the otaku that would enjoy proving this stuff in a lab rather than getting out there and train :)

I'll totally agree with you on the tendon thing though, that was badly worded on my part. But the intention does goto the "tendon" rather than the muscles, though that's probably more a looking at the "result" than what's actually going on. Muscles are strengthened and its not a bad thing, you just have to know "how" to strengthen them and build them up. Sagawa was a big proponent of this. Note however while he said you needed up build up muscles, he said that building them in the fashion of lifting weights etc was useless, and that you had to understand the "manner" in which you had to strengthen them.

The stabilizer muscles I do agree...I've strained some weird "#$" around the spine (not surface muscle) during intensive tanren designed to strengthen the structure. I was out for 4 days... That certainly was a wakeup call that something very physical is used in these advanced skills, lol


Nice post ;)

Rob

Joshua Lerner
19th January 2006, 00:41
I'll totally agree with you on the tendon thing though, that was badly worded on my part.

Sorry if it sounded like I was directing it at you specifically, because it was really directed at everyone I've heard use that explanation over the last few years. And there have been quite a few - you are not the only one I've come across who uses that image. You just happened to be there when I finally wigged out in public.

One of the really interesting issues in all of this is how quickly we (myself included here, by the way) go from an experience, to an expedient explanation, and then quickly forget the experience and just start relying on the explanation. It happens to me all the time in various trainings I'm involved in. Something will work, and then almost immediately I'll come up with a theory about why, and then when I go to apply that theory again, it doesn't work. Or it will kind of work, but in a way that takes me further from the *real* skill I'm trying to develop. Know what I mean?

In terms of Qi/Ki, there is a great story I read in a book by an American acupuncturist. I think it was one of Mark Seem's books. He does alot of teaching at seminars, and he often won't allow people to use the word "Qi" when they are describing what they are feeling when they needle a patient. Maybe someone will say that they felt the Qi gather around the needle - okay, he says, say that again, without using the word Qi. What are you actually experiencing? Are the fingers in your supporting hand starting to tingle? Is the skin around the needle tightening? Are the muscles beneath the skin tightening? Is the needle feeling more resistance? Is it feeling heavy? Does it feel like there is an electric current going through the needle? What?

As he tells it, people at these seminars get very upset with him because he makes them reflect on their actual, immediate experience, and won't let them be lazy and use words that simply allow them to tune out their experience. Neigong seems to be similar in that way.

Thanks, by the way, for the interesting discussion.

Asura
19th January 2006, 01:06
but in a way that takes me further from the *real* skill I'm trying to develop. Know what I mean?

What are you actually experiencing? Are the fingers in your supporting hand starting to tingle? Is the skin around the needle tightening? Are the muscles beneath the skin tightening? Is the needle feeling more resistance? Is it feeling heavy? Does it feel like there is an electric current going through the needle? What?

As he tells it, people at these seminars get very upset with him because he makes them reflect on their actual, immediate experience, and won't let them be lazy and use words that simply allow them to tune out their experience. Neigong seems to be similar in that way.

Thanks, by the way, for the interesting discussion.

I totally feel you on that point. I guess to some degree I'm also guilty of wanting a valid explanation to describe the sensations I feel, the skill I manifest since it's easier to describe in that manner to other people.
Fortunately for me (I think) I try and keep my experience/feeling seperate from whatever explanation that I adhere to at the moment, lol.

I like the description you gave of that American accupuncturist. We need more people like him teaching the Nejia and "aiki" based arts.

I've often felt that the japanese language (and I dont speak chinese fluently so I can really comment) has a leg up in teaching these matters since they have "sound words" such "sutooon", "doshi doshi", "pata pata", "guu guu" etc to describe "internal" feelings.

While not exactly concrete, if you get "what" feeling you're supposed to be after (and these sound words get extremely specific in their own right), advancement in the neijia is faster I think than if you say, oh just relax the kua, round the mingmen, etc.
I'm sure Chinese has a similar leg up in that venue.

Sorry for going off on a tangent, that particular subject, getting the nejia concepts across has been on my mind recently.
It's a grey area. You explain too much you lose them, you get too abstract and wishywashy about stuff "feel ki like water running through a hose" and you'll lose them. It's a fine line to walk. ^^;

Rob

kimiwane
19th January 2006, 03:06
Seems like you're trying to say that Ki is the universal "essence", which is fine, whatever makes you happy right? ;)

No. As far as I know, that's the best Western translation that can be made of it, other than "energy". And what's energy? The Universal Essence.

But what of that? You have never defined it at all. You have said "it" can be "explained" by science, etc. But you, yourself, have never said what this "it" is. If not "energy" (the universal essence), then what is ki?

Let's go back to your earlier analogy of the belief that the sun revolved around the earth. No "better" map of the whole "ki" system has emerged than that of Chinese medicine. Just as Einsteinian physics did not make Newtonian physics meaningless, Western science has only added another level of thinking (from the Chinese perspective. From the Western perspective, it is the only way of thinking.) So the Chinese can benefit by the best of both. But we in the West have access mainly to surgery and pharmaceutical chemicals. The Chinese know what qi is. The West debates "whether" it is without ever understanding what "it" is supposed to be.


What I'm trying to say is, I doubt the majority of accomplished "azians" with their 1000+ year plus involvement in these matters necessarily think like you. Especially the accomplished ones.

Well, as Joshua said above, if you "know" better, lay out the argument. What accomplished asian disagrees with me about the nature of ki? Please quote him with context.

Have I used ki to explain any martial art technique?

I have over thirty years of training in karate, judo, aikido and sword (through yoseikan budo), taiji and baguazhang. My deepest focus was aikido and I lived in Japan for five years. Aiki and Kiai are approaches. Technique is taijutsu. I trained with Minoru Mochizuki. I saw his approach to all the above-mentioned Japanese arts and his attitude toward ki, the Bible, Western medicine (he was a seikotsuin (bone doctor, or bone setter) and he taught me some things about koppo. But when he was sick, he went to a hospital.). I got most of my attitudes about these things from him and from my long study of Tao te Ching, I Ching and Sun Tzu.


So really you're applying only your understanding of "ki". Not the generally accepted notion (among the accomlished, not the rabble of chuutohanpa ;) )

I think Mochizuki sensei was accomplished. Where ki is concerned in martial arts, I teach as he taught. All the rest that I do is showing that the linguistic use of "ki" is entirely consistent and, broadly assimilated, illustrates a clear nature for "ki", which is, as I said, "nature". Ki is a universal phenomenon that permeates personal, social and planetary life. It permeates emotions and art as well as science (in the Japanese language).

You talk about everything coming down to bone alignment and such. But you talk as if that is exclusive to martial arts. It comes first from daily life. A natural body is naturally aligned and it expresses itself with natural power. This is called "genki" or "healthy" ("original spirit" such as a baby has).

This "secret" is taught in martial arts classes because most people old enough to study martial arts have strayed from the natural way of standing and moving. Through social stress and the abuses of the education system, the personality learns to express itself through distorted postures of the body. These are a result of the "kimochi warui" or "bad feeling" of having the body constrained in a desk all day except for the times when the larger kids are running over it.

Distorted body and distorted health go hand in glove. A natural body needs little instruction to learn the mere techniques of martial arts. An unnatural body has to be taught how to straighten itself out over time and takes years to assimilate very simple techniques.

Do you suppose that all this alignment that is so good for martial arts technique just accidentally happens to be the same alignment taught by qigong masters for centuries, for nothing more than cultivating one's personal qi?

How can you be "genki" if your body is distorted or stiff?

The purpose of the aligned posture is first and foremost for the health of the individual. Is it an accident that healthy, well-aligned people just happen to be able to do martial arts more effectively?

If you can find where some accomplished master of these matters contradicts me, please quote them in their context.

best wishes.

Asura
19th January 2006, 05:13
Well, as Joshua said above, if you "know" better, lay out the argument. What accomplished asian disagrees with me about the nature of ki? Please quote him with context.

I have over thirty years of training in karate, judo, aikido and sword (through yoseikan budo), taiji and baguazhang. My deepest focus was aikido and I lived in Japan for five years. Aiki and Kiai are approaches. Technique is taijutsu. I trained with Minoru Mochizuki.


I think Mochizuki sensei was accomplished. Where ki is concerned in martial arts, I teach as he taught. All the rest that I do is showing that the linguistic use of "ki" is entirely consistent and, broadly assimilated, illustrates a clear nature for "ki", which is, as I said, "nature". Ki is a universal phenomenon that permeates personal, social and planetary life. It permeates emotions and art as well as science (in the Japanese language).

You talk about everything coming down to bone alignment and such. But you talk as if that is exclusive to martial arts. It comes first from daily life. A natural body is naturally aligned and it expresses itself with natural power. This is called "genki" or "healthy" ("original spirit" such as a baby has).


Distorted body and distorted health go hand in glove. A natural body needs little instruction to learn the mere techniques of martial arts. An unnatural body has to be taught how to straighten itself out over time and takes years to assimilate very simple techniques.

Do you suppose that all this alignment that is so good for martial arts technique just accidentally happens to be the same alignment taught by qigong masters for centuries, for nothing more than cultivating one's personal qi?



Ok, first off, you assume too much ;)

Second, you're "katayotteru" ;)

I would agree with you that the proper alignments/other factors I talked about are NOT exclusive to the martial arts. Actually attaining the ability to use a power that is unimpeded results in effective martial techniques, good health etc.
All the things you mentioned are side effects of strengthening those abilities within the body.

"It permeates emotions and art as well as science (in the Japanese language)."

And it will permeate all things related to "humans" because "humans" came up with that term. Personally I don't think its any mystery that high levels of caligraphy or art and dance run parallels with the high level mastery seen in martial arts. All involve the movement of the human body connected to the mind. (Especially with the regards to the "flip" in intention to make some of the higher stuff work) But I think you're grasping at straws if you try and make a more universal connection.

The views your expressed are those coming from your teacher really, and aren't necessarily those held by the average Japanese person ;)



I have over thirty years of training in karate, judo, aikido and sword (through yoseikan budo), taiji and baguazhang. My deepest focus was aikido and I lived in Japan for five years. Aiki and Kiai are approaches. Technique is taijutsu. I trained with Minoru Mochizuki.

Um... ok. First off not to be rude but xxx amount of years in whatever or another art doesn't bring any extra weight to an argument that isn't being really substantiated on your side either. Besides which I've seen too many MAists of various backgrounds come to train and then get thrown around by a first year student at our school. I've even been to Abe sensei's class in Kyoto, a big proponent of "Ki", yet his students of xxx years can't even perform up to snuff :rolleyes:
Btw, even though Abe sensei is a propnent of "Ki", it only pretty much extends to using the breath to reinforce the "groundpaths" connecting the entirebody. He didn't refer to it as "Ki" in the pseudo asian sense either.

And great you trained with such and such a teacher. Awesome. We also just recently had a student from Sagawa's dojo drop by and his skill level after training for 10 years was well... abysmal.

Btw those body skills and health don't always necessarily go hand-in-hand.
Wang Shu Jin's health was a doctor's nightmare. Diabetes, some kind of growth in his leg, breathing problems. Yet he could still beat the stuffing out of most people because he'd already accquired that particular body skill.

The bodyskill I refer to, if you want me to define it extremely loosely, is a body that can absorb force without being affected. In turn when that body generates power, say in a strike or throw, it can send it in such a way that it goes unimpeded "through" someone else as a result, even when it looks like there's a force on force action going. There is a psychological "flip" in intention related to this, which is needed in order to use the muscles and body in a different way then we're normally used to. (A result of "imashime" something you can see demonstrated in the Aun Kongourikisi Statues in Nara)

That doesn't mean that something universal is controlling/permeating it. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. But there's no evidence either way ;)
It still falls back to the human factor.

Btw, I already gave you an example... Sagawa huffed at the notion of "Ki", as well as the founder of I-Chuan. If I'm not mistaken Li Shu Wen of Baji fame was also noted for riduculing the "Qi" proponents.
Let's see...stepping outside of the eastern paradigm for an instant, you can take a look at Vlad from Systema and you'll see similarly superb skills manifested with no mention of Ki/Qi/ether/energy either.

I guess my take on it is, the whole "Qi" paradigm is an antiquated notion left behind by an earlier generation. The research done before isn't useless, but the bujutsu notions of "henka"/change and "adaptation" should be applied :)

kimiwane
19th January 2006, 16:42
The views your expressed are those coming from your teacher really, and aren't necessarily those held by the average Japanese person

Oh. I see. I thought you wanted to discuss the highly developed type of person--not the average.

Are we having definition fuzziness again?


Second, you're "katayotteru" ;)

touche


Btw, I already gave you an example... Sagawa huffed at the notion of "Ki", as well as the founder of I-Chuan. If I'm not mistaken Li Shu Wen of Baji fame was also noted for riduculing the "Qi" proponents.

All you are really saying is they did not explain their techniques as any kind of ki/qi "magic". Now what part of "NEITHER DO I" did you fail to understand? What part of "NEITHER DID MOCHIZUKI SENSEI" doesn't get through to you?

But did any of these people flatly say that "ki" as a universal energy does not exist? Did an aikijujutsu master ever define his art as "jujutsu based on blending with something that doesn't exist"?

Really, you clearly do not understand any aspect of "ki" or the broad asian meaning of it outside martial arts technique. But you also read my comments saying I don't use ki to explain martial arts techniques and reply with comments showing that you clearly think I credit miraculous striking and throwing powers to ki.

Slow down and read every word, would you?

As for technique, the way I explain that comes more from Moshe Feldenkrais than from a "ki" base. Feldenkrais was a judo master taught by Jigoro Kano and his senior students in the 1920s and '30s. He was a mechanical and electrical engineer by education, working with the Curies and instrumental in the creation of the Van deGraf Generator. He viewed the human body in mechanical terms and the nerve activity in electrical terms. He referred to vivisection of cats to understand the functions of the various brain centers and which were involuntary, which were voluntary and how they related.

In my teaching, the most important thing to know is that humans have a reflex to extend the legs and spine when there is pressure on the soles of the feet. We have an instinct or reflex to push against pressure in the soles of our feet. In babies, when weight is on the feet, they straighten the legs and spine with vigorous force and stand up straight like corks popping to the surface of water.

For adults, the most important thing is to "feel" and cooperate with the nervous impulse to push straight up in gravity and to stand as tall and erect as one's own skeleton should naturally stand. Social pressure causes us to bend that posture and lose a lot of empowering energy that we get from standing straight in gravity. Or I should say, it causes us to use energy to fight gravity that we don't have to use as long as we remain straight in gravity.

This relates directly to the erector muscles you and Joshua were discussing earlier. Feldenkrais called these the "antigravity" muscles. But do not mistake some muscular sensations for "ki".

Ki is not a sensation. Or, at least, it is not a "special sensation". The "sensation" of ki is the pleasurable feeling of moving a healthy body through its daily activities. Nothing more. I once knew a guy who claimed to see purple fire after doing the first five moves of tai chi. This is the kind of guy you seem to think you are addressing here.

And you seem to have that image of "anyone who believes in ki". You're addressing every reference to "ki" as if it were among the bizarre claims of ki. The reality of "ki" is "everyday life". I am talking about the completely consistent way that the Japanese use terms with "ki". You have never shown any inconsistency in that whole system of words. Everything you have said addresses the manga version of ki--not the serious words of masters.


Let's see...stepping outside of the eastern paradigm for an instant, you can take a look at Vlad from Systema and you'll see similarly superb skills manifested with no mention of Ki/Qi/ether/energy either.

I don't suppose they describe it in terms of Einsteinian physics, either, do they? But does that mean they deny the existence or truth of Einstein? Does that mean that Einsteinian physics has no effect on what they do?

I'm not that familiar with Systema but I don't think I've ever heard of any of them say that "ki" "does not exist", either. They can create an effective system without resorting to the word but that does not nullify the word or its meaning.

But let's get back to my earlier explanation of movement in electro/mechanical terms.

Once the body responds to the nervous impulse to push against gravity, it assumes the absolutely most efficient organization of bones, muscles and nerve energy to remain tall and upright. This is all automatic, or "natural". If the body bends or leans in any direction, it must expend its own energy in muscular effort to compensate for the resistance to gravity. Staying straight in the line of gravity, with the weight held high, there is no resistance to gravity and we develop a reservoir of potential energy in that elevated weight. This potential energy can be converted to kinetic energy in a split second simply by dropping the weight.

Is all that clear? Any unacceptable or unclear definitions or uses of terms? Did I mention ki to explain any of that?

Now, the upright standing body is the zero point. No one naturally remains standing in one place for long. As humans, we have things to do, so we start walking and doing things. And as we stand or move, the changing pressure on the bottoms of the feet stimulates nerve signals from the feet to the brain, telling the brain what's happening with the feet. The brain compares this to the information it receives from the inner ear and other balance-measuring structures and calculates at gigaflop rate what the foot should do in response to the total data. It sends a message back to the foot, telling it to adjust (the calf, the ankle, the foot, all together, so, in fact, many signals are sent down from the brain) and all this takes one tiny fraction of a second. The muscles make the adjustments ordered by the brain, the weight on the foot changes and the foot sends new information to the brain, which sends back new instructions to the muscles.

And this happens hundreds or thousands of times in a single step. If we walk a mile, the brain sends and receives literally millions of messages through the nerve system, just monitoring the pressure on the feet, the information from the balance sensors and sending muscular adjustment signals to the feet. All these messages are essentially electrical in nature, so the spine is carrying active two-way current at all times.

This current flowing through the nerves is affected by any new stimulation of any nerve ending anywhere on the body. So if your opponent is stepping and your knee contacts a "nerve point" on the side of his knee, the inormation goes to his brain and must be processed and reconciled with all the other signals from the body in the fraction of a second. The brainial calculation results in some motor response in his body within a split second, most probably to pull his knee away from the pressure, but possibly to press back into the pressure. If a standing person makes no adjustment in response to such knee pressure, a tiny amount of energy (what I call 'zero force') will cause the body to fall away from the pressure. The body can be made to fall over in this way with truly tiny forces if the opponent does nothing to prevent it. In a "live" opponent, of course, he will respond to such a force and resist falling over.

But look at that: we have made him take on another task in his nervous system. Now, rather than simply moving upright, he has to make some adjustment to remain upright. If this zero force is applied to the knee at precisely the correct moment, the very tiny force will not only make him fall over, but the escape efforts he makes with his legs may actually cause him to shoot off the ground and land on his back several feet away. This is NOT a "ki" throw, but the result of his straightening his legs vigorously just as his body leans at such an angle that he actually ends up jumping backward as if to land on his head.

I have seen enough Systema to know that they use some similar manipulations of the knee to produce seemingly effortless takedowns. That is the same general thing I do.

I have explained all this mechanically and electrically, viewing the body as a structure and mechanical system. I have not used the word "ki" to describe any of it. Is that clear?

So all of your resistance to everything else I have said has been fighting an empty jacket. You have missed what I did say and responded to things I didn't say.

That said, none of this obviates the entire cultue of ki/qi and Chinese medicine and fighting arts or Japanese accupressure and fighting arts.


I guess my take on it is, the whole "Qi" paradigm is an antiquated notion left behind by an earlier generation.

My take is that you don't have a deep enough understanding of what those 'antiquated" generations were talking about to enable you to comment on it at all.


The research done before isn't useless, but the bujutsu notions of "henka"/change and "adaptation" should be applied :)

Again, you have to understand what they are talking about before you can change or adapt it. You can create a comic-book version of their system in your mind and annihilate that to show your intellectual superiority (based on the fact that you studied with great people), but it just shows you never understood what any of them have said.

Asura
19th January 2006, 17:32
your mind and annihilate that to show your intellectual superiority (based on the fact that you studied with great people), but it just shows you never understood what any of them have said.

Never claimed to study with "great people" but, sure at this point I'd say that my own bodyskills speak as to how much I "understand" ;)


But did any of these people flatly say that "ki" as a universal energy does not exist? Did an aikijujutsu master ever define his art as "jujutsu based on blending with something that doesn't exist"?


Nope, but Sagawa still refferred to his art as Aikijutsu even though he scorned the notion of "Ki". To most people it's "just" a word :rolleyes:

So you believe in an overall riding notion of "ki". Which is wonderful.

But personally I was just more interested in mapping out those things that're collectively reffered to as "ki" within the martial context. ;)

Btw, your description while I give you props for the detailed explanation still doesn't really cover the six directional contradictory compression expansion that's fundamental to generating that kind of "zero" power you refer to :)
Maybe you'd like to elaborate?

Trevor Johnson
19th January 2006, 17:51
As a linguistic comment, just because "ki" is a part of a lot of words, doesn't mean that those concepts are necessarily involved with ki.

When someone says "ki wo tsukete," or be careful, they may mean activate your ki just as much as a westerner would be invoking God when saying "goodbye!" (the origin of which is God be with you) Or than they invoke God when you sneeze. Bless you was originally a frantic attempt to prevent your soul flying out your nose! Nowadays, it's just polite. God is a popular linguistic concept to westerners as much as ki is to asians.

Be careful when using linguistic arguments. The meaning of words changes greatly over time, and just because you call everything you don't get "ki" if you're Asian, and "miracle" if you're a westerner, doesn't mean you're right. Just means you don't yet understand it.

Ron Tisdale
19th January 2006, 18:42
Btw, your description while I give you props for the detailed explanation still doesn't really cover the six directional contradictory compression expansion that's fundamental to generating that kind of "zero" power you refer to :)
Maybe you'd like to elaborate?

Hmmm...wasn't going to participate in this discussion, but I've been enjoying it emensely, at least the last few posts. Just a suggestion, take it or leave it as you will. There is a tendancy in some who discuss these matters to be snidely derogatory in their manner, and I think it would serve everyone if that would stop. All it does is bring the same out in others, even when they do their darndest to avoid it.

Best,
Ron (carry on...)

kimiwane
19th January 2006, 22:39
Never claimed to study with "great people" but, sure at this point I'd say that my own bodyskills speak as to how much I "understand" ;)

Well, the same as you, I can make that claim, but I didn't feel compelled to on a meditation forum, despite your earlier assumption that I could have gone where I did and trained as I did without learning anything. Still, anyone can claim anything. This does not mean you understand what you're talking about here. It sounds like you have some grip on aikijujutsu technique, but you should limit your comments to that.

Since you've never clearly defined what you are even referring to when you use the word "ki", please explain what you think it is (this thing that you keep talking about though you insist it doesn't exist).


Sagawa still refferred to his art as Aikijutsu even though he scorned the notion of "Ki". To most people it's "just" a word :rolleyes:

Yes, like the average Japanese to whom you refer. But I thought you wanted to talk about "accomplished" people. I gave you Mochizuki sensei's take but then you wanted to shift back to "average" Japanese conceptions. And it seems you're determined to cling to the average way of thinking.

The fact is, to "most" people, "ki" is not even a word. But to people with many years of budo background it's a word with deep meaning. EVEN if they don't credit ki with any magic powers. It has meaning.

But seriously, being able to see "ki" and any other aspects of the world--history, politics, religion or whatevr--ONLY through "martial arts" eyes tends to be the realm of young people with maybe six or seven years' experience. Maturity is being able to see the broad, subtle connections that make up the "whole" picture of human life--not just the parts where we play "samurai".

Ki is like that. Being able to see it in ALL aspects of life puts it into its proper perspective.

[qote]But personally I was just more interested in mapping out those things that're collectively reffered to as "ki" within the martial context. ;) [/quote]

Since I don't recall seeing any such attempt in your earlier posts, please resummarize those things for us.


Btw, your description while I give you props for the detailed explanation still doesn't really cover the six directional contradictory compression expansion that's fundamental to generating that kind of "zero" power you refer to :) Maybe you'd like to elaborate?

Generating "zero" power?

What do you mean, "generating"?

I'm afraid you may have read those bits rather quickly and have some blurry ideas about what I said. Please do quote and phrase a more precise question and I will show you the delineations.

Thanks.

kimiwane
19th January 2006, 22:55
As a linguistic comment, just because "ki" is a part of a lot of words, doesn't mean that those concepts are necessarily involved with ki.

Absolutely not. For instance, in an earlier post, I listed "ki gaeru" as meaning "to change one's mind."

And of course it actually means "to change one's clothes".

I was thinking of "kichigae", "changed mind" or "crazy", even though I listed "kichigae" in the same list.

But in fact, most words involving ki do involve it because they are connected like bamboo with a single root system.


When someone says "ki wo tsukete," or be careful, they may mean activate your ki just as much as a westerner would be invoking God when saying "goodbye!" (the origin of which is God be with you) Or than they invoke God when you sneeze. Bless you was originally a frantic attempt to prevent your soul flying out your nose! Nowadays, it's just polite. God is a popular linguistic concept to westerners as much as ki is to asians.

You know, Confucius believed that a word had to have a precise meaning and usage. For instance, if a word means "little white cup", then you can't use it for a little black cup or a small bowl or anything but that exact little white cup.

Just because the popular usage of a word has become obscure and modern people may not know what it means (not everyone even realizes that "goodbye" does mean "God be with you", for instance) does not evacuate the real meaning of the word. Even though people call bowls and black cups by a name that literally means "little white cup", the real meaning of the word remains unchanged. So what you ultimately have there is incorrect usage.

I was asking my wife about these things earlier today.

"Why do we say 'ki wo tsukete' (turn on your ki) but we never say 'ki wo keshite' (turn off your ki)?"

We agreed that your ki becomes tired, fuzzy and unfocused through boredom and inactivity through the day. The usual time that we say ki wo tsukete is when one of us is leaving the house. Turn on your ki! we say. Become aware of the world and tuned in to what's happening around you!

Now, to her, this might be a simple meaning, but I have always thought of it as "turn on your ki".

And when I say "Goodbye," my meaning has always been "God be with you."


Be careful when using linguistic arguments. The meaning of words changes greatly over time, and just because you call everything you don't get "ki" if you're Asian, and "miracle" if you're a westerner, doesn't mean you're right. Just means you don't yet understand it.

Well, no one has yet shown an example of any inconsistent use of the word 'ki' in Japanese language. I think it's the height of cultural arrogance to dismiss these words as things the asians "just didn't get".

Please show an example.

Goodbye and ki wo tsukete.

kimiwane
19th January 2006, 23:01
There is a tendancy in some who discuss these matters to be snidely derogatory in their manner, and I think it would serve everyone if that would stop. All it does is bring the same out in others, even when they do their darndest to avoid it.

Ron, as always, point well taken.

Goodbye and ki wo tsukete.

Let's take this further tomorrow.

DRooster
19th January 2006, 23:17
I am enjoying Rob and Trevor's posts immensely.
Having been physically lazy for the last few years
I and my friends are keen to get into more
physical combat training. I seem to 'get' a
relaxed power quite easily, but how do we
actually TRAIN it and make sure we don't just
'muscle' through throws and stuff??
Yes, I expect exercises to include some
resembling meditation.

Thanks,
Ulfric Michael Douglas

Asura
20th January 2006, 00:47
Ok,

First off, let me summarize it as I see it,
you're trying to describe key from a universal "philisophical" standpoint. That standpoint can be valid, but it's not provable eitherway. Just as the existence of any Deity isn't provable.

What I am trying to map out is the physical sensations that're often defined as "Ki" within the martial, and even meditational realm (yes they're linked).
Believe you me, I can also look at the bigger picture and go on and on about how Aun no Kokyu relates to almost everything we do. The "Ki" paradigm you're pushing is more that abstract philisophical view. And I'm not arguing that it "doesn't" exist. It does exist, but mainly only within the human nature, and in nature so long as their are opposites. The whole yin/yang thing. Unfortunately it can be broadly applied to just about anything that the meaning often gets muddied and distorted if you ask me.

Drooster:
Basically you have to change the way your body works. In a very loose and general sense (I've discussed this with others in Aikiweb, do a search for "Aunkai" or "Akuzawa") you have to abandon technique and start focusing on exercises that literally mold your body from the inside/out out/inside.
This can take a variety of forms, Chen Style's Silk Reeling, Bagua's Single Palm Change, Hsing Yi's Santi+Pichuan, etc etc.
Our own curriculum consists of the Shiko movement (Sumo stamping), Koryu Ten Jin Chi exercises, Body Axis training methedology etc, all which remold the body physically as well as the intention.
You can see some clips of this here, tho if you want the explanation I suggest you head over Aikiweb where it's been done to death ^^;
http://www.badongo.com/vid.php?file=Ten+Chi+Jin__2005-12-11_MOV01612.MPG

http://www.badongo.com/vid.php?file=Shin+Tai+Jiku+Divx+-edited+to+not+defy+gravity-__2005-12-11_ShinTaiJiku+-+Low.avi

Result w/in the context of kicks:
note, this is without the six directional contradictory power, but simply emphasizing a clean axis within the spine and using compression to generate cleaner power in the context of kicks. And he's exaggerating the motion to make the power transferance more easily visible. He can do the same in maybe about a tenth of the distance, and easily 10 times the power. Of course then all you'd see is the person drop to the ground, and not "sent" away.

http://www.badongo.com/vid.php?file=Difference+in+kicks__2005-12-11_Difference+in+Kicks.mpg

To swing this back on into the "meditation" venue of things, I'd say a certain amount of the same physical attributes are worked within a meditation context since they serve to change the "Yi" or "Intent". It's not an abstract concept but rather a very real physical/psychological "flip". It's this very "flip" which causes the "buddhist" outlook on things.

Oh yea, and Sagawa was one of the "accomplished" I'd say. To him it was "just" a word expressing an idea. Nothing more nothing less. ;)

Trevor Johnson
20th January 2006, 01:55
Absolutely not. For instance, in an earlier post, I listed "ki gaeru" as meaning "to change one's mind."

And of course it actually means "to change one's clothes".

I was thinking of "kichigae", "changed mind" or "crazy", even though I listed "kichigae" in the same list.

But in fact, most words involving ki do involve it because they are connected like bamboo with a single root system.

...

You know, Confucius believed that a word had to have a precise meaning and usage. For instance, if a word means "little white cup", then you can't use it for a little black cup or a small bowl or anything but that exact little white cup.

Just because the popular usage of a word has become obscure and modern people may not know what it means (not everyone even realizes that "goodbye" does mean "God be with you", for instance) does not evacuate the real meaning of the word. Even though people call bowls and black cups by a name that literally means "little white cup", the real meaning of the word remains unchanged. So what you ultimately have there is incorrect usage.

...

Well, no one has yet shown an example of any inconsistent use of the word 'ki' in Japanese language. I think it's the height of cultural arrogance to dismiss these words as things the asians "just didn't get".

Please show an example.

Goodbye and ki wo tsukete.

My point is simply that just because you have a bunch of words that come from a single root, that doesn't mean that in actual fact those words come from the same phenomenon. What it means is that the people who made the words thought that they did. Furthermore, words do change. I realize that to a purist such as Confucius or the french Academie that is unacceptable, but that is nontheless the truth. I would never call someone "gay" just because they were happy, and telling someone to go out and gather faggots for the fire would get you arrested nowadays. To insist that because a word used to mean something it still does is hearkening perilously close to the concept of the "True Name," and magick of all stripes.

Furthermore, there's an issue of culture clash here. Do you consider the Japanese to be the be-all and end-all of knowledge? What are the Chinese, Vietnamese, Mongolian, and Korean words for lighting, for example? If they do not include the concept of ki, is the Japanese word pre-eminent as proof that lightning is the root of ki? What about occidental concepts? For example, a Scandinavian used to know that thunder was Thor being ticked off about something, and lighting was him chucking his hammer. A European Christian used to know that lighting was Divine Wrath. The Druids thought it was Taranis, if I recall correctly. The American Indians were sure it was sky spirits of various types. Are all of those beliefs equivalent? I would hold that it is cultural arrogance indeed to put up Japanese linguistics and beliefs over those of the rest of the world.

Add that to the fact that we can replicate lighting strikes, and tame them, and indeed know what causes them, and I personally doubt the ki of lighting. Unless, that is, ki=electrons, and they don't show the rest of the characteristics that ki displays.


Basically what I'm saying here is that using linguistics is a very bad way of proving phenomena. There are several proofs of the existance of God, by distinguished theologians like St. Augustine, that rely upon wordplay to make their case. God does not exist because we can pun him into being. Neither does ki.

I'm not saying that ki doesn't exist, just that linguistics is no way to prove it.

Here endeth the reading.

kimiwane
21st January 2006, 00:09
My point is simply that just because you have a bunch of words that come from a single root, that doesn't mean that in actual fact those words come from the same phenomenon. What it means is that the people who made the words thought that they did.

Sure, but I have not seen any example where there is inconsistency or the system fails. The other thing is that I'm not trying to "prove the existence" of ki by saying "Look at all the words that include the term."

What I was trying to get across is that the "real" nature of ki is much more subtle and all-pervading than the anime martial arts image.

If people say "Ki is baloney," they may be referring to frauds who move objects by pointing at them or knock out a line of students by punching in front of them, etc.

What I was trying to point out is that those things are the false image.

The real nature of ki as illustrated by the broad range of linguistic terms that include the word, is a subtle matter of human feelings, health, attitudes, and a connection to nature.

I note in Asura's last post that he does in fact agree that "ki exists". Otherwise, literally, we would have to say "energy does not exist".

But while ki DOES exist, we can only understand what ki means in Japanese culture (and what it REALLY means in martial arts) by seeing how the term is used. It's not magic. It's human life in movement.

Thanks for your comments.


Furthermore, words do change. I realize that to a purist such as Confucius or the french Academie that is unacceptable, but that is nontheless the truth.

Sure, words change, but to really understand them, we have to go to the original intended meaning. What I meant by the Confucius reference was that when they named things, they did not take it lightly and they didn't give nonsense names or call something by a name just because they didn't understand it. These were very deep, quiet and serious people, deeply and subtly observant. When the names were given, they were given with care and deep awareness of nature and human nature.


I would never call someone "gay" just because they were happy

I would do it just to be mean.

:) (joke: any gay folks, please excuse me.


telling someone to go out and gather faggots for the fire would get you arrested nowadays.

Tell me about it. I once told an subordinate worker, "I need to know if you're going to fag out."

"What's that mean?" she asked. She thought I was calling her gay. I said it was something like a cigarette (fag) burning out. She reported me. It was not pleasant.


To insist that because a word used to mean something it still does is hearkening perilously close to the concept of the "True Name," and magick of all stripes.

Yeah, I guess. But...why not? Isn't that why we pursue the oldest, purest form of budo we can find? Isn't that why we'd rather learn from old masters than from young boys?

On the other hand, I learn from toddlers...


Furthermore, there's an issue of culture clash here. Do you consider the Japanese to be the be-all and end-all of knowledge?

Only in matters of budo and Japanese language. This thread, after all, asks for the meaning of a Japanese word. So...


What are the Chinese, Vietnamese, Mongolian, and Korean words for lighting, for example? If they do not include the concept of ki, is the Japanese word pre-eminent as proof that lightning is the root of ki? What about occidental concepts? For example, a Scandinavian used to know that thunder was Thor being ticked off about something, and lighting was him chucking his hammer. A European Christian used to know that lighting was Divine Wrath. The Druids thought it was Taranis, if I recall correctly. The American Indians were sure it was sky spirits of various types. Are all of those beliefs equivalent? I would hold that it is cultural arrogance indeed to put up Japanese linguistics and beliefs over those of the rest of the world.

I don't think I'm putting the Japanese over the rest of the world. We are discussing a Japanese word, though...

Literally, the translation of "ki" is "energy". But it also has the nuance of "spirit", since it refers to living energy, the energy of life, the energy of nature. And all your examples, pretty much, viewed lightning as a kind of spiritual force. So I would say they're all pretty much equivalent.

My big argument in this thread is quite the opposite: you can't translate the entire Japanese understanding of "ki" into Western physics. You can't explain every element of it with physics and you can't negate the entire united system of ki thinking with statements from western physics.

Moshe Feldenkrais was also one who disdained "ki" as an explanation for technique. He poo-pooed the idea of ki in explaining judo technique. I think he did say it's only a term for energy. He promoted an understanding of the whole body organized around the whole center--not a little BB below the navel, but the whole hip structure and all the muscles and viscera.

Before studying Feldenkrais, I thought of my center as being like a BB in my abdomen. Now I think of it as a bowling ball in the same place, that I can move about easily with a great displacement of weight and energy.


Add that to the fact that we can replicate lighting strikes, and tame them, and indeed know what causes them, and I personally doubt the ki of lighting. Unless, that is, ki=electrons, and they don't show the rest of the characteristics that ki displays.

Well, I think natural lightning is a great example of ki in nature. It is flowing energy of nature. It's one example. Wind is ki in movement. The ocean is full of ki and it is always moving. It is the energetic universe doing its thing, which is flowing this way and that.


Basically what I'm saying here is that using linguistics is a very bad way of proving phenomena.

I hope it's clear now that I am not trying to "prove" ki but to show a more complete picture of what it means in daily life. Japanese language shows ki in many forms, all intimately connected in daily human life in nature. These words DO NOT support the image of ki as a long-distance immaterial weapon that can be shaped into balls and thrown. It's just natural life energy.


God does not exist because we can pun him into being.

Speaking of whom...if you wanted to know what a Christian thinks God is like, where would you turn? Would you take an atheist's explanation? Or would you look at the language of the Bible that describes that God?

You would get a different view by looking at the source material than looking at the arguments of a biased opponent.

And to know what Ki really means in Japanese, you have to look at how it is used in everyday language spanning the entire spectrum of everyday human experiences.

Thanks for the comments.

I'm not saying that ki doesn't exist, just that linguistics is no way to prove it.

Here endeth the reading.[/QUOTE]

kimiwane
21st January 2006, 00:19
you're trying to describe key from a universal "philisophical" standpoint. That standpoint can be valid, but it's not provable eitherway. Just as the existence of any Deity isn't provable.

Again, I'm not trying to prove anything and I'm not trying to describe anything. I am posting exact examples of how Japanese language describes ki.

The linguistic spectrum of words using "ki" add up to a picture of a natural energy of life.

They do not support "magic" ki.

They support nature.

As for your comments about zero point energy, I referred to two different things. I casually mentioned that "maybe ki is 'zero point' energy". And, in fact, I believe that they are the same thing.

Next, I mentioned a training exercise where I teach people to develop sensitivity through using tiny forces that I call "zero force". Meaning "no more force than necessary to achieve the result". And that tiny force does not require any generation because it is already present in the body as potential energy in the tall stance. To exerty zero force energy, all you do is lower the weight. The bend in the knee presses into the partner's pressure point. Gravity does ALL the work.

As for "zero point" energy, I'm under the impression that, being all-permeating, it cannot be generated.

However, there is some possibility that it can be generated. I may have mentioned a thing from a PBS special called "Megafloods" in which huge vortexes of flowing water released tremendous energy when the vortex collapsed. Scientists believe that these massive collapsing vortices drilled hole in solid rock because there are several perfectly round holes, maybe hundreds of yards wide, drilled in solid stone in the area in question (maybe around Montanna? see PBS for accurate details).

So perhaps this zero point energy does 'appear' sometimes on earth, through natural phenomena.

I remember Mochizuki sensei once telling me to "think about whirlpools. Think about tornadoes..." He said it's all right there.

Best wishes.

Trevor Johnson
21st January 2006, 04:20
I note in Asura's last post that he does in fact agree that "ki exists". Otherwise, literally, we would have to say "energy does not exist".
Sure, words change, but to really understand them, we have to go to the original intended meaning. What I meant by the Confucius reference was that when they named things, they did not take it lightly and they didn't give nonsense names or call something by a name just because they didn't understand it. These were very deep, quiet and serious people, deeply and subtly observant. When the names were given, they were given with care and deep awareness of nature and human nature.

Literally, the translation of "ki" is "energy". But it also has the nuance of "spirit", since it refers to living energy, the energy of life, the energy of nature. And all your examples, pretty much, viewed lightning as a kind of spiritual force. So I would say they're all pretty much equivalent.

My big argument in this thread is quite the opposite: you can't translate the entire Japanese understanding of "ki" into Western physics. You can't explain every element of it with physics and you can't negate the entire united system of ki thinking with statements from western physics.


Well, if you really WANT to use the Confucian Doctrine of Names, then I'll hold you to it. That's not good for your argument.

For one thing, the meaning of ki has changed over the years, as with many other words. Its original meaning was "breath."

What is the vital difference, on first glance, without the complex math and biochemistry of today, between a living and a dead man? Simple. The living one's breathing. There is power in breathing, expressed in the sound produced by the kiai, the manipulation of the abdomen for force, etc. Originally, living energy meant breathing, because if you stopped you weren't living very long. Breathing right is also good for the health. Lots of people breathe wrong.

So, if you want to mean vital energy, the thing that keeps living things alive, I'd have to go with ki meaning ATP. Given its rate of decay, dead things lose it quickly after death, and poisons which interfere with its production are very quickly fatal. At that point, ki is expressed in chemical bonds.


Look, one of the things that being a scientist has taught me is that we all make constructs in our head and fit the world into them. The problem is, our brain's a liar. It adapts the world it senses into the world we know because that way we can handle it. If a person charges you with a banana, you may see them as having a knife. Why? Because if you assumed a knife was a banana, you could die, but assuming the other way, you're less likely to do so, and your brain doesn't have time to ponder and make that decision, it needs to act.

Ki was a construct, and a good one. It makes sense, and is very useful even today. We don't have time to tell each other to tense these specific muscles just this much, and relax these, and such and so forth. So, ki comes in handy. Flow with ki, use ki, and you just do it right. Once you "feel the ki," every movement of that type is made easier because you can just tune into the feeling. And when someone's trying to kill you, you need to move right! So ki keeps you alive and is useful, and is passed down. It's a good way to move; efficient, fluid, etc. However, over time it was too useful, and got expanded beyond its original meaning by having other concepts attached to it. So be it.

And yeah, I'm involved with ki myself. My girlfriend's mom just went and did the whole feng shui thing on me to determine if we should stay together or not. I'm getting her a rabbit for luck in the coming year. (Whether or not I think the whole concept is silly, going with the flow is clearly the course of wisdom in this case. Besides, the omens for our being together were so strong, how could they be wrong, right? :D)

My sensei's also taught me to move with the feeling of ki, he finds it useful for certain parts of training. He doesn't believe it's mystical, just a very practical way of doing certain things.


And, btw, I will agree that not everything your theories of ki say can be tested by modern physics. However, that's where biology comes in. All of the effects ki should have on the body can and should be tested, especially the effects on the mind. I know, I know, people think the mind's a black box. It's not, not anymore. The brain is a wonderful thing, and it's getting more and more comprehensible now. It's possible that ki is entirely a mental phenomenon, as I suggest. It's possible that it's more. Simple physics may not be able to test ki, as you say, but I would suggest that you go find a competent neurobiologist. I would also go ask a very good PhD-level physicist. Physics is getting wierder every day, it's possible that it's gotten there and nobody's noticed because it's just a bunch of wierdos in an ivory tower somewhere. (Like nuclear physics before the A-bomb. )


Now, you may not be doing this, but some of the arguments I've seen about ki have gotten nowhere because, when someone came up with a good argument against the existance of ki, the ki-proponent changed theories or became vaguer and vaguer about the nature of ki. Having an argument elsewhere with someone who does exactly that. Drives everyone nuts. If one could come up with a standard unified ki theory, then it would be very easy to test. However, if it stays fuzzy, one side will propose, and the other side will throw up their hands in disgust, because there's no substance, just verbiage. And if there is a concrete energetic version of ki, then we can start doing things with it, using it, in a way more efficient and effective than ever before. So it benefits us all to generate one.

Care to take a stab? You have my theory of ki above, and it's one I can test, eventually. Is there a concrete theory of ki that makes explicit predictions about the behavior of a ki-filled universe that you can write, or that someone else has written?

Todd Lambert
21st January 2006, 07:22
An article titled "What is Ki?" (http://www.meibukanmagazine.org/Downloads/MeibukanMagazineno4.pdf) starting on p.15 of Issue 4 in Meibukan Magazine may be of some interest.

kimiwane
23rd January 2006, 04:27
An article titled "What is Ki?" (http://www.meibukanmagazine.org/Downloads/MeibukanMagazineno4.pdf) starting on p.15 of Issue 4 in Meibukan Magazine may be of some interest.

No time for fancy replies or yet to read that article...

but must reply...

don't want that old guy on the magazine cover to hit me.

domo

kimiwane
23rd January 2006, 18:09
Well, if you really WANT to use the Confucian Doctrine of Names, then I'll hold you to it. That's not good for your argument.
For one thing, the meaning of ki has changed over the years, as with many other words. Its original meaning was "breath."

I don't see how that changes anything. Except I'm not sure you guys are even addressing "my argument". Would you mind stating what you think my position is?

If we want to talk in scientific terms, we first have to get on the same page. I never was able to get clear on basic terms with Asura. I don't think we ever talked about the same thing from one post to the next.


What is the vital difference, on first glance, without the complex math and biochemistry of today, between a living and a dead man? Simple. The living one's breathing. There is power in breathing, expressed in the sound produced by the kiai, the manipulation of the abdomen for force, etc.

Isn't that exactly what I said? You even use "kiai" to illustrate that the condition of life is power (energy????).


Originally, living energy meant breathing, because if you stopped you weren't living very long. Breathing right is also good for the health. Lots of people breathe wrong.

I thought you were disagreeing with me? All the old "ki" development exercises involve breathing methods. As I understand it, one of the main concepts of taijiquan is that breath brings "external qi" into one's body where it is mixed with "internal qi".


So, if you want to mean vital energy, the thing that keeps living things alive, I'd have to go with ki meaning ATP. Given its rate of decay, dead things lose it quickly after death, and poisons which interfere with its production are very quickly fatal. At that point, ki is expressed in chemical bonds.

ATP? A chemical (doesn't leap to mind).
But that doesn't account for the ki in the sky or that in rocks and water.


Look, one of the things that being a scientist has taught me is that we all make constructs in our head and fit the world into them. The problem is, our brain's a liar.

What kind of science? I work in epidemiology and biostatistics. I know the things I'm about to say are familiar to you, but I want to set them out here for others who may not be familiar with our methods. Epidemiology is an observational rather than experimental science. We use four standards by which to measure every result we come up with:

the results come from bias
the results come from chance
the results come from confounding
the results are true

We don't come to any final conclusions at all. Virtually never, because all epidemiologists do is present the data and the study parameters. They say that the results "indicate" a relation between a work factor (occupational epi) and a disease suffered by the workers. But they don't say "our study 'proves' a link between "factor X" and cancer or kidney disease or whatever.

For instance, we know that painters have higher rates of lung cancer than other occupations. But we still have to find out about their smoking habits because that counts. Say you find that 80% of the workers in a painting shop have lung cancer. It would look like the job caused it. But then you find out that 80% of the workers (100% of the cancer cases) were heavy smokers...if you did not account for smoking in your analyses, it would look like you had "confounded" data: a very big factor that you failed to account for.

Or if you got all your subjects from the patients of a certain hospital. This could be a kind of selection bias and cause all manner of distortion in the final conclusions.

Chance, I guess, speaks for itself. We have to use special methods to account for chance in our results.

Only when we have searched as deeply as possible to try to eliminate chance, bias and confounding can we make a statement such as "there appears to be a relation" between the suspect conditions and the disease.

And we put that study out there and other people either follow up our same group of subjects or do a new study in another country or another company or state. They must address our study when they do so. They must consider our findings and if they can, point to a facet of our study that could have distorted our findings, as hard as we worked to eliminate chance, bias and confounding from our methods.

When many, many of these studies have been done, if they all point to the same conclusions, then we begin to feel that we are dealing with sure facts.


Ki was a construct, and a good one. It makes sense, and is very useful even today. We don't have time to tell each other to tense these specific muscles just this much, and relax these, and such and so forth. So, ki comes in handy. Flow with ki, use ki, and you just do it right. Once you "feel the ki," every movement of that type is made easier because you can just tune into the feeling. And when someone's trying to kill you, you need to move right! So ki keeps you alive and is useful, and is passed down. It's a good way to move; efficient, fluid, etc. However, over time it was too useful, and got expanded beyond its original meaning by having other concepts attached to it.

So you feel that modern misuse and misunderstanding of the nature of ki has actually "changed" the nature of ki?

Not at all. Say men today want to wear leather chaps without the pants because "cowboys wore leather chaps". Does that mean that cowboys wore their chaps without pants? (Brokeback Mountain notwithstanding, I am of the opinion that cowboys wore pants with their chaps).

And think of all the pseudoscience available today. Think of that guy who photographs frozen water with high speed cameras and claims he gets all these buddha images and mandala type things when he exposes this frozen water to positive thinking and such.

Well, without exhaustive studies, I am hesitant to say that this does not really work. But there is a certain part of my mind that insists that ice crystals are always the same whether you pray over them or expose them to a Steven Seagal movie (uggghhhhhhh......what horror....).

But what of people who want to wedge Bible studies into science classes? Will we hear, ten years from now, "The theory of evolution was incomplete and inconsistent until we balanced it with the theory of intelligent design. Now it is a complete, balanced and rational true science, based on the Book of Genesis."

Then you would get all kinds of people saying "The theory of natural selection DID mean "evolution" AT ONE TIME. But now it means intelligent design."

Because modern people don't know what the ancient meaning was does not erase that meaning from the universe. The original meaning remains intact and useable.

Just as Einsteinian physics did not replace Newtonian physics, nothing has replaced or superseded the ancient meanings of 'ki' and 'qi' as universal energy that flows through all living and non-living things as well as the sky and the empty space that surrounds the planet.


And yeah, I'm involved with ki myself. My girlfriend's mom just went and did the whole feng shui thing on me to determine if we should stay together or not. I'm getting her a rabbit for luck in the coming year.

Isn't this the Year of the Dog?


My sensei's also taught me to move with the feeling of ki, he finds it useful for certain parts of training. He doesn't believe it's mystical, just a very practical way of doing certain things.

My point exactly. It is everyday life. My problem with Asura was the insistence that only 'martial ki' is of interest. But that's like saying "Gulf of Mexico water is different from Carribean Sea water."

The point being that water flows freely between the two "artificially defined" areas of one huge global body of water. Maybe if there were a wall between the two...but Asura had erected a mental wall between "martial" ki and all other ki in the universe.


And, btw, I will agree that not everything your theories of ki say can be tested by modern physics.

I don't think any of it can--at least not yet. But to be clear about that, I don't think it ever will be. You would have to have some kind of "inspirationometer" or "feelingograph" or something. You would have to be able to measure the energy and its movement. I think the best device for that is a type of biological instrument called a "Chinese doctor".

In the future, I guess we'll all have robots to make love to our wives because science will convince us that human agents are too imprecise and unreliable to do things like that.


However, that's where biology comes in. All of the effects ki should have on the body can and should be tested, especially the effects on the mind.

These things have been tested for thousands of years by Taoists, accupuncturists and shiatsuists.


I know, I know, people think the mind's a black box. It's not, not anymore. The brain is a wonderful thing, and it's getting more and more comprehensible now.

I suggest two books on this matter, both by Moshe Feldenkrais: "Body and Mature Behavior" and "The Potent Self".

Oh, but he never uses the word "ki". His thesis is that the deeper functions of the mind and nervous system are self-resetting and are accessible through conscious attention to small movements of the body.


It's possible that ki is entirely a mental phenomenon, as I suggest. It's possible that it's more.

Feldenkrais, here, would throw you with kuki nage and ask if that were mental or physical.

In fact, he insisted that neither can be isolated from the other. What kind of thoughts could a disembodied mind have? Everything we think about relates back to our social or physical situation.

And what is a body without a mind?


Simple physics may not be able to test ki, as you say, but I would suggest that you go find a competent neurobiologist.

I never discuss ki with neurologists. If they ever believed that ki were a "real" phenomenon, they would believe that Western methods had rendered it pointless.

But maybe you could tell me what question I should ask my neurologist colleagues next time we do meet?


I would also go ask a very good PhD-level physicist. Physics is getting wierder every day, it's possible that it's gotten there and nobody's noticed because it's just a bunch of wierdos in an ivory tower somewhere. (Like nuclear physics before the A-bomb. )

Well, physics is not my field. But I doubt you could get anywhere on this matter with a physicist either--if only for lack of a clearly defined subject for the question. So please tell me how you would phrase your question to a physicist.


Now, you may not be doing this, but some of the arguments I've seen about ki have gotten nowhere because, when someone came up with a good argument against the existance of ki, the ki-proponent changed theories or became vaguer and vaguer about the nature of ki. Having an argument elsewhere with someone who does exactly that. Drives everyone nuts.

But isn't that what you guys have been doing here? Lack of a common defintion of what we're discussing has made this a very slippery conversation with more disagreement than has been necessary.


If one could come up with a standard unified ki theory, then it would be very easy to test.

Ther is such a unified theory. It's called Chinese medicine. It has been tested over thousands of years. It is known to work well with some people some of the time, less well with others at other times. Also, depending on who's doing the work. And who's being worked on.


if there is a concrete energetic version of ki, then we can start doing things with it, using it, in a way more efficient and effective than ever before. So it benefits us all to generate one.

I would like to be involved, but I am extremely tied up right now, working on some kind of round thing that I can use to convert vertical kinetic energy into horizontal energy, facilitating the movement of weighty items from one point to another. My brother says that's "reinventing the wheel". I said I don't believe in wheels. My invention will be unique in history.


Is there a concrete theory of ki that makes explicit predictions about the behavior of a ki-filled universe that you can write, or that someone else has written?

Sure. They're the ancient texts of Chinese medicine.
AND The I Ching.
AND Tao te Ching.

They do what you ask, but not in western scientific terms.

And that, I feel, is the weakness of this discussion. You guys have been trying hard to make one kind of measuring system completely interchangeable with a completely different kind of measuring system.

For a very rough analogy, think of Americans supplying large left-side-steering cars to the Japanese market which needs small right-side-steering cars. This doesn't mean either kind of car is wrong, but they don't match up.

Maybe a less rough analogy: "I want an American car, but I want all the English-system parts to match metric-system tools..."

That really may be the best analogy for trying to make Asian ideas of ki fit into the western scientific straits.

Thanks for the interesting discussion.

kimiwane
23rd January 2006, 18:44
I am enjoying Rob and Trevor's posts immensely.
Having been physically lazy for the last few years
I and my friends are keen to get into more
physical combat training. I seem to 'get' a
relaxed power quite easily, but how do we
actually TRAIN it and make sure we don't just
'muscle' through throws and stuff??
Yes, I expect exercises to include some
resembling meditation.

The books of Yang Jwing-Ming, especially "Baguazhang: Emei Bagua", contain all the information you could want on this matter.

Best wishes.

Trevor Johnson
23rd January 2006, 21:20
I don't see how that changes anything. Except I'm not sure you guys are even addressing "my argument". Would you mind stating what you think my position is?

If we want to talk in scientific terms, we first have to get on the same page. I never was able to get clear on basic terms with Asura. I don't think we ever talked about the same thing from one post to the next.

Your position may be clear to you, not so to me.



Isn't that exactly what I said? You even use "kiai" to illustrate that the condition of life is power (energy????).



I thought you were disagreeing with me? All the old "ki" development exercises involve breathing methods. As I understand it, one of the main concepts of taijiquan is that breath brings "external qi" into one's body where it is mixed with "internal qi".

What I am saying is that if you're breathing, you're alive. That's all. I'm making no statements about bringing energy into your body or anything else. Breathing is a physical thing, and it allows things that are perfectly explainable by the laws of biology and physics.



ATP? A chemical (doesn't leap to mind).
But that doesn't account for the ki in the sky or that in rocks and water.

Adenosine Tri-Phosphate? Look up the Krebs cycle. It's the stuff that provides energy for everything you do, and is produced in mitochondria. It's the stuff that you breathe in O2 to make. Breathing is for getting enough O2 to make ATP, which is the fuel for every energetically unfavorable reaction in your body, and there are a lot of them! So, for the thing that differentiates the quick from the dead, that's it biochemically. You don't have ATP, you stop breathing, heart stops beating, brain dies, liver, kidney, etc stop, and you're dead.

If rocks and water are alive, then it's a new one on me. This is where your explanation gets a tad unclear. HOW are these things full of living energy? WHAT makes them live? Are they then in some limited sense sentient? What is your definition of life?



So you feel that modern misuse and misunderstanding of the nature of ki has actually "changed" the nature of ki?

But what of people who want to wedge Bible studies into science classes? Will we hear, ten years from now, "The theory of evolution was incomplete and inconsistent until we balanced it with the theory of intelligent design. Now it is a complete, balanced and rational true science, based on the Book of Genesis."

Then you would get all kinds of people saying "The theory of natural selection DID mean "evolution" AT ONE TIME. But now it means intelligent design."

Because modern people don't know what the ancient meaning was does not erase that meaning from the universe. The original meaning remains intact and useable.

Just as Einsteinian physics did not replace Newtonian physics, nothing has replaced or superseded the ancient meanings of 'ki' and 'qi' as universal energy that flows through all living and non-living things as well as the sky and the empty space that surrounds the planet.


I'm raising the possibility that the ancients who used qi as a metaphor changed the meaning long before you got here.

And yes, Einsteinian physics completely and totally replaced Newtonian physics. Newtonian physics is dead, buried, and gone. If you don't believe me, read T. S. Kuhn, Structure of Scientific Revolutions, and see for yourself. You don't see the difference, but that's because of how science is taught. The difference between the two is vast.




Isn't this the Year of the Dog?

Yes, it is. And apparently she requires a rabbit to balance the ill luck that it's going to bring her. Gofig.



My point exactly. It is everyday life. My problem with Asura was the insistence that only 'martial ki' is of interest. But that's like saying "Gulf of Mexico water is different from Carribean Sea water."

The point being that water flows freely between the two "artificially defined" areas of one huge global body of water. Maybe if there were a wall between the two...but Asura had erected a mental wall between "martial" ki and all other ki in the universe.

Actually, for me, the only application of ki that I ever use IS martial. For me it is a way of moving and of thinking about movement, that is linked to breathing and relaxation. Meditation, if you will. It's very efficient and has certain benefits, though it can't be used all the time.




I don't think any of it can--at least not yet. But to be clear about that, I don't think it ever will be. You would have to have some kind of "inspirationometer" or "feelingograph" or something. You would have to be able to measure the energy and its movement. I think the best device for that is a type of biological instrument called a "Chinese doctor".

In the future, I guess we'll all have robots to make love to our wives because science will convince us that human agents are too imprecise and unreliable to do things like that.



These things have been tested for thousands of years by Taoists, accupuncturists and shiatsuists.

Feelings are products of the brain. They are caused both by chemical release into the bloodstream and brain microenvironment and by direct chemical interactions at synapses. People are working on ways to measure them, and have already gotten technology that measures aggressiveness and willingness to harm developed. Simple matter of looking at bloodflow in the brain. Not as hard as you think to do this.

Honestly, I prefer instruments. Less bias. Which is why we use them.



I suggest two books on this matter, both by Moshe Feldenkrais: "Body and Mature Behavior" and "The Potent Self".

Oh, but he never uses the word "ki". His thesis is that the deeper functions of the mind and nervous system are self-resetting and are accessible through conscious attention to small movements of the body.



Feldenkrais, here, would throw you with kuki nage and ask if that were mental or physical.

In fact, he insisted that neither can be isolated from the other. What kind of thoughts could a disembodied mind have? Everything we think about relates back to our social or physical situation.

And what is a body without a mind?



I never discuss ki with neurologists. If they ever believed that ki were a "real" phenomenon, they would believe that Western methods had rendered it pointless.

But maybe you could tell me what question I should ask my neurologist colleagues next time we do meet?

Which is my point. All of ki may be explainable by interactions within the brain itself. In other words, it's a way you FEEL that you think has extensions outside of your own head. The fact that other people have such feelings as well is because the brain can be trained to function that way. In other words, the brain reorganizes its synapses to produce the feeling because you are being conditioned to feel it by your teaching. So, if you can find evidence that the feeling of ki is not a feeling that can be conditioned, you eliminate that hypothesis.

I will have to read Feldenkrais to get more of an idea what he's saying, but if he's saying that the brain and its' interactions with the body can produce a certain feeling, and that that feeling is known as ki, well, we may just agree.

And please, why NOT discuss it with neurologists? This sort of question is something some of them would love to answer! The brain and behavior people could do some nifty experiments, if they had a clear definition to work with.
Some people, when faced with proof that their arguments are faulty, change the arguments and the definition so that they aren't wrong, regardless of the data. As an epidemiologist, I don't think you'd do that. Whole scientific ethics thing. However, you'd need to pin down a definition that can make predictions, which some of them can help you with.



Well, physics is not my field. But I doubt you could get anywhere on this matter with a physicist either--if only for lack of a clearly defined subject for the question. So please tell me how you would phrase your question to a physicist.

1st, define it. 2nd, make a prediction. One person I know tests things like this by using quantum-level random number generators, that should produce an even statistical spread, and finding ways that people may perturb them from a distance. There's lots of ways. The whole promise of a scientific career is that if you're ingenious enough, you can solve a problem. The trick is being smart enough to tackle it, and a lot of them are VERY smart. There's more tricks in the field than you think. Give it a shot!



But isn't that what you guys have been doing here? Lack of a common defintion of what we're discussing has made this a very slippery conversation with more disagreement than has been necessary.

Yup.



Ther is such a unified theory. It's called Chinese medicine. It has been tested over thousands of years. It is known to work well with some people some of the time, less well with others at other times. Also, depending on who's doing the work. And who's being worked on.



I would like to be involved, but I am extremely tied up right now, working on some kind of round thing that I can use to convert vertical kinetic energy into horizontal energy, facilitating the movement of weighty items from one point to another. My brother says that's "reinventing the wheel". I said I don't believe in wheels. My invention will be unique in history.

Which is a problem. If a phenomenon is not reliably repeatable in vitro or in vivo, one has to find out why. Look, I'm not saying that your data's not correct, here. I'm saying that your paradigm may be faulty. Totally different thing. If I can find a paradigm that explains your results as well as the lacunae in your data, the stuff that you can't test, then my paradigm can supersede yours. This does not mean that the paradigm is completely right, just that it provides better tools for understanding the current questions.

No need to get snippy here. This is, at least on my end, a FRIENDLY discussion. If you want to be annoyed at me, go right ahead. I, however, am not going to reciprocate.



Sure. They're the ancient texts of Chinese medicine.
AND The I Ching.
AND Tao te Ching.

They do what you ask, but not in western scientific terms.

And that, I feel, is the weakness of this discussion. You guys have been trying hard to make one kind of measuring system completely interchangeable with a completely different kind of measuring system.


Which is one of the usual things I run into. Someone tells me I can't approach this from a Western perspective, because they're totally different things. If that were true, then reality would be fundamentally different in Asia. Our minds are the same, our brains are the same, we have the same neurology, biochemistry, and genetics. If we can take drugs that the chinese use for medicine and find the ingredients that make them work, and then translate them into western-style medications, then we should be able to do the same for all of the medicine that they use. It's not that hard, and people are doing it. The problem is eliminating the placebo effect. If you've been steeped in a culture's ways and medicines for years, the placebo effect is considerable and is indeed therapeutic. However, it's due to your own beliefs and mental programming that it works. Once you have eliminated placebo, however, what is left is what works. Next question is, once you've distilled that out, HOW does it work. We can figure that out. As above, just takes someone smart enough, and we've plenty of those!

kimiwane
24th January 2006, 05:00
Your position may be clear to you, not so to me.

But you're addressing it as though it were very clear to you. Your replies don't seem to coincide with what I posted.


If rocks and water are alive, then it's a new one on me. This is where your explanation gets a tad unclear. HOW are these things full of living energy? WHAT makes them live? Are they then in some limited sense sentient? What is your definition of life?

There's nothing in this world that isn't here to enhance the presence of life on earth. Every rock is part of the energetic system that, as I said before, permeates everything in the world and also the space that holds the world and the stars and other planets in that space. That's why I have no problem thinking that it could be the same as zero point energy, which, as I understand it is a vital part of string theory.

So everything on earth is made of that energy, when you get to the subatomic level. Isn't that the scientific view?


I'm raising the possibility that the ancients who used qi as a metaphor changed the meaning long before you got here.

Well, that would be getting to the meat of the subject. Please show some examples of that.

[qote]And yes, Einsteinian physics completely and totally replaced Newtonian physics. Newtonian physics is dead, buried, and gone. ...The difference between the two is vast. [/quote]

Well, again, as I understand it, Newtonian physics is perfectly useful below the speed of light and within certain ranges of scale. In other words, on earth, it is the only useful physics. Even for moon shots, I believe, Newton still holds the apple. Einsteinian physics is the only thing that works on the subatomic and interstellar levels. But as far as I know, it's pretty much useless on earth.

So if I want to deal with almost anything on earth, I believe I must still use Newtonian physics. Say, to calculate the architectural stresses on a concrete dome, for instance.

So Einstein did not obliterate Newton. They are two very different measurement systems for use in very different levels of reality.


Yes, it is. And apparently she requires a rabbit to balance the ill luck that it's going to bring her. Gofig.

I was thinking maybe it's supposed to be like a sacrifice to the dog, or maybe the dog is supposed to chase the rabbit all year and so she'll have a vigorous year. Who knows?


Actually, for me, the only application of ki that I ever use IS martial. For me it is a way of moving and of thinking about movement, that is linked to breathing and relaxation. Meditation, if you will.

Ahh, but moving and thinking about movement permeate all aspects of life, don't they? You wouldn't say that the only time you move is to do martial arts, would you? It's a huge mistake to think that ki can be segregated off into martial arts technique when it is not present in any other aspect of daily life.


Which is my point. All of ki may be explainable by interactions within the brain itself. In other words, it's a way you FEEL that you think has extensions outside of your own head.

Well, when I say "feeling" I am not talking about "sensation" but more like emotion. Like when Musashi says, "Cut down strongly with a feeling of tut-TUT!"

What is that? And would we hook up Musashi to some kind of meter with a tut-TUT scale on it? But Musashi could convey that to his student in a way that the student could receive it.

And when I say "feeling" rather than "sensation" I want especially to differentiate between an emotion and a sensation that ki is flowing through your body in such a way or other. The sensation of doing something with ki is pretty much entirely bogus or misguided. The only "sensation" I associate with real ki is just the natural pleasure of a relaxed, healthy body moving easily. That's called "nothing special" and that state is the best state to be in when the fight starts. No need to "feel" ki in your punches. The relaxed body and easy movement will convey your "feeling" to the attacker. Like Bruce Lee said, "emotional content".


The fact that other people have such feelings as well is because the brain can be trained to function that way. In other words, the brain reorganizes its synapses to produce the feeling because you are being conditioned to feel it by your teaching. So, if you can find evidence that the feeling of ki is not a feeling that can be conditioned, you eliminate that hypothesis.

We can get rid of that hypothesis now because babies are full of the best kind of ki. It's called 'genki' or 'original ki', meaning, like a baby's. Its usual usage means 'vigorous'. Healthy. That's all. What is the sensation of "healthy"? Who has to be taught to feel it? Only the sick. Everyone else knows without being told. It's nothing special, but there's nothing better.


I will have to read Feldenkrais to get more of an idea what he's saying, but if he's saying that the brain and its' interactions with the body can produce a certain feeling, and that that feeling is known as ki, well, we may just agree.

He says that the effects of judo techniques as described by ki can better be described as Kano described them, as the result of momentum and leverage.

Mostly what he says is far more important than that because it does relate to every aspect of daily life. He says that through small movements of the body we can activate a sort of "reset" function of the brain, which causes the body to go back to its "default" setting, or optimal tonus.

He did this with actors, a Prime Minister, martial atists and children with cerebral palsy. He showed them how their habitual tonus, the pattern of muscular tension and relaxation throuhout the body, could cause rigidity in the body, affecting the self image and the ability to act as we intend and wish.

There's been a lot of discussion on the Aikido threads about how to get people to see and do what the teacher shows them. The fact is that most people cannot really act fully as they wish and often, not as they intend. Picture the classic inability to talk to a girl one wishes to meet, or the inability to go for the judo technique when one sees the opening. same thing.

Feldenkrais works on helping people to recognize that they ways they hold their bodies and move are not really "them". They hold themselves in ways clearly recognizable from a distance. They do this because this is how it feels "right" for them to stand.

When it comes to feelings, most people's speedometers don't start gauging movement until they're already going 20 mph, if you know what I mean.


And please, why NOT discuss it with neurologists? This sort of question is something some of them would love to answer!

Well, there's your problem. "This sort of question" is not a question. As I requested earlier, tell me what question should be asked.

[qutoe]The brain and behavior people could do some nifty experiments, if they had a clear definition to work with.[/quote]

Which is why I would like you to be precise as to what exactly the prime question would be. You see, I have experience in talking with such scientists about "these sorts of questions" and now that I have had experience in my current area, I see exactly why their thinking is as it is. So I have no questions left for neurologists in this matter. Do you?


Some people, when faced with proof that their arguments are faulty, change the arguments and the definition so that they aren't wrong, regardless of the data. As an epidemiologist, I don't think you'd do that. Whole scientific ethics thing. However, you'd need to pin down a definition that can make predictions, which some of them can help you with.

That's assuming I want to waste more time trying to convert English to metric. As I see it, Einstein is right. Newton is right. Lao Tzu is right. If they don't fight among themselves, I'm not going to stir them up.


1st, define it.

universal energy


2nd, make a prediction.

This root energy manifests itself as the ten thousand things of human consciousness, including the body and the world that supports the body and all the oher human bodies.

This root energy permeates the entire system in which humans live, on every level that they can observe.

This root energy cannot be manufactured, generated, perceived or manipulated by any mechanical or artificial means. It can only be contained in the elements of the living system and can only be manipulated by creative application of human awareness.

It will be scientifically measurable the day we can quantify and analyze "humor" and "passion".


One person I know tests things like this by using quantum-level random number generators, that should produce an even statistical spread, and finding ways that people may perturb them from a distance. There's lots of ways. The whole promise of a scientific career is that if you're ingenious enough, you can solve a problem.

Have you yet formally defined what the problem is?


Which is a problem. If a phenomenon is not reliably repeatable in vitro or in vivo, one has to find out why.

Well, the same carcinogen doesn't always give two different people cancer. Even sometimes, the non-case has longer exposure. Why would that be?

Why is a medication not always as effective on one person as on another?

Just apply all those same reasons to Chinese medicine and shiatsu.


Look, I'm not saying that your data's not correct, here. I'm saying that your paradigm may be faulty.

And I say you're just missing the fact that it is a completely different realm of consideration. What you suggest is like doing Einsteinian physics with neurology questions. You cannot scientifically "take over" ki and just replace everything involved there with a scientific substitute.


Totally different thing. If I can find a paradigm that explains your results as well as the lacunae in your data, the stuff that you can't test, then my paradigm can supersede yours.

As I said above, that's just trying to scientifically "take over" an entirely different field, like neurologists trying to take over the field of engineering.

And that's where the reinventing the wheel remark comes in. It's not supposed to be snippy. It's supposed to draw attention, though, maybe like an accupuncture needle. That's my point. There is no need to supersede Chinese medicine with 21st Century science. It's a different system. Like Newton and Einstein. Each has his place, neither obviates the other.


No need to get snippy here. This is, at least on my end, a FRIENDLY discussion. If you want to be annoyed at me, go right ahead. I, however, am not going to reciprocate.

Well, I appreciate it.


Which is one of the usual things I run into. Someone tells me I can't approach this from a Western perspective, because they're totally different things.

No, I think it's fine to "approach" them from a western perspective, but not to try to supersede them and replace every aspect of that system which is beyond fully rational comprehension with a scientific schema.


If that were true, then reality would be fundamentally different in Asia.

Well that's assuming that the west has perfect and complete comprehension of reality. We don't. And again, Einstein did not kick Newton off the earth and Newton's gravity cannot hold Einstein down. But I don't think you'd be very productive trying to design a spruce-winged airplane to fly at 80mph with two passengers using Einsteinian physics. As far as I know, Einstein's discoveries did not alter that level of reality. You still need Newton for things like that airplane and Newton still works for that. Anything that worked before Einstein will still work today.

And the entire world of ki is still a valid approach to living on this planet in a human body.

So why not just accept that "ki" refers to a complete network of human existence in the environment which Western science simply cannot translate?

If it can, then it should be able to answer the koans. And then what? If you answer the Roshi from your physics book, will you still be enlightened?

Thanks for the interesting comments.

Cufaol
24th January 2006, 10:20
Sorry to interrupt this discussion, but I'd like to say a few words about ch'I here, while we're on the subject...


Primo:
Ch'i as being a Universal Energy, may indeed exist. But as far as I'm concerned, it is nothing more than the energy described by Western science in their current String/M-theories. Is energy the basis of everything? Yes, basically. Does this mean we can 'use' it? No. Ofcourse not. these energies we speek of, are all bound together in tight structeres/forms/fields. Structures known as rocks, planets, chemical elements and indeed humans...So this theory over everything, is really not that new at all. It just happens to be so, that science has finally gotten to a point were it can prove it (more or less, I know). Now, human beings posses a certain amount of free will. We can do things that are against instincts or nature. Our brain is really one of the most powerful things ever. (way beyond any pc.) And, thanks to our understanding of nature and it's laws, we can enhance our performances on a lot of areas. If we train ourselves (both mind and body) we can achieve incredible feats. But it is all natural ofcourse. If we focus, we can concentrate all our power and intelligence in 1 point/action/... So, when we do that, we may achieve some pretty freaky things, like a 80-year-old master throwing/thrashing a bunch of young, trained Judo athletes. However admirable this feat may be, it's experience, focus and training who made it possible, rather than having more ch'i. Unless ofcourse, ch'i means to you 'training, understanding of how the human body works, focus...etc.'

Secundo:
We musn't underestimate the power of symbols. Certain symbols can help generate huge amounts of power, if we believe in those symbols.When we believe there is an underlying power we can tap into, we just use our own body and mind to a greater/larger extent than ever. Why is that? Humans are weak. We just lack self-confidence. If we could only free our minds, a lot of this sort of discussions would become completely unnecessary. Why do we need a god/elohim/allah/....or ch'I to feel better ? We can do what we do without the help of such concepts. Bottomline is that we are all scared. Scared of being alone on this tiny planet, 3th rock from the sun, in a god forsaken universe, somewhere in time. Hell, there's even a chance we live in a sort of multiverse. It's all pretty confusing. But, now that we are here, we might as well enjoy it.

That mostly covers what I wanted to say. Thanks for reading, enjoy.



Kind regards, Christophe.

Trevor Johnson
24th January 2006, 18:29
Sorry to interrupt this discussion, but I'd like to say a few words about ch'I here, while we're on the subject...


Primo:
Ch'i as being a Universal Energy, may indeed exist. But as far as I'm concerned, it is nothing more than the energy described by Western science in their current String/M-theories. Is energy the basis of everything? Yes, basically. Does this mean we can 'use' it? No. Ofcourse not. these energies we speek of, are all bound together in tight structeres/forms/fields. Structures known as rocks, planets, chemical elements and indeed humans...So this theory over everything, is really not that new at all. It just happens to be so, that science has finally gotten to a point were it can prove it (more or less, I know). Now, human beings posses a certain amount of free will. We can do things that are against instincts or nature. Our brain is really one of the most powerful things ever. (way beyond any pc.) And, thanks to our understanding of nature and it's laws, we can enhance our performances on a lot of areas. If we train ourselves (both mind and body) we can achieve incredible feats. But it is all natural ofcourse. If we focus, we can concentrate all our power and intelligence in 1 point/action/... So, when we do that, we may achieve some pretty freaky things, like a 80-year-old master throwing/thrashing a bunch of young, trained Judo athletes. However admirable this feat may be, it's experience, focus and training who made it possible, rather than having more ch'i. Unless ofcourse, ch'i means to you 'training, understanding of how the human body works, focus...etc.'

Secundo:
We musn't underestimate the power of symbols. Certain symbols can help generate huge amounts of power, if we believe in those symbols.When we believe there is an underlying power we can tap into, we just use our own body and mind to a greater/larger extent than ever. Why is that? Humans are weak. We just lack self-confidence. If we could only free our minds, a lot of this sort of discussions would become completely unnecessary. Why do we need a god/elohim/allah/....or ch'I to feel better ? We can do what we do without the help of such concepts. Bottomline is that we are all scared. Scared of being alone on this tiny planet, 3th rock from the sun, in a god forsaken universe, somewhere in time. Hell, there's even a chance we live in a sort of multiverse. It's all pretty confusing. But, now that we are here, we might as well enjoy it.

That mostly covers what I wanted to say. Thanks for reading, enjoy.



Kind regards, Christophe.

Me like. And yes, symbols are important to us. If you tell a grandmother to lift a rock, yeah, right. If you make her believe, through hypnosis or something, that her grandkid is under there, that rock's moving!

Symbols and mental constructs are extremely important. As Harry explained earlier on this thread, the original meaning of chi is breath. That's all it meant. Completely physical and organic phenomenon. But, it also has a symbolic aspect. This is a completely mental construct that allows us to manipulate our bodies. I have received classical voice training, and a lot of it is learning the symbols and mental images/feelings/whatever that work for the individual student to allow them to manipulate their body in such a way as to sing well in the desired mode, be it classical or not. (I should point out that a lot of rock singers and such could really use that kind of voice training, they do some pretty horrible things to their voices at times. This is besides the whole drinking, smoking, and sometimes drugs thing. )

I should point out that the concept of chi has changed from breath, given the descriptions of it on this thread. Most of the universe doesn't even have air to breathe, so the concept of universal chi obviously does not involve breathing.

Cufaol
24th January 2006, 18:45
I should point out that the concept of chi has changed from breath, given the descriptions of it on this thread. Most of the universe doesn't even have air to breathe, so the concept of universal chi obviously does not involve breathing.


Back to planet earth and it's Carbondioxide madness.... :p
If ch'i is just steam from a ricecup or air, the entire point is that when you breath right (and as pointed out before, a lot of peolpe breath in a wrong way), you can aply more force (probably because of some complex physical law/theory/system I don't inderstand). Ofcourse, this does make this entire discussion obsolete... :rolleyes:


A typical academic discussion I'd say. We made it peope, now let's get back to training. :)


Regards, Christophe.

Trevor Johnson
24th January 2006, 19:34
But you're addressing it as though it were very clear to you. Your replies don't seem to coincide with what I posted.
My conception of ki is clear to me. Yours is extremely fuzzy to me.



There's nothing in this world that isn't here to enhance the presence of life on earth. Every rock is part of the energetic system that, as I said before, permeates everything in the world and also the space that holds the world and the stars and other planets in that space. That's why I have no problem thinking that it could be the same as zero point energy, which, as I understand it is a vital part of string theory.

So everything on earth is made of that energy, when you get to the subatomic level. Isn't that the scientific view?
This is where it gets fuzzy.




Well, that would be getting to the meat of the subject. Please show some examples of that.

[qote]And yes, Einsteinian physics completely and totally replaced Newtonian physics. Newtonian physics is dead, buried, and gone. ...The difference between the two is vast.

Well, again, as I understand it, Newtonian physics is perfectly useful below the speed of light and within certain ranges of scale. In other words, on earth, it is the only useful physics. Even for moon shots, I believe, Newton still holds the apple. Einsteinian physics is the only thing that works on the subatomic and interstellar levels. But as far as I know, it's pretty much useless on earth.

So if I want to deal with almost anything on earth, I believe I must still use Newtonian physics. Say, to calculate the architectural stresses on a concrete dome, for instance.

So Einstein did not obliterate Newton. They are two very different measurement systems for use in very different levels of reality.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I believe that Harry pointed this out earlier on the thread. He's certainly mentioned it before on e-budo. If you won't believe his examples...

And no, Newtonian physics is not a special case of Einsteinian, and it is NOT separate but equal. Newtonian physics has been completely superseded by Einsteinian. Newton's concept of looking at the universe was wrong. Even on earth, you are still using Einsteinian physics, it's just that some of the additional terms are so small we don't bother to include them. Much of the most advanced technology we use today would not be possible under Newtonian physics.

I keep telling you to read Kuhn, without looking at that, you're fundamentally missing something about the basis of science. Don't read about Kuhn, either, especially not philosophy based on his texts. Read his original work, it's a history of science, and it tells you a great deal about what science really is, not just what the layman THINKS it is.



Ahh, but moving and thinking about movement permeate all aspects of life, don't they? You wouldn't say that the only time you move is to do martial arts, would you? It's a huge mistake to think that ki can be segregated off into martial arts technique when it is not present in any other aspect of daily life.
Perhaps, however, it's where it tends to be needed most.



Well, when I say "feeling" I am not talking about "sensation" but more like emotion. Like when Musashi says, "Cut down strongly with a feeling of tut-TUT!"

What is that? And would we hook up Musashi to some kind of meter with a tut-TUT scale on it? But Musashi could convey that to his student in a way that the student could receive it.

And when I say "feeling" rather than "sensation" I want especially to differentiate between an emotion and a sensation that ki is flowing through your body in such a way or other. The sensation of doing something with ki is pretty much entirely bogus or misguided. The only "sensation" I associate with real ki is just the natural pleasure of a relaxed, healthy body moving easily. That's called "nothing special" and that state is the best state to be in when the fight starts. No need to "feel" ki in your punches. The relaxed body and easy movement will convey your "feeling" to the attacker. Like Bruce Lee said, "emotional content".
Musashi could have been referring to a breath pattern and a specific mental pattern that goes with it. This is one of the things that the koryu arts teach. If you've read the book of one of his contemporaries, The Life-Giving Sword, you know that much that is in that book is deliberately incomprehensible. Not mystical, just he gives you part of it, and your teacher has to fill in the rest that is passed down orally. This may be so with Musashi.
Furthermore, much of what he was doing involved using cultural memes that we now have to suss out. So that feeling of Tut-TUT corresponds to something that we use in Western culture, most likely, he just expressed it in a way uniquely Japanese because those were the memes he was used to.



We can get rid of that hypothesis now because babies are full of the best kind of ki. It's called 'genki' or 'original ki', meaning, like a baby's. Its usual usage means 'vigorous'. Healthy. That's all. What is the sensation of "healthy"? Who has to be taught to feel it? Only the sick. Everyone else knows without being told. It's nothing special, but there's nothing better.
This is another example of fuzzy. Really fuzzy. WHAT qualities? Does a premie have genki? What about a baby born addicted? Bad ki from the mother's drug problem?
If you are talking about a baby's movement quality, or their complete lack of experience, or the hardwired safety responses that they are born with, you need to specify.


Well, there's your problem. "This sort of question" is not a question. As I requested earlier, tell me what question should be asked.

[qutoe]The brain and behavior people could do some nifty experiments, if they had a clear definition to work with.

Which is why I would like you to be precise as to what exactly the prime question would be. You see, I have experience in talking with such scientists about "these sorts of questions" and now that I have had experience in my current area, I see exactly why their thinking is as it is. So I have no questions left for neurologists in this matter. Do you?[/QUOTE]
Probably because you got fuzzy on them. Drives scientists nuts. I'll try to pin it down, eh?

There is no prime question, but there are several different ones that can be asked. If one feels ki, or perceives it in some way, or manipulates it through creative exercise of will, the brain should change. This can be measured electrophysiologically, through MRI, through EKG, etc. So, first one needs to find the changes. This is easy to do.

The next question that can be asked is what do those changes do? It might help to start generating mouse models at that point, so we can manipulate the system. Mice are living, they should have ki, no? Or is this just a human thing? They're also aware and measurable. At this point, one can try to find the molecules involved, or stimulate the various regions, or inhibit them. Lots of things.

One can also work on stimulating those areas of the brain to find which neurons are being used. I'm betting on dopaminurgic, myself. Using hypnosis to produce those changes is also useful. One can then determine what benefits those stimuli give. There's lots to do!



That's assuming I want to waste more time trying to convert English to metric. As I see it, Einstein is right. Newton is right. Lao Tzu is right. If they don't fight among themselves, I'm not going to stir them up.
Actually, the first two have both been proved wrong. I won't proclaim the great Lao Tzu wrong, though. That's a more multi-disciplinary question.
Won't say that we didn't benefit from Newtonian and Einsteinian paradigms, just that they eventually proved incomplete and were both discarded.



universal energy

This root energy manifests itself as the ten thousand things of human consciousness, including the body and the world that supports the body and all the oher human bodies.

This root energy permeates the entire system in which humans live, on every level that they can observe.

This root energy cannot be manufactured, generated, perceived or manipulated by any mechanical or artificial means. It can only be contained in the elements of the living system and can only be manipulated by creative application of human awareness.

It will be scientifically measurable the day we can quantify and analyze "humor" and "passion".

Have you yet formally defined what the problem is?
Easy enough. We know the types of the brain that are involved in humor, and in emotion. Their reactions can both be quantified and analyzed.

I do have a problem, though. Fuzziness alert. Ten thousand things of human consciousness? Define please. Creative application of human awareness? Define please. Human awareness has more holes than swiss cheese. We're just not aware of it.


Well, the same carcinogen doesn't always give two different people cancer. Even sometimes, the non-case has longer exposure. Why would that be?

Why is a medication not always as effective on one person as on another?

Just apply all those same reasons to Chinese medicine and shiatsu.
This is a problem which we are currently solving on a medicine-by-medicine basis. The reason that people respond differently to different environmental factors is that they have many different alleles of many different genes. These alleles have effects on processing of various drugs. We are currently using genomics to solve the problem, and it's working. Take a genotype before prescribing, and you can figure out how someone will metabolize a given medicine. Not done with all the drugs yet, that will take time and funding, but this is the near future!

Which suggests an experiment. A fairly easy one, though expensive. Take patients who have never experienced chinese medicine before and have a particular disorder and offer them some free. Take blood and followup on the patients to find out what their experience was and whether the technique worked or not. Use their blood for genomic screening, perhaps using some nice genechips or doing more specific arrays on target genes. There you are, problem solved!


And I say you're just missing the fact that it is a completely different realm of consideration. What you suggest is like doing Einsteinian physics with neurology questions. You cannot scientifically "take over" ki and just replace everything involved there with a scientific substitute.

As I said above, that's just trying to scientifically "take over" an entirely different field, like neurologists trying to take over the field of engineering.

And that's where the reinventing the wheel remark comes in. It's not supposed to be snippy. It's supposed to draw attention, though, maybe like an accupuncture needle. That's my point. There is no need to supersede Chinese medicine with 21st Century science. It's a different system. Like Newton and Einstein. Each has his place, neither obviates the other.
No such thing. Read below.


No, I think it's fine to "approach" them from a western perspective, but not to try to supersede them and replace every aspect of that system which is beyond fully rational comprehension with a scientific schema.
If ki can do things that our current science cannot predict, then the current scientific paradigm MUST be replaced with one that can. Research ethics. We look for the truth, we can't lie to ourselves about what we find, and we can't hide from that kind of dissent. We MUST resolve it, or we are not scientists. End of story.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 02:46
I think it's admirable in a way that you guys are intent on taking on this entire culture that goes back some 6000 years and replacing it, in your mind, with terms you have been taught and have misunderstood as the perfect definition of reality. But to think that you have "superseded their paradigm" when you never even knew what their paradigm really was is just to ignore the truth. You have built a straw man of the Chinese/Japanese concept and declared that their "Pi" is "exactly three". Where things don't relate or convert or translate, you have just assigned your own chosen meanings and values, ignoring and contradicting the meanings that are clearly stated and thoroughly outlined in ancient sources. Your view is biased in that you insist on viewing their material through your prejudices. It is confounded by inclusion of unrelated concepts that you won't drop from your analysis.

I think it's a shame that you have spent so little time trying to understand "what they are saying" (when their language is full of words for it and so many texts have been written, on which most of my comments are based) and that you have put so much effort into trying to invent in your mind what they "probably" mean by the words--of which you are familiar only with the few that address martial arts.

This is a meditation forum, not a ki ball or ki throw forum. There is no work in this thread to get back to but "meditation". These questions can't be escaped by declaring that we have superseded their meaning or that we have to get back to working out.

Your attempts are vaguely amusing but, because of your overriding bias, I find them less and less interesting. You are trying to explain an entire culture having first dismissed all of their cultural elements and substituted your own. This may amuse and satisfy you, but it only relates to your inner view of the matter and does not really matter where one is seriously trying to understand this subject.

Also, to try to use science so loosely and selectively does not help your case in this and would indicate to me upcoming difficulties in following the scientific way.

Best wishes.

Asura
25th January 2006, 03:12
Where things don't relate or convert or translate, you have just assigned your own chosen meanings and values, ignoring and contradicting the meanings that are clearly stated and thoroughly outlined in ancient sources.

Your attempts are vaguely amusing but, because of your overriding bias, I find them less and less interesting. You are trying to explain an entire culture having first dismissed all of their cultural elements and substituted your own.

:rolleyes:

Rather than the overtone of
"I know Japanese culture, you don't hee hee", I'd be interested to see you respond to Trevor's questions ;)

The fact that you CAN'T answer them shows that you haven't fully sorted this stuff out in your head yet.

Sorry but my BS meter has been in the Red for the past couple pages...
it was good entertainment while it lasted.

Asura
25th January 2006, 03:22
This may be so with Musashi.
Furthermore, much of what he was doing involved using cultural memes that we now have to suss out. So that feeling of Tut-TUT corresponds to something that we use in Western culture, most likely, he just expressed it in a way uniquely Japanese because those were the memes he was used to.


Japanese is full of "Giongo" which are sound words used to describe certain physical or emotional feelings. Using this also implies a certain internal feeling that's associated with it as well. I will say that in some cases there isn't a western equivalent to exactly describe it...which is why it's kind of pointless to read that stuff in english. :p
And Musashi being vague on purpose, I totally agree.
Both the Chinese and Japanese have the nasty habit of doing that.
But I mean, can you really blame them? If you spent 40+ years aquiring a certain skill, you're not going to give it away that easily ;)
Even if you could.
It's only the "atama no warui ko tachi" that read more than what's actually there.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 05:27
:rolleyes:

Thanks for the pithy input. That's the height of your post, but I will go through a few of your other points.


Rather than the overtone of
"I know Japanese culture, you don't hee hee", I'd be interested to see you respond to Trevor's questions ;)

It's foolish to try to cram another culture into your little frame. I'd be interested in seeing either of you fully address the lines I laid out long ago that you both skimmed past.


The fact that you CAN'T answer them shows that you haven't fully sorted this stuff out in your head yet.

I've sorted it quite well enough to know that he never asked a relevant question and skimmed over the answers I did give. If you want to wank on about how you've figured out 6000 years of culture by rephrasing what your professors put you to sleep with in uni classes, fine. Amuse yourself. But it's not real science and it doesn't even address the real culture it tries to supersede.


Sorry but my BS meter has been in the Red for the past couple pages...

Don't sit so close to it. You're confounding your instruments.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 05:45
It's only the "atama no warui ko tachi" that read more than what's actually there.

Uh...you were saying about the snide "I know Japanese culture better than you...." attitude?

But aren't you going to define the chemical compound that accounts for Musashi's "feeling of tut-TUT"? It can't be translated into English? But you guys claim you can translate it into chemistry and physics!

You guys need to step back and listen to yourselves.

You ignore what traditional asian culture says on this topic, supply your own definitions for what "YOU" don't understand but you attribute the lack of understanding to the old masters. You are the ones trying to slap "scientific" labels on things YOU don't understand.

The way I have referred to ki and qi is completely consistent with the usage in qi gong (or kikoo in Japanese), accupuncture, Chinese medicine, taiji, xing yi and bagua. Some modern guys may skip this explanation, but they do not alter the underlying physical methods established before them.

You guys, on the other hand, seem to have gotten your ideas from Star Wars. Why do you feel driven to overwrite an entire culture that you don't understand with words that you think you understand? You end up then telling yourself you have somehow conquered the old culture, that you have not only "understood" it but through your superior ways, have "perfected" it.

But that culture goes on and on as you pat yourself on the back. It will not end as long as there are humans.

Einstein did not obviate Newton. You can still open a 100 year old physics book and perform every experiment in it with the same results. And Einstein has not been obviated. You can still use his work to build an atomic bomb.

And neither of these outsmarted or replaced the ancient culture that perceives and lives with universal ki force in every aspect of their lives.

Not to say that "ki wo tsukete" enters their consciousness as anything like "turn on your holy and mystical ki power to protect you when you are walking down to the train station."

All it means is that they activate their normal human mind and apply it to their safety in their normal human life. It's not a thing that they "believe" or "don't believe". It is ordinary human life.

Thanks for your comments.

Asura
25th January 2006, 06:18
But aren't you going to define the chemical compound that accounts for Musashi's "feeling of tut-TUT"? It can't be translated into English? But you guys claim you can translate it into chemistry and physics!


Of course. Because language, and the english language is still a "human" construct. So is japanese. As such they're still fallible, and there will be parts where they overlap, and where they dont.

And it can be translated into physiology/physics/neurology.
Ask anyone that can "do", and he can probably tell you "how" he does it mechanically, and which feeling he needed when he was training that skill ;)

I never said this stuff/skill only applied to a martial context. Certain aspects are trained more rigorously in a martial context, but any movement done by humans can contain it.

My own personal opinoin is that people stuck in the "dojo" atmosphere of things tend to get this warped view of asian culture...
Even here in Japan, seriously you see so many foreigners that look like they want to their virtual topknot and hakama, spend a couple of years with their "sensei" who espouses "deep" thoughts, and then that makes them a philisophical master :rolleyes:

Rob

Trevor Johnson
25th January 2006, 15:18
Japanese is full of "Giongo" which are sound words used to describe certain physical or emotional feelings. Using this also implies a certain internal feeling that's associated with it as well. I will say that in some cases there isn't a western equivalent to exactly describe it...which is why it's kind of pointless to read that stuff in english. :p
And Musashi being vague on purpose, I totally agree.
Both the Chinese and Japanese have the nasty habit of doing that.
But I mean, can you really blame them? If you spent 40+ years aquiring a certain skill, you're not going to give it away that easily ;)
Even if you could.
It's only the "atama no warui ko tachi" that read more than what's actually there.

This is EXACTLY why I mentioned the koryu earlier in the post. This is the sort of thing they do all the time. Think the word is "gokui." Amdur's posted on it earlier.

Trevor Johnson
25th January 2006, 15:22
Your attempts are vaguely amusing but, because of your overriding bias, I find them less and less interesting. You are trying to explain an entire culture having first dismissed all of their cultural elements and substituted your own. This may amuse and satisfy you, but it only relates to your inner view of the matter and does not really matter where one is seriously trying to understand this subject.

Also, to try to use science so loosely and selectively does not help your case in this and would indicate to me upcoming difficulties in following the scientific way.

Best wishes.

And here I am trying to be helpful, specific, and propose experiments that would sort out whether or not ki exists and what it does. If science has been wrong for years, I want to know it! This is how we get it right!

And no, what I am doing is being specific, careful, and tightening up my definitions. Could you at least comment on experiments I've proposed, thoughts, etc? I'd be interested to know where you think I'm wrong, or if you think I'm wrong at all.

Ah, well. I will respond more specifically and thoroughly later, no time now.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 15:57
Of course. Because language, and the english language is still a "human" construct. So is japanese. As such they're still fallible, and there will be parts where they overlap, and where they dont.

And it can be translated into physiology/physics/neurology.

Well, please, by all means, stop talking about it and do it. You're always talking about people who can "do". Have at it.

You guys have come to me wanting me to put the old culture in scientific terms and suggested experiments for me to do. I'm not the one claiming a scientific base in this. I am answering the question "What is Ki?" by showing the picture drawn by language and well established and documented arts and healing practices. If you want to analyze it in Western scientific terms, please do and present your findings. All you've done so far is claim that it could be done and demand that I do it. If you are someone who can "do", then define your terms, make your hypotheses, set up your rigorous experiments, document your results, repeat your experiments, see if others get the same results, and then let us know what you come up with.

But until you do, scientifically, you have no basis to "explain" ki in any terms other than those used by the culture that gave us the concept.

You have done neither the scientific nor the cultural work to make even the superficial statements you persist in making.

It's like Intelligent Design. They want to rewrite the rules of science and insert their cultural beliefs fundmental elements of the scientific method. I am a Christian, but I do not want any preachers tampering with the rules of science.

Likewise, I don't want any scientists coming in and trying to rewrite the Bible.

You guys are the classic "full cup" types. You brought your Western baggage to the Asian culture, you're watching American soap operas and calling it Kabuki.


Ask anyone that can "do", and he can probably tell you "how" he does it mechanically, and which feeling he needed when he was training that skill ;)

That's the way Mochizuki sensei was. That's the way Feldenkrais was. That's the way I am.

But what if the old guy tells you it was "ki" (as in Morihei Ueshiba)?

You accept his answer if he explains things mechanically, but you are too smart for him if he says it's ki. You just blithely unpack your Intelligent Design presentation package and hand out bumper stickers condemning the old man a "Ungodly". Or in your "scientific" thinking, "O'Sensei is Irrational". Same cultural bias and self-superiority. But all it's doing is glossing over your own fear of things that have not been explained.

But is there really anything wrong with Ueshiba's seeing the world entirely without rationality? Did he freak out and kill people because he was irrational? And can our own culture even claim pure rationality? Is the US operated on an entirely rational basis?

Again, this reminds me of the grandstanders who pander to emotions of fear in their constituency to try to invade and erase another culture and replace it with their own, with no regard to the fact that people have lived very fulfilling lives for thousands of years by their own ways. It is too superior to bear.


I never said this stuff/skill only applied to a martial context. Certain aspects are trained more rigorously in a martial context, but any movement done by humans can contain it.

Yes. It is universal. Any movement by humans MUST contain it to be healthy and effective.

Feldenkrais put his heaviest emphasis on movements like sitting down and standing up from a chair, walking, reaching, pulling, watching something. These areas are where our real personalities are expressed--which is to say where we can observe our false personalities in action. Only when we see the artificialness of our learned movements can we recognize the nature of our real selves and actually choose which one to use in daily life. As long as we don't recognize that we aren't moving "naturally", we are like slaves, moving not at all as our inner nature urges us to.

We each have a self-image that we store in the kinesthetic sense of our bodies. We stand a certain way, hold our shoulders a certain way, walk a certain way and even maintain a precise set of tensions to produce "our" own voice, which our friends can recognize in a single word. These things add up to a consistent pattern of tonus throughout the body. We maintain our sense of who we are by maintaining that exact set of bodily tensions. When we feel that precise set of tensions, we feel comfortable, because that set of tensions is how we recognize ourself, or we think it is the way to become what we want to be. Any other tonus of the body actually makes us uncomfortable. If a person feels "right" slightly slumped, he will feel "wrong" if he stands straight.

Some people are so intensely copying their teacher's "correct" movement that they lose the sense of their own "correct" movement. They condition themselves to feel "natural" when they are imitating their teacher, even if he explains what he is doing in scientific terms. Even if the teacher spouts back those same scientific phrases, he will be unable to feel comfortable standing in his own body's best organization.

We may be copying a movie star or a martial artist or a famous writer or the tough guy down the street. But our habitual kinesthetic tonus maintains our sense of who we are.

Our "correct" or "natural" tonus is more efficient at everything than any other tonus we can maintain. I call this natural tonus "zero stance". Feldenkrais called it "neutral position". If one can completely release the "artificial" or "imitative" or "coerced" tonus he has adopted in developing his sense of self, his body will naturally assume the "neutral" posture and will naturally exhibit the "three external harmonies" of Chinese Martial Arts. In a natural-tonus body, the shoulders will harmonize with the hips. The elbows will harmonize with the knees. The hands will harmonize with the feet. The person will stand straight, relaxed, tall and light, mobile and strong. And he will be able to do any movement you show him.


My own personal opinoin is that people stuck in the "dojo" atmosphere of things tend to get this warped view of asian culture...

That is why it is so unhealthy to "focus only on the martial aspects" of things like ki. To know only the "martial words" out of Japanese language gives a very artificial view of Japanese martial arts--and also of ki.

I learned that the word "sutemi" means "sacrifice". After thousands of hours of sutemi-waza practice, I also found out that sutemi comes from the same word you use for throwing out trash. That's how you wind up hearing aikido people say "throw him away". Sensei used to say "throw him away for good."

Since you often wound up choked before you hit the ground with his sutemi waza, and stopped with a nice little JERK, it's easy to see that he meant it.

I long ago realized that it's more important to understand the sensei and the shihan's DAILY language than to understand everything they said related to technique. The more I understood the daily language (and there's no better way to do that than seeing a baby brought up in that language), the more I understood them on the mat and the deeper understanding I had of words like "sutemi".


Even here in Japan, seriously you see so many foreigners that look like they want to their virtual topknot and hakama, spend a couple of years with their "sensei" who espouses "deep" thoughts, and then that makes them a philisophical master

We're lucky to have someone like you among us who is above such things. We can follow your example and be like you. We will, from now on, dismiss with a :rolleyes: all the things that are not like you.

Your attitude reminds me of the old Steely Dan line: "the things that pass for knowledge I don't understand".

Maybe it's because you really don't understand.


:rolleyes:

Don't roll'em out of your head, son.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 16:28
This is EXACTLY why I mentioned the koryu earlier in the post. This is the sort of thing they do all the time. Think the word is "gokui." Amdur's posted on it earlier.

It doesn't matter what "feeling" tut-TUT exactly describes: what's important is that it describes a "feeling". You guys have talked about analyzing the brainwaves of tut-TUT to ascertain exactly what that feeling was.

But then what do you plan to do? Will you have some computer modem of some kind that will modulate a digital signal into "ki waves" or something, some electrical signal or something that will make you do Musashi's technique like a robot or a puppet?

Most of the Book of Five Rings is really not meant to be understood by us, hundreds of years down the line, in another country and another language (even if you are in Japan, it's not the same Japan and the language is not the same Japanese that Musashi used) with only the barest of experience with the sword. The book was written for his student to understand and pass down if he wished. I don't think he did, despite the fact that there is a modern Nitto Ryu. I guess I get that opinon for Draegger.

In fact, the only part of The Book of Five Rings that is completely useful across time and space is the Ground Book, where he compares the way of strategey to the way of the carpenter. That's where most of the useful information in the book is located. The Red Leaves Cut and the "feeling of tut-TUT will never be much use to anyone without decades of sword experience under very deep masters in Japan.

But his rules, such as "Do not be dishonest" and "The Way is in Training" and "Know the ways of every art, learn the ways of every profession" and "Distinguish Between Gain and Loss in Worldly Matters" are as useful today as when they were written.

But notice that he does say "KNOW" the ways of every art--NOT "CHANGE" the ways of every art to something you're more comfortable with.


And here I am trying to be helpful, specific, and propose experiments that would sort out whether or not ki exists and what it does. If science has been wrong for years, I want to know it! This is how we get it right!

That's good. You have outlined some good things there for anyone who wants to look at the matter through that framework. Since you are the one who wants to do that, please let me know how it comes out.


And no, what I am doing is being specific, careful, and tightening up my definitions. Could you at least comment on experiments I've proposed, thoughts, etc? I'd be interested to know where you think I'm wrong, or if you think I'm wrong at all.

I have to admit you did come up with some questions and experiments. If you want to see if anything happens in the brain, maybe you could measure that, but I believe those experiments have been done. I believe they have also been published. Did you do a literature review?

In any case, your results will tell you much more about your own science than they will about ki and its nature. That's why I say again, you're trying to reinvent the wheel. It's perfectly useable as it is if you understand it deeply enough to recognize how to use it most effectively.

Anecdotally, I am aware that many surgeons in the US have experimented with accupuncture for anesthesia. The Chinese, of course, have been doing that for a long time. I would say that the proven (usually effective) application of accupuncture to anesthesia shows that, however you describe it, placement of needles at recommended accupuncture points does work as the Chinese model predicts. Again, this is not always true, but that is also balance by the many documented examples of patients "waking" from Western anesthesia enough to feel intense pain but not enough to let the doctor know.

And where I mentioned that ki treatments do not always heal disease, you jumped on that to say that they are flawed. Yet when I pointed out that Western treatments don't always affect every patient the same way, you glossed over it.

Sensei was a bone doctor in addition to being a martial artist. When neighborhood kids got broken arms, their parents would bring them to Sensei before taking them to the hospital. He was skilled at massage and accupressure, but for self defense, he never relied on pressure points. "Those will work on some people, but not on others," he said.

When it came down to serious survival issues, rather than try to numb the arm with a pressure point, he recommended breaking the bone or dislocating the limb.

When he went on travels, he would get very tired because he didn't like to eat what you could find out there on the road. Everyone else was happy with bento boxes, bought at a station vendor, but those things left sensei disappointed. He wanted his wife's cooking. Those bento, he said, "Don't have kokoro (heart) in them," as did okusan's.

Do you want to scientifically analyze "kokoro" and see if it can be synthesized by machine for injection into bento boxes?

Or why not have a quantum examination of a Picasso masterpiece. Say "Guernica". Analyze that with random numbers, extract the essence of "inspiration" and have a computer use that to paint another painting with the same inspiration as Picasso.

Again, it will tell you more about your science than it will about inspiration or Picasso.

Your painting may wind up "a real piece of work", but it still won't be a Picasso.

Trevor Johnson
25th January 2006, 16:43
Well, see, here's the problem. I tell you something can be done, but only if you care to define some of the terms you are casually throwing around as if they mean something very specific. You blow up, get defensive and edgy, tell me that it can't be done, that the two things are totally different, and that I'm no scientist.

The WAY in which you're going about this tells me that you don't understand the basis of science very well. It's also very fuzzy. If you can tighten it up and come up with something very specific that you believe, it can be tested. Otherwise, I have to interpret WHAT you believe, test that, and you can then tell me that that's not what you believe. So...?

As they say on other parts of the forum, care to answer the questions?

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 17:37
Well, see, here's the problem. I tell you something can be done, but only if you care to define some of the terms you are casually throwing around as if they mean something very specific.

That's a vague statement, Trevor. Please give examples.

I'm using the Japanese language itself in both broad and specific examples to show the entire range of this concept.

You are trying to replace the concept with something that makes you feel more comfortable--in this case, the idea that science accounts for everything. It does not and should not.


You blow up, get defensive and edgy, tell me that it can't be done, that the two things are totally different, and that I'm no scientist.

I say that science has its place and that you're over-reaching the bounds. Again, it's like a Creation Scientist trying to force his way into real scientific circles. Ain't gonna happen.

And likewise, it's clear you guys have very little real work into matters of ki, so you want to just skip all that, write it all off and tell yourself you have explained it "with science".

That self-satsifaction with an investigation very shallowly done is the hallmark of weak science.


The WAY in which you're going about this tells me that you don't understand the basis of science very well.

I'm not approaching it as a science, Trevor. How many times must I say that? I am coming from the traditional asian view on this. I make no claims in terms of Western science. YOU are the one who wants to do that. So, of course, I'm not sticking to scientific rules. But since YOU are trying to approach it as science, YOU MUST adhere to them.

It's like a judo guy coming into the ring with a karate man and telling him "No kicks, now." because that's outside your system. You have assumed that I am required to discuss this by YOUR rules. I say you are obliged to discuss it from "their" rules and to discard your own until you have correctly assimilated theirs. When you have done that, maybe there will be some value in THEN applying your scientific view to the subject. But as long as you haven't even defined what "ki" is supposed to be, anything you "scientifically" say about it is just so much fluff that will blow away in a minute.


If you can tighten it up and come up with something very specific that you believe, it can be tested.

I've given several examples, most recently, that accupuncture, based on ki theory, has been proven to work for anesthesia. Did you just skim over that one? Now you're demanding what I just gave you.

But in general, no test is necessary. All you have to do is look at the list of terms I gave above. They are a small part of the large linguistic picture of ki as a universal all-permeating energy in human life. I said that's the asian view of it and when you couldn't penetrate that, you tried baffling me with science.

If you were a serious scientist, you would make no more statements until you have done YOUR experiments and had your results reproduced by others. Why would you expect me, coming from the other direction, to use your methods? See, that's where you seem to have some blind spot. You seem not to realize that it is valid to base a way of life on something other than scientific reasoning. How would your ways have improved Picasso as a painter or James Joyce as a writer?

Not at all, I'm sure.


Otherwise, I have to interpret WHAT you believe, test that, and you can then tell me that that's not what you believe.

Well, all you have to do is give an example of where I said one thing about ki in one place, then changed my definition later. Please give said example or grow up and stop trying to minimize, mis-summarize and dismiss. What I've said.

As they say on other parts of the forum, care to answer the questions?

You have skimmed over every answer I have given. YOU have changed your statements and your parameters and contradicted yourself several times in this thread.

But I will hang with it on the off chance that you'll get your ducks straight and go somewhere meaningful with it.

Asura
25th January 2006, 18:25
I'm not approaching it as a science, Trevor. How many times must I say that? I am coming from the traditional asian view on this.

No, you're only parroting your former teacher's view on this ;)

Quick annecdote.
I remember an 8th Dan kendo teacher in NYC, Ebihara. Awesome guy, great teacher(I thought at the time). I was a couple years down the line in my practice, and I knew, felt, that the older guys moved "different" than the younger ones. So I asked him to explain it...lo and behold he gives me the tired old,"Do the shoumen strike over and over", and the "you have to hold your Ki down here in the hara", and that was that.
He didn't want to tell you.
"#$"hole.
Lol, the thing is, I can now "do" what he was doing, so I "know" it's a physical bodyskill. Nothing more nothing less.


Besides, I suggest you talk to the Hsing-yi boxers on the mainland or Taiwan(You studied CMAs right?)
They have a clear seperation between the philisophical metaphysical discussion of Qi, and what physically goes on in their body. Generally the two are considered seperate ;)
Unless of course you insist that people like Luo De Xiu (in Taiwan) or Sam Chin (in NYC) are only talking out of their !!!.

What goes on in the body, and the metaphysical construct that we apply to view the world are two seperate things.




Well, please, by all means, stop talking about it and do it. You're always talking about people who can "do". Have at it.


Already did, in fact I think you already skimmed past it.
See my post where Trevor thinks the Fascia isn't involved.

On the other hand reading your post describing how you do your kuzushi, it's pretty clear you don't have it, to be quite blunt. Then again you might. (It has to be felt to be shown "IHTBFTBS" applies here )
But I'd bet good money that you don't. :p




But what if the old guy tells you it was "ki" (as in Morihei Ueshiba)?

You accept his answer if he explains things mechanically, but you are too smart for him if he says it's ki. You just blithely unpack your Intelligent Design presentation package and hand out bumper stickers condemning the old man a "Ungodly". Or in your "scientific" thinking, "O'Sensei is Irrational".


Ironic how Tohei, the guy that would eventually create the Ki society, was the one that called Ueshiba "deranged" and a babbling "madman".
But once Tohei got his skill, he was just as vague as Ueshiba, even though he knew it was a "mechanical" skill tied to a flip in the psyche. Nothing more, nothing less.

Besides, Ueshiba was vague on purpose. He didn't want to teach his students anything.
Otherwise we'd be seeing a second Ueshiba around. But we don't ;)
He didn't give away his bodyskill training techniques. (Or rather he did, but no one listened).
And while he talks about Ki, he also referrs to the mechanical body skill rather directly, in his quotes. "Happo ni michiru kami no chikara" blah de blah de blah... he was doing the old "ha ha, I know it you, but you don't. If you do, well, welcome to the club" ;)




Our "correct" or "natural" tonus is more efficient at everything than any other tonus we can maintain. I call this natural tonus "zero stance". Feldenkrais called it "neutral position". If one can completely release the "artificial" or "imitative" or "coerced" tonus he has adopted in developing his sense of self, his body will naturally assume the "neutral" posture and will naturally exhibit the "three external harmonies" of Chinese Martial Arts. In a natural-tonus body, the shoulders will harmonize with the hips. The elbows will harmonize with the knees. The hands will harmonize with the feet. The person will stand straight, relaxed, tall and light, mobile and strong. And he will be able to do any movement you show him.

Now I know you're full of BS.
That's exactly why most of the CMA practicioners in the US suck (no offense at any that don't).
You have to mold the body physically to get those harmonies. They're not "natural" persay.
Do the San-ti, or Tai Chi'S "playing the pi pa" with all internal and external harmonies fulfilled, and you should be ready to fallover in under a minute.
There's a reason real Tai Chi training was considered a sadists' game :rolleyes:

AFTER a couple years of rigorous training like that, then you can exhibit a "zero stance" with meaning.
Wait what was that chinese saying? "stance on the inside"...oh right they mean that you take that trained physical sensation and place it in whatever movement you're doing.
Means its not exactly natural to the body. You have to train it to be that way.

Someone without any of that rigorous training, and that had simply trained to "relax" and let Ki flow, would probably cave in to a well placed Thai low kick.
Someone who's had the proper PHYSICAL training can stand there (apparently relaxed), take the kick, and whistle and pick his nose at the same time.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 18:50
No, you're only parroting your former teacher's view on this ;)

Again, skippy, give an example. As I have stated MANY times, Mochizuki sensei did NOT use ki as any kind of explanation.

Now are you just committed to mis-stating and mis-representing other people's views, like an adolescent, or do you have an example of where I quoted Mochizuki sensei on ki?

Quite the opposite. Pretty much ALL my views on this come from my readings, my experience with accupuncturists and shiatsuists and my experience in taiji, xing yi, bagua and aiKIdo.

Has that crossed into your brain, Asura?

Are you clear on that?

Do you need to STOP right here and go back and read what I just said?

Okay? Are you ready to proceed as an adult and deal with what I'm really saying?


I remember an 8th Dan kendo teacher in NYC, Ebihara. Awesome guy, great teacher(I thought at the time). I was a couple years down the line in my practice, and I knew, felt, that the older guys moved "different" than the younger ones. So I asked him to explain it...lo and behold he gives me the tired old,"Do the shoumen strike over and over", and the "you have to hold your Ki down here in the hara", and that was that.

When you consider that his teacher probably also refused to spoonfeed the answer to him, I don't consider it unreasonbable at all. I learned sword without having to be told precisely "how" to do it. Many years of practice and kata made me ready for lessons with masters.


He didn't want to tell you.
"#$"hole.

Like I said. A BOY's attitude.

Come back when you grow up.


Lol, the thing is, I can now "do" what he was doing

Gee, since I can't reach you, why don't you give yourself a big pat on the back? Already done that, huh? Okay.

But I will say to your claim, "I can now 'do; what he was doing": BS. You THINK you can. You CLAIM you can. I don't even care enough to question that. Promote yourself to King of France, while you're at it.


so I "know" it's a physical bodyskill. Nothing more nothing less.

No, you know that what YOU do is a purely physical skill. You still don't know for sure what HE was doing.


Besides, I suggest you talk to the Hsing-yi boxers on the mainland or Taiwan(You studied CMAs right?)
They have a clear seperation between the philisophical metaphysical discussion of Qi, and what physically goes on in their body. Generally the two are considered seperate ;)

So they, too, teach as I teach?

As I said, I consider ki to be much more a matter of daily life than of martial technique. But then, YOU were the one who insisted on addressing ONLY the "martial" aspects of ki...


Unless of course you insist that people like Luo De Xiu (in Taiwan) or Sam Chin (in NYC) are only talking out of their !!!.

No, it sounds like they are saying exactly what I am saying. The talking out the !!! would sound like you.


On the other hand reading your post describing how you do your kuzushi, it's pretty clear you don't have it, to be quite blunt. Then again you might. (It has to be felt to be shown "IHTBFTBS" applies here )
But I'd bet good money that you don't. :p

That did NOT describe how I do my kuzushi, you poor reader. That was only a description of the interaction of two human skeletons in close proximity. I don't have kuzushi like Mochizuki sensei, who could get you off balance with a simple grip of your sleeve.


Besides, Ueshiba was vague on purpose. He didn't want to teach his students anything.

Hmm. Mochizuki had no trouble learning from him. Nor did Shioda.


Otherwise we'd be seeing a second Ueshiba around. But we don't ;)

Well since you're in Japan, I suggest you head to Shizuoka and see Kyoichi Murai while he is still alive. Lay some of your BS on him.


He didn't give away his bodyskill training techniques. (Or rather he did, but no one listened).

That is a hugely ignorant statement.


blah de blah de blah... he was doing the old "ha ha, I know it you, but you don't. If you do, well, welcome to the club" ;)


You have to mold the body physically to get those harmonies. They're not "natural" persay.

Yes, they are natural. That proves that you are king of BS and backward in all your thinking.

Asura
25th January 2006, 20:38
That did NOT describe how I do my kuzushi, you poor reader. That was only a description of the interaction of two human skeletons in close proximity. I don't have kuzushi like Mochizuki sensei, who could get you off balance with a simple grip of your sleeve.

Then can you describe how he got kuzushi on you by just gripping your sleeve? ;)

Asura
25th January 2006, 20:53
Hmm. Mochizuki had no trouble learning from him. Nor did Shioda.


Actually I hear that Shioda got most of his skill from DRAJJ. But that's just heresay. One that I'm inclined to believe tho :)



Well since you're in Japan, I suggest you head to Shizuoka and see Kyoichi Murai while he is still alive. Lay some of your BS on him.

Awesome! Thanks for the tip. (I really mean that)
Finding people with that "touch" is hard to find. I might make a trip out there at some point. Tho, if I don't get tossed around, my BS meter is going to have to be reworked, rebuilt from the ground up to accomodate you :p
(In all honesty tho, if I make that trip, I do hope I get my !!! tossed. Making a trip like that only to be dissapointed would suck loads...)



That is a hugely ignorant statement.


Well, then you might want to head over to Ellis's Blog on Aikidojournal (Hidden in Plain Sight) and contribute something. They were discussing this for the longest time. It's a long read, but I'm sure you're enormous intellect should have no problem grasping it ;)





Yes, they are natural. That proves that you are king of BS and backward in all your thinking.
Mmm nope. Totally disagree with you there. Like I said, IHTBFTBS applies here, but I'd bet money I'd be able to do stuff you couldn't ;)

Besides, "natural" is relative.
To a crazy person, everyone EXCEPT him is crazy :cool:

Trevor Johnson
25th January 2006, 21:19
Now we ARE getting snippy! There's no need to be angry and pejorative, (And comparing me to a christian scientist is not only name-calling, it's inaccurate and completely off-base) I'm still commited to a friendly discussion, if you can cool down long enough to have one.

All right, then, David, I have to go, analyzing data right now, but if you like, I can go over the thread tonight and clip out some stuff from it to respond to your claims and questions.

I still would like you to clarify a few points, however.

A. What particular qualities of a child are involved in genki, and how?

B. What do you mean by creative application of human awareness?

C. What do you mean by the ten thousand things of human consciousness.


I would also like to point out that ancient wierdos like Aristotle, Plato, Hippocrates, and such were doing the same thing as the ancient Chinese and Japanese doctors. Both were practicing observational science. They reached different conclusions, but that is largely because they were using different memes to base their judgements on. One had humors, the other had chi.

But they were BOTH practicing as you call it western science.

Both were observing the same exact system, using the tools available to them, and reaching conclusions which they were able to test.
They tested them by:
Whether their patients got better or worse, in the case of doctors,
Whether their other predictions came true; weather, tides of fortune, etc.

And you know what, the early proponents of western science were WRONG! Plato was wrong, Aristotle was wrong, Hippocrates was wrong. Nonetheless, from their mistakes, we derived paradigms, explored them, found data that the paradigms couldn't hold, and then fought like mad over new paradigms until we found one that worked to explain what the old couldn't. And then we repeated that process with the new paradigm, and then the next, ad infinitum.

As scientists, we're LOOKING for holes in our data, that's what honest scientists do.

Now, I WOULD like to insist, before you impugn my capacity for science, my research ethics, my knowledge, and my intentions again, that you read T. S. Kuhn, Structure of Scientific Revolutions. This is one man who got it right. He's a historian of science. He explains what science really is, what it is for, what it does, and how it works.

If you had read it, you would not have said the things to me that you have. I am not pleased to be insulted in a friendly discussion, and I would like you to try to understand the insults you gave before you again repeat them.

I'm currently doing research in a lab that studies pain. I will then rotate through a lab that studies learning. One thing that fascinates me currently is the concept of the phantom limb, where a patient who has had an amputation continues to feel the limb that has been removed. I am wondering what chinese science and medicine has to say about the problem?

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 21:35
Then can you describe how he got kuzushi on you by just gripping your sleeve? ;)

He did it by deep direct personal experience with his teachers, including Jigoro Kano, Kyuzo Mifune and Morihei Ueshiba--being the ones you may have heard of.

But why would you be interested in my explanation. You should get some kind of meter that can read these things and analyze them for you and give you a computer printout of the results. Then YOU can have kuzushi like that, too.

It's clear from all your comments that you need to be spoon fed everything and don't have the discernment to learn by observation. So why don't you write a book on the matter? Make new rules for Zen while you're at it. Make Zen a "rational" thing.

Go ahead and pat yourself on the back for that one, too.

Asura
25th January 2006, 21:43
But why would you be interested in my explanation. You should get some kind of meter that can read these things and analyze them for you and give you a computer printout of the results. Then YOU can have kuzushi like that, too.

It's clear from all your comments that you need to be spoon fed everything and don't have the discernment to learn by observation.

Now who's gettin' snippy? :p

I'm just curious to see if you can explain how the Kuzushi felt like. (Even if you can't do it yet)
If you understood the principal of what was going on, then you should be able to explain it.

Btw, I don't need to be spoon fed everything. A good scientist learns by observation as well. There's a reason I can explain this stuff, and turn right around and teach it to someone, whereas you still remain vague and wishy washy.
The metaphysical stuff, you can remain vague on that. Whatever.
But the movement side, you should be able to define what's going on.

And there's a number of internal methods to apply Kuzushi on someone like that. Just curious how your teacher did it, and if you were able to discern how he did it.

Cmon, you're versed in the CMA internal arts as well. This should be a cakewalk for you ;)

I'll give you a hint.
It's not all in their head :p

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 21:54
Actually I hear that Shioda got most of his skill from DRAJJ. But that's just heresay. One that I'm inclined to believe tho :)

Yeah. I guess he was actually "teaching" Ueshiba from 1930 to 1938. I didn't know that.


Awesome! Thanks for the tip. (I really mean that)
Finding people with that "touch" is hard to find. I might make a trip out there at some point. Tho, if I don't get tossed around, my BS meter is going to have to be reworked, rebuilt from the ground up to accomodate you :p
(In all honesty tho, if I make that trip, I do hope I get my !!! tossed. Making a trip like that only to be dissapointed would suck loads...)

First, don't wait long if you want to see Murai sensei. He's in his 90s now, having trained with Mochizuki sensei from the early 1950s until the late 1990s. I'm not sure he's always at the dojo. He used to live in Omaezaki and came to the dojo only on occasion. He's now the top man there, but I don't know if he's always there. What his health is like now, I can't say.

However, if you don't find him, ask for a guy named Akira Tezuka. Go up and lay some attitude on him. I could give you the addresses of some people who would URGE YOU NOT TO DO THAT, but I personally think you could use a good lesson in humility. So I would suggest that when you meet him, tell him that aikido is a bunch of BS and then stick your face out at him. You know. Just be yourself.

Likewise if you are so undeservingly blessed with the chance to see Washizu sensei in action, by all means, go over there and show him who's boss.

Maybe Murai sensei is really too old now, but that's what I thought the first time I met him an NO ONE has ever shocked me so thoroughly in 33 years of martial arts training.

And on that matter, based on your attitude and lack of profile information, were you even alive 33 years ago? How long have you been doing budo and what are your academic credentials? Since you are asserting mastery in all these areas...


Well, then you might want to head over to Ellis's Blog on Aikidojournal (Hidden in Plain Sight) and contribute something. They were discussing this for the longest time. It's a long read, but I'm sure you're enormous intellect should have no problem grasping it ;)

Is this where he discusses whether aikido techniques are based on children's movement?

No. That is the one on Natural Movement. I think I've read the Hidden in Plain Sight columns. Intersting. Nothing earth shaking. Nothing particularly new.


Mmm nope. Totally disagree with you there. Like I said, IHTBFTBS applies here, but I'd bet money I'd be able to do stuff you couldn't ;)

Well, for the past several days, you've been farting rings around yourself and managed to call a distinguished teacher an a-hole in the bargain. You've been disrespectful, asinine, childish and a general jerk. I guess I "could" do those things, but you're so good at them...

And I guess you must really be a young fellow because you don't seem to know a thing about infants and toddlers--something every adult man have experience with by age 30. Are you in your 20s yet?

Ellis Amdur's column on Natural Movement is the one I'm interested in because as far as I know, I am the originator of the idea that aikido techniques are derived from the movements of toddlers.

Do you need lessons on going to the toilet, too? You have so little understanding of natural movement you don't recognize that all your sadistic lessons are leading you back to natural standing and movement.


Besides, "natural" is relative.

With a very wide range of acceptable values.


To a crazy person, everyone EXCEPT him is crazy :cool:

I see. So I will NEVER get a sane answer from you? Just more and more self-referential babble claiming to be scientific?

Thanks for the heads up on that one.

Joshua Lerner
25th January 2006, 22:18
One thing that fascinates me currently is the concept of the phantom limb, where a patient who has had an amputation continues to feel the limb that has been removed. I am wondering what chinese science and medicine has to say about the problem?

Hi Trevor,

I'm not aware of any references to phantom limb pain in the Chinese medical classics, though that doesn't mean much because there is a huge amount of literature and I'm sure they were familiar with the phenomenon. I will say that I had an elderly patient in the last year who was having phantom leg sensations that were keeping her up at night. Her leg had been amputated at the hip (i.e. no hip joint), and she was having "crawling" sensations down her missing leg.

A guess as to what Chinese acupuncturists would have said two thousand years ago would be that the qi was still circulating where the leg used to be, just not in the way it was supposed to. But that's just one possibility - they might just have equally said that it was a type of madness to be feeling sensation where there was no limb.

It might also depend on what kind of sensation it was - dull pain is usually considered a problem of qi stagnating, while sharp, fixed, stabbing pain is considered to be either blood stagnating or cold that has gotten into the channels, whereas the "crawling" sensation my patient reported would be characterized more as a manifestation of wind in the superficial layers of the body.

The reason all of those different etiologies is important is that it is likely that any sensations other than those attributable to qi stagnating might be considered a mental problem, because blood, cold and wind are in some ways more "physical" than qi.

But this is all speculation - I treated it using a slightly different paradigm that didn't rely on differentiation between qi, blood, cold or wind stagnation, but instead on the relationships known as the "Six Harmonies" and the theories of yin and yang in relation to how the front/back, top/bottom and left/right sides of the body are related. The treatment actually worked for brief periods of time, usually for about 5 hours after each treatment, but there was no overall change in her condition and I told her after about 6 treatments that I thought it was unlikely we were going to be able to achieve any lasting results.

I have my own speculations about what phantom limb pain means in terms of western physiology and how it relates to classical Chinese physiology, but I'll spare everyone the details so we can get back to the Jerry Springer episode that is currently underway.

Trevor Johnson
25th January 2006, 22:19
And I guess you must really be a young fellow because you don't seem to know a thing about infants and toddlers--something every adult man have experience with by age 30. Are you in your 20s yet?

Ellis Amdur's column on Natural Movement is the one I'm interested in because as far as I know, I am the originator of the idea that aikido techniques are derived from the movements of toddlers.


With respect, could I ask you again to answer my question about infants and toddlers?

Asura
25th January 2006, 22:30
So I would suggest that when you meet him, tell him that aikido is a bunch of BS and then stick your face out at him. You know. Just be yourself.

Likewise if you are so undeservingly blessed with the chance to see Washizu sensei in action, by all means, go over there and show him who's boss.

Maybe Murai sensei is really too old now, but that's what I thought the first time I met him an NO ONE has ever shocked me so thoroughly in 33 years of martial arts training.


And I don't doubt you.
Plus go back and read what I wrote. I never said anywhere that "Aikido" sucks.
Just the majority of people doing it :p
I'd welcome the opportunity to get my !!! trashed.




And on that matter, based on your attitude and lack of profile information, were you even alive 33 years ago? How long have you been doing budo and what are your academic credentials? Since you are asserting mastery in all these areas...


I'm not asserting mastery. I'm asserting a certain level of competency, which you don't seem to be able to do.
You still haven't answered my question on Kuzushi.
Stop dodgin' the questions.

I've only been doing MAs for about 6 years now? But only got a good grip on the core basics in the last 4.

Training here in Japan at this particular class has enabled me to goto Abe Sensei's Dojo in Kyoto, throw around more than a few of his senior students (all of them with at least 8 years more experience on me), goto the Tomiki Aikido branch here in Tokyo and have them unable to be able to do anything.

I've also been able to apply the same bodyskill successfully to BJJ and have no problems going head to head with guys 25kg heavier than me, and years more experience(despite my lack of ground experience..6months of crap newaza in college 3 years back doesn't count) and stop them in their tracks. Something I've yet to hear from any other IMA type guy except maybe Tim Cartmell.

Let's see...we had a Yoshinkan shihan with 30 years experience walk into our class, and get held down by a first year student during Agete practice.

So up until now the results speak for themselves.

And yes, I'm only 26... which means that you should be the better man and not be getting so riled up by lil ol me :)




Is this where he discusses whether aikido techniques are based on children's movement?

No. That is the one on Natural Movement. I think I've read the Hidden in Plain Sight columns. Intersting. Nothing earth shaking. Nothing particularly new.




Well, for the past several days, you've been farting rings around yourself and managed to call a distinguished teacher an a-hole in the bargain. You've been disrespectful, asinine, childish and a general jerk. I guess I "could" do those things, but you're so good at them...


Um...actually you've been staying tit for tat with me in terms of the insults. Frankly I was expecting smarter, and sharper insults. Since you're the wiser one :rolleyes:

As for Ebihara, I was only expressing that in jest.
He's a wonderful teacher, and I owe him a lot, if only for pwning me constantly and smacking my eardrums more than once.
When I think back on it now, I think its too bad that neither him nor the top iai teacher their would teach those body skills directly, especially since Ebihara used to bitch about how sporting Kendo had become. Then again, he was your typical Japanese salary man. They're pretty hard headed when it comes to changing their ways.
No less respect though.



Ellis Amdur's column on Natural Movement is the one I'm interested in because as far as I know, I am the originator of the idea that aikido techniques are derived from the movements of toddlers.


LOL.
Now THAT is funny.
You think you're the first one to observe that?
That idea is old news over here in japan.
How toddlers move do overlap with the particular bodyskill.
You still have to train it correctly, and build up those parts up the body, and mold it to work more effeciently.
Even Sagawa said that the reason why no one could do the stuff he could was because their bodies weren't ready yet. (Besides the snide comment that everyone under him was stupid. You should read his book, Toumei no Chikara. The old man had quite an attitude,but then again he deserved it ;) )

IE, they hadn't reached that stage where their bodies had changed.
Oh wait...the chinese talk about this too...
I thought you were versed in the CMA arts :rolleyes:



Do you need lessons on going to the toilet, too? You have so little understanding of natural movement you don't recognize that all your sadistic lessons are leading you back to natural standing and movement.


Toilet jokes huh? I thought that was below you ;)
No I do understand that it leads back to that. But you still have to mold/forge your body with those "sadistic" lessons in order to understand what "standing" really is, and then strengthen/reinforce those components.



I see. So I will NEVER get a sane answer from you? Just more and more self-referential babble claiming to be scientific?

:rolleyes: :p :rolleyes:
Btw, you're taking this way too seriously.
Lighten up ;)

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 22:51
Now we ARE getting snippy! There's no need to be angry and pejorative, (And comparing me to a christian scientist is not only name-calling, it's inaccurate and completely off-base) I'm still commited to a friendly discussion, if you can cool down long enough to have one.

No, "comparing" your arguments to the efforts of Intelligent Design pushers is about the most accurate analogy than anyone could make. It isn't name calling, but it is on base for what you're doing.

The Intelligent Design people have no respect for the standards they are trying to bend. You have no respect for the culture you are trying to "supersede".


All right, then, David, I have to go, analyzing data right now, but if you like, I can go over the thread tonight and clip out some stuff from it to respond to your claims and questions.

Please do.


A. What particular qualities of a child are involved in genki, and how?

First, he is healthy. Second, he is lively. Third, he is fearless (in general). Fourth, he is bright and alert. This applies not only to children but to adults and anyone who is genki (has "original ki").


B. What do you mean by creative application of human awareness?

I don't remember the context of that statement, so I don't know exactly how I used it previously, but Mochizuki sensei said that jujutsu was a product of Japanese culture. It shows how the Japanese people used forebearance and creativity to learn to overcome the larger and stronger people who would keep them down.

In general, by that term, I mean "look, see, notice, understand, creatively develop a method that best employs what you noticed by looking and seeing."

I think it was Douglas Adams who said that entropy is, indeed tearing the universe apart, but creativity is constantly putting the broken pieces back together in strange, improvisational ways, so that creativity is the universal answer to entropy.

Again, I would have to see your question and my response to explain exactly what that meant in that context.


C. What do you mean by the ten thousand things of human consciousness.

Sorry. I guess I just assumed that everyone loves Tao te Ching as much as I do. Lao Tzu said, "The tao begot one, one begot two, two begot three and three begot the ten-thousand things."

I understand it to refer to the multiplicity of human existence. Of course, there are many more than 10,000 things. I'm sure he used (in Japanese, via romaji) the kanji for "ichi-man butsu". He uses 10,000 to indicate the endless variation of phenomena in this world where humans are conscious.


I would also like to point out that ancient wierdos like Aristotle, Plato, Hippocrates, and such were doing the same thing as the ancient Chinese and Japanese doctors. Both were practicing observational science. They reached different conclusions, but that is largely because they were using different memes to base their judgements on. One had humors, the other had chi.

Or aether.


But they were BOTH practicing as you call it western science.

They were at the root of it.


Both were observing the same exact system, using the tools available to them, and reaching conclusions which they were able to test.
They tested them by:
Whether their patients got better or worse, in the case of doctors,
Whether their other predictions came true; weather, tides of fortune, etc.

Hmm. Chinese medicine works the same way.


And you know what, the early proponents of western science were WRONG! Plato was wrong, Aristotle was wrong, Hippocrates was wrong. Nonetheless, from their mistakes, we derived paradigms, explored them, found data that the paradigms couldn't hold, and then fought like mad over new paradigms until we found one that worked to explain what the old couldn't. And then we repeated that process with the new paradigm, and then the next, ad infinitum.

Well, that is an excellent description of how the Western method developed. But the Eastern way need not be held to those same ways of working.


As scientists, we're LOOKING for holes in our data, that's what honest scientists do.

Yes, of course. But I am not a scientist. I never claimed to be. I presented my summary of Eastern thinking that is completely consistent with their own summaries. I see no need of taking that apart and holding to Western standards.

By the same token, working as a project coordinator in occupational epidemiology and biostatistics, learning to listen to these doctors and to understand the questions they're asking and the methods and restrictions within which they have to ask them, I would NEVER think of inserting any kind of discussion of "ki" to their work. Maybe in passing if someone decided to ask me something about Japanese culture or something (one of our study sites is in Japan), I might mention ki, but I would never try to insert it into their way of thinking or studying their questions.

I would never demand that they turn to the Bible for answers in scientific fields. I would never imagine telling them that their calculations are invalid because as a Christian, I know that the earth is only 6,000 years old...

Wouldn't that be stupid? Wouldn't that be arrogant? Wouldn't it be arrogantly stupid to the point that, when I spoke, stupid bees came out of my mouth?

Please have the same respect for other cultures. Don't try to nullify massive swathes of their language to make yourself comfortable with the idea that you have "mastered" their system. Isn't that what Phony Sokes do? What difference does it make if you steal from them by wearing their fashions and awarding their belts or if you steal by claiming you have translated the "WHOLE" system into Western scientific terms?


Now, I WOULD like to insist, before you impugn my capacity for science, my research ethics, my knowledge, and my intentions again, that you read T. S. Kuhn, Structure of Scientific Revolutions. This is one man who got it right. He's a historian of science. He explains what science really is, what it is for, what it does, and how it works.

I will attempt to find time to give that book a look. It sounds interesting, but I do have more than a passing familiarity with science in general and several specific areas of science as well. I understand the scientific method, experimentation, documentation, reproducibility of results, etc. I think that's the only way to really pin down what your thoughts are, where you have been with your thoughts, where you have not been, where you want to go with your exploration, etc.

But it is a system with internal logic and rules.

You see? It is ONE system of many ways of thinking. It is great for launching rockets and examining atoms, but how good is it for painting or writing poetry or dancing or doing martial arts?

The Eastern ways are ALL ABOUT DIRECT PARTICIPATION: NO INSTRUMENTS (as in meters and "o-graphs" and such). They are about human feelings and the human heart. This is where science cannot give us useful answers because the terms cannot be used in scientific questions.

But ki also accounts for the whole environment in which humans live. We cannot be separated from our environment any more than our minds can be completely separated from our bodies. We can create an artificial environment, but humans must get back to the natural environment pretty quickly or they will die or become neurotic.

It is as pointless to try to make this into something you can measure with meters and graphs as it is to try to turn "Guernica" into a mathematical equation. It may amuse the one who does it, but it remains irrelevant.


I am not pleased to be insulted in a friendly discussion, and I would like you to try to understand the insults you gave before you again repeat them.

I understood them when I made them. And I made them in response to your insults toward me. Didn't know you made any? You dismissed my statements, summarized them incorrectly, skipped over answers that you demanded, etc.

My answers generally go right along the lines of the person with whom I am discussing things.


I'm currently doing research in a lab that studies pain. I will then rotate through a lab that studies learning. One thing that fascinates me currently is the concept of the phantom limb, where a patient who has had an amputation continues to feel the limb that has been removed. I am wondering what chinese science and medicine has to say about the problem?

I think it's probably very similar to what a Western doctor would say. And I'm guessing that would be that the severed nerves still have some activity or are stimulated by something and that the mind interprets these nerve signals as coming from the limb that is no longer there.

As for me, I am currently studying whether removal of the thymus gland and administration of prednisone is really more effecitve in treating Myasthenia Gravis than treatment with prednisone alone. We are expecting 70 surgical centers around the world to participate. My tasks involve logistics for training the participants and documenting the results. But I have to understand what the doctors are talking about and most of that does not involve either the disease, the surgery or the medication. It involves the database we will use, the sub-routines the programmers will use to make the database interactive, and so on. Pretty much all these matters are beyond my personal ability, but I have to know enough about each of them to understand exactly what the experts need from me.

It's wonderful work. The people are great, even the restriction of thinking in a narrow range is fun.

But I don't want anyone rewriting the Bible or Tao te Ching or the Kojiki according to those standards. And when it comes to "ki" I understand it in the terms left for us by the ancient sages who developed the concept.

And when it comes to science, I never bring I Ching or Zen or ki into it at all.

There's that old saying, "A place for everything and everything in its place". That means that "ki" notions have their rightful place, outside which they should not be used. And science has its rightful range, outside which it is ridiculous to attempt to use it (such as in art or certain aspects of budo).

I don't want Christians running my government solely because they stirred up enough fearful people to think that Christianity is the answer to all our governmental problems.

And I don't want scientists fiddling around with art, music, dance, aikido or taiji if they mean to discard these real arts and "supersede" them with misguided explanations forced to fit.

Best wishes.

Trevor Johnson
25th January 2006, 22:54
But this is all speculation - I treated it using a slightly different paradigm that didn't rely on differentiation between qi, blood, cold or wind stagnation, but instead on the relationships known as the "Six Harmonies" and the theories of yin and yang in relation to how the front/back, top/bottom and left/right sides of the body are related. The treatment actually worked for brief periods of time, usually for about 5 hours after each treatment, but there was no overall change in her condition and I told her after about 6 treatments that I thought it was unlikely we were going to be able to achieve any lasting results.

I have my own speculations about what phantom limb pain means in terms of western physiology and how it relates to classical Chinese physiology, but I'll spare everyone the details so we can get back to the Jerry Springer episode that is currently underway.

I can tell you one way that an indian doctor treats it, though it is the so-called "Western" medicine, I must confess. He uses a mirror! What he does is that he sets up a mirror so that the existing limb is mirrored where the nonexistant limb used to be. At that point, moving the existing limb gives the SENSATION of moving the missing one. Cool, eh? Given that what was going on was extremely painful "phantom cramps," the mirror movement released them! I must say I was really fascinated!

Oh, one interesting tidbit, which I don't know if you can interpret or not... Basically, if you prick someone in the side of the face, a person will feel pricking in the fingers of a phantom limb. If you prick someone in the testicles, the will feel it in missing toes of a phantom limb. If you're not missing the limb, it all works normally, but I found that really interesting.


Springer, eh? Never seen it. Should I be yelling or cheering? Or going back to my evolutionary origins and flinging poo like the chimps in the zoo?

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 22:55
With respect, could I ask you again to answer my question about infants and toddlers?

Which one? You mean, what qualities in a baby are "genki"? If so, already answered, above.

If not, please remind me.

Asura
25th January 2006, 23:14
I don't remember the context of that statement, so I don't know exactly how I used it previously, but Mochizuki sensei said that jujutsu was a product of Japanese culture. It shows how the Japanese people used forebearance and creativity to learn to overcome the larger and stronger people who would keep them down.


More like they were busy figuring out ways to better kill themselves, considering the long periods of civil war.
Not to mention that most of the stuff probably originated in china anyways. (There's too much overlap to be coincidence)



I think it was Douglas Adams who said that entropy is, indeed tearing the universe apart, but creativity is constantly putting the broken pieces back together in strange, improvisational ways, so that creativity is the universal answer to entropy.

Douglas Adams was a comedic writer. If that's your standard for getting ideas...




Well, that is an excellent description of how the Western method developed. But the Eastern way need not be held to those same ways of working.

Um...why? Are they special?

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 23:25
I'm not asserting mastery. I'm asserting a certain level of competency, which you don't seem to be able to do.

I guess that's because I generally don't make such claims at all. "I'll bet money I can do things you can't". Ever hear of "humility"???

What am I supposed to say, "Oh yea? Well I'll bet you money..."

Don't be childish.


You still haven't answered my question on Kuzushi.

No, I answered it. It was a skill he developed through decades of close training with the early masters of judo and aikido.


I've only been doing MAs for about 6 years now? But only got a good grip on the core basics in the last 4.

Asura, I have children who have been doing MA longer than you. I was uchi deshi to an aikido judan in Japan before you even stepped into a dojo. So, no, I don't feel any need to assert to a beginner such as yourself that I have any particular competencies. You bet me money you can do things I can't do. What a childish statement. Now it's clear exactly why that is.


Training here in Japan at this particular class has enabled me to goto Abe Sensei's Dojo in Kyoto, throw around more than a few of his senior students (all of them with at least 8 years more experience on me), goto the Tomiki Aikido branch here in Tokyo and have them unable to be able to do anything.

And what dojo is that?


I've also been able to apply the same bodyskill successfully to BJJ and have no problems going head to head with guys 25kg heavier than me, and years more experience(despite my lack of ground experience..6months of crap newaza in college 3 years back doesn't count) and stop them in their tracks. Something I've yet to hear from any other IMA type guy except maybe Tim Cartmell.

Hmm. So you're like a god or something? Too bad you couldn't have kicked Ueshiba's butt when he was around. I mean, you know, too bad you didn't get the chance because surely you could have beaten him.

But again, I urge you to go to the Seifukai (the old Yoseikan Dojo) at 846 Mukoushikiji, Shizuoka-shi, Shizuoka-ken, Japan and put Tezuka sensei in his place.

Gee...I just didn't realize I'd been exchanging insults with a real god.


Let's see...we had a Yoshinkan shihan with 30 years experience walk into our class, and get held down by a first year student during Agete practice.

So up until now the results speak for themselves.

Well at the Seifukai, they like to be taught lessons. If you can teach them something, you will be welcome there. But please, don't wait until they all get into their 90s. I travelled 10,000 miles to see these people. Surely you can go a few kilometers to set those yokels straight, huh?


And yes, I'm only 26... which means that you should be the better man and not be getting so riled up by lil ol me :)

Well, that's the danger of extending yourself for a civil discussion on the internet. You take someone seriously and really start dealing with deep issues before you realize they're just a child talking out their butt. So sorry.


Um...actually you've been staying tit for tat with me in terms of the insults. Frankly I was expecting smarter, and sharper insults. Since you're the wiser one :rolleyes:

Read my comments again. I don't think you detected half of what I said.


As for Ebihara, I was only expressing that in jest.

Yeah, well you did it in public and with a snotty attitude. You were extremely lucky to have such a teacher. He was probably ashamed of how much amaeru he had to use for a little boy who couldn't keep his mouth shut and train.


LOL.
Now THAT is funny.
You think you're the first one to observe that?
That idea is old news over here in japan.
How toddlers move do overlap with the particular bodyskill.
You still have to train it correctly, and build up those parts up the body, and mold it to work more effeciently.

Yes, you have to "cultivate" the particular movements and guide them into expression as technique.

But I never heard such an idea in 14 years of aikido training before I went to Japan. I never heard the idea while I was in Japan. I started writing about it when I came back from Japan and no aikidoka or karateka I ever met would accept it. And if it's old news in Japan, why has Ellis Amdur never heard it? At least, he thinks it's a wrong idea.

So, perhaps in America I'm the only one to have said it so far. And I deduced this by watching my own children, little girls, move naturally, according their "feelings" (ki).


Even Sagawa said that the reason why no one could do the stuff he could was because their bodies weren't ready yet. (Besides the snide comment that everyone under him was stupid...)

You mean HE said everyone under him was stupid? I know I didn't say it, no matter how snide it was.

But my theory is that it's not because their bodies "weren't ready yet," but because their bodies had LOST that readiness. They had it when they were children. If Sagawa had gotten to them when they were babies, he could have cultivated fantastic aikido out of their own natural movements.

But since they didn't get that when they were babies, they lost that quality through being forced to sit in desks at school all day and constantly cow down to authorities. Of course, if they had been taught to their full potential from infancy, they would have been unfit for public schools, which are only designed to hammer down the nails that stick up.


IE, they hadn't reached that stage where their bodies had changed.

No, he hadn't gotten to them BEFORE their bodies and minds were made stiff by bad education and socialization.


Oh wait...the chinese talk about this too...
I thought you were versed in the CMA arts :rolleyes:

Yeah, those little rolly eyeballs add a lot to your air of maturity. Those are your dismissive insults, too. If you add all those, you far outdistance me in snide and snippy behavior. Please. Grow out of that.


Toilet jokes huh? I thought that was below you ;)

Well, I like to get on someone's level when i talk to them.


No I do understand that it leads back to that. But you still have to mold/forge your body with those "sadistic" lessons in order to understand what "standing" really is, and then strengthen/reinforce those components.

It's not nearly so difficult as that when you start with a good beginning and just cultivate the positive things they do. Of course, high attainment is only through hard work to the end. But when someone is particularly stupid and has to have everything explained to them in explicit terms, I guess that just brings out the teacher's sadistic side.


:rolleyes: :p :rolleyes:
Btw, you're taking this way too seriously.

Yes, I realize that now. I thought I was talking to someone of substance.
Sorry. I won't make that mistake again.
Lighten up ;)[/QUOTE]

Joshua Lerner
25th January 2006, 23:27
Oh, one interesting tidbit, which I don't know if you can interpret or not... Basically, if you prick someone in the side of the face, a person will feel pricking in the fingers of a phantom limb. If you prick someone in the testicles, the will feel it in missing toes of a phantom limb. If you're not missing the limb, it all works normally, but I found that really interesting.

That is really interesting. Looking at a chart of acupuncture meridians would give you part of the Chinese medical interpretation. Briefly -

There are twelve main meridians of the body, six in the arm and six in the leg. They are also further divided into yin and yang meridians, so you have three arm yin and three arm yang meridians, etc.

The three arm yang meridians start at the tips of certain fingers and end on the side of the face.

The three arm yin meridians start in the chest and end at the tips of certain fingers.

The three leg yang meridians start on the face and end up at the tips of certain toes.

The three leg yin meridians start at the tips of certain toes and end up in the chest.

Note that five of the six leg meridians either go directly through the genitals or have branches that do.

Which, of course, proves nothing but suggests some interesting correlations. What would be really interesting to me is to see exactly which phantom fingers and toes were being affected, and exactly where on the face the pricking was done.

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 23:30
If you prick someone in the testicles, the will feel it in missing toes of a phantom limb.

I don't know about that, but anyone who goes trying to "prick" my testicles is going to feel it in his NOSE!

hl1978
25th January 2006, 23:33
xxxxxxxxxxxxx

kimiwane
25th January 2006, 23:41
...most of the stuff probably originated in china anyways. (There's too much overlap to be coincidence)

I had that same thought, but he insisted that jujutsu was an indigenous Japanese invention.


Douglas Adams was a comedic writer. If that's your standard for getting ideas...

Well, I don't limit the sources for good ideas. Mark Twain was primarily a humorist, but he is now remembered as one of the wisest and most honest men in American history.


Um...why? Are they special?

No. They are pre-rational. Just because you wanted to start wearing pants doesn't mean they have to give up hakama. Or just because next year you might want to get "BADASS" tatooed on your forehead, should the Japanese?

Kano was right to introduce rationality to Japan through Judo, but it doesn't mean that everything in Japan should then be converted to pure rational bases.

Again, the Picasso example. Why should he have to translate all his strange inner visions into something the common visionless wage slave is used to seeing? Or the common doctor or statistician?

The Eastern ways have a right to exist on their own terms. There is no need to explain it beyond that. Just as science has a right to set its own standards by its own rules and to resist politicians trying to insert religious teachings into it.

The East has every right to continue along the lines it followed for over 5000 years before Western science got started.

Your sad limitation is the compulsion to force everything in human experience to fit a rational framework. Humanity would only be weakened and eventually sickened by such an approach.

Asura
26th January 2006, 00:36
I guess that's because I generally don't make such claims at all. "I'll bet money I can do things you can't". Ever hear of "humility"???
Don't be childish

Just saying I have confidence in doing stuff that a majority of people with 10 times the training can't do. That's not bragging. Just a fact.
IHTBF applies. You should drop by sometime ;)
Aunkai, Tokyo
We're off the Seibu Ikebukuro Line in Fujimidai station.
The guy teaching there is Akuzawa Minoru.
You should be able to pull up a website by typing in "Aunkai" in google.



No, I answered it. It was a skill he developed through decades of close training with the early masters of judo and aikido.


Dude that's not an answer.
Was it kuzushi where he brings you to the heel or toes?
Or you just lose power from the legs?
Depending on how the kuzushi is applied, a different groundpath and different kind of internal power are being used.
There's nothing "fuzzy" about it.



Asura, I have children who have been doing MA longer than you. I was uchi deshi to an aikido judan in Japan before you even stepped into a dojo. So, no, I don't feel any need to assert to a beginner such as yourself that I have any particular competencies.


And your particular need to assert that fact shows that you have something to prove ;)
I threw around one of Abe sensei's students with my index finger, and he's been studying him with 9+ years.
How many years you've been studying means squat if you don't have the results to back it up.
A german guy with 25 years of aikido experience that came by the week before last that couldn't do anything to me comes to mind :)





And what dojo is that?

Aunkai, see beginning of post.





Hmm. So you're like a god or something? Too bad you couldn't have kicked Ueshiba's butt when he was around. I mean, you know, too bad you didn't get the chance because surely you could have beaten him.


Never said that. ;) I'm just saying that the overall average is that low.
I also said its funny that no one's been able to replicate Ueshiba's skill. Some people got really good, but no one ever really got close. (From what I've heard)





But again, I urge you to go to the Seifukai (the old Yoseikan Dojo) at 846 Mukoushikiji, Shizuoka-shi, Shizuoka-ken, Japan and put Tezuka sensei in his place.

Ok ok, lol.
Seriously I will at some point.
And if he ends up being as skilled as you say, I'll owe you one.
Like I said before, finding someone with the "touch" is hard.
I'm not out to teach anyone a lesson, or assert my "mastery".
I've just been sorely dissapointed in the past.






Well, that's the danger of extending yourself for a civil discussion on the internet. You take someone seriously and really start dealing with deep issues before you realize they're just a child talking out their butt. So sorry.

musn't...bu..t can't reeeesssisttt...
dammit...here it comes

:rolleyes:




But I never heard such an idea in 14 years of aikido training before I went to Japan. I never heard the idea while I was in Japan. I started writing about it when I came back from Japan and no aikidoka or karateka I ever met would accept it. And if it's old news in Japan, why has Ellis Amdur never heard it? At least, he thinks it's a wrong idea.

Well I should give credit where credit is due I suppose.
The ideas been thrown out ever since the Namba aruki craze started a couple years back.
They noted that children walk in a "Namba" fashion, and that body movement is used in basic IMAs. Though there's a lot more to it than that.






But my theory is that it's not because their bodies "weren't ready yet," but because their bodies had LOST that readiness.

But since they didn't get that when they were babies, they lost that quality through being forced to sit in desks at school all day and constantly cow down to authorities. Of course, if they had been taught to their full potential from infancy, they would have been unfit for public schools, which are only designed to hammer down the nails that stick up.


That's your own theory then ;)
The majority of people that "can" do, will still tell you that "tanren" is needed to change the body. This applies from both the Japanese and Chinese side.

As for the public school issue thing, have you been enrolled in Japanese school?
Most of my primary and secondary education were spent there, and there is both truth and fallacy to that.
What you refer to mostly takes place in high school, and it got worse, then better over the years.
I agree that part of the habits drilled in these early years can have a detrimental effect on some of the kids.

By this argument we should see some awesome Aikidoists coming out of an American education system, which is freer and doesn't "hammer" down the nails as much.

Funny thing is, it doesn't seem to apply...




It's not nearly so difficult as that when you start with a good beginning and just cultivate the positive things they do. Of course, high attainment is only through hard work to the end. But when someone is particularly stupid and has to have everything explained to them in explicit terms, I guess that just brings out the teacher's sadistic side.

You really haven't done any hardcore CMA training have you? :rolleyes:



I had that same thought, but he insisted that jujutsu was an indigenous Japanese invention.

And his insistence makes this fact?
It was modified in Japan and made Japanese, but I highly doubt it originated here.
Japanese people get a weird pride thing going when it comes to their cultural arts.
Kind of like Koreans insisting Taekwondo's history goes back 4000Y, and that they were the originators of Kendo.
You have to do your own research in these areas.
Just because you respect the man doesn't make him right.



No, I answered it. It was a skill he developed through decades of close training with the early masters of judo and aikido.

Just elaborate on that skill if you will ;)
C'mon, smart guy like you could describe what he was doing?
Even within the asian paradigm. How did he use his "Ki" to get the Kuzushi?



The East has every right to continue along the lines it followed for over 5000 years before Western science got started

No one's trying to stop it. In fact they're shifting themselves over. It's ironic that people like you are far louder proponents of those lines than "azia" itself.

hl1978
26th January 2006, 02:12
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/omb/results/images/tape_measure.jpg

mikesigman@eart
26th January 2006, 02:13
Asura, I have children who have been doing MA longer than you. I was uchi deshi to an aikido judan in Japan before you even stepped into a dojo. So, no, I don't feel any need to assert to a beginner such as yourself that I have any particular competencies. You bet me money you can do things I can't do. What a childish statement. Now it's clear exactly why that is.
So, yes, ki is real but, like Zen, it's "nothing special" and we can get more of it by "not-doing" or by paying attention to very mundane matters than by focusing on the 'ki' itself and trying to generate it like a coal-fired electric plant.


Ki is just the energy of life in its many formsI usually just skim various forums looking for information in posts or prodding to see what people know, but after glancing through this thread, I'll toss in my 2 cents. Asura knows what he's talking about; kimiwane doesn't have a clue. Kimiwane, ki/qi demonstrations are pretty straightforward and give set attributes to "ki/qi":
(1.) focused lines of force of unusual power
(2.) resistance to blows
(3.) resistance to cuts and/or puncturing of the skin
(4.) increased immune-system functions
(5.) detectable (by western instruments) increase in a fascia-related magnetic field.

The generic term "ki" or "qi" was indeed used as a generic catch-all for unknown forces and that's a fairly common comment by many Asian writers. The body-specific "ki" is just what I listed above and it involves physical skills and training skills that are usually not openly disclosed, particularly to "foreigners". Instead of the personal attacks, how about a little more substance?

FWIW

Mike

Joshua Lerner
26th January 2006, 02:36
(5.) detectable (by western instruments) increase in a fascia-related magnetic field.

Hi Mike,

Rob and I discussed this earlier in the thread. I'm glad you joined in because I'm hoping you have more information than I do.

How do you relate (or *do* you relate?) the fascia to the development of jin/kokyu? Is it directly related in your view? If so, how? Or are the changes in the fascia you are talking about side effects of the training, like the increase in immune function?

Thanks,

Josh

Asura
26th January 2006, 02:54
Instead of the personal attacks, how about a little more substance?


何か冷めちゃった。。。o(´^`)o ウー
And I was just starting to enjoy the Jerry Springer atmosphere of it all :p

うりゃ (((( -_-)乂(-_- )))) うりゃ 勝負!
酔拳 ヨロ (*~∇~)ノ ヨロ ヽ(~∇~*)ヨロ (*~∇~)―〇 ☆ バシ

(^^^You need Japanese fonts to see the above ^^^)

mikesigman@eart
26th January 2006, 03:16
How do you relate (or *do* you relate?) the fascia to the development of jin/kokyu? Is it directly related in your view? If so, how? Or are the changes in the fascia you are talking about side effects of the training, like the increase in immune function?I need to meet up with Rob to see what he does, although it's obvious from what he says that he's talking about the same things, the classical usage of kokyu and (to some extent) ki. I tend to separate the two, although in a classical sense (in a world where all unknown forces were attributed to qi) they are part of the same phenomenon. Technically jin is the physical manifestation of ki, so just about every "stand on one leg and can't be pushed over" demo which is really kokyu can be called "ki". Hitting someone with your ki for Dim Mak (dim xue) means actually to use jin/kokyu, but unless you condition your "ki" you can't really have that force in every instance. It gets confusing. So my splitting them out is just arbitrary (i.e., it ain't necessarily correct) and I can't make a hard and fast rule. I can usually discuss a usage or application by describing what part is ki and what part is kokyu, though.


FWIW

Mike

kimiwane
26th January 2006, 04:23
Just saying I have confidence in doing stuff that a majority of people with 10 times the training can't do. That's not bragging. Just a fact.

I believe Bruce Lee described himself in a similar way.


IHTBF applies. You should drop by sometime ;)
Akuzawa Minoru.


I saw some clips. However, you're a lot closer to where I learned than I am to your place, so let me know when you get to the Seifukai. Don't wait until Murai has retired.


Dude that's not an answer.

Yes, it was a precise answer for your question.


Was it kuzushi where he brings you to the heel or toes?

I lived with him for 21 months and taught special classes there before and after living there besides the regular black belt classes. He threw me many times in four years. You think he only had one way of doing it? He did it in every direction, whichever direction he pleased.


Or you just lose power from the legs?

He once did an armlock on me and I was surprised by the feeling that he had managed to align all my bones in such a way that I couldn't move either foot. No particular pain. I just couldn't move anything until he let me go.


Depending on how the kuzushi is applied, a different groundpath and different kind of internal power are being used.
There's nothing "fuzzy" about it.

Well, expecting everyone to rattle off the same kinds of descriptions you use to explain things is pretty fuzzy. I can go back to a number of posts where you confidently dispute me with rolly eyes and then back down and rephrase yourself to have been saying what I said in the beginning. But somehow your way is superior.


And your particular need to assert that fact shows that you have something to prove ;)

Well, you, from the first, have been on here talking about people who can "do" to dispute my statements. And the clear message there is that you know I can't do. But you know, I guess I made a lot of statements like that when I was your age. I hadn't trained in Japan, but I had had some very hard aikido training by then. I know how powerful it can make you feel. it's good that you're genki, but it sounds a lot like Bruce.

I threw around one of Abe sensei's students with my index finger, and he's been studying him with 9+ years.

And your particular need to assert that fact shows that you have something to prove ;)

Again, go do it to Tezuka. I gave you the address. You're always terrorizing the sheep down in Kyoto. Stop in and scare those guys. Morihei Ueshiba spent a lot of time down there.


How many years you've been studying means squat if you don't have the results to back it up.

No, it doesn't. And you don't have the maturity to talk like an adult.


A german guy with 25 years of aikido experience that came by the week before last that couldn't do anything to me comes to mind :)/quote]

Well, again, I guess that just proves you have nothing to prove. Doesn't it??? Must I answer with my stories about German guys in my classes in Shizuoka? Anyone can talk.

Again, I say, step back and listen to yourself.

[quote]Aunkai, see beginning of post.

And it's a derivative of aikido or aikijujutsu?


I'm just saying that the overall average is that low.

Yes, it is.


I also said its funny that no one's been able to replicate Ueshiba's skill. Some people got really good, but no one ever really got close. (From what I've heard)

You should get out more. Or, well, you should've gotten out 20 years ago and seen who was around. You still have a chance if you're polite and very careful when you go to Shizuoka.

Mochizuki sensei says that Kyuzo Mifune was quite comparable to Morihei Ueshiba. But he mentioned no one else. Still, Mochizuki sensei was uchi deshi to both Mifune and Ueshiba. And his longest-standing student, Kyoichi Murai trained deeply with him and also trained directly with Morihei Ueshiba. He can do all the sutemi and he looks like Mifune doing them. He's tiny.

It's sad, in a way, that Murai sensei never became better known. He stayed in Mochizuki sensei's shadow and after Mochizuki sensei left for France, they made the Seifukai. Murai sensei is very old now and I don't know how active he is, but he is the only person who ever threw me with aiki nage from my own grip. Mochizuki sensei never did those kinds of throws. He always got a grip on the uke and threw him for sure. He always believed that uke could just let go. But I grabbed Murai from behind, trying to snatch him off his feet and he did a classic Ueshiba-looking little bow and I came off my feet and flew. He did this a couple of times around that same visit, 1986, when he was about 71. And when I was there in the early 90s, he did the same kind of thing a few more times. He really was amazing. If anyone I ever met approached Ueshiba's real aiki nage ability to throw at will with only the attacker's grip, it would be he.


Ok ok, lol.
Seriously I will at some point.
And if he ends up being as skilled as you say, I'll owe you one.

You already owe me more than one for your attitude, but I'm not worried about that. If you really want to know the truth, you talk after you've been to Seifukai.


Like I said before, finding someone with the "touch" is hard.
I'm not out to teach anyone a lesson, or assert my "mastery".
I've just been sorely dissapointed in the past.

That's no ordinary aikido school. It's pre-war. Mochizuki was one of two men to get scrolls in daito ryu from Ueshiba. And he studied very seriously in several other arts. All the shihans down there were very powerful. But every one of them was very humble and quiet.


Well I should give credit where credit is due I suppose.
The ideas been thrown out ever since the Namba aruki craze started a couple years back.

A couple of years?

I produced booklets on this thesis over ten years ago. I began developing it in Shizuoka over twelve years ago.


They noted that children walk in a "Namba" fashion, and that body movement is used in basic IMAs. Though there's a lot more to it than that.

The way babies walks is very temporary due to the continuing development of the skeleton and muscles. The baby will soon walk very differently, more smoothly and more maturely unless his development is disturbed. So I don't teach anything about baby walking except that self defense ability should naturally develop much as walking does. But both are disrupted by education and other social pressures.

However, this is not the root of aikido technique in babies. It is in other types of movement they use in interacting with people.


The majority of people that "can" do, will still tell you that "tanren" is needed to change the body. This applies from both the Japanese and Chinese side.

But their effort is really to change the body "back" to the qualities it had before distortion by social pressure and physical pollution. Baguazhang, in particular, the classic internal martial art, explicitly intends to develop "pre-heaven chi", such as the child had before birth. See Yang's "Emei Baguazhang" which shows the original texts of old Chinese bagua materials, followed by a rough English translation, followed by a smoother English translation.


As for the public school issue thing, have you been enrolled in Japanese school?

Why, sure.

My first daughter was in yochien, which is a lot sweeter. But my wife remembers a teacher who used to hit her in the forehead with a shinai.


Most of my primary and secondary education were spent there, and there is both truth and fallacy to that.

I find that true for almost any statement one can make about Japan. But I have read widely on Japanese schools and I had a number of English students in Jr. High and High School in Shizuoka. And I saw them by the hundreds at the 7-11s, a lot of them perusing the sukebe magazines in the rack, as I used to do when I was that age.


What you refer to mostly takes place in high school, and it got worse, then better over the years.
I agree that part of the habits drilled in these early years can have a detrimental effect on some of the kids. By this argument we should see some awesome Aikidoists coming out of an American education system, which is freer and doesn't "hammer" down the nails as much.

Funny thing is, it doesn't seem to apply...

You miss the point. The problem is not Japanese or American schools. The problem is human society, and everyone wanting you to bow down to them. This is not so much a school function as it is social function. But schools add to it by putting students in rows and ranks making them sit more or less still for so much of every day. This kills the kinesthetic sense in most people. Or it weakens and confuses it. Even those who maintain some kinesthetic connection have it channeled into football, which is even more about making others bow down, and it gets confused. So even professional athletes, who need do nothing but "play" all their lives, have a deeply ingrained distortion of sense of self embedded in the tonus of their bodies.

And since we don't have a culture and tradition of cultivatiing martial arts, no, it doesn't happen in American schools. Remember, I didn't say children develop this naturally: they have the roots naturally, but the roots have to be cultivated for the aikido to come out as anything similar to aikido.

In fact, the way it developed in China produced baguazhang. Other reflexes and movements were cultivated to produce xing yi. Taiji is a combination of bagua and xing yi.

In other cultures, other ways developed. But I, as a teacher, can cultivate the aikido responses that I observe in my children's natural movement and I expect that they will be quite skilled when they are grown.


You really haven't done any hardcore CMA training have you? :rolleyes:

Well, I guess not since you poo-poo my having been uchi deshi to an uchi deshi of both Ueshiba and Mifune. I could say I lived in China for eighteen years and ate only the grains of rice that I could kick backward with my duck walking so that the flipped over my head and I caught them in my mouth and you would say, "Oh, yeah. I beat up a guy last week that did that." No one has approached the level of blood sweat and tears you have poured into the martial arts of the world. See my tiny violin playing a tribute to you? (Hey, here's where I think I'll stick a rolling eye thing. No, wait...where's the bird symbol, dang it?)

I started taiji training in about 1978, had a few teachers and met Xia Ming, of Wuhan Physical Education University, in about 1988. He started wushu at age nine when the Communist government evaluated him as particularly suited for martial arts training. He was a member of the first Chinese national wushu demonstration team after the cultural revolution, in the early 70s, when that was becoming popular.

Oh, I forgot you weren't born then. You wouldn't know about those days, I guess. It's when i was starting karate, myself. Ming trained under pre-revolution masters with communist discipline until he graduated college wih a degree in sports medicine. I graduated with a degree in Writing and a few years of aikido/judo/karate/kenjutsu experience. Ming married an American woman who was teaching in China and eventually made it to the US. By that time I had been teaching aikido for some years and had trained briefly in Japan. Ming began teaching me baguazhang in 1988. I trained with him off and on until I went to Japan. In Japan, I started doing my taiji and bagua again and was able to see a real difference in how the two cultures view things. And yet I found a lot in common among all the arts I was training in. It was also about that time (1992 or 93) that I recognized aiki in my year-old daughter's movement.

When I came back to the US, I took up bagua with Ming again and also learned Chen taiji and taiji sword.

Of my fifty years of life, I have lived seven in dojos. Almost two in Mochizuki sensei's old yoseikan hombu and over five in my own dojos.

In the late 1990s, I had a house with an alley in front and a large open room just inside the door. I had it lined with mats and people would come there for lessons. During those days, I did taiji, taiji sword and baguazhang in the alley in front of the house every evening after work.

I wore a discernible circle in the asphalt from my bagua practice.

But I know you chewed a hole that big in a street just last week, so I'd have to say I couldn't possibly meet your standards for hardcore training. With your six years of experience, after alllllll....


And his insistence makes this fact?

It simply makes it his insistence.


It was modified in Japan and made Japanese, but I highly doubt it originated here.

Well, gee, I guess your opinion does count for more than Minoru Mochizuki's.


Japanese people get a weird pride thing going when it comes to their cultural arts.

Well, that's the thing. He didn't make that claim about kenjutsu or even aikijujutsu. But he did insist that jujutsu was purely Japanese. I haven't done enough research to decide. I always assumed it was heavily inspired by Chinese arts. I have come to no conclusion.


You have to do your own research in these areas.
Just because you respect the man doesn't make him right.

Son, I've been researching all this stuff very seriously since you were researching the contents of your diaper. But thanks for the hint.


Just elaborate on that skill if you will ;)
C'mon, smart guy like you could describe what he was doing?
Even within the asian paradigm. How did he use his "Ki" to get the Kuzushi?

Gee. I know we have discussed this before. Mochizuki never used ki in that kind of explanation, nor do I. But you are impressing me more and more as an illiterate idiot, asking that insipid question again.

Originally Posted by kimiwane
The East has every right to continue along the lines it followed for over 5000 years before Western science got started


No one's trying to stop it. In fact they're shifting themselves over.

What are you talking about now? This coming after 7 pages of your insisting that the Eastern way must be superseded by Western thinking? Now you say the West is shifting to those beliefs. Talk about fuzzy!


It's ironic that people like you are far louder proponents of those lines than "azia" itself.

I only mention it as a natural aspect of ordinary human life. And I hardly think my comments on ki in an internet meditation forum counts as "loud".

P Goldsbury
26th January 2006, 04:24
何か冷めちゃった。。。o(´^`)o ウー
And I was just starting to enjoy the Jerry Springer atmosphere of it all :p

うりゃ (((( -_-)乂(-_- )))) うりゃ 勝負!
酔拳 ヨロ (*~∇~)ノ ヨロ ヽ(~∇~*)ヨロ (*~∇~)―〇 ☆ バシ

(^^^You need Japanese fonts to see the above ^^^)

Mr John,

I do have Japanese fonts (Windows XP, Japanese version), but I cannot read your post.

As a moderator, I must ask you to sign your posts in E-Budo with your full name. I chanced upon thios thread and it is very interesting. But I saw that you are breaking a rather fundamental rule of this forum and I would hate to ban you because of it.

Best wishes,

Asura
26th January 2006, 04:42
Mr John,

I do have Japanese fonts (Windows XP, Japanese version), but I cannot read your post.

As a moderator, I must ask you to sign your posts in E-Budo with your full name. I chanced upon thios thread and it is very interesting. But I saw that you are breaking a rather fundamental rule of this forum and I would hate to ban you because of it.

Best wishes,
Weird... Kaomoji don't work so well I guess. No biggie.

Sorry, I finally fixed my signature so I don't have to worry about tacking it to the end of every post. Thanks for the heads up ;)

Asura
26th January 2006, 05:06
:rolleyes:

In fact, the way it developed in China produced baguazhang. Other reflexes and movements were cultivated to produce xing yi. Taiji is a combination of bagua and xing yi.

And why would you say this? (Not an attack, just curious what you have to say about this)
Depending on how you look at it, it can be, or it can be different.




Well, I guess not since you poo-poo my having been uchi deshi to an uchi deshi of both Ueshiba and Mifune. I could say I lived in China for eighteen
/snip

I'm not poo pooing, just saying you still haven't been able to describe mechanically how that kuzushi I talked about earlier is caused. And as such I'm poo pooing all your attempts to dodge that question.





..... etc ....etc
I wore a discernible circle in the asphalt from my bagua practice.

Awesome, I also know kids here in Yoyogi park that have done the same thing for 10 years and still have zip.

So, can you explain the kuzushi?
Like Mike said, some posts with substance maybe?



Well, gee, I guess your opinion does count for more than Minoru Mochizuki's.
...
I always assumed it was heavily inspired by Chinese arts. I have come to no conclusion.

Fair enough, I thought you were holding his opinoin to be the rule ^^;





What are you talking about now? This coming after 7 pages of your insisting that the Eastern way must be superseded by Western thinking? Now you say the West is shifting to those beliefs.


Um no... I meant that the East has been shifting over to the Western way of thinking for some time now, and been explaining their own paradigms in a western way on their own.

The most vocal people about the pure asian paradigm are people like you actually.



I only mention it as a natural aspect of ordinary human life. And I hardly think my comments on ki in an internet meditation forum counts as "loud".


Well, I don't think I'm alone in thinking you're being pretty vocal about your comments.

Anyways, discussing this stuff with you has been fascinating, but as much as I've enjoyed this farce, I think I'll wait for Trevor to swing his angle on Fascia and needle Mike for more uh, concrete information..."western" information.

Kimiwane... mou ikkai saisho kara yarinaosita houga iikamo yo? :p
ごめん、口から出ちゃった~

kimiwane
26th January 2006, 05:29
Instead of the personal attacks, how about a little more substance?

You haven't read this forum very closely, either, have you?

Asura has come back to agree with me on many points already.

What experience do yo have in these areas?

edg176
26th January 2006, 09:17
This should be very interesting.

I've held out posting on this subject in hopes that other people far more qualified than I am would pick this point up, but that's not happening. Alas my own scholastic ability in Chinese is almost non-existent due to my personal laziness so I'll have to hack away at it. Hopefully my pathetic attempts will inspire the more knowledgeable to chime in. I will attempt to be extremely critical while still maintaining a level of civility. Some may view overt criticism by a young and not particularly talented martial arts practitioner as uncivil, and if that is the case I remind them that we are conducting this discussion in English on a website hosted in the United States where we have a tradition of open, tough minded public discourse.

As to David's point regarding the use of Chinese metaphysical tools to describe fighting arts:

I agree with Rob that much of East Asia has worked hard to shift away from using these conceptual models and towards a scientific method. I am confused as to why someone would voluntarily subscribe to discredited ways of knowing.

As Trevor alluded to earlier, science is not simply another discourse, coequal with Chinese metaphysics, Navajo mythology or Japanese Shinto. Rather, per Karl Popper it is about establishing theories which are capable of being falsified. That is, there is a way of testing the truth of the matter.

The problem with the intuitive method of learning which David has championed is two fold. First of all, it is inherently hierarchal and anti-democratic. This may not be a concern to you, however, as a person living in what is theoretically a Western democracy it is a concern to me. I would personally not choose to participate in a system of knowledge which tells me that I cannot find the answers for myself unless I spend decades following someone else.

Second, this method has produced demonstrably poor results, which is why both Japan and later (with much greater difficulty) China have abandoned it. This method, whatever its other benefits never developed calculus and physics. Free exchange and inquiry in Europe allowed the flowering of modern science. Failure to embrace the free exchange of information rendered China poor, backwards and incompetent to deal with foreign invasion, because Chinese imperial government officials could not deal with technology, and ultimately with the Western way of war. We are discussing martial arts on this board. Martial arts originally justified their existence through their effectiveness in the face of opponents. Unfortunately for China, the non-rationalist way of knowing proved rather inadequate in the face of close order drill. Very intelligent people in Japan realized this and took drastic steps to remake the Japanese mind. In a broader sense, we also see that the iterative, non-hierarchal way of knowing also provides for a greater freedom for individuals to learn as they see fit, and yields tangible results. The rise of the Linux operating system is a good current day example of this.

David has asserted that the intuitive, neo-Confucian, non-rationalist way of knowing is traditional. It really depends on whose tradition we are discussing. Some of the finest minds in East Asia wrestled with the idea of how to reconcile neo-Confucian and Buddhist thought with the modern era, among them Yoshida Shoin, Kang Youwei, Tan Sitong, and Liang Qichao.

Kang deserves special notice because he is widely regarded (by historians in the field) as the last of the great scholars of the imperial era. He also came to see at the end of his life that the hierarchal nature of Chinese society was fundamentally unjust and the cause of much misery, which again plays right back into my first point. It seems that David himself acknowledges this when he writes about his concerns that the school system in Japan and the United States stamp creativity and free movement out of its students through forcing people to bow down to a hierarchy. An insistence on the use of a subjective and non-rationalist, intuitive way of knowing will actually strengthen hierarchy.

In the end they realized that rationalist thought was superior in the realm of the material. Martial arts, whatever there other benefits, exist in the realm of the material because we are looking at tangible results, i.e. does this throw work? Can I develop so-called short power? Can I neutralize the force with a touch (ala Shioda)?

I realize that one could construe my argument to be a radical Spencerian/Social Darwinist viewpoint. I am only arguing about the means and the methods of violent confrontation, and not making a normative claim about wider social issues.

This is not to say that there is no place for metaphysics or the discussion of subjective aspects like feelings. There is, but it has to happen in the context of looking for repeatable results. That's the rationalist way.

David has made some other statements about measuring human feelings being beyond measurement. This is not the case. A very good friend of mine is a Ph.D. candidate in neuroscience. A large portion of his work is about addiction, and finding ways to detect and quantify obsessive/thrill seeking/drug seeking behavior.

I will admit that my views on this subject are colored by my family history and personal experiences. It is rather difficult for me to be objective on this subject. I am typing this post in English, sitting in America because of the early 20th century collapse of the Chinese state which I, and others far more erudite than I am, chalk up to a fundamental failure to grasp rationalist thought. It was the reason that my grandparents could never go home, and it is the reason that many of my friend's families were subjected to horrific suffering. Please understand I treasure my copy of Chan Wing Tsit's Chinese philosophy source-book, and I mourn for the passing of what in many ways was a more sustainable and less volatile way of life.

Nonetheless, in a modern, rationalist democratic world there really is very little room for the neo-Confucian way of knowing. There is even less room for it in the very pragmatic world of martial arts.**

I hope people find this post interesting and useful, and I welcome correction and harsh criticism. That's the whole point.

**I respect enormously the amount of time and commitment that koryu practitioners have put in to their study of the art. I enjoy their articles. But I profoundly disagree with the pedagogical method. Koryu is also not something I would be interested in doing, for the reasons I've listed above.

mikesigman@eart
26th January 2006, 12:41
I think these conversations are really fascinating to watch because they represent a trend that started more than a decade ago. As more bits and pieces of knowledge about how to train ki and kokyu come out (and Rob's teacher is obviously showing a good and recognizable approach to some of these things, even if it's not exactly what I do/learned) there are always these head-to-head discussions with people who have studied martial arts for years, have some place in the hierarchies, but who for some reason weren't shown how to train these things. I guess that's nothing knew, really, if you look at the fact that some of Ueshiba's top deshi had to go outside in order to learn these things.... and they just did it without arguing that there was nothing big that they didn't know.

But overall, watching this thawing of the ice where someone who has found out that there was more actual substance to this stuff about ki and kokyu than most practitioners are aware of is pretty interesting and it keeps running into the same problems: knowledge is limited and "established" teachers will almost never easily accept the idea that there is anything major that they don't know.

I still learn stuff. Each time I do find out more (these things are complex subjects, not the few simple things I wish they were) I am so glad that I haven't taught a group of students and found out that I left out some key piece of information. I would hate to have taught someone wrongly who gave me dues and loyalty.... they would have deserved better. But another reason is that this stuff is slowly coming out of the woodwork and within another 10-20 years a lot of it will be common knowledge.... so any "students" are ultimately going to be able to look back and know which teachers were clueless about ki and kokyu. And there's no way to defend against the inexorable obviousness of this. I think Rob, by commenting that he knows people who have studied a long, long time and yet who don't even know some of the basics of the stuff Akuzawa has showed him... I think that's what you're going to see start happening more and more. And there's no way for anyone to hold their ground and keep the knowledge away by simply denying there can be something they don't know. This is too big.

The good news is that real martial arts knowledge, in general, is improving and is getting more available to true enthusiasts. It's a positive thing.

FWIW

Mike

mikesigman@eart
26th January 2006, 12:52
You haven't read this forum very closely, either, have you?

Asura has come back to agree with me on many points already.

What experience do yo have in these areas?I have a lot of experience in martial arts, both Japanese and Chinese, but a lot of that, it turns out, was wasted because I didn't understand the ki and kokyu things. Therefore, I feel it would be gratuitous to start claiming names and pedigrees. The best way to find out what experience I have in these things is to talk and to ask questions so that we can both see what each other knows. However, your earlier comments on Ki indicate fairly clearly that you and I are far apart on those matters, almost without a doubt. So your best bet for a debate would be to find some statement of mine (I've made a few already) that has to do with the *subject* (not this devolution to personality I see coming up too often) and then to debate me on it. You have your position of years, experience, names, etc., and all I'll use is what I actually know. How's that? ;^) And BTW, Rob is obviously correct in a statement you pooh-poohed early on.... the term "qi" is a catchall term that encompasses a large number of phenomena, including lightning, air, pressure, blood-sugar effects, body skills, etc. You can't deny, for example, the existence of lightning, so in the qi-paradigm many things really do exist, even if the paradigm and terminology don't withstand complete scrutiny.

Regards,

Mike

mikesigman@eart
26th January 2006, 13:21
**I respect enormously the amount of time and commitment that koryu practitioners have put in to their study of the art. I enjoy their articles. But I profoundly disagree with the pedagogical method. Koryu is also not something I would be interested in doing, for the reasons I've listed above.Hi Tim:

That was a well-written post. I misjudged you on Aikido Journal, unfortunately, and I admit it.

I noticed some currently-featured article by Dave Lowry which is accessible throught the Home page of E-Budo. He basically defends against the idea of "Koryu Snobs". What people like Rob, me, and many others I can name, etc., have been seeing is that there has been a growth of martial arts hierarchies (this includes a number of arts) which have been embarrassingly obviously missing any real knowledge of these ki and kokyu things. And I'm serious... there are now a LOT of people who are aware this is going on and the general level is increasing (more on this in PM, if you want: mikesigman@earthlink.net ). What I'm getting at is that most of the westerners I see in "Koryu" are just as ignorant of basic kokyu and ki training as are the non-Koryu people. In other words, this basic missing knowledge is quite common and easily seen by really qualified martial artists. I remember a discussion at a national tournament in Houston once in which a number of the visiting teachers from mainland China watched, smiled, etc., but later all agreed among themselves that none of the westerners understand the basics involving qi and jin (my teacher was recently immigrated from China and was able to relate the conversation to me). So Koryu or otherwise, the same general problem exists.

I was thinking about the term you used, "metaphysical". I'm not sure that "ki" and "kokyu" (or "qi" and "jin") honestly fit into the idea of "metaphysical". These skills are unusual and not widely known, but they fall into the purview of western physics' paradigm; it's just that the descriptions in the ki-paradigm turn out not to be an accurate way of describing these phenomena. So "metaphysics" is probably wrong, I would offer as a suggestions.

And since this thread is in a "meditation" compartment, I'd have to also suggest that a lot of what is described as "meditation" is not really meditation but methods of training the body (although these two concepts get confused, even among knowledgeable Chinese). My point being that a large contributing problem is that a lot of very practical matters have been misunderstood because the exotic terminology led people to perceive some substantive physical endeavours as "metaphysical", allegorical, etc.

My 2 cents worth of opinion.

Mike

dbotari
26th January 2006, 19:04
Let's see...we had a Yoshinkan shihan with 30 years experience walk into our class, and get held down by a first year student during Agete practice.



Rob,

Who is this Shihan you are referring to in the above quote? I asked once before but you couldn't remember his name. Any chance you or Tomoo can remember?

Thanks,

Dan Botari

kimiwane
26th January 2006, 21:36
The problem here is called THREAD DRIFT. So many unrelated assumptions have been brought into this discussion that I don't think anyone knows what anyone else is saying. The discussion has become ridiculous.

Now, thread drift is natural, of course, but it has to be held to limits. A little is natural and excusable. But once it gets to far from the topic of the thread, you should open a new thread in the appropriate forum and bring it up there. Too much thread drift is disrespectful of the thread, but still excuseable. But when one just flits from claim to claim on all kinds of unrelated subjects it's very disrespectful and bound to get snappy replies.

We should have a full thread on "science and ki", another on "I can beat up anyone with my special techniques!" another on "Kuzushi". On that thread I would be glad to discuss many of the questions that Asura has been pushing like a rude boy. The reason I have found these other lines distasteful is that none of them belong in this thread.

This thread is:

1. In a Meditation Forum.
2. It is titled "What is Ki?"
3. My answers have been in that vein
4. My answers have been consistent with Tohei, Yang Jwing-Ming, Lao Tzu and other reliable traditional sources. Nothing I've said contradicts well-established concepts of ki.
5. I have not described martial arts according to ki theories. Nor did Mochizuki sensei.
6. Inserting scientific buzz phrases into a discussion of Meditation/Ki is pointless
7. Inserting claims of how many people you can beat is pretty lame on a MEDITATION/Ki thread.
8. Betting money on your ability to beat someone up on a Meditation/Ki thread is also pretty lame.
9. Bragging about people you have beaten is also extremely lame on a Meditation/Ki thread. As a matter of fact, it's downright redneck.
10. If you want to strut around and spout off about "science says this, science says that," you should state your qualifications as a scientist.
11. I will discuss any subject on the appropriate thread. From here forth, I wil answer some of the posts on this thread that I haven't addressed yet, but after that, I, myself, shall ignore all posts and comments that don't belong on this thread.

WHEREAS: premises considered, you guys need to clear up what question you're addressing and open a thread for it.

This is not the place to drag in who all you can beat up while rolling your eyes. The very mention of "ki" need not degenerate into dragon ball posturing and bragging. You want to brag about your power, there are all kinds of forum where you can discuss technique.

Asura
26th January 2006, 21:37
Rob,

Who is this Shihan you are referring to in the above quote? I asked once before but you couldn't remember his name. Any chance you or Tomoo can remember?

Thanks,

Dan Botari

Dan,

Mmm... since I wasn't there it's hard for me to say anything. I will ask Gerald (one of my classmates now in London) when we goto Europe next week and see if he remembers. It's been a while though so I wouldn't expect too much.
If I find out I'll be sure to PM you.

mikesigman@eart
26th January 2006, 22:37
The problem here is called THREAD DRIFT. So many unrelated assumptions have been brought into this discussion that I don't think anyone knows what anyone else is saying. The discussion has become ridiculous.

[snip]

This thread is:

1. In a Meditation Forum.
2. It is titled "What is Ki?"
3. My answers have been in that vein
4. My answers have been consistent with Tohei, Yang Jwing-Ming, Lao Tzu and other reliable traditional sources. Nothing I've said contradicts well-established concepts of ki.
5. I have not described martial arts according to ki theories. Nor did Mochizuki sensei. [snip]
Just to throw in some opinions about Ki, meditation, and discussion protocols:


Ki
I'd suggest that your view of Ki is limited and focused because of preconceptions. Ki can be a quasi-mystical or near religious object in some peoples' minds, but that's usually westerners. Originally "Ki" was a term that was used to explain a wide number of unexplained forces in nature (they didn't have western science or an equivalent)... so it became a word that explained a large spectrum of phenomena. The idea of the "unseen force" being the cause for lightning, oxygen reactions, blood sugar, genetic conditions, etc., etc., was fine, but think of it as just an umbrella-term and a perspective that few people believe in nowadays (although Tohei tries to sell a version of this old perspective). Then take a look at the qi being demonstrated in martial arts. That's not something separate. It is also part of the same Ki. In other words, you can't talk about what is Ki and try to pretend that the Ki in martial arts is something else again. If you're going to talk about Ki, you have to include all the traditional perspectives of Ki/Qi. And in fact, if you really know anything about Ki, you'd know that martial kiko (=qigongs), medical kiko, and the other basic studies of Kiko are actually dealing with the same thing. And BTW, I wouldn't mention Tohei, Yang Jwing Ming, and the foggy Lao Tzu as support for any normal views of Ki... it doesn't fly. Ki/qi and qigongs are practical things, not exercises in imagination. Just because someone hasn't been shown how to do these things doesn't mean that they don't exist and that zillions of Asians have been wasting their time for thousands of years with nothing to show for their efforts.

Meditation
In terms of meditation, I think there is again some sort of western preconception about what "meditation" is that may not be fully accurate if you look at the full range of "meditations". If you look at Taoisty, Shintoey, etc., visions of someone becoming one with the universe, you're looking at a very limited view of what "meditations" encompass. Consider this.... ultimately, the goal of "meditation" in India, China, and Japan, etc., is to move the "sexual essence" up the spinal cord to the brain. This is done via ki/qi/prana. In other words, "meditations" have a lot to do with this often tangible and demonstrable skill-set of Ki. It's not figurative and intangible... meditation is aimed at a substantive goal. So the idea that substantive and practical discussions don't belong on a "meditation" forum is just wrong. All it shows is a wrong and limited idea of what ki and meditation really are.

Discussion Protocols
I actually read posts purely for information and I just skim over the bickering. If there was a real martial arts list where no bickering occasionally happened, I certainly wouldn't want to read it -- those are not the general martial artists population. I do notice when people shift from a discussion of an issue to a discussion of their debate opponent's personality and I see it more in Kimiwane's posts (despite the worries about "meditation"). But let me point out that in a lot of martial arts forums there is an affectation of "this is how us deeply-philosophical Taoist-Sage-Martial-Artists should pretend to talk". I.e., it's often a role-play that does little to disguise a lot of self-serving behaviour. Rob is obviously young in some ways, but his major sin seems to be that he won't participate in the accepted role-play games (like the "AikiSpeak" some people have artificially tried to establish as a part of Aikido).

My 2 cents of opinion.

Mike

kimiwane
26th January 2006, 23:13
Hopefully my pathetic attempts will inspire the more knowledgeable to chime in. I will attempt to be extremely critical while still maintaining a level of civility. Some may view overt criticism by a young and not particularly talented martial arts practitioner as uncivil, and if that is the case I remind them that we are conducting this discussion in English on a website hosted in the United States where we have a tradition of open, tough minded public discourse.

Well, that's a good beginning.


As to David's point regarding the use of Chinese metaphysical tools to describe fighting arts:

I agree with Rob that much of East Asia has worked hard to shift away from using these conceptual models and towards a scientific method. I am confused as to why someone would voluntarily subscribe to discredited ways of knowing.

Unfortunately, now it starts to sound like Kafka's version of the Monty Python sketch about The Cheese Shop.

Your two paragraphs just quoted seem to dispute one another. I have read them several times now, very slowly and carefully, and the only meaning I can derive is that you believe I have described fighting arts according to Chinese metaphysics.

I do not and my teacher did not. I did point out that Yang Jwing-Ming's book on baguazhang translates old bagua texts as being oriented to develop pre-heaven chi. That is him. So let's hold close to the truth as we criticize with civility.

And last on this bit: "I am confused as to why someone would voluntarily subscribe to discredited ways of knowing."

Unfortunately, I don't know what kind of ideas you think I subscribe to, based on your comment above and the chaotic lack of discipline on topic in this thread. But please tell me who has discredited the Taoist ways of knowing?


As Trevor alluded to earlier, science is not simply another discourse, coequal with Chinese metaphysics, Navajo mythology or Japanese Shinto. Rather, per Karl Popper it is about establishing theories which are capable of being falsified. That is, there is a way of testing the truth of the matter.

This is largely true, but the way it comes through here is like saying that "French used to be the international language of diplomacy. Now English is. Therefore French is a discredited language and all people of the earth must stop speaking French and begin speaking English."

Science has its place. But it cannot answer all human needs. Do you use the scientific method to find a wife? Do you use the scientific method to communicate with your mother?

Just as one should not attempt to fulfill his entire life with martial arts--getting all his exercise, all his meditation, all his language and history study, all his religious content, all his social contact--one should understand the place and limits of science in human life.


The problem with the intuitive method of learning which David has championed is two fold. First of all, it is inherently hierarchal and anti-democratic. This may not be a concern to you, however, as a person living in what is theoretically a Western democracy it is a concern to me. I would personally not choose to participate in a system of knowledge which tells me that I cannot find the answers for myself unless I spend decades following someone else.

That's an image of how it works. But that's not how it works. Yes, it is inherently hierarchical and un-democratic, but that's because you are learning from someone who knows something you don't. That effectively places them "above" you in knowledge, but not as a human being. You are always free to say, "Hey, sensei, thanks for all the fish, but I must be on my way." And then you seek out the best teacher you can find. I went through five teachers of various arts before I ended up in Japan as uchi deshi to an uchi deshi of both Ueshiba and Mifune. I served my sensei because he was better to me than that. I worked really hard to try to help him anytime I could, but he did more than that for me. He took ukemi for me when he was judan in aikido. He had me lie down on the tatami in the dojo and balanced himself with his walking cane while he massaged my injured back with his foot. An 83 year old man!

And when it was time for me to go, I said, "Sensei, I cannot repay you." I should have said, "I'll be back," but I knew I wouldn't for a long time.

So that kind of worry is really irrelevant when you're talking about a master. He really expects you to be a man. The only thing is, it's HIS house! He will let you know that just like your daddy will if you get too pushy. So when you're too big you either go to a bigger house or you make your own.

I didn't leave because I had gotten too big. I had just gone as far as I could for the time. I had to take care of the whole big life I had neglected. And he didn't try to stop me. And usually the people who come to a man like this have already spent a lot of time finding out the answers and have already figured out a lot on their own. He liked that kind of person. We were always told that his art meant "find out for yourself". But of course, he set the environment and general guidelines by which you could do research in his house.


Second, this method has produced demonstrably poor results, which is why both Japan and later (with much greater difficulty) China have abandoned it.

You mean the intuitive method of teaching? Partly true. Partly not. It's still out there and it would be bad judgment to dismiss it so. The Zen method is still a deep method of teaching. Of course, the teacher has to understand it. If you're studying some martial art in the US, it's very likely that your teacher does not understand that method and that you have had confusing experiences for that reason. The teacher has to understand. If you can tell that he doesn't, it's your human duty to tell him goodbye (which means "God be with you," according to Trevor, I believe) and find a better teacher who DOES understand.


This method, whatever its other benefits never developed calculus and physics. Free exchange and inquiry in Europe allowed the flowering of modern science.

Nothing against science, but it is not a panacea. And arts like baguazhang are quite worthy in their own right. But Westerners are attracted to such beautiful and interesting things that OUR culture never produced.


Failure to embrace the free exchange of information rendered China poor, backwards and incompetent to deal with foreign invasion, because Chinese imperial government officials could not deal with technology, and ultimately with the Western way of war.

And that relates to ki or the intuitive method of learning?

I'm sorry I didn't look further at your profile. I believe you said you're in the US. Are you saying the US really has its act together? Poor, backwards and incompetent to deal with foreign invasion because (fill in the blank) government officials could not deal with basic common sense facts of daily life. And you forgot to mention corrupt. The Chinese officials of those days were as corrupt (or almost, anyway) as many American officials now are.


We are discussing martial arts on this board.

No. Once again, this is a Meditation forum and the thread is "What is Ki?"
I will read your comments here, but if yu want to continue that line, you need to open another thread in another forum on e-Budo.


Martial arts originally justified their existence through their effectiveness in the face of opponents. Unfortunately for China, the non-rationalist way of knowing proved rather inadequate in the face of close order drill.

?? You mean armies marching in ranks and files? By no means. China had that for thousands of years. Where did The Art of War originate? Has it been discredited???


Very intelligent people in Japan realized this and took drastic steps to remake the Japanese mind.

My sensei was a direct student of one of the foremost innovators in that way, Jigoro Kano. Judo was created to communicate rational thinking and Western physics to the Japanese masses through the kinesthetic sense as well as conscious awareness of the concepts of reason and physics.


In a broader sense, we also see that the iterative, non-hierarchal way of knowing also provides for a greater freedom for individuals to learn as they see fit, and yields tangible results.

Umm-hmm. So you can make a computer program, but who will teach you their secrets of survival? Can you be overly familiar with him? That's hierarchy right there. It's integral to martial arts because it is integral to human nature. You can find out some things for yourself, but even the Olympic champion, Yamashita came to Mochizuki sensei for special instruction. He was humble enough to know that this old man could teach him something. There was a photo on the dojo wall showing sensei pouring a glass of beer, the giant Yamashita holding the glass in both hands and looking sincerely grateful to sensei. Does Olympic gold count as tangible results for you? Of course, sensei was a direct student of Jigoro Kano. He was very rational. He never used ki as an explanation for his techniques. He analyzed the body movement and applied this to Morihei Ueshiba's teaching. As one of the few advanced judo men among Ueshiba's students of that day, he was able to dissect the techniques that were just a blur to other students. And since he'd had other jujutsu experience, some of Ueshiba's techniques were already familiar to him. He said that o'Sensei once said to him, "You're a pain, Minoru. I constantly have to change my techniques because of you." But Minoru was one of his favorite students.

And while Mochizuki sensei had photographs of both Kano and Ueshiba on either side of his kamiza, he had a dragon head IN the kamiza, representing the non-rational Ueshiba. He gave me a verbal instruction along this line.


David has asserted that the intuitive, neo-Confucian, non-rationalist way of knowing is traditional. It really depends on whose tradition we are discussing. Some of the finest minds in East Asia wrestled with the idea of how to reconcile neo-Confucian and Buddhist thought with the modern era, among them Yoshida Shoin, Kang Youwei, Tan Sitong, and Liang Qichao.

No question, but the general culture is based on Confucius, Lao Tzu and I Ching. I understand the thinking in Confucianism, generally, but I don't prefer it. I think the principles are true, but to try to portray the image of it without inner content is as hollow as a loveless marriage. In other words, human nature will not really fulfill this ideal, but if that's the standard, everyone will try to appear to fulfill it. And that is what I say is hollow.

I much prefer Lao Tzu and I Ching. Neither of them has been discredited in any way.


Kang deserves special notice because he is widely regarded (by historians in the field) as the last of the great scholars of the imperial era. He also came to see at the end of his life that the hierarchal nature of Chinese society was fundamentally unjust and the cause of much misery, which again plays right back into my first point. It seems that David himself acknowledges this when he writes about his concerns that the school system in Japan and the United States stamp creativity and free movement out of its students through forcing people to bow down to a hierarchy. An insistence on the use of a subjective and non-rationalist, intuitive way of knowing will actually strengthen hierarchy.

Well, I hope you understand my attitude toward hierarchy better by now. And it should also be clear that fundamental injustice and misery is not the case in China alone. Also, when they got rid of the old superstitions, they did replace them with the purely rational-based "COMMUNISM", which really is so rational that it becomes inhumanly cold. Also, America is consumed with it. Which is why I have mentioned the Creation Scientists and Intelligent Design crowd so often on this thread. That stuff does NOT belong in science classes. Just as I see no need for scientists to rewrite the Bible. I happen to be Christian as I have said before, but I have no trouble accepting the scientific view of creation. I don't necessarily thing The Big Bang really explains it, but I'll accept the age, the geologic processes, the observed universe seeming to expand. Fine. I'll accept evolution. And I still accept The Holy Bible. If it says God made the world in seven days, Okay. I guess they were very long days. A thousand years is the blink of an eye to God...That's another thing that cannot be reconciled with science though some of it has been proven archaeologically. Other parts cannot possibly be literally true.

I live happily with both ideas. One works for the grand scheme of life and my personal relation with the universe, the other works for mechanics, calculations, rational deduction, etc. And at the same time, I appreciate the beauty of the ki system as shown in the Japanese language and described by Tohei, Yang Jwing-Ming, books on accupuncture, etc. Aiki and kiai are more than just half-meaningless phrases. They're part of daily life for me on a very subtle level that does not prevent my showing up at work every day and answering strange questions for epidemiologists and biostatisticians. I really like a good question, but when it comes to science, I have no patience for sloppy statements or questions.


In the end they realized that rationalist thought was superior in the realm of the material. Martial arts, whatever there other benefits, exist in the realm of the material because we are looking at tangible results, i.e. does this throw work? Can I develop so-called short power? Can I neutralize the force with a touch (ala Shioda)?

Once more, this is a Meditation forum, the thread being "What is ki?" But this last time I'll work with you on this topic in this thread.

In the end, "they" realized???

Who is "they"?

Kano introduced rationality and physics through kinesthetic awareness in judo, but when he saw the non-rational Ueshiba, he said, "That is my ideal of budo."

Maybe some. Maybe sometimes. But not everyone at all times and in all things. There is a definite place in human life for the non-rational mind. "The inner eye sees deeper."


This is not to say that there is no place for metaphysics or the discussion of subjective aspects like feelings. There is, but it has to happen in the context of looking for repeatable results. That's the rationalist way.

No. It doesn't "have to happen in the context of looking for repeatable results" if you are not a rationalist. The rationalist way is NOT the only valid way of human thinking. Can you force Picasso into it? Can you force Debussy or Stravinsky into it?


David has made some other statements about measuring human feelings being beyond measurement. This is not the case. A very good friend of mine is a Ph.D. candidate in neuroscience. A large portion of his work is about addiction, and finding ways to detect and quantify obsessive/thrill seeking/drug seeking behavior.[/qoute]

Well that's nice, but does he take some kind of 'feeling-o-meter' with him on dates to see how his date feels about him (assuming he dates)? Or does he hold his dear one's hand? Can he not tell more from that touch, from a simple exchange of glances than any artificial quantifier is going to give him???

Well...for some foks...maybe not.

I like to look in the eyes.

[quote]I will admit that my views on this subject are colored by my family history and personal experiences. It is rather difficult for me to be objective on this subject. I am typing this post in English, sitting in America because of the early 20th century collapse of the Chinese state which I, and others far more erudite than I am, chalk up to a fundamental failure to grasp rationalist thought. It was the reason that my grandparents could never go home, and it is the reason that many of my friend's families were subjected to horrific suffering. Please understand I treasure my copy of Chan Wing Tsit's Chinese philosophy source-book, and I mourn for the passing of what in many ways was a more sustainable and less volatile way of life.

Have you ever read Barbara Tuchman's book on General Stillwell? With my Chinese statistician colleague, I often chat at length about the events of the early 20th century in China. We talk about General Stillwell, Chiang Kai-shek, the Japanese in WWII. This is a very bright man, almost totally rational, to the point of almost mystical esotericism. I think the situation of China at the beginning of the 20th Century has some parallels with modern USA. And look at China now. And rationalism/irrationalism is not the defining issue. It's more about economic freedom. Their new hero is Yao Ming, a guy who plays basketball. Is that rational for China as a whole, following all those years of praising the working class struggler? And is it rational for America as a whole to worship professional sports figures and pay them vastly more than teachers and reasoners? America has enough irrationality to keep everyone busy for decades if they're looking for screwy systems to correct. Compared to those problems of waste, neglect, corruption and injustice, someone's preference to think in terms of feng shui for his home instead of outfitting everything with shiny high-tech items is really not worth pushing.


Nonetheless, in a modern, rationalist democratic world there really is very little room for the neo-Confucian way of knowing. There is even less room for it in the very pragmatic world of martial arts.**
**I respect enormously the amount of time and commitment that koryu practitioners have put in to their study of the art. I enjoy their articles. But I profoundly disagree with the pedagogical method. Koryu is also not something I would be interested in doing, for the reasons I've listed above.

Well, I hope you understand by now that I do not advocate a strict return to confucian ethics any more than I think we need to install the Ten Commandments on everyone's front door. But I also do not think we should be expecting everyone to become purely rational in every aspect of their lives, as long as their non-rationality does no one else any harm. Who knows? They could get rich with their paintings, like Picasso. In that case, irrationality is the most rational course to pursue.

Sorry, I can't see your profile, but do you train in a martial art?


I hope people find this post interesting and useful

Well, I sure do. And I appreciate your civil attitude and humble way of expressing it. I feel like it shows the best of both Chinese and American attainment. I hope you have found my comments understandable and reasonable.


I welcome correction and harsh criticism. That's the whole point.

It's the point if harsh criticism is due. I see nothing in your post that can be criticized harshly. Nice to talk to someone who doesn't have to roll his eyes with every statement.

No, quite the contrary, I found your post to rate on the higher end of the scale for quality commentary on this board.

I will tell you what someone once told me: "You're a gentleman and a scholar. And there's danged few left."

kimiwane
26th January 2006, 23:43
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
In fact, the way it developed in China produced baguazhang. Other reflexes and movements were cultivated to produce xing yi. Taiji is a combination of bagua and xing yi.


:rolleyes: And why would you say this? (Not an attack, just curious what you have to say about this)
Depending on how you look at it, it can be, or it can be different.

Going from what we discussed earlier about children, just put the baby in the particular culture and the habits of the people influence how the self-defense and escape reflexes evolve. Bagua developed as it did because of the peculiar ways of the people where it developed. The silk-reeling movement, for instance, was not made up but developed from the literal physical movements of reeling silk. Cutlivated from that.


I'm not poo pooing, just saying you still haven't been able to describe mechanically how that kuzushi I talked about earlier is caused. And as such I'm poo pooing all your attempts to dodge that question.

Yes, I thought about this earlier when I was running some strange tasks for my study...oh, by the way. Since we're talking about dodging questions, I think my much earlier question has priority. Please state your scientific credentials as Trevor and I have done and which I asked you to do before you shifted off to kuzushi.

Now, as to whether I am able to describe this or not, I don't care what you think, but as I said in an earlier post the reason I refuse to discuss it on this thread is purely that it doesn't belong in this discussion. You are fouling an entirely different discussion in your pushy little boy attempts to foul me up with words. Fine. Open a thread on kuzushi and we will discuss it there. And please open up a thread on how many people you can "beat". It should be as much fun as the "Worst Dogi List".


Awesome, I also know kids here in Yoyogi park that have done the same thing for 10 years and still have zip.

Well, I didn't give myself Zero Degree for nothing. I am quite fine to be nothing in the eyes of a foolish young man like yourself, spoiled by your mother and not well taught by your father. You should learn from the example of edg176.


So, can you explain the kuzushi?

I'm sure you think you can explain the nuances of technique of a man like Mochizuki sensei or Mifune sensei. I'm not egotistical enough to pretend to do so. However, if you open another thread, I will discuss this matter in depth.


Like Mike said, some posts with substance maybe?

You haven't noticed my signature line, have you? For a champion of rationality, you are pretty irrational and emotional yourself. There is no room in your mind, but my words will penetrate anyway.


Fair enough, I thought you were holding his opinoin to be the rule ^^;

That's usually what happens when you read superficially and with your head full of your own image.


Um no... I meant that the East has been shifting over to the Western way of thinking for some time now, and been explaining their own paradigms in a western way on their own.

Yet they haven't banned Lao Tzu, Sun Tzu or I Ching. Maybe very few people still give them credence. But you know what? VERY few people ever HAVE looked at these things really deeply. That's why Lao Tzu said, "The fool hears of the tao and laughs out loud."

Of course, if he had known such a spoiled fellow as yourself, he would have made it "The fool hears of the tao and rolls his eyes."


The most vocal people about the pure asian paradigm are people like you actually.

Well, you know, this is a forum on meditation. A question was asked and I answered according to the traditional ways described by many writers and teachers. You came in trying to change the topic. My raised voice is not so much to promote the idea of ki as to try to keep an eye-rolling pest from bouncing around to every non-relevant angle on the earth.

You are a regular Woody Woodpecker, you are.


Anyways, discussing this stuff with you has been fascinating, but as much as I've enjoyed this farce

Well, you brought more than your share of the farts. Unfortunately, those were you best comments.

And if I want to go back to the beginning, I'll go back to the beginning of this thread and map out some of the reversals you've made in your statements after ridiculing the statement you finally come around to making.

Other than that, I go back to the beginning of all my techniques and rest among the common root of them all.

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 00:04
I think these conversations are really fascinating to watch because they represent a trend that started more than a decade ago. As more bits and pieces of knowledge about how to train ki and kokyu come out (and Rob's teacher is obviously showing a good and recognizable approach to some of these things, even if it's not exactly what I do/learned)

Well, since he has me to roll his eyes at, he probably won't start with you, but he claims there IS NO KI at all. If it were only you and he, he would start the rolly eyes at you and tell you right out there's no such thing as ki.


there are always these head-to-head discussions with people who have studied martial arts for years, have some place in the hierarchies, but who for some reason weren't shown how to train these things.

They were very open in my dojo. Just because I don't describe them by the words Asura uses and you're familiar with hearing (because this is a Meditation/Ki thread and NOT a technique thread), doesn't mean I didn't learn them. Come on over to Asura's technical thread where we can hear more about whom he beat.


I guess that's nothing knew, really, if you look at the fact that some of Ueshiba's top deshi had to go outside in order to learn these things....

Mochizuki didn't find that necessary. Of course, he already had such broad experience...But Ueshiba taught him the full thing.


But overall, watching this thawing of the ice where someone who has found out that there was more actual substance to this stuff about ki and kokyu than most practitioners are aware of is pretty interesting and it keeps running into the same problems: knowledge is limited and "established" teachers will almost never easily accept the idea that there is anything major that they don't know.

I'm warning you. Keep up that ki talk and Asura's going to roll those eyes at you yet.


I still learn stuff. Each time I do find out more (these things are complex subjects, not the few simple things I wish they were)

Well, if your mind is clear and you read carefully and broadly and study with the best teacher you can find, you may finally see that these things are not so complex, either.


I am so glad that I haven't taught a group of students and found out that I left out some key piece of information.

I'm glad I can say that too. Though I wonder if both you and I haven't done that to some degree?

I can look back to a young lady who trained with me over 20 years ago, went to New York City and on two different occasions, repelled two-man attacks with a single move each time. And it wasn't even what you could call a technique. It was her ability to move with the moment, keep her balance and clarity and affect the attacker where it will do the most good. Two men at once two different times. And that was before I went to Japan and learned.

Now, over there, I learned that I could be beaten. I could throw some people reliably and consistently, but I did see very talented people become much much harder to throw. But I have NEVER seen someone who could not be beaten by SOMEONE. I knew a really strong guy who was very proud and pushy, the cock of the walk until a certain Dutchman showed up and put him in his place. I don't care WHO you are: SOMEONE can beat you. That means someone can beat me, too. That's one of the very biggest lessons of budo. SOMEONE can beat YOU. There's no one on earth and no art or method on earth that SOMEONE will never overcome it. So to crow that you know something so super special is just to cry for the day when someone rubs your nose in it. Humility can't be beaten. It is a shame you have not learned that lesson yet. Who failed to show you that?


I think Rob, by commenting that he knows people who have studied a long, long time and yet who don't even know some of the basics of the stuff Akuzawa has showed him... I think that's what you're going to see start happening more and more.

Well, who is he talking about? I'm not familiar with most of the names he gives. Are these aikido people? I can say the same for myself if you want to talk 'average' aikido people. Has Asura fought in any cage matches? K1, maybe? Because that's the real end for that kind of attitude. Finally, if you are so blindingly good, and you can beat so many people, it's time to put your money where your mouth is. I note he was willing to bet money he could beat me, too. But I didn't hear him say that to someone like Jason Delucia.

Well, he's never heard of me. And I guess you haven't either. Does not bother me, but only a fool sizes up someone he's never met and throws insults about what the person has done, where he's been, his teacher and what he can "do" : rollseyes:.


And there's no way for anyone to hold their ground and keep the knowledge away by simply denying there can be something they don't know. This is too big.

Sure there is. You just don't go to Shizuoka and see Akira Tezuka. Asura is so sure he's seen everything and knows everyone. I don't think hes been down to the deeper parts of the ocean where Tezuka will quickly take him. Sounds like you could use some of that exposure yourself.

IF you want to talk about REAL martial arts.

But if you want to talk further about it, please do so in a thread other than the MEDITATION/KI thread.

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 00:20
I have a lot of experience in martial arts, both Japanese and Chinese, but a lot of that, it turns out, was wasted because I didn't understand the ki and kokyu things.

Maybe your teacher didn't understand. But were you TEACHING back then? Could it be you might have taught someone incorrectly at that point???

After all, who has ALWAYS been perfect???


Therefore, I feel it would be gratuitous to start claiming names and pedigrees. The best way to find out what experience I have in these things is to talk and to ask questions so that we can both see what each other knows.

Which is why I didn't say "What experience do you :rollseyes: have in these matters?"

Makes a difference, doesn't it?


However, your earlier comments on Ki indicate fairly clearly that you and I are far apart on those matters, almost without a doubt.

Almost without a doubt, perhaps, but probably not as much as you think. There has been so much thread jumping that I don't think my ideas on ki have come through clearly. I think you've associated my statements with some other things that have been said and you have my ideas framed in the wrong light. I'm trying to keep this MEDITATION/Ki thread in its proper boundaries and have not put my efforts into clarifying technique and such just because this is NOT a technical forum and thread.

[quote]So your best bet for a debate would be to find some statement of mine (I've made a few already) that has to do with the *subject* (not this devolution to personality I see coming up too often) and then to debate me on it.

I've not noticed any particular point to object to in your posts other than the ones I've answered. I'm not sure what we would "debate" in this meditation/ki forum. Your comments seem mostly to be concerned with technique. Why don't you make a statement that seems to summarize what you feel I'm saying and I'll address that politely. (I'm through with rolling eyes). But if it's a technical question, please post it on a technical thread.


You have your position of years, experience, names, etc., and all I'll use is what I actually know. How's that? ;^)

What can you know other than the results of your years of experience and the teachers with whom you have trained? It's the same thing. By no means am I trying to set myself up as above anyone. How are you going to answer a snotty boy who says, "Those who can "do"...?" other than to let him know where you have been in your life? Of course, to a boy, these things bounce right off. You don't know anything because he alone knows everything. There's nothing left for dumbasses like me and you to know.

And then he rolls his eyes.

That's not even thread drift. That's just being a butt.


And BTW, Rob is obviously correct in a statement you pooh-poohed early on.... the term "qi" is a catchall term that encompasses a large number of phenomena, including lightning, air, pressure, blood-sugar effects, body skills, etc. You can't deny, for example, the existence of lightning, so in the qi-paradigm many things really do exist, even if the paradigm and terminology don't withstand complete scrutiny.

No! See, here's where the chaos of thread drift has confused every reference I've made to ki/qi. You just stated MY argument. NOT Rob's. He said, in short, that it's irrational to try to associate things like the weather and human emotions and aiki/kiai/sakki as all being somehow related.

What HE said was that this PROVES how irrational ki/qi thinking is. He at first refused to discuss any aspect of ki but the martial aspects, then he insisted that there IS no ki, and therefore the Martial aspect of Ki is that there is no such thing.

MY position is that all things in nature and human life ARE connected behind the scenes. We each have our own portion of ki and we can waste it or cultivate it by correct body movement. He just says body movement alone is the end-all be-all. It has nothing to do with ki. So please don't attribute my thinking to him.

Thanks for the input.

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 00:25
Dan,

Mmm... since I wasn't there it's hard for me to say anything. I will ask Gerald (one of my classmates now in London) when we goto Europe next week and see if he remembers. It's been a while though so I wouldn't expect too much.
If I find out I'll be sure to PM you.

You weren't there? But you reported it as if you were. Maybe you got the story wrong or someone exaggerated it for you. And he was a great Shihan with 30 years of Yoshinkan training (meaning he was trained from very early on by Gozo Shioda...)

But unfortunately...how's that? You can't remember his name....?????

Yeah, where is that bird symbol?

Oh, yeah, and it's been awhile, so I wouldn't expect too much?

Not at all, Rob. In fact, this is exactly what I have been expecting. In other words, BS.

Asura
27th January 2006, 00:42
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
In fact, the way it developed in China produced baguazhang. Other reflexes and movements were cultivated to produce xing yi. Taiji is a combination of bagua and xing yi.

Personally I think that's an overly simplistic way of looking at it.
But I think Mike would be more qualified to comment on that since he's already posting.

All three still contain 6 directional power, 6 harmonies etc etc the only thing that really differs is the way in which they choose to develop that power and execute it tactically.
In fact all three share a similar training base I'd say,
"Playing the Pi Pa" -> same basic configuration as Hsing Yi's San Ti
Bagua's Single Palm Change -> Twisted San Ti.



You should learn from the example of edg176.

now THAT is funny :rolleyes:
But I'd PM him for more info on why I find that so.



I'm sure you think you can explain the nuances of technique of a man like Mochizuki sensei or Mifune sensei. I'm not egotistical enough to pretend to do so. However, if you open another thread, I will discuss this matter in depth.


Actually I don't give a rats !!! about the edaha or the variations in how the techniques are executed, so much as the basic underlying foundation that powered their movements. And yes I have a good idea how they probably did a lot of their "tricks".
Its that foundation/Kou(功) that's often described using Ki/Qi in the MAs
->


I am interested in knowing what the opinions are about what Ki or Chi actually is, and how people use it and teach it in their different styles of Martial Arts, or religion.


Considering that the original thread also asked about the USE of Ki/Chi in Martial Arts, my questions are fair game.
So yes I'm going to continue to be pushy about it, especially since this is the Martial Arts Board.


Like you say, Zen isn't something to be measured scientifically(if you want to understand it, that doesn't mean that certain aspects can't be measured). Meditation is a very physical process, and as such I think we should be able to describe/explain what's going on physically.





Well, you know, this is a forum on meditation. A question was asked and I answered according to the traditional ways described by many writers and teachers. You came in trying to change the topic. My raised voice is not so much to promote the idea of ki as to try to keep an eye-rolling pest from bouncing around to every non-relevant angle on the earth.


And I answered them in the non-traditional sense, bringing the view that what looks like abstract psychobabble, is based in a real physical skill that can be directly cultivated, devoid of the metaphysical explanation, which Mike succinctly outlined.

Besides, your answers are boring. You can get the same vague answers reading your run of the mill Tai Chi/Ki Book

What I was trying to give was an impression that these views arose from concrete physical skills, and unless you have those physical skills you won't be able to understand where those seemingly abstract metaphysical allusions come from. Even Ueshiba's trippy Kami allusions make perfect sense once you begin to manifest 6 directional contradictory power (sorry, scientific buzzword?)




You haven't noticed my signature line, have you? For a champion of rationality, you are pretty irrational and emotional yourself. There is no room in your mind, but my words will penetrate anyway.

Actually, I just got such a kick out of the typical "I studied under such and such teacher for 439849384 years, worship me and my word for g0D i am UBER" reaction that I couldn't help but needle you.

You're actually the first person I've so openly ridiculed on a forum (for those that know me on Aikiweb or even !!!!!!ido), but only because you make it so easy.

The difference between us is that I'm still having fun, and you're obviously annoyed by me ;)
Imashime tarinaizo oyaji! :p

And yea I'm young, shoot me, gotta enjoy it while I have it :rolleyes:

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 00:44
I'd suggest that your view of Ki is limited and focused because of preconceptions.

I think you need to reread my comments. Asura and Trevor want to limit the concept ONLY to martial arts discussions. My idea of ki is very, very wide. It encompasses all of life--not just the narrow topic of martial arts, thanks.


Ki can be a quasi-mystical or near religious object in some peoples' minds, but that's usually westerners. Originally "Ki" was a term that was used to explain a wide number of unexplained forces in nature (they didn't have western science or an equivalent)... so it became a word that explained a large spectrum of phenomena.

It can appear that way, but the truth is, it describes a large range of phenomena that are subtly unified below the visible surface.


The idea of the "unseen force" being the cause for lightning, oxygen reactions, blood sugar, genetic conditions, etc., etc., was fine, but think of it as just an umbrella-term and a perspective that few people believe in nowadays (although Tohei tries to sell a version of this old perspective).

but it's not inconsistent with the general idea of zero point energy or quantum mechanics. EVERYTHING is unseen energy when you look through a powerful enough microscope.


Then take a look at the qi being demonstrated in martial arts. That's not something separate. It is also part of the same Ki.

My point exactly, but in a subtle way that we will see in one second:


In other words, you can't talk about what is Ki and try to pretend that the Ki in martial arts is something else again. If you're going to talk about Ki, you have to include all the traditional perspectives of Ki/Qi.

Well, yes, but Trevor and Asura INSISTED that we LIMIT the discussion to ONLY the martial aspects of ki. That's exactly what you're criticizing. My point was that the pure question "What is ki?" CANNOT be answered by addressing ONLY the martial aspects of ki. Especially when, as Asura has repeatedly claimed, KI doesn't exist.

It's like Alex Trebek saying, "This strange Asian force does not exist."

BING-BING

Trebek: Asura!

Asura: What is KI, Alex?

Trebek: Fifty dollars!

At best, looking at the martial aspects give a VERY incomplete and unbalanced view of the whole, wide flowing world of ki in human life. It took me many years just to be able to see that there is a LOT about ki that has NOTHING to do with MA.


And in fact, if you really know anything about Ki, you'd know that martial kiko (=qigongs), medical kiko, and the other basic studies of Kiko are actually dealing with the same thing.

Well, you can go back in my posts and pretty much clip that exact statement from MY comments. This is exactly what Asura and Trevor have protested. They say those things are NOT related and only Asian backwardness and ignorance lumped them together because they were too stupid to understand them. Which is about where I really started getting snippy with them.


And BTW, I wouldn't mention Tohei, Yang Jwing Ming, and the foggy Lao Tzu as support for any normal views of Ki... it doesn't fly. Ki/qi and qigongs are practical things, not exercises in imagination. Just because someone hasn't been shown how to do these things doesn't mean that they don't exist and that zillions of Asians have been wasting their time for thousands of years with nothing to show for their efforts.

Well, I can see your points about Tohei (though I'll bet Tohei can put Asura on his head [Tohei being a very old man now]). But I don't see the problem with Yang. He seems very practical to me and his book presents the original Chinese texts for old bagua theoretical texts going WAY back. It's all practical, has a lot about ki development, but the ultimate aim is to make a very tough, fast, unpredictable and powerful FIGHTER. As for Lao Tzu, I don't think he directly talks about ki anywhere. But he does nicely illustrate the underlying unity of all things in human life.

Thanks for the careful analysis. I think we're really much closer than this convoluted thread has allowed us to recognize.

I'll look at the rest of your comments later, if my wife will tolerate it.

best wishes!

Asura
27th January 2006, 00:54
You weren't there? But you reported it as if you were. Maybe you got the story wrong or someone exaggerated it for you. And he was a great Shihan with 30 years of Yoshinkan training (meaning he was trained from very early on by Gozo Shioda...)

But unfortunately...how's that? You can't remember his name....?????

Yeah, where is that bird symbol?

Oh, yeah, and it's been awhile, so I wouldn't expect too much?

Not at all, Rob. In fact, this is exactly what I have been expecting. In other words, BS.

hehehe,
That's alright my skill speaks for itself.
And anyone that steps into Aunkai and touches hands with either myself or Akuzawa WILL understand why that "Shihan" and others couldn't do anything.

If you want a testimony by another person who's spent his fair share of years at Yoshinkan and touched hands with myself and Akuzawa, then goto Ellis's "Hidden in Plain Sight" Blog.

But really all that is irelevant.
Like I've said again and again, this stuff has to be felt.
So anyone that has doubts is always welcome to come to class ;)

We're actually looking to get some heavier guys to get into the class to mix things up. Anyone that's interested PM me for more details on the when and where of the class.

I may not remember that Shihan's name, but I'm certainly not nervous about backing that statement up. ;)

And no the story wasn't exaggerated. Nor are the stories of Akuzawa pwning 200lb guys with his pinky and throwing them :p

Sorry, I just had to put in a plug for Aunkai since I was on a role.

Asura
27th January 2006, 01:21
Btw, Ki essentially referred to any phenomenon they couldn't put a label on at the time ;)

Were my exact words. Nothing more nothing less. I didn't say it was "irrational" to apply it to the weather. Just that ANY phenomenon they couldn't label, they would associated with "Ki".

It's the x-factor in the equation.

Since this is a meditation forum on a MA board, a discussion on what comprises that "x-factor" in Meditation and a Martial context is a perfectly legite discussion :)

As the french say,

Amicalement

PS
I also said that this discussion of power generation/movement etc wasn't limited to a Martial Context only, and that it can be used in everyday life. In fact it needs to be worked into everyday movement if you want to be able to use it since it's not a natural way of moving.

Trevor Johnson
27th January 2006, 01:51
I think you need to reread my comments. Asura and Trevor want to limit the concept ONLY to martial arts discussions. My idea of ki is very, very wide. It encompasses all of life--not just the narrow topic of martial arts, thanks.

but it's not inconsistent with the general idea of zero point energy or quantum mechanics. EVERYTHING is unseen energy when you look through a powerful enough microscope.

Wrong. Asura may have happened to point out that this is a MA-related board, and it can be so assumed that ki and martial arts is a valid focus.

I simply pointed out that this is the only place where I personally use the concept. I have no opinions one way or the other about limiting it to martial arts.
In fact, you may notice that my questions have NOT been on the martial aspects of ki, which means that I'm not limiting myself to that aspect of it. I would think that would be rather obvious.

Please do not lump me in with Asura, btw. I would like you to respond on individual merits, and this sounds like a prelude to dismissing us both after so conflating us.

Now, you said earlier:

First, he is healthy. Second, he is lively. Third, he is fearless (in general). Fourth, he is bright and alert. This applies not only to children but to adults and anyone who is genki (has "original ki").

Good start. Now, what is the causal connection between ki and these qualities? Does "original ki" cause them? You say that ki cannot be created or destroyed, I believe. Therefore, do these qualities somehow focus or distill the ki? Which comes first, the quality or the ki?

I asked about preemies specifically in this context. Could you comment on that?


In general, by that term, I mean "look, see, notice, understand, creatively develop a method that best employs what you noticed by looking and seeing."

Zanshin, you mean? It sounds rather like the scientific method, the way you describe it.

You say you'd need to see the original context of the statement, I'm fairly sure it's somewhere on this thread.


Sorry. I guess I just assumed that everyone loves Tao te Ching as much as I do. Lao Tzu said, "The tao begot one, one begot two, two begot three and three begot the ten-thousand things."

I understand it to refer to the multiplicity of human existence. Of course, there are many more than 10,000 things. I'm sure he used (in Japanese, via romaji) the kanji for "ichi-man butsu". He uses 10,000 to indicate the endless variation of phenomena in this world where humans are conscious.
To Lao Tzu, "Gee, could you vague that up for me a little?" (kudos to those who pinpoint the source of that... :D)

What do you mean by phenomena, by the way? Are you talking about physical objects and patterns, or "li", as I believe confucius called them? Sensory inputs? Emotional reaction to the outside world? Are these supposed to be external or internal to human consciousness? As in, do they have an existance outside of human observance of them?


No, "comparing" your arguments to the efforts of Intelligent Design pushers is about the most accurate analogy than anyone could make. It isn't name calling, but it is on base for what you're doing.

The Intelligent Design people have no respect for the standards they are trying to bend. You have no respect for the culture you are trying to "supersede".

I would dispute that. When pressed on intelligent design, provided counterexamples and proofs, such as that evolution IS occurring every day, in viruses and bacteria, its proponents grow extremely defensive, offensive, rude, and mendacious. When asked how something occurred in a way other than evolution, they have trouble with propounding one, and REALLY get defensive and worried when someone actually TRIES to poke holes in their theories. They believe, and try to substitute belief and what they think of as personal experience and feeling for sound logic and debate. They also tend to get really rude and call people names, and count them as the enemy, because no true intelligent design believer WOULD ask questions, now would they?

This is not what I am doing. I am asking questions, trying to find answers to things I find interesting and curious. I am probing for holes and trying to find definitions because I WANT to understand.

You're not a scientist. I realized that long before you stated what you did. It was rather obvious. If you have ever been to a well-run scientific seminar, you've seen people taking chunks out of the presenters, not because they hate them or their theories (mostly) but because knocking holes in those theories, or showing them where their weaknesses are, makes them stronger. An audience that asks only questions that the presenter can answer is not a good audience.

Now, in all of your training, has not a sensei or sifu of yours knocked holes in your defenses, expecting you to fix them? Have your dohai not done the same? And your kohai? Both those above and below tried to get through your defenses, to find your weaknesses, in the sure belief that you COULD and WOULD find the way to make them whole.

On your charge that I have no respect for the culture, I respond that I'm not insulting it. I'm not calling you names, I'm not telling you that you're stupid or immature for believing in ki. I'm simply asking you what you believe, and asking you to make it specific enough that I can understand it. That is called respect, not disrespect.

Who said I'm trying to supersede the culture? If ki exists, then "Western Science" is what needs work!

And I would be interested in what those doctors would think of ki. Are you afraid that they'd make fun of you for professing it? Go ahead, challenge them. You might be surprised!

Cufaol
27th January 2006, 10:51
but it's not inconsistent with the general idea of zero point energy or quantum mechanics. EVERYTHING is unseen energy when you look through a powerful enough microscope.



Just to get back to the source of this topic. Yes indeed, everything is energy, however -and I rephrase the same as I've said before (some 2 pages ago or something like that)- that doesn't proof that you can use this. After all the most important thing about energy, is that actually it creates or rather forms information-fields or paterns/structures. Hence my question: How in the world do you think it is possible to 'use' this energy if it is bound in more or less tight structures? Unless ofcourse you are going to claim that you use 'free' energy like 'heath' for instance. (Remember, steam from a ricecup....) The day you can proof that, you'll be the most famous noble-prize winner ever. In which case I'll gladly admit I was wrong. :cool:


Cheers, Christophe.

mikesigman@eart
27th January 2006, 14:47
They were very open in my dojo. Just because I don't describe them by the words Asura uses and you're familiar with hearing (because this is a Meditation/Ki thread and NOT a technique thread), doesn't mean I didn't learn them. ??? This thread is about "Ki"... which is in meditation as well as martial usage, unless you're doing what I said previously and putting some silly western idea of "meditation" up as the standard.
Well, if your mind is clear and you read carefully and broadly and study with the best teacher you can find, you may finally see that these things are not so complex, either. You must be used to talking to potted plants, you're so superior. Let me ask you about one of the terms you dropped..... do you understand physically what "pre-heaven" qi is and what it means? I'm snipping the rest of the comments as non-productive to the thread.

FWIW

Mike

Trevor Johnson
27th January 2006, 14:57
Just to get back to the source of this topic. Yes indeed, everything is energy, however -and I rephrase the same as I've said before (some 2 pages ago or something like that)- that doesn't proof that you can use this. After all the most important thing about energy, is that actually it creates or rather forms information-fields or paterns/structures. Hence my question: How in the world do you think it is possible to 'use' this energy if it is bound in more or less tight structures? Unless ofcourse you are going to claim that you use 'free' energy like 'heath' for instance. (Remember, steam from a ricecup....) The day you can proof that, you'll be the most famous noble-prize winner ever. In which case I'll gladly admit I was wrong. :cool:


Cheers, Christophe.

Actually, Cufaol, there is a type of energy that isn't really bound up in forms and such. It's called Entropy. In physics, it's that dratted DeltaS that's in all thermodynamics equations. So, if the claim is that ki is the heat death of the universe, well, hmmm...

Of course, if one can actually take this entropy and do work with it, then we need to develop a ki-based engine. Perpetual motion, stardrives, etc, here we come! Plus, we can tell all those greenies where to shove it, because using ki slows down the heat death of the universe!

mikesigman@eart
27th January 2006, 14:58
I think you need to reread my comments. Asura and Trevor want to limit the concept ONLY to martial arts discussions. My idea of ki is very, very wide. It encompasses all of life--not just the narrow topic of martial arts, thanks.[snip]It can appear that way, but the truth is, it describes a large range of phenomena that are subtly unified below the visible surface. Yeah, but there is no such thing. Don't confuse a semantic attempt to explain things in a pre-scientific society with reality. Your "idea" is kewl, but it's not reality either, unless you want to provide something known as "facts", as opposed to vague musings about quantum mechanics (why do they always head toward techno-babble?).

Your comments about Bagua were so far off the mark that I didn't even roll my eyes... it's beyond that. You also 'name-dropped' the term "reeling silk", which I think you don't understand either. Not to mention you dropped a few political remarks and various other off-topic comments while at the same time humorously bemoaning the fact that people were getting off-topic in a "meditation" thread. Heh.
Well, yes, but Trevor and Asura INSISTED that we LIMIT the discussion to ONLY the martial aspects of ki. That's exactly what you're criticizing. My point was that the pure question "What is ki?" CANNOT be answered by addressing ONLY the martial aspects of ki. Especially when, as Asura has repeatedly claimed, KI doesn't exist. In the ki-paradigm there is only one ki, at core, so martial ki is the same as medical ki and all the other body ki's. I don't see a problem. In the western-science paradigm, there is no such thing as a univeral ki, in reality. I can define pretty well exactly what ki in the body is and it's sort of an amalgam.... but it's simpler to say "ki" at the present time. So there's "ki" and there is no ki. Be flexible without focusing on trivia.

FWIW

Mike

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 17:42
Meditation
In terms of meditation, I think there is again some sort of western preconception about what "meditation" is that may not be fully accurate if you look at the full range of "meditations". If you look at Taoisty, Shintoey, etc., visions of someone becoming one with the universe, you're looking at a very limited view of what "meditations" encompass. Consider this.... ultimately, the goal of "meditation" in India, China, and Japan, etc., is to move the "sexual essence" up the spinal cord to the brain. This is done via ki/qi/prana. In other words, "meditations" have a lot to do with this often tangible and demonstrable skill-set of Ki. It's not figurative and intangible... meditation is aimed at a substantive goal. So the idea that substantive and practical discussions don't belong on a "meditation" forum is just wrong. All it shows is a wrong and limited idea of what ki and meditation really are.

Well, I'm not trying to limit the discussion so much as keep the thread drift from becoming absolutely continental in scale. To refuse to look at ki in any terms other than martial is way overboard in the other direction. If I had written your statement as above, asura would be all over it. He insists that there is no such thing as ki in any case. But he will let that pass if he thinks it will help him maintain or build any kind of group ijimeru against an individual like me. That's middle school behavior. That's the kind of junk I'm trying to filter out of this discussion.

I am, fortunately, aware of the kunalini element of Indian meditation and I will admit that this is not what I do.

My main "meditation" is zazen. I've got about 33 years of that, mostly in the context of before-and-after practice mokuso. I like things like Shunryu Suzuki's book Zen Mind Beginner's Mind and things like Zen Flesh, Zen Bones. I love that one. Also, Zen Comics, for those who may not have heard of it. It's sort of like Zen Flesh, Zen Bones in comic form. A little different but interesting.

My other big forms are maintaining a calm, centered mind while doing budo practice and I do a sort of walking meditation. It's really just walking most everywhere I go and practicing mindfulness. For me, the purpose of Zen is to open they "eyes" to the vision of Tao. Or, like Jesus said, I "consider the lilies of the field."


Discussion Protocols
I actually read posts purely for information and I just skim over the bickering. If there was a real martial arts list where no bickering occasionally happened, I certainly wouldn't want to read it

That's good to hear. Thanks for that human honesty. I'll throw you a snide remark now and then just to keep our blood pressure up and remind us both to meditate!!!!


I do notice when people shift from a discussion of an issue to a discussion of their debate opponent's personality and I see it more in Kimiwane's posts (despite the worries about "meditation").

Hey, I am human. But I don't like to hear a young whippersnapper make snotty comments about people who were bleeding in dojos when he was incapable of any voluntary movement. The constant references to "people who can 'do'"...and the rolly eyes. These are all comments on the aite's "personality and character" as well a ability and the ability and intelligence of their teachers.

There is that old saying, "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get filthy but the pig enjoys it" (you can tell by the way his eyes roll around and his tongue hangs out of his mouth like Barney Google).

But, you know what happens to the pig after that, don't you???

As they say, "It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it."

Well, of course, no one HAS to wrestle the pig...but as you said, you wouldn't read a board with NONE of that. So please excuse me while I truss up the pork and prepare him for his due.


But let me point out that in a lot of martial arts forums there is an affectation of "this is how us deeply-philosophical Taoist-Sage-Martial-Artists should pretend to talk". I.e., it's often a role-play that does little to disguise a lot of self-serving behaviour.

And it can appear in statements that are carefully phrased to sound like they're not doing exactly the same thing. You see, whenever I do it, it sounds very reasonable to me, and very fair. And when you do it, it sounds reasonable and fair to you. But you know, you just did the same thing, yourself.

So on that line, to me, the really most valuable thing about meditation is to have a good, long, quiet look at how your own mind operates. It is a sneaky little devil to keep track of. And that goes for us ALL.

But thanks.


Rob is obviously young in some ways, but his major sin seems to be that he won't participate in the accepted role-play games (like the "AikiSpeak" some people have artificially tried to establish as a part of Aikido).

No, Rob is full of "Yugi-oh" talk. Man I listen to him and it's like some live-action "Yugi-oh On Ice" little drama. "I beat this guy and I beat that guy and my friend beat a shihan with ONE FINGER!!!"

What is that? It's only the ura of "aiki-speak" and I hate both of them. You may think I speak that way, but I can hardly go into ordinary aikido dojos because I don't talk that crap enough for them. I think in terms of leverage, balance and momentum, not flowing whirlpools of universal energy. I don't know if you've gotten the sense of it, but the aikido I learned is pre-war and very technical, passed down, moreover, by a totally technical and rational teacher. His descriptions of technique usually begins with "He attacks me with a right forward punch..." and ends with "I step forward and kick him hard in the stomach, two or three times..." or "I stomp on his stomach."

So these aiki people see my mouth moving but can't hear what I say (sort of like Rob-sama.) and they just supply their own words.

However, when they feel my technique, they say, "Oh, wow! You have good energy!"

One thing that irritates me in ordinary aikido classes is the smarmy little smile when they say things like, "If he doesn't fall, I can just smash him in the face with my elbow!"

But I'm accustomed to the uke giving me a lot of resistance if I don't do excellent aiki in the first instance. At our school, if you didn't put him down decisively (and he would not go down otherwise), he would INSTANTLY follow through (on the black belt level) with another strike or a footsweep or a tackle. You either threw him at once or you had a struggle on your hands and it would go to the mat and you would struggle until someone got a submission hold or choke. So I am not the least bothered by resistance in aikido practice and I can go a LONG way before I need to resort to actually hitting the uke. I do believe that aikido is to do as little harm to the opponent as possible, but the equalizer in that statement is that you do have to do as much as necessary.

Yes, Rob is probably a very mischievous scamp in ordinary life. I'm sure his mother thinks he's cute. And he probably is....in that scruffy alley-cat manga look...But he's never met me. He doesn't know what my technique is like and he has NOT seen all there is to aikido just because he has run across a teacher who is actually TECHNICAL enough to "beat" people from "average" type aikido schools. He is swelled up with success and thinks it gives him the right to ridicule and disrespect other human beings.

I don't make money on teaching. I charge "0" for my classes. I don't give ranks except "0" degree. I skip ALL the stuff that makes forming a cult possible. NO ONE studies with me except those who really want to learn for the sake of knowledge. If I wanted to play roles, I'd promote myself to some crazy rank and make my own style of samurai arts. I'm just an old Harry Dean Stanton-looking guy who has seen all this stuff from the inside and I have as much right to discuss it and tell my old-fart stories the way I want as he has to roll his eyes and and act like a 'stupidorange'.

They say about pilots, "There are OLD pilots and there are BOLD pilots. But there are NO OLD BOLD pilots."

And an old fighter pilot adage: "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill every time."

FWIW.

And thanks for the comments.

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 18:23
I think Rob, by commenting that he knows people who have studied a long, long time and yet who don't even know some of the basics of the stuff Akuzawa has showed him... I think that's what you're going to see start happening more and more. And there's no way for anyone to hold their ground and keep the knowledge away by simply denying there can be something they don't know. This is too big.

The good news is that real martial arts knowledge, in general, is improving and is getting more available to true enthusiasts. It's a positive thing.

But this is nothing new by any stretch. I've seen wave after wave of such changes sweep across the entire martial arts world, time after time since I started in 1972. First everyone only knew karate, if anything, or maybe judo or jujutsu. You had some people doing hapkido and tae kwon do, and that was the scene. A book on Tae Kwon Do at that time was almost indistinguishable from one on Shotokan karate.

The first wave I saw come over that was the Bruce Lee movies and the Kung Fu craze. Then Bruce Lee was setting all the stupid old ninnies in their place, exaggerating his exploits and the results of his fights, reacting in one case by chucking his entire style and replacing it with a mishmash of stuf he had never studied in depth. He just took bits and pieces and worked at it until it had become a shining jewel of the wise ways of self defenese and self development until he dropped dead like a profligate rock star.

There were good reasons for his fame. He became known in the US because he could handle our best karate men like Chuck Norris and Joe Lewis. But you know, that was forty years ago! Guys like Chuck Norris were really beginners back then, with ten or twelve years of experience and no exposure to most other arts outside their own, except through stand-up punch-kick sparring.

Bruce came from outside their paradigm and was able to dazzle them until he dropped dead. At 32. He rejected the old ways, found something so much better, and killed himself with it.

Still, he did make people loosen their ideas of effectiveness and limitation, which is a good thing. I will acknowledge the early spectacular effect he had on me (when I was maybe 10 years old) and even that he affects my thinking somewhat to this day. But I do not want to imitate him past that.

I guess the Kung Fu wave also brought in Wushu performance and you started seeing aerial walkovers with swords. It was the age of the musical kata and the beginning of Eye of the Tiger becoming de riguer at every martial arts event.

Then the ninja craze as Stephen Hayes came back and broke up the standard image of noble samurai, dastardly ninja murderer. He was the first to present detailed training in these mysterious arts and the first to use "shidoshi" as a title, which he says Masaaki Hatsumi coined especially to refer to him, Stephen Hayes, as his chosen representative. Now we have "34th generation shidoshi" everywhere you look. But when it first appeared, it looked like they were going to sweep away all the old, musty junk.

As a backdrop note, let's run a clip of Dave Lowry doing his arts. I'm pretty sure he was training in the 1960s. He trained on through Bruce Lee, on through the Wushu craze, on through the Ninja phase, on through the next thing, which was maybe the actual turning of a generation. You know, these waves all produced commercial tides as well, each sending new waves of students to every kind of school. And many schools just added the new fad art to their old curriculum. So you had Karate/KungFu schools, which soon became Karate/Kung Fu/Ninjutsu! schools, and so on.

At this time, a great thing happened. Few people knew of it, but it was destined, in the distant future, to change the world and bring enlightenment to everyone: Asura was born!!!!

Well, the next big commercial wave was an entire generation of people who knew very little about all that had happened in the US before them. The first "martial arts" they were likely to see would be some really weird mixture of high and low Japanese/Chinese/Korean/Philipino/Burmese and American arts mixed together like potato (sp?) salad. And where most people my age learned from someone of 1st-3rd dan, this wave of students was lucky to have 10th dan teachers! A tenth dan sensei for EVERYONE!!! No matter if you were in Podunk, Alabama or New York City! 10th dans everywhere.

But it wasn't finished! No, no, no! There was still a lot of division among the many arts and there were still people claiming their art could beat aikido, their judo could beat karate, their kung fu could beat jujutsu and karate...

Then the Gracies came along and said, "Let's see. We'll put up $50,000.00 to anyone who will fight us to prove the superiority of their art." They finally allowed people to really find out whether their arts worked or not. In fact, a famous 10th dan was beaten badly in his only showing.

Then you had to learn Brazillian Jujutsu.

But that was a short wave. After everyone and his brother and ever clever coach in the world saw those tapes and slowed them down and analyzed all the tricks...then you had to learn wrestling. Shootfighting...

At some point, it was said that baguazhang would be the future wave of interest, but I don't think that went very far.

So now we come to Asura's group....

I did look at those clips. It looks like aikido, frankly. And the clips I saw, I didn't notice any particularly formidable looking opponents doing the attacks.

The guy looks like a young Washizu, from the old yoseikan. Washizu doesn't look impressive standing still in his street clothes. He was always very skinny. But he had incredible power. Someone said it was like walking on ice to step onto the mat with him. You couldn't stay on your feet.

Well, he always let me stay on my feet--at least long enough to attack. And then he was like a panther taking down a deer, going all the way around your body so that you ended up supporting his weight and were then lofted through the air as he fell to the ground. And when you landed, Washizu would already have you in a choke and he would then roll up on top of you. Beautiful to see, terrifying to experience. But he was really a trustworthy man, very gentle in spirit, very quiet and almost always smiling. He could do the most amazing things, throw you in the most amazing ways and always keep you completely safe, if you trusted him.

So I'm sure there's some "substance" to Asura's teacher, but there's no reason to be a little jerk about it.

BECAUSE, you have to ask yourself. If, as you say, this teaching is only going to spread more broadly, then there will be a lot of younger, stronger people who know the technique and some of them WILL IMPROVE it. And then young punks will be telling Asura "People who CAN do will tell you that an old guy like you knows NOTHING."

Hahaha!! And they will be able to throw him very easily.

Because the waves don't stop for anyone and pride goeth before the fall.

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 19:50
Personally I think that's an overly simplistic way of looking at it.

Yeah. It's just a summary, very brief. But the root is always pretty simple.


In fact all three share a similar training base I'd say

Yes. The same root.


Actually I don't give a rats !!! about the edaha or the variations in how the techniques are executed, so much as the basic underlying foundation that powered their movements. And yes I have a good idea how they probably did a lot of their "tricks".

I'm sure. ummm...so when will YOU get an Olympic gold medal in judo? You're in the perfect place for it, you KNOW what Mifune did (oooohhhhh...stomach about to burst from holding back laughter.......) So you should be out wiping the mat with all the fools who have trained so long and hard without the vast and wonderful advantage of being YOU!


Considering that the original thread also asked about the USE of Ki/Chi in Martial Arts, my questions are fair game.

Well, it does ask how people use ki in martial arts, but since you insist that ki does not exist and it's all a discredited notion, you DON'T use ki in your martial arts. So, really, it's NOT a thread for your comments. Why don't you open a technical thread about "Technique Without Ki is Better"?


Like you say, Zen isn't something to be measured scientifically(if you want to understand it, that doesn't mean that certain aspects can't be measured).

You're going to "measure" "certain aspects" of Zen?

That should be interesting. What "aspects" of Zen can you measure? Do you have a satori-o-meter??? What can be measured of Zen?


Meditation is a very physical process, and as such I think we should be able to describe/explain what's going on physically.

Well, in zazen, what's going on physically is "nothing". Your mind moves and you get the chance to watch it move (without moving the body). But eventually, even the mind should calm down and stop moving.


And I answered them in the non-traditional sense, bringing the view that what looks like abstract psychobabble, is based in a real physical skill that can be directly cultivated, devoid of the metaphysical explanation, which Mike succinctly outlined.

Gee. That's how I teach. That's how my sensei taught. What part of that have you so miserably failed to understand, young man?


Besides, your answers are boring. You can get the same vague answers reading your run of the mill Tai Chi/Ki Book

The immature get bored so easily. You always need something new and exciting. You're a lot like Homer Simpson in that. One or two words and "BOOOORRRINNNGGGG!!!!!"

That's a nice, idiotic reason for ignoring what an educated person says. The run of the mill tai chi book explains what's been said since the beginning of tai chi. It's a basic, clear description of ki in the universe and human life. It's more than most people need, enough for the serious-minded, too little for the impatient kid.


What I was trying to give was an impression that these views arose from concrete physical skills, and unless you have those physical skills you won't be able to understand where those seemingly abstract metaphysical allusions come from.

Hmm. Again, the way I teach.


Even Ueshiba's trippy Kami allusions make perfect sense once you begin to manifest 6 directional contradictory power (sorry, scientific buzzword?)

Was that a scientific term? Sorry. Sounded like something out of Yugi-oh. Very inspiring if you're about 12 years old. And BTW, what did you say your qualifications are to preach about science? What's your experience?


Actually, I just got such a kick out of the typical "I studied under such and such teacher for 439849384 years, worship me and my word for g0D i am UBER" reaction that I couldn't help but needle you.

I simply advised you where I'd been and what I'd studied, Woody. And that as a very mild reply to your "I bet money I can do things you can't do" even though you had NO idea who I was or what I have physically done in my life.

Tell the truth, little man. Just quote where I said worship me or how mighty I am. Unlike the little boy I'm talking to, I never said anything about beating anyone. Again, little fellow, grow up sometime before you die, would you?


You're actually the first person I've so openly ridiculed on a forum (for those that know me on Aikiweb or even !!!!!!ido), but only because you make it so easy.

I don't know. Before I had any contact with you, you were already making rude, rolly-eye asinine and egotistical statements. Maybe everyone else is just too polite to point out to you that you're supposed to wear pants under your macho chaps...unless you are trying to tell us something.


The difference between us is that I'm still having fun, and you're obviously annoyed by me ;)

Yes, the pig enjoys it, ne?

And my annoyance? It's simply a sign that, like any good teacher, I care about the people I address. It saddens me to see a young fellow who has been overly coddled by his mother and apparently had no male influence at home to teach him how to act like an adult. Someone needs to take you by the hand and teach you to grow up, even if you rub your feces all over him as he helps you. As I have compassion, I bear with you even though you are an annoying little tick.

Of course, even Jesus called a fool a fool and upbraided the haughty with stinging words.

A word (one single word) is enough for the wise. What does it take for a foolish young man who knows everything without having seen much at all?


And yea I'm young, shoot me, gotta enjoy it while I have it :rolleyes:

Well, keep up your mouth work and you could wind up in a wheelchair for fifty years straight. There are people who won't bother with kuzushi, but can twist their wrist and rupture several of your spinal discs before you can throw yourself to escape. And not by using any ki at all, but just pure, good old mechanical torque.

You say I'm the only person you (admittedly) ridicule on this board, but it looks like an integral part of your personality. You had the good luck to find a teacher who would explicitly teach you regardless of your lack of preparation of emotional capacity to be trusted with such knowledge. Don't go and make him look like a jerk by showing everyone your butt tattoo that says your his student and claims, "I can beat you!"

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 20:00
hehehe,
That's alright my skill speaks for itself.

Well, that's what YOU say, but others might see it as tooting your own horn.


And anyone that steps into Aunkai and touches hands with either myself or Akuzawa WILL understand why that "Shihan" and others couldn't do anything.

hehehe....

Starting to sound like Konigun, my friend. Who is your teacher? Did you call him Saija????


If you want a testimony by another person who's spent his fair share of years at Yoshinkan and touched hands with myself and Akuzawa, then goto Ellis's "Hidden in Plain Sight" Blog.

Gladly.


But really all that is irelevant.
Like I've said again and again, this stuff has to be felt.

Yeah...I heard that once from Moonie concerning the loving atmosphere to be found around the esteemed Reverend Sun Myung Moon. I think they also said it about Shoko Ashahara.


So anyone that has doubts is always welcome to come to class ;)

Yeah. Sure. Let me know when you have been to Shizuoka.


We're actually looking to get some heavier guys to get into the class to mix things up. Anyone that's interested PM me for more details on the when and where of the class.

Yeah. Maybe you shouldn't tell them what you can do to them. You've scared all the big guys away. They're just scared of you.


I may not remember that Shihan's name, but I'm certainly not nervous about backing that statement up. ;)

What, with more big claims?
Have you gone and put Shioda's son on the mat yet? He's somebody that really needs a lesson. He's older than you. You should kick his butt for that.


And no the story wasn't exaggerated.

Every fraud says the same thing, Woody. Every single one.

[quick]Nor are the stories of Akuzawa pwning 200lb guys with his pinky and throwing them :p[/quote]

What is pwning?

And I have no doubt that Akuzawa is both a talented and nice man. How old did you say he is? Who was his teacher?

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 20:01
hehehe,
That's alright my skill speaks for itself.

Well, that's what YOU say, but others might see it as tooting your own horn.


And anyone that steps into Aunkai and touches hands with either myself or Akuzawa WILL understand why that "Shihan" and others couldn't do anything.

hehehe....

Starting to sound like Konigun, my friend. Who is your teacher? Did you call him Saija????


If you want a testimony by another person who's spent his fair share of years at Yoshinkan and touched hands with myself and Akuzawa, then goto Ellis's "Hidden in Plain Sight" Blog.

Gladly.


But really all that is irelevant.
Like I've said again and again, this stuff has to be felt.

Yeah...I heard that once from Moonie concerning the loving atmosphere to be found around the esteemed Reverend Sun Myung Moon. I think they also said it about Shoko Ashahara.


So anyone that has doubts is always welcome to come to class ;)

Yeah. Sure. Let me know when you have been to Shizuoka.


We're actually looking to get some heavier guys to get into the class to mix things up. Anyone that's interested PM me for more details on the when and where of the class.

Yeah. Maybe you shouldn't tell them what you can do to them. You've scared all the big guys away. They're just scared of you.


I may not remember that Shihan's name, but I'm certainly not nervous about backing that statement up. ;)

What, with more big claims?
Have you gone and put Shioda's son on the mat yet? He's somebody that really needs a lesson. He's older than you. You should kick his butt for that.


And no the story wasn't exaggerated.

Every fraud says the same thing, Woody. Every single one.

[quick]Nor are the stories of Akuzawa pwning 200lb guys with his pinky and throwing them :p[/quote]

What is pwning?

And I have no doubt that Akuzawa is both a talented and nice man. How old did you say he is? Who was his teacher?

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 20:06
Were my exact words. Nothing more nothing less. I didn't say it was "irrational" to apply it to the weather. Just that ANY phenomenon they couldn't label, they would associated with "Ki".

It's the x-factor in the equation.

Show any example of any time they used the term inconsistently and it stuck.


I also said that this discussion of power generation/movement etc wasn't limited to a Martial Context only, and that it can be used in everyday life. In fact it needs to be worked into everyday movement if you want to be able to use it since it's not a natural way of moving.

And I say that's where you miss the boat. It is natural. We are just made unnatural in our socialization and so it SEEMS unnatural to us.

Of course, it must be cultivated from natural roots to BE natural movement. When you're a neurotic bundle of "why didn't momma love me?" and such, every simple human thing seems unnatural.

But to the natural man, really freed from his delusions, it's easy to see what's natural and what's artificial, what's real and what's fraud. The hint: if it's not based in the natural, it is NOT real.

kimiwane
27th January 2006, 20:11
In fact, you may notice that my questions have NOT been on the martial aspects of ki, which means that I'm not limiting myself to that aspect of it. I would think that would be rather obvious.

Please do not lump me in with Asura, btw. I would like you to respond on individual merits, and this sounds like a prelude to dismissing us both after so conflating us.

I'm really trying. It's just that you two were kind of doing the Snake Brothers Kung Fu teamwork thing a little earlier, it seemed. Nice to have you back on the thread. I've been looking forward to carrying forward with some of our earlier lines of inquiry.

Sorry for the confusion, but that's why we need to keep the threads separate. Actually, the scientific line belongs here much more than those technical threads based on the assertion that ki is just an ignorant BS that the backward men of old foisted off on the future.

I will carefully read the rest of your statements ASAP.

Thanks.

Trevor Johnson
27th January 2006, 20:15
I'm really trying. It's just that you two were kind of doing the Snake Brothers Kung Fu teamwork thing a little earlier, it seemed. Nice to have you back on the thread. I've been looking forward to carrying forward with some of our earlier lines of inquiry.

Sorry for the confusion, but that's why we need to keep the threads separate. Actually, the scientific line belongs here much more than those technical threads based on the assertion that ki is just an ignorant BS that the backward men of old foisted off on the future.

I will carefully read the rest of your statements ASAP.

Thanks.

That would be nice. Questions to answer here...

And no, just two people who think alike about certain things. If you can answer my questions he may well change his tone too. Both of us were aiming at a similar point, by two very different methods.

P Goldsbury
27th January 2006, 23:41
Gentlemen,

I have looked over this thread and it seems that things began to go downhill around Page 2. Yet, here we are, in much the same situation eight pages later. If this type of discussion continues for much longer, people will lose patience and the reputation of E-Budo, as a forum where people can debate important issues without losing mutual respect, will suffer. Kenka ryouseibai?

Best wishes to all,

Asura
28th January 2006, 02:24
I'm sure. ummm...so when will YOU get an Olympic gold medal in judo? You're in the perfect place for it, you KNOW what Mifune did (oooohhhhh...stomach about to burst from holding back laughter.......) So you should be out wiping the mat with all the fools who have trained so long and hard without the vast and wonderful advantage of being YOU!

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of Sanda if it becomes an Olympic sport ;) And yes, I do crosstrain outside...I haven't tried Judo yet, I opted to dive into BJJ(Rickson's school here in Tokyo) since groundwork seems a weak link for most standup people. Funny thing was, even though I had no ground experience I could roll on an equal level with people that had 5+ years experience with me ;) That this bodyskill applies as much on the ground as in standup surprised even me. It's also a venue that a lot of the IMA arts didn't experiement with. Of course back in the day you wouldn't have wanted to be on the ground for a number of reasons, but it's still an interesting "lab" to play in.





Well, it does ask how people use ki in martial arts, but since you insist that ki does not exist and it's all a discredited notion, you DON'T use ki in your martial arts. So, really, it's NOT a thread for your comments. Why don't you open a technical thread about "Technique Without Ki is Better"?


I said that the "ki" referred to as "ki" in martial arts is a specific kind of body skill. In that sense it DOES exist. That same "bodyskill" is applied in meditation. To a different degree.

In fact I'm a big proponent of training that body-skill over technique.
The reason I was being an !!! about that Kuzushi is that if you know the fundamentals of that body-skill, you should be able to describe how that Kuzushi is done, beyond the typical description of technique.

Typical description of technique generally follows this line:
I twist his wrist xxx way, then I pull him forward to his toes, step away from the line of attack, then use waist to do xxx throw

Rather than the typical explanation outlined above, I was seeing if you would explain something like the following (not necessarily the same way, just wanted to see how your body works, according to your descritpion)

The "Ki" or bodyskill based description I refer to is
Forget about the wrist, if he grabs you, equalize the pressure on your hand by drawing/compressing into the spine. Maintaining the "up/down" "forwards/backwards" "left/right" contradictory power (which by the way you dismissed as a manga term...its actually a fundamental in both CMA and JMAs...but you wore a circle in asphalt walking the circle, so you should know that, right? :rolleyes: ), create a groundpath to his hands, then release while driving the compression into the ground, etc.

That's just an example, not saying I expected you to explain it exactly the same way. Everyone has their own ways of describing things, but if your body is "built up", then you should be able to describe these things on a universal level, and identify where they univerally apply (within movement, and since these movements happen more or less in a martial context, I mean, you don't go around flooring people with Fajing everyday when you shake their hand, so talking about it in a martial context is only natural.)




You're going to "measure" "certain aspects" of Zen?

Of the physical aspects, sure you can identify them.
There's a concrete reason they use the breathing that they do. It's not "simply" to empty the mind. There's a very physical process going on, which leads to the "imashime" feeling.

Take a look at the Aun Kongourikisi Statues on display in Nara.
They're an exaggerated view of what's going on within the body, but on the surface all you see is the buddha's half open eyes/calm demenor.





Well, in zazen, what's going on physically is "nothing". Your mind moves and you get the chance to watch it move (without moving the body). But eventually, even the mind should calm down and stop moving.


I disagree. There's a lot going on physically, and mentally. What you attempt to do is to get your body to do what your "I" (intention) demands.
In that sense you do calm it down. The "watching" your thoughts flit through your head is a technique designed to help you through the first stages.



Was that a scientific term? Sorry. Sounded like something out of Yugi-oh.

Dude...six powers(or tension, or intention, however you want to describe it), specifically front/back left/right up/down is pretty basic if you're talking about IMAs... :rolleyes:




I simply advised you where I'd been and what I'd studied, Woody. And that as a very mild reply to your "I bet money I can do things you can't do" even though you had NO idea who I was or what I have physically done in my life.

And I simply asked you if you could describe the bodyskill that drives the kuzushi, and is universal to ALL technique.
Since you refused to, and decided to play the "I have xxxx years experience" game, I simply made the observation, that years mean nothing if your training was nothing. Doesn'T matter how many times Mochizuki slammed you into the mat, massaged you, and made you appreciate his "human"ness. You either got the bodyskill, or you don't.
If you do, then you should be able to describe it physically.





Yes, the pig enjoys it, ne?

Souiu nihongo no tukaikata suru to, atama no waruiko ni miechauzo.
Tanjoubini kondo Hakama to Chonmage katte ageruyo :rolleyes:



Well, keep up your mouth work and you could wind up in a wheelchair for fifty years straight. There are people who won't bother with kuzushi, but can twist their wrist and rupture several of your spinal discs before you can throw yourself to escape. And not by using any ki at all, but just pure, good old mechanical torque.

And I'm saying that if you have that body skill, good old mechanical torque just doesn't work anymore. No matter how strong. I had a guy try and do an armbar from guard on me full bore (he weighed 185lb, in great shape) and couldn't get it on me. Even with full leverage and power.
(Those that are coming to the Paris seminar and want to play around, I'd be happy to show it)




And I have no doubt that Akuzawa is both a talented and nice man. How old did you say he is? Who was his teacher?

He's 39? I think. You can find his Bio on the website.

Asura
28th January 2006, 02:36
Gentlemen,

I have looked over this thread and it seems that things began to go downhill around Page 2. Yet, here we are, in much the same situation eight pages later. If this type of discussion continues for much longer, people will lose patience and the reputation of E-Budo, as a forum where people can debate important issues without losing mutual respect, will suffer. Kenka ryouseibai?

Best wishes to all,

With all respect, I think this kind of discussion, even with the mudslinging (and hey, it's all in good fun right? :) ) is extremely important, since it offers insight into both sides. Those that feel David more, and want to know more of his line of thought will PM him, just as those that're curious about the training methedology to build up the bodyskill I refer to have PMed me.

ケンカはあらゆる考えのぶつかり合い、これがなければ変化もないし、進化もないだろう?:)

It's a good thing, and if E-budo tolerates this kind of discussion, which despite all the attacks is still discussing the rift in thought between the metaphysical explanation and the physical explanation of "ki", there will be a lot of people that will be exposed to a new line of thinking, and maybe rethink their positions (for better or worse, without saying which line of thinking is better).

Besides, despite all the flaming, I think there's been good information that's been posted, that might've otherwise not been posted
Otherwise people wouldn't be PMing me for more info. :)

mikesigman@eart
28th January 2006, 02:52
I think e-budo is certainly entitled to moderate their forum as they see fit, although the assumed "reputation" of e-budo may be more than I can fit my head around. I tend to agree with Rob and others that these sorts of conversations are quite important since they connote the shift from an entrenched mindset about "ki" being some sort of mumbo-jumbo to a realization that a number of the current western martial arts hierarchies are largely ignorant about a set of body skills that is thousands of years old and which are the keystones of the arts which many people claim to be experts and teachers in. It's an important debate... and it won't be accomplished without frictions and attempts to impose viewpoints, even if it's the viewpoints of people who think they are wise and just.

My personal opinion is that the current discussion isn't going much of anywhere other than down the tubes, as Peter implies, but if it does, let me say ahead of time that there is a limited (and sometimes desultory) discussion of the physical aspects of ki/qi and kokyu/jin on a private email list, "QiJing", for people who can give a good indication of real and practical interest in the topics. I own that list and can be reached via private mail. In the sense that the list is private and by-invitation, it is also moderated, but it is moderated by limiting the type of people on the list. Life is like that. ;)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 04:57
Now, you said earlier:

Originally Posted by kimiwane
First, he is healthy. Second, he is lively. Third, he is fearless (in general). Fourth, he is bright and alert. This applies not only to children but to adults and anyone who is genki (has "original ki").


Good start. Now, what is the causal connection between ki and these qualities? Does "original ki" cause them?

Dang it, Trevor. That is a very nice question. It's a really thoughtful, conversational peer-to-peer, friendly kind of intelligent way to approach a subject like this. Thank you.

There is no "causal" connection between the ki and the qualities. The ki does not "cause" the baby to be like that. The qualities are qualities of the ki itself, of which the baby is entirely made. He "is" genki. That's like saying "The water is hot." In this case, we're saying "The baby is as fresh as the day he was born." Very loosely. Very simply, it just means that he is healthy. But the Japanese language specifically "origin ki". An aspect of "healthy" is "vigorous," especially in adult males. I didn't really appreciate the fullness of "genki" until I went to a "genki taikai" that my dojo sponsored with a branch in another city. I didn't realize until much too late that they were giving out medals for the "MOST genki" performances of the day. I couldn't figure out why everyone was being so much rougher and seemed more aggressive than usual (in a pretty darned aggressive dojo).


You say that ki cannot be created or destroyed, I believe. Therefore, do these qualities somehow focus or distill the ki? Which comes first, the quality or the ki?

In my rudimentary view of modern physics, the universe is a pulsing field of invisible energy. No atom can be completely located. How did it go? You can know it's location, but not its properties at the same time. Alternatively, you can know its properties, but not its location. Such a "particle" is not a permanent or even what we could call a semi-permanent solid object, but more like a knot in a net, a condensation of the field at certain points--so concentrated that it is effectively a solid object. But probability concerns just where that object is at any given moment. We can locate it but cannot simultaneously determine its speed, OR we can determine its speed, but cannot exactly locate it. Isn't that very generally the idea?

Now, to your question, the ki comes first. The qualities are qualities of the ki. The entire mind and body are ki. I suppose you're familiar with the liu he--the six harmonies. I described the three external harmonies earlier as listed in Yang's Emei Bagua. Those are, shoulders and hips harmonize, elbows and knees harmonize, hands and feet harmonize. You can do that alone and you will become genki.

But the three internal harmonies are extremely important. These are:

1 wisdom mind leads emotion mind
2 harmonized mind leads the qi
3 qi leads the body

The first harmony is between the emotional mind and the wisdom mind. Note, that's wisdom--not necessarily "reason". It consists mainly of balance. And you can easily see it's a short leap from "balance" to "ratio" and "rationality." But it is still slightly different. There is a much larger measure of intuition involved in the Chinese "wisdom" mind than in our "rational" mind.

The harmony between wisdom and emotion is NOT just "balance". The wisdom mind DOMINATES the emotional mind. When the mind is balanced in that way, it is what the Chinese really mean by 'mind', Yi, or, in Japanese, "I", as in "chui"=="pour your mind (on the subject)" or "pay attention."

When the wisdom mind dominates the emotional mind, the "harmonized mind leads the qi". The "qi leads the body."

So even though qi is the underlying energetic matrix on which the physical world is formed, the wise human mind can influence and direct that qi in the body. And the human body follows the movement of its qi. For martial arts, the calm, clear mind perceives danger, it moves the qi in response, and the body goes with the qi.

So do the qualities focus and distil the qi? Yes. To a very large extent. You can make yourself healthy or sick depending on how you direct the qi with your mind.

I mentioned qualities of a genki baby. I forgot to mention that his body is soft and flexible, but very strong. He smiles freely and without inhibition. This smile is evidence that the baby is experiencing "kimochi ii," or "holding good ki," or "feeling good." If your girlfriend likes what you're doing, she will say "kimochi ii!!!"

So genki is directly related to ii kimochi.

If the mind grows tired, overworked, whatever, becomes somehow unfocused or fatigued, "kimochi ii" gradually phases into "kimochi warui" or "feeling bad." If you get to feeling bad and weak enough, you become "byouki", or "sick", the polar opposite of "genki".

So, yes. There is a subtle interplay of natural health, natural feelings, and the condition of the ki.


I asked about preemies specifically in this context. Could you comment on that?

I don't remember the exact question but I think the above may cover it. Please remind me if not.


Zanshin, you mean? It sounds rather like the scientific method, the way you describe it.

Well, I generally don't like to label it too definitely. But the Eastern way is absolutely empirical if not exactly rational. This kind of observation also relies extensively on intuition.


You say you'd need to see the original context of the statement, I'm fairly sure it's somewhere on this thread.

I'm sure it is. I don't have it indexed. You mean the thing about creative application of human awareness or something, don't you? I don't know where that comment is.


To Lao Tzu, "Gee, could you vague that up for me a little?" (kudos to those who pinpoint the source of that... :D)

What do you mean by phenomena, by the way? Are you talking about physical objects and patterns, or "li", as I believe confucius called them? Sensory inputs? Emotional reaction to the outside world? Are these supposed to be external or internal to human consciousness? As in, do they have an existance outside of human observance of them?

By "phenomena," in this case, I mean all the things we observe as human beings. We're talking human scale, though even if you look into a microscope or telescope or for that matter an endoscope, the things you see all fall within Lao Tzu's "10,000 things."

I like the Gia-fu Feng/Jane English version. It has Feng's brush work on one page with the translation on the other. I showed it to Mochizuki sensei and he looked it over and said, "Who did the calligraphy?" I told him it was the translator's work. He said, "That guy's very good." As for the book, he was familiar with it.

Anyway, Feng translates in section 16:

The ten thousand things rise and fall while the Self watches their return. They grow and flourish and then return to the source. Returning to the source is stillness, which is the way of nature. The way of nature is unchanging.

In this case, I think he's referring to how all of nature automatically wakens in the spring, grow vivid in summer and die off in autumn and disappear in winter. And then they come back. The ten thousand things are the trees, grasses, animals, and all their interactions and the results of the interactions, all the strange ways of all creatures and the bizarre things that men make up and push on one another. Styles come and go and are forgotten. The eternal remains unchanged, though its face is always changing.

He says it more clearly in other passages than in 16. But that contains the line I was thinking of. Finishing up, they are both iniside and outside the human mind. However the tao is seen as far larger than any individual and also eternal. So I'd have to say, they are whether anyone observes them or not.


When pressed on intelligent design, provided counterexamples and proofs, such as that evolution IS occurring every day, in viruses and bacteria, its proponents grow extremely defensive, offensive, rude, and mendacious. When asked how something occurred in a way other than evolution, they have trouble with propounding one, and REALLY get defensive and worried when someone actually TRIES to poke holes in their theories.

Well, sure. They know they're poking their nose where it doesn't belong. I don't know if they realize how water-tight the rules of science are. I don't know if they care. But they want their belief to be inserted among the core principles of science. They just don't know (or maybe they do) that this insertion would cause the whole system to collapse because it begins with no belief except that self-consistency must be rigidly maintained. Inserting the Bible into science is like adding Checkers rules to Chess. Or something like that. It's just not right.

BUT...

there are limits to where science can and should go. It should NEVER get fouled up into romance, for instance. You cannot scientifically make love. A robot can, but a human should not.

The whole ki system is a personal interaction with the universe. It's walking taoism. It's fine as it is.

Now if you want to analyze the physics of martial arts techniques or something like that, to improve your delivery of power, or your transmission of effort, analyze to your heart's content.

But how can you scientifically quantify the I Ching or Lao Tzu? Or poetry or painting or sculpture? This is one of those areas, I believe, where science just doesn't belong. You want to cure disease? Cure the disease. Don't try to cure Asia and all its students of their personal relationship to the world. Unless, of course, they ask for it. But again, what's the harm if someone does feng shui in their home instead of decorating it, as some do, like the bridge of the Starship Enterprise?


They believe, and try to substitute belief and what they think of as personal experience and feeling for sound logic and debate.

But that's not what makes their position silly, is it? It's the very fundamental idea that they want to insert an entire set of beliefs and assumptions and the fundamental conclusions those things suggest into a completely incompatible set of measurements. Such as trying to legislate that every metric ruler shall also be incremented in English measurements on the same scale. What's ridiculous about Creation Science people is the belief that they CAN insert this into the institution of science. I don't know if they don't realize how crazy that is or if they know but actually want to destroy science.

I think a lot of people really believe that the Bible is completely literally true and that science really is the enemy of humanity. Such people would like to see the entire institution of science destroyed and replaced by religion.

And to me, it seems that you have advocated the total replacement of "the ki system" with scientific explanations for everything. So what difference is it if we say the "baby feels bad" or we say "the baby is suffering a condition of physical and emotional discomfort". Or if we can quantify that and say "the baby = m/c - (rc/l + g)".

I just look at the baby and say "Kawai-chai-cho". (baby talk Japanese for "poor little baby".)


This is not what I am doing. I am asking questions, trying to find answers to things I find interesting and curious. I am probing for holes and trying to find definitions because I WANT to understand.

Well, I understand these questions, but I think if you'll read back over what you've said, I believe you'll see that you've made some statements that were less generous.


You're not a scientist.

I did say that. But I do work with international scientists very closely. I see how they structure their questions and I see their standards for proof. They don't have to straighten out my work very often because I understand what they want and need. And I never hand them anything outside their standards and concerns.


I realized that long before you stated what you did. It was rather obvious.

I like to be obvious. But I am capable of maintaining the standards and rules of science if that's the standard we're using. I just don't think it is reasonable to apply it to ki any more than it is to apply it to zen or to apply creation science to real science. They simply are not compatible and they aren't just things you can "translate" over into scientific values.


If you have ever been to a well-run scientific seminar, you've seen people taking chunks out of the presenters, not because they hate them or their theories (mostly) but because knocking holes in those theories, or showing them where their weaknesses are, makes them stronger. An audience that asks only questions that the presenter can answer is not a good audience.

Absolutely. I was in on an international phone conference the other day in which the independent reviewers asked some very tough and incisive questions of these people I work for. International geniuses questioning international geniuses. Very tricky questions but always respectfully presented. And careful, precise answers professionally returned, but all with friendly human interaction.


Now, in all of your training, has not a sensei or sifu of yours knocked holes in your defenses, expecting you to fix them? Have your dohai not done the same? And your kohai? Both those above and below tried to get through your defenses, to find your weaknesses, in the sure belief that you COULD and WOULD find the way to make them whole.

Well, sure, but you know, I never had a scientist come into the class and try to measure our kiai or anything else. We had no kinds of meters to analyze anything we did--except the organic meters called Sensei and the Shihans. Very sensitive instruments, those. And they were all we needed.


On your charge that I have no respect for the culture, I respond that I'm not insulting it. I'm not calling you names, I'm not telling you that you're stupid or immature for believing in ki. I'm simply asking you what you believe, and asking you to make it specific enough that I can understand it. That is called respect, not disrespect.

Well I'm reading you 5 by 5 as I once heard a cop in a movie say. Coming in loud and clear. But please read back through what you said earlier. Maybe in light of my earlier comments about "causality" and ki, you will realize what I'm NOT saying. Ki is not some disembodied force that floats around that we can suck up and use to generate ki balls to throw at one another. It is so much simpler and plainer than that that there's nothing for science to look at.

Ki balls, sure. Go ahead and do all the science you want. But how to prove the energetic matrix? How to prove that we can "lead" our own ki to make ourselves healthy or sick?

Well, if you want to do those experiments, or hook up your girlfriend to meters, to see how she feels, I won't stop you. But for me, it's a personal relationship with life and i don't see the need to interject it into the academic world where I work or to interject science into my personal and subtle and very happy relationship with life.


Who said I'm trying to supersede the culture? If ki exists, then "Western Science" is what needs work!

Maybe I've confused you with someone else. Didn't you say you have to get a new paradigm to supersede the old? Weren't you talking about renovating all ki concepts to get rid of all those that aren't proven by science?

I don't think ki needs to be renovated and I don't think its existence indicates the need to change science, either.


And I would be interested in what those doctors would think of ki. Are you afraid that they'd make fun of you for professing it? Go ahead, challenge them. You might be surprised!

I think they think it's cool that I know aikido. But I don't think they have any interest in going anywhere with it themselves, either physically or intellectually, frankly.

I might be more interested in what they might have to say about Picasso's Guernica.

Well, so much for that one. I hope we can continue to improve the tone of these exchanges. Thanks very much for your great effort.

Best wishes.

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 05:01
Are you afraid that they'd make fun of you for professing it? Go ahead, challenge them. You might be surprised!

I've been through that kind of thing in the past. I never saw it do much good or help anything at all. I think right here on this board is the best place for this. You be the doctor and I will be me. I think we're doing fine as it is.

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 05:06
...the most important thing about energy, is that actually it creates or rather forms information-fields or paterns/structures. Hence my question: How in the world do you think it is possible to 'use' this energy if it is bound in more or less tight structures?

I think this question is covered in my post two back, with the question about the genki baby, and how our minds lead the ki and allow its condition to change from "genki" or healthy, origin ki, to "byouki" or illness ki.

But moving, walkng, typing, breathing are all uses of ki energy. All human movement "uses" ki energy in the more or less tight structure of the human organism.

How's that?

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 05:20
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
They were very open in my dojo. Just because I don't describe them by the words Asura uses and you're familiar with hearing (because this is a Meditation/Ki thread and NOT a technique thread), doesn't mean I didn't learn them.


This thread is about "Ki"... which is in meditation as well as martial usage, unless you're doing what I said previously and putting some silly western idea of "meditation" up as the standard.

True, BUT Asura insists that ki is not involved, so it doesn't belong on this thread. However, as I said, if he or you or anyone else wants to talk about kuzushi on a technical thread, just open it up and tell me where it is. I will be there.

But to try to phrase things in some way that's going to please Asura, in whatever lingo and catchphrases he is programmed to accept it is a childish game. I walk into aikido dojos already and the lingo is so thick you can cut it. Whatever I say that's not in that exact lingo seems to send them into a panic. In this case, unfamiliarity with his desired lingo is sure to set off a barrage of unhealthy eye rolling and childish ridicule. Fine. Let's do it outside the mediation thread.

Quote:
Well, if your mind is clear and you read carefully and broadly and study with the best teacher you can find, you may finally see that these things are not so complex, either.


You must be used to talking to potted plants, you're so superior.

But you haven't even heard how many people I can beat!!

You mean superior like that???


Let me ask you about one of the terms you dropped..... do you understand physically what "pre-heaven" qi is and what it means? I'm snipping the rest of the comments as non-productive to the thread.

Well, of course, as I said, that's what I read. I mentioned it only to counter the idea that no traditonal martial art really relies on ki or qi. I mentioned that to point out that development of qi in the fighting context is a MAIN purpose of bagua. And that the health and purity are equally important with the martial aspects.

But as I understood it, pre-heaven qi means the qi that you have in the womb, when you have just begun to condense from formless qi into the form of a human baby. That barely differentiated qi is very powerful. But after birth, it quickly becomes polluted with air, water and food impurities and social stresses. This is post-heaven qi. The old bagua masters believed that, through baguazhang practice, you could "alchemically" condition the qi back to that pre-heaven state. And for those people, development of pre-heaven qi was the real purpose of training. Becoming a formidable fighter was just something that happened along the way--not purely through qi power, but developing the qi through powerful fighting forms. The two aspects are effectively inseparable.

If you find flaws in this description, of course, it is my recollection of Yang's book, which i read about ten years ago.

Hope that makes my statement clearer.

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 05:25
...if the claim is that ki is the heat death of the universe, well, hmmm...

Please don't try to define it as that. I don't think anyone has ever gone that way.


Of course, if one can actually take this entropy and do work with it, then we need to develop a ki-based engine.

That's where the Douglas Adams quote comes in. Entropy is constantly breaking everything down. So why doesn't the universe grind to a halt? Because creativity is recombining the scattered parts in new ways.

He meant human creativity, I think, but maybe he meant that the universe also is creative.

P Goldsbury
28th January 2006, 05:34
With all respect, I think this kind of discussion, even with the mudslinging (and hey, it's all in good fun right? :) ) is extremely important, since it offers insight into both sides. Those that feel David more, and want to know more of his line of thought will PM him, just as those that're curious about the training methedology to build up the bodyskill I refer to have PMed me.

ケンカはあらゆる考えのぶつかり合い、これがなければ変化もないし、進化もないだろう?:)).
With all respect, it does not seem to me to be "all in good fun", or you have a strange sense of fun. And I disagree with your thinking expressed in Japanese. Kangae no bustsukariai does not always have to be kenka. I know most of the participants in this discussion only from what they post here and in other forums and via PM. So for me it as a moderator, it is what they say here, in this forum, that matters, not whether they PM you.


It's a good thing, and if E-budo tolerates this kind of discussion, which despite all the attacks is still discussing the rift in thought between the metaphysical explanation and the physical explanation of "ki", there will be a lot of people that will be exposed to a new line of thinking, and maybe rethink their positions (for better or worse, without saying which line of thinking is better).
Wel, E-Budo is a private forum and the Administrator sets the rules, which are posted at the head of every forum. I am aware of the content of the discussion, which I have been following right from the beginning, but think as a moderator that it would be even better without all the personal attacks.


Besides, despite all the flaming, I think there's been good information that's been posted, that might've otherwise not been posted
Otherwise people wouldn't be PMing me for more info. :)
You appear to think that "all the flaming" is par for the course, if people post good information, so that they can send PMs. Of course, it might be that other people will steer clear of the thread and not want to post information because of the school playground atmosphere.

Sincerely,

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 05:46
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
...the truth is, it describes a large range of phenomena that are subtly unified below the visible surface.


Yeah, but there is no such thing.

So atoms really are solid objects? Come now. Physics tells us that the entire universe is energy that sometimes is and sometimes isn't little particles. Why will yu accept it if a physicist says it, but refuse to accept virtually the same statement describing that universal energy matrix as ki? What difference does that make?


Your comments about Bagua were so far off the mark that I didn't even roll my eyes...

that was nice of you.


You also 'name-dropped' the term "reeling silk", which I think you don't understand either.

Actually, no, I don't really understand it. I'm a Japanese stylist with some hardcore training in my background and a good bit of bagua, tai chi and xing yi on the side. At best I draw some parallels between the Japanese and Chinese ways.

The mention of reeling silk was probably unclear. I didn't mean to imply that it's related to bagua. As far as I recall, it's more of a taiji thing. BUT my comments concerned how baby relfexes are cultivated into full-blown martial arts. And I said that the work and movement habits of the local culture affect that. Reeling silk is a movement that was actually used by silk workers and adapted by martial arts masters for the way it uses the whole body. But the point is, that's how it got into the martial art: it was a part of the everyday culture. So where you have fishermen, oars are used as weapons. Where you have cowboys, ropes and whips. Where you have carpenters, hammers and lengths of wood become weapons. And where you have people working silk as they did in China, the "silk reeling" method comes into martial arts.

Does that make more sense?

{quote} Not to mention you dropped a few political remarks and various other off-topic comments while at the same time humorously bemoaning the fact that people were getting off-topic in a "meditation" thread. Heh.[/quote]

It's pretty funny, isn't it?

Quote:
Well, yes, but Trevor and Asura INSISTED that we LIMIT the discussion to ONLY the martial aspects of ki. That's exactly what you're criticizing. My point was that the pure question "What is ki?" CANNOT be answered by addressing ONLY the martial aspects of ki. Especially when, as Asura has repeatedly claimed, KI doesn't exist.


In the ki-paradigm there is only one ki, at core, so martial ki is the same as medical ki and all the other body ki's. I don't see a problem.

Well, the problem was getting them to acknowledge that. SOMEONE kept insisting that this is a martial arts board and dang it, martial ki is the ONLY ki we need discuss here. In fact, your statement above agrees with me.


In the western-science paradigm, there is no such thing as a univeral ki, in reality. I can define pretty well exactly what ki in the body is and it's sort of an amalgam.... but it's simpler to say "ki" at the present time. So there's "ki" and there is no ki. Be flexible without focusing on trivia.

You just pretty well summed up my views. However, while western science has no "universal ki," I am seriously under the impression that modern science does posit an omnipresent field of energy from which the world of apparently solid objects is formed. I believe this is an element of string theory and it's called "zero point energy". As I understand it, the strings emerge into existence from the "non-existent" zero-point field and return to it within nano-seconds and these coming and going strings add up to atoms and molecules, etc. This is layman's terms.

But if science believes that and calls it zero point energy, what's the harm in ki people believing in such a universal matrix and calling it ki?

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 06:19
And I simply asked you if you could describe the bodyskill that drives the kuzushi, and is universal to ALL technique.
Since you refused to, and decided to play the "I have xxxx years experience" game, I simply made the observation, that years mean nothing if your training was nothing.

And you get that assumption because I don't use your lingo???

That's pretty rational okay. Well, no. Really, it's rude. Very presumptuous. Your skill has to be felt to be understood, but you can read my posts and if they don't have the lingo you're used to, then you insult my teacher.

How does one answer such impertinence? I just don't know. Because I know that NO answer will merit anything but more Yugi-oh posturing and bragging.

I don't know if you guys have any kind of new technique or what, but if you think introducing this kind of attitude into the world is good, then you are going to have big trouble and you will have a very bad effect on humanity and the world. More jerkism we do not need.


Doesn'T matter how many times Mochizuki slammed you into the mat, massaged you, and made you appreciate his "human"ness. You either got the bodyskill, or you don't.
If you do, then you should be able to describe it physically.

I wasn't spoon fed and I wasn't taught your specific lingo. I've never been one to "tell" how I do it. There are times when I win and times when I lose. And you will find this to be true for yourself as well.

But you talk about bodyskill while depending on talkskill. Quite pointless.


Souiu nihongo no tukaikata suru to, atama no waruiko ni miechauzo.
Tanjoubini kondo Hakama to Chonmage katte ageruyo :rolleyes:

Didn't Dr. Goldsbury just ask us to act like adults?
Or is that your version of it?

The latter, i'm convinced.


And I'm saying that if you have that body skill, good old mechanical torque just doesn't work anymore.

Geez, you have just frozen your mind in ASSumption, haven't you?


No matter how strong. I had a guy try and do an armbar from guard on me full bore (he weighed 185lb, in great shape) and couldn't get it on me. Even with full leverage and power.

I know this sounds amazing to a young man with 6 years experience, especially if you have only attended soft, flowy aikido classes in the past. But this kind of thing was the norm at the old yoseikan. It was always heavy resistance and pure aikido technique.

But please go down to Shizuoka. Please give Tezuka a shake. He weighs about 140 to 150, I believe and he will teach you the truth. Still haven't made it down there yet, huh? Are you afraid that your bodyskills will be proven to be not so unique? Are you afraid to find there's a place where people like you are around the low-mid-level of skill?


He's 39? I think. You can find his Bio on the website.

I doubt he'd want to be represented by such uncouth and rude methods as you've used. I would flat expel any student I heard bragging about how many people he's beaten. Traditionally braggarts are despised. Do what you can do and let others praise you. Or not. As the case may be. But bragging is simply so punky that no one with self-respect would do it. You really dishonor your teacher with such rude and immature comments.

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 06:26
I tend to agree with Rob and others that these sorts of conversations are quite important since they connote the shift from an entrenched mindset about "ki" being some sort of mumbo-jumbo to a realization that a number of the current western martial arts hierarchies are largely ignorant about a set of body skills that is thousands of years old and which are the keystones of the arts which many people claim to be experts and teachers in.

Well, it's odd that this thread started off completely bypassing the "mumbo-jumbo" of explaining every martial art technique as the result of ki.

That was NOT the line of comments, but Rob started the whole thread on technique by attacking the discussion as if it were claiming ki to be the holy vehicle for performance of all techniques.

The thread was NOT promoting such a view and Rob's comments have ONLY obfuscated that fact. All his posts have been like a little "runway" show with the I'm Tooo Sexy music going as he prances about bragging and telling everyone else that they don't know anything about technique. That's pure BS.

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 06:37
With all respect, it does not seem to me to be "all in good fun", or you have a strange sense of fun.

Also, Dr. Goldsbury, I wish you would explicitly remind our young friend that it is forbidden to issue challenges on this board. Asura has made many comments that were pretty close to that--"ask someone who can "do"" and "if Mochizuki taught you but the teaching was no good..." (however exactly he said it).

But he has explicitly "bet" me money he could beat me time after time. At least four times, I'm sure.

This unrestricted childishness has really made it difficult to maintain civility here. If I say "I studied for 33 years," I"M bragging. And then he turns around and issues another explicit challenge (from 10,000 miles away...).

Every one of those comments has been a clear violation of forum rules. I didn't want to call for the teacher (I mean the moderator...he's got me thinking in middle school terms). But since you are here, please advise him that that foolishness must stop.

Thank you.

Asura
28th January 2006, 06:52
But as I understood it, pre-heaven qi means the qi that you have in the womb, when you have just begun to condense from formless qi into the form of a human baby. That barely differentiated qi is very powerful. But after birth, it quickly becomes polluted with air, water and food impurities and social stresses. This is post-heaven qi. The old bagua masters believed that, through baguazhang practice, you could "alchemically" condition the qi back to that pre-heaven state. And for those people, development of pre-heaven qi was the real purpose of training. Becoming a formidable fighter was just something that happened along the way--not purely through qi power, but developing the qi through powerful fighting forms. The two aspects are effectively inseparable.


And this is where we differentiate.
You take the meaning literally (IMO), whereas my position is that there is a concrete physical feel for this, which was allusioned to a an alchemical change. The change occurs in your body as you do certain exercises.
I think Mike's more qualified to talk about this though.

From what I've experienced the fighting forms are tertiary really. The meat of body development comes from the single palm change, and other "basic" warmpup exercises.



If you find flaws in this description, of course, it is my recollection of Yang's book, which i read about ten years ago.

I wouldn't say its flawed so much as Yang simply regurgitates the standard explanation given in the classics. What I'm saying is that maybe the answer is much much simpler than many would think.

The chinese loved to be obtuse when talking about stuff, and being vague and talking in allegories was there way of "teasing" people.
If you already had the bodyskill, then you'd read the text and go "oh yea...".
If you didn't then you were screwed until a teacher could physically correct you and show you the literal meaning of those texts (through your body)

About your comment on the three external harmonies, I used to think that this was also something that you simply manifested by "relaxing".
What I've found from my own personal practice is that while natural, it's far from "relaxing", there's a certain amount of internal physical tension/ and psychological involved in keeping them aligned, while at the same time stacking your bone structure so that you use the least amount of muscular force possible.

Trevor:
This is where the fascia/tendon thing comes in(at least for me)
There's a concrete feel of expansion/contraction that pulls all the aligments together constantly, and Mike's explanation of the fascia is tempting to accept (especially with the tai chi approach).

I myself take a "harder" approach relying on more tension that "feels" like it comes to the tendons. The reason I say this is because it's not the muscles themselves that get sore, but rather the joint areas where the bone and muscle meet. This kind of body development is heavily alluded to in the Yi-jin-jing. Any thoughts on what's actually going on?

Btw, maintaining this kind of tension, whether in the Santi, or other postures, causes all sorts of tingling, compression/expansion sensations that I can feel physically, and which you often see described as "Qi" in chinese texts.
Keeping these sensations while doing movement tends to greatly increase the power and penetration when striking, throwing, and pushing as a result. (Although that's not the intent)

Asura
28th January 2006, 07:12
But he has explicitly "bet" me money he could beat me time after time. At least four times, I'm sure.

This unrestricted childishness has really made it difficult to maintain civility here. If I say "I studied for 33 years," I"M bragging. And then he turns around and issues another explicit challenge (from 10,000 miles away...).

Every one of those comments has been a clear violation of forum rules. I didn't want to call for the teacher (I mean the moderator...he's got me thinking in middle school terms). But since you are here, please advise him that that foolishness must stop.


Lighten up :)
I meant that in the sense that I'm that confident of my bodyskill, and that from what I've read, I'm guessing that there's a substantial difference in how we operate. I never said I'd bet money that I'd beat you. Don't take it so literally.

When I say it has to be felt, I mean it.
That doesn't mean I'm going to put the beatdown on you.
It just means that the exact physical skill I'm referring to may be hard for you to grasp until you touch me.
I really won't know what you have until I touch you as well.
(Though reading what someone writes can give me a good idea of what to expect sometimes)
Nothing more, nothing less.

My comments as to who I held down, or who I threw around were not comments on "I can beat you so hah!", but rather to give you a sound idea of what I've been capable of doing so far.
My own personal experience is that xxx years of training has been rendered meaningless in the past. That's just a fact.

Now, if I were actually BSing, there is the high likelyhood of someone calling me on it and showing up at the Aunkai. Which is exactly what I'm saying I'm fine with. In fact I prefer it not because I like having brawls, but because this stuff has to be felt to be understood.
It's as simple as that.
And if I meet you, (as I've met various other people off other boards) it'll only be to compare and contrast these skills physically. Whether I end up getting thrown around, or the other person gets held down by me is irrelavent, and not what I'm seeking, but rather the simple exchange of information done the most effecient way possible :)

P Goldsbury
28th January 2006, 07:40
Also, Dr. Goldsbury, I wish you would explicitly remind our young friend that it is forbidden to issue challenges on this board. Asura has made many comments that were pretty close to that--"ask someone who can "do"" and "if Mochizuki taught you but the teaching was no good..." (however exactly he said it).

But he has explicitly "bet" me money he could beat me time after time. At least four times, I'm sure.

This unrestricted childishness has really made it difficult to maintain civility here. If I say "I studied for 33 years," I"M bragging. And then he turns around and issues another explicit challenge (from 10,000 miles away...).

Every one of those comments has been a clear violation of forum rules. I didn't want to call for the teacher (I mean the moderator...he's got me thinking in middle school terms). But since you are here, please advise him that that foolishness must stop.

Thank you.

Hello Mr Orange,

Yes, I am aware of this. I think that, generally, in a forum such as this, appeals to age (particularly young or particularly old) in relation to supposed experience are undesirable, since they run the risk of being misconstrued. It really does not matter to me how old you are; what matters is that you were once a deshi of Mochizuki Sensei and that as such what you have experienced is especially worth hearing about. Similarly with Mr John. I do not mind very much how old he is or how old his sensei is; what matters much more is the content of the training both are doing and how it is described.

I have followed similar discussions on Aikiweb and Aikido Journal and have corresponded by PM with some of the participants. It is clear that discussing such concepts like KI and KOKYUU is especially difficult. It is similar to the difficulties I am professionally familiar with involved in discussing private experiences in so-called 'ordinary' language. On the one hand, the experiences are quite real to the participants; on the other hand, so much is assumed in discussing these experiences in language. It is so easy to make gratuitous value judgments about quality or authenticity here.

Anyway, like Mr Sigman, I think the issues being discussed here are very important and I prefer any moderation to be minimal. Nevertheless, given the difficulty of the subject, I think that extra care needs to be taken not to resort to personal attacks.

I will make any further interventions as moderator via PM. Of course, I will close the thread if I think that the rules of this forum are being broken, but this is really a last resort and we are nowhere near that stage yet.

Best wishes,

kimiwane
28th January 2006, 07:57
Dr. Goldsbury,

Again, as always, thanks for your attitude, your insight and your moderate moderation.

David

P Goldsbury
28th January 2006, 12:30
Dr. Goldsbury,

Again, as always, thanks for your attitude, your insight and your moderate moderation.

David

Hello David,

Thank you for the reply.

As I stated earlier, I think the thread started to deteriorate around Page 2, with #19 for you and #26 for Robert John. Before this, many posters contributed from various angles, but it was clear to me that if there was to be any real progress made with the question posed by the original post (Chi/KI in the martial arts and religion), the discussion would have to become much sharper in focus.

The parameters of such a discussion were suggested by Brian Kennedy in the article cited by Joe Svinth in #6. In my opinion, Mr Kennedy summed up most of the issues, except perhaps that of how to gauge the extent to which students are in a position to judge their Sensei's awareness of the issues he presented.

However, the thread developed into a tussle between Robert John and yourself, as you did a randori-style search for each other's potential weaknesses, based on accumulated training experience. This went on for several pages and I think that the other posters were more or less excluded from the discussion. One such poster sent me a PM, asking whether the tone and content of his contribution was OK. Another poster (#44) signalled some concern that the argument had become too personal for his taste.

Whether to moderate Internet forums or not is another issue. E-Budo is a very general forum and is openly moderated, with varying degrees of severity by individual moderators. This E-Budo meditation forum does not have its own moderator, but, some of us look in occasionally.

In my opinion, the 8-page tussle between Robert and yourself has been very instructive, from a wide variety of issues. These include issues such as the obvious issue of how to define KI, plus more extraneous issues such how to argue in the special conditions of an Internet discussion forum: how to marshall evidence appropriate to an Internet discussion forum; how to ignore peripheral issues and keep to the main point, etc etc.

So, I hope that you and Robert (and Mike S and others) will feel motivated to continue the argument, but I also hope that you will accept the ethical rules of the discussion here.

Best wishes,

hl1978
28th January 2006, 14:20
I wasn't spoon fed and I wasn't taught your specific lingo. I've never been one to "tell" how I do it. There are times when I win and times when I lose. And you will find this to be true for yourself as well.

But you talk about bodyskill while depending on talkskill. Quite pointless.


Well, it's odd that this thread started off completely bypassing the "mumbo-jumbo" of explaining every martial art technique as the result of ki.

That was NOT the line of comments, but Rob started the whole thread on technique by attacking the discussion as if it were claiming ki to be the holy vehicle for performance of all techniques.

The thread was NOT promoting such a view and Rob's comments have ONLY obfuscated that fact. All his posts have been like a little "runway" show with the I'm Tooo Sexy music going as he prances about bragging and telling everyone else that they don't know anything about technique. That's pure BS.

If you feel, that it is not proper to discuss it in physical/technical terms in this thread, why not open a new thread in a different section of the board in order to specifically address the issue? In fact, you had suggested that you would be willing to post to such a thread a few posts back. I think that would clear up this point of contention for the benefit of everyone.

Otherwise, all I have seen, is a lot of dancing around the issue (and posturing) without actually answering Rob's core question.

P Goldsbury
28th January 2006, 14:47
If you feel, that it is not proper to discuss it in physical/technical terms in this thread, why not open a new thread in a different section of the board in order to specifically address the issue? In fact, you had suggested that you would be willing to post to such a thread a few posts back. I think that would clear up this point of contention for the benefit of everyone.

Otherwise, all I have seen, is a lot of dancing around the issue (and posturing) without actually answering Rob's core question.

Sorry. Apologies for interfering once more, but what was Rob's core question?

Cufaol
28th January 2006, 14:50
Of course, if one can actually take this entropy and do work with it, then we need to develop a ki-based engine.

I know about enthropy, (or the basics at least) but my point actually was that I've some hard time believing ki might be another term for enthropy. I just didn't phrase it that well. Sorry, but I'm not a native speaker, hence my confusion. My apologies.

@ Kimiwane: really, are you actualy suggesting that we all run on Ki? A movement, is really just biomechanics, electricity etc. So unless Youle=Ki, your argument really doesn't make much sense. After all, we don't use warmth energy, we produce warmth by moving, resulting in or explained through the theory of enthropy. And don't give us the "Maybe the old masters meant enthropy when they were talking about ki...", that would be really dull.

cheers, C.

mikesigman@eart
28th January 2006, 15:31
So atoms really are solid objects? Come now. Physics tells us that the entire universe is energy that sometimes is and sometimes isn't little particles. Why will yu accept it if a physicist says it, but refuse to accept virtually the same statement describing that universal energy matrix as ki? What difference does that make?Seriously, you're talking to the wrong person if you want to hypothesize in this manner. My training is in engineering and I keep abreast of mathematical and scientific matters too much to be drawn into these wastes of time about ki and energy. "Energy" is a bookkeeping device that always balances. If there was a ki it would be known by now and all the Chinese books wouldn't have dropped it like a hotcake. Let's move on.

Similarly, I don't think you should drop terms like "pre-heaven qi", "reeling silk" and the like just for the nice sound they make in a conversation. However, for stark practical purposes let me quickly encapsulate a few things: "Pre-heaven" qi is sometimes called "pre-birth" qi and refers to the "natural" order of things... in line with the ancient Chinese cosmology. It refers to the body's "qi" and natural movements as exemplified by the foetus in the womb. The idea is that we lose this naturalness after birth, yada, yada, but the point to remember is that it's talking about the same general subject that Rob and I are referring to, in actuality. "Reeling Silk" is a type of movement and is simply a variation of "Six Harmonies movement". But again, that is simply a manipulation of the general subject that Rob and I are talking about.

Six-harmonies movement has the 3 external harmonies and the 3 internal harmonies. You referred to the 3 internal harmonies and your description was simply flummery, to put it diplomatically. The 3 internal harmonies are:
heart leads mind (meaning your emotional mind, your "desires" trigger your mind to start doing something.... you had it backwards and confused).
mind leads qi (meaning you use intent, not normal motion controls, to lead the control of jin and qi that are all part of qi).
qi leads strength/jin(meaning that the jin/kokyu strength is led to where it is wanted).

In other words, the 3 internal harmonies have to do with using the strength and movements of jin/kokyu/intent rather than normal movement. That's essentially all it means. So this topic was also being discussed by Rob, but you don't hear him.... you're hearing stuff you've "read", etc., and he's talking the stuff that he "does".

I think this sort of conversation, bickering, defense of pecking-order, etc., is going to be the norm as people who can actually do wind up in conversations with people who have "years of experience" and "dan rankings" but who can't really "do" and who will defensively deny that there is any body of essential knowledge that they don't have. THAT is what the real discussion needs to look at, IMO, but then it's just an opinion.

Regards,

Mike

Trevor Johnson
28th January 2006, 18:00
I've been through that kind of thing in the past. I never saw it do much good or help anything at all. I think right here on this board is the best place for this. You be the doctor and I will be me. I think we're doing fine as it is.

I am not playing doctor with you. I could get in a lot of trouble for that... ;)

Trevor Johnson
28th January 2006, 18:16
Please don't try to define it as that. I don't think anyone has ever gone that way.



That's where the Douglas Adams quote comes in. Entropy is constantly breaking everything down. So why doesn't the universe grind to a halt? Because creativity is recombining the scattered parts in new ways.

He meant human creativity, I think, but maybe he meant that the universe also is creative.

Actually, from what I know of physics, the universe IS grinding to a halt. It's just slowly. One example can be found in this year. It's one second longer than last year, because the earth is slowing down! Entropy, it gets us all.

Trevor Johnson
28th January 2006, 18:19
I think this question is covered in my post two back, with the question about the genki baby, and how our minds lead the ki and allow its condition to change from "genki" or healthy, origin ki, to "byouki" or illness ki.

But moving, walkng, typing, breathing are all uses of ki energy. All human movement "uses" ki energy in the more or less tight structure of the human organism.

How's that?

The problem with that statement is that it defines ki as ATP. ATP and myosin, how your muscles work. ATP and nerves, just about everything a nerve does requires it. ATP depletion is what causes rigor mortis.

So, that makes ki the energy specifically stored in chemical bonds, which I know you don't mean.

Trevor Johnson
28th January 2006, 20:05
Dang it, Trevor. That is a very nice question. It's a really thoughtful, conversational peer-to-peer, friendly kind of intelligent way to approach a subject like this. Thank you.I do try, in a wiseass sort of way.


There is no "causal" connection between the ki and the qualities. The ki does not "cause" the baby to be like that. The qualities are qualities of the ki itself, of which the baby is entirely made. He "is" genki. That's like saying "The water is hot." In this case, we're saying "The baby is as fresh as the day he was born." Very loosely. Very simply, it just means that he is healthy. But the Japanese language specifically "origin ki". An aspect of "healthy" is "vigorous," especially in adult males. I didn't really appreciate the fullness of "genki" until I went to a "genki taikai" that my dojo sponsored with a branch in another city. I didn't realize until much too late that they were giving out medals for the "MOST genki" performances of the day. I couldn't figure out why everyone was being so much rougher and seemed more aggressive than usual (in a pretty darned aggressive dojo).

.....

I mentioned qualities of a genki baby. I forgot to mention that his body is soft and flexible, but very strong. He smiles freely and without inhibition. This smile is evidence that the baby is experiencing "kimochi ii," or "holding good ki," or "feeling good." If your girlfriend likes what you're doing, she will say "kimochi ii!!!"

So genki is directly related to ii kimochi.

If the mind grows tired, overworked, whatever, becomes somehow unfocused or fatigued, "kimochi ii" gradually phases into "kimochi warui" or "feeling bad." If you get to feeling bad and weak enough, you become "byouki", or "sick", the polar opposite of "genki".

So, yes. There is a subtle interplay of natural health, natural feelings, and the condition of the ki

So in other words, the way that you can tell whether or not a baby exhibits genki is by the physical signs that he manifests, in the way he moves and in how he smiles, (and in whether or not he spits up all over you or your wife?) etc. Hrm.
One thing that's interesting about that kind of motion is that it's hardwired, to some extent, plus a gradual learned component. Babies don't have the neural connections that are gradually built up during development. So, part of the reason they do that is that they don't know HOW to move, and their muscles are taffy! They build up neural connections corresponding to the movementsThe interesting part here is that the reasons that they move that way are in fact knowable. We know a great deal about baby brains, because they're the root of a lot of adult insanities.

A lot of baby behavior is in fact hardwired, because they haven't done any learning yet. Their smiling is not a concious thing, it's automatically triggered when they see Mom. Dad not so much, he's not so important.

Do these qualities manifest in babies of other species? Does a puppy have genki? What about premature babies? They're not healthy, but they have the same qualities of movement.

So, when I want to understand ki, I should be able to look at the infant cerebellum, to see what CAUSES those qualities of movement.


In my rudimentary view of modern physics, the universe is a pulsing field of invisible energy. No atom can be completely located. How did it go? You can know it's location, but not its properties at the same time. Alternatively, you can know its properties, but not its location. Such a "particle" is not a permanent or even what we could call a semi-permanent solid object, but more like a knot in a net, a condensation of the field at certain points--so concentrated that it is effectively a solid object. But probability concerns just where that object is at any given moment. We can locate it but cannot simultaneously determine its speed, OR we can determine its speed, but cannot exactly locate it. Isn't that very generally the idea?

Now, to your question, the ki comes first. The qualities are qualities of the ki. The entire mind and body are ki. I suppose you're familiar with the liu he--the six harmonies. I described the three external harmonies earlier as listed in Yang's Emei Bagua. Those are, shoulders and hips harmonize, elbows and knees harmonize, hands and feet harmonize. You can do that alone and you will become genki.

But the three internal harmonies are extremely important. These are:

1 wisdom mind leads emotion mind
2 harmonized mind leads the qi
3 qi leads the body

The first harmony is between the emotional mind and the wisdom mind. Note, that's wisdom--not necessarily "reason". It consists mainly of balance. And you can easily see it's a short leap from "balance" to "ratio" and "rationality." But it is still slightly different. There is a much larger measure of intuition involved in the Chinese "wisdom" mind than in our "rational" mind.

The harmony between wisdom and emotion is NOT just "balance". The wisdom mind DOMINATES the emotional mind. When the mind is balanced in that way, it is what the Chinese really mean by 'mind', Yi, or, in Japanese, "I", as in "chui"=="pour your mind (on the subject)" or "pay attention."

When the wisdom mind dominates the emotional mind, the "harmonized mind leads the qi". The "qi leads the body."

So even though qi is the underlying energetic matrix on which the physical world is formed, the wise human mind can influence and direct that qi in the body. And the human body follows the movement of its qi. For martial arts, the calm, clear mind perceives danger, it moves the qi in response, and the body goes with the qi.

So do the qualities focus and distil the qi? Yes. To a very large extent. You can make yourself healthy or sick depending on how you direct the qi with your mind.


Hm. Interesting. Because this fits a conception of ki within the brain. Funny thing, did you know that your health is partly controlled by the brain? Nerves release signals to the immune system to control it, to the bones to change density, to the organs to modulate their function, etc. Called neuropeptides, and they also may regulate how much pain we feel when, as well as directing inflammation to the sites of injury. (Which may have quite a bit to do with why shingles hurts so very, very much! The are some cancers which have increased pain as well. ) Given that pain would be a symptom of unhealthy ki, this is a connection, no?

What I'm having some trouble with is the comment about the brain controlling energy. Besides the whole electrical impulse thing, it SOUNDS like you're talking about energy control at a quantum level. Which sounds like psychic powers, but perhaps it is not. One easy way to test this is to get the random number generator I mentioned earlier. There's a lab at Princeton in the engineering dept that I know used them to test this exact sort of question. I forget exactly how it worked, but it used I think something like radiation from an isotope to determine a random number. They would see if someone could get a statistically significant shift in the random numbers generated, either higher or lower. I'm uncertain what their successes were.






Well, I generally don't like to label it too definitely. But the Eastern way is absolutely empirical if not exactly rational. This kind of observation also relies extensively on intuition.




I'm sure it is. I don't have it indexed. You mean the thing about creative application of human awareness or something, don't you? I don't know where that comment is.



[QUOTE=kimiwane]By "phenomena," in this case, I mean all the things we observe as human beings. We're talking human scale, though even if you look into a microscope or telescope or for that matter an endoscope, the things you see all fall within Lao Tzu's "10,000 things."

...

The ten thousand things rise and fall while the Self watches their return. They grow and flourish and then return to the source. Returning to the source is stillness, which is the way of nature. The way of nature is unchanging.

In this case, I think he's referring to how all of nature automatically wakens in the spring, grow vivid in summer and die off in autumn and disappear in winter. And then they come back. The ten thousand things are the trees, grasses, animals, and all their interactions and the results of the interactions, all the strange ways of all creatures and the bizarre things that men make up and push on one another. Styles come and go and are forgotten. The eternal remains unchanged, though its face is always changing.

He says it more clearly in other passages than in 16. But that contains the line I was thinking of. Finishing up, they are both iniside and outside the human mind. However the tao is seen as far larger than any individual and also eternal. So I'd have to say, they are whether anyone observes them or not. However, it does matter whether they are observed in their influence on the human mind and will, yes?




there are limits to where science can and should go. It should NEVER get fouled up into romance, for instance. You cannot scientifically make love. A robot can, but a human should not.

The whole ki system is a personal interaction with the universe. It's walking taoism. It's fine as it is.

Now if you want to analyze the physics of martial arts techniques or something like that, to improve your delivery of power, or your transmission of effort, analyze to your heart's content.

But how can you scientifically quantify the I Ching or Lao Tzu? Or poetry or painting or sculpture? This is one of those areas, I believe, where science just doesn't belong. You want to cure disease? Cure the disease. Don't try to cure Asia and all its students of their personal relationship to the world. Unless, of course, they ask for it. But again, what's the harm if someone does feng shui in their home instead of decorating it, as some do, like the bridge of the Starship Enterprise?
Go take a look at E-Harmony, or the various dating services. That's exactly what they do. They look at people and see what qualities make them fit. Other research is being done on how to make a marriage work. There are specific qualities, that can be trained, that will keep people together in a loving partnership, even with the husband slowly transitioning into a grumpy and rather irritating old man with disgusting personal habits. (I'm male, so I'm not allowed to slang at the wife on hers.) Love may not be able to be quantified, but attraction can be, as well as lasting affection.

Lust certainly can be, and the equation is complex. It's based on molar EtOH, pico- and nanomolar concentrations of pheremones, a certain percentage of visible epidermis/total size of body, and a complex psychological calculation based on net worth and facial features. I'm only being partially facetious here.

A certain amount of feng shui is based on psychology of the environment. That may not be what they CALL it, but arranging someone's home in a certain way so that it pleases them and they are happy in it is in fact a science. It can be learned as feng shui, but I don't care what you call it. Well, more into a field of engineering, I'd guess. There's definitely an art to it, but there's an art to science as well, one most people, who see us only as bland number-crunchers and cell-pokers, don't understand. (And you really won't understand us until you see the Princeton math dept. rituals under Fine Tower at night...)

And yes, I do use scientific thinking in my relationships. It has certain benefits that you are perhaps overlooking, mostly involving anatomy and physiology, but also involving psychology. In my case, I've used elements of immunology, a lot of psychology, and several other things, including elements of neurobiology. Some things are best analyzed.



I think a lot of people really believe that the Bible is completely literally true and that science really is the enemy of humanity. Such people would like to see the entire institution of science destroyed and replaced by religion.

And to me, it seems that you have advocated the total replacement of "the ki system" with scientific explanations for everything. So what difference is it if we say the "baby feels bad" or we say "the baby is suffering a condition of physical and emotional discomfort". Or if we can quantify that and say "the baby = m/c - (rc/l + g)".

I just look at the baby and say "Kawai-chai-cho". (baby talk Japanese for "poor little baby".) My paradigm demands I say gootchy gootchy goo, actually. ;)

Which would you prefer, changing babies by equation or by hand? More seriously, though, I think you're missing something of what I'm saying. I'm not advocating destroying it, I'm advocating understanding it. What were all those Taoist alchemists DOING, if not exploring the universe and trying to better humanity, or at least themselves? It seems to me that I'm carrying on in the same tradition. I don't see it as a bad thing to explore the concept of ki by the same methods that it was originally explored, by logic, by creativity, and by rigorous experimentation, the same way those crazy old Taoist alchemists did. I just use different, more modern, approaches. Ones that involve fewer mercury fumes and risk less madness.


The reason that the creationists are going so nuts is that they're scared of us. They're afraid that somehow we'll change the world into a Godless one, that we'll reveal that they've been wrong about God and that all their existance is a myth. Further, nobody really likes thinking about the inevitable heat death of the universe, now do they? If it's such a cold hard place, with entropy killing us eternally, then what does it mean to be human? What is it even WORTH?

Those are good questions, and they must be considered. I consider them regularly, because my own sense of ethics and responsibility makes me. My own is perhaps slightly heretical, but that's me to a T. I should point out here that when Darwin postulated the theory of evolution, no theologians of the time saw any problem believing in God and evolution at the same time. Neither do I. Where theologians read the Bible and study God's word, I study God's works. The physicists who reach back before the Big Bang for answers study them as well. Was there a creation? How did it work? The big one, WHY?
I study how we work, and I would say that, if there is a creator, that creator was a danged clever being. Whether a Christian god or Izanami and Izanagi, danged clever all the same. You look at the complexity, and it's amazing how we work, and how we came to be.

For ki, the question's slightly different. Darwinian-era theologians didn't postulate God as necessarily having physical extensions, unless of course God wanted to. Here, you're postulating something that by rights SHOULD have a physical extension, since it's involved in our existance and manifests in our movements, no? So, it's fair game for investigation. Furthermore, I'm not sure it matters if it can be proven that ki exists as a kind of megaversal energy field like the Force, as the chemical bonds of ATP, as a concept in quantum mechanics, or as a neural phenomenon that exists in the brain and mind and can be used to control the body. I really don't care which it is, because whatever it is, it IS going to teach us stuff we don't already know. We may be able to quantify it for our own use, and we'll need to if we want to understand it, BUT there's no reason to not use it yourself, in the form to which you're accustomed. Just don't get all ticked off if we manage to explain it and use it to better humanity.


Well I'm reading you 5 by 5 as I once heard a cop in a movie say. Coming in loud and clear. But please read back through what you said earlier. Maybe in light of my earlier comments about "causality" and ki, you will realize what I'm NOT saying. Ki is not some disembodied force that floats around that we can suck up and use to generate ki balls to throw at one another. It is so much simpler and plainer than that that there's nothing for science to look at. It's exactly the opposite. It may look simple and plain, but how many years of your life have you been trying to train it? Simple and plain is how it feels once you actually learn it, but while you're trying?

There's everything to look at. And if you look at neurosci wonks, you'll see we're currently doing it.


Ki balls, sure. Go ahead and do all the science you want. But how to prove the energetic matrix? How to prove that we can "lead" our own ki to make ourselves healthy or sick?

Well, if you want to do those experiments, or hook up your girlfriend to meters, to see how she feels, I won't stop you. But for me, it's a personal relationship with life and i don't see the need to interject it into the academic world where I work or to interject science into my personal and subtle and very happy relationship with life.
But yield who will to their separation,
My object in living is to unite.
My avocation and my vocation
As my two eyes make one in sight.

Robert Frost, Two Tramps in Mudtime.

It's the way I see the world. Everything has a cause. I may not always understand it, but it's the trying that's important. It's what I live for, because the more I understand, the happier I am. The more we understand, the more we can do, the more we can save.
Same mindset of the early philosophers, early doctors, East and West. That's what I've kinda been trying to get across, is that just because people have different ways of saying things and different ways of looking at them, doesn't mean that they don't MEAN the same thing at the root.

There's no East or West, border nor breed nor birth, when two such men come face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth! (With apologies to Kipling)

And as I said above, we're learning how it works right now. I'm working on it right now, my little piece, my little question. And we'll have it soon. In my lifetime. Betcha! Scare you? Scares me, a little. But it's so much fun, if it weren't scary we'd have to ban it as illegal!


Maybe I've confused you with someone else. Didn't you say you have to get a new paradigm to supersede the old? Weren't you talking about renovating all ki concepts to get rid of all those that aren't proven by science?

I don't think ki needs to be renovated and I don't think its existence indicates the need to change science, either.
Well, this is why you need to read kuhn. You need to understand what a paradigm is or you won't understand what I'm saying about the above. It's a bit of a tricky concept. Much like what we're discussing now.

Joshua Lerner
29th January 2006, 01:04
I guess my take on it is, the whole "Qi" paradigm is an antiquated notion left behind by an earlier generation. The research done before isn't useless, but the bujutsu notions of "henka"/change and "adaptation" should be applied :)

Hi Rob,

Sorry to dig this up from page two, but I thought it was an interesting idea and wanted you to elaborate. How are you equating qi with henka in terms of bujutsu? Is this a notion that Akuzawa talks about? I get the feeling that there is something very important in there worth pursuing.

Asura
29th January 2006, 02:17
Hi Rob,

Sorry to dig this up from page two, but I thought it was an interesting idea and wanted you to elaborate. How are you equating qi with henka in terms of bujutsu? Is this a notion that Akuzawa talks about? I get the feeling that there is something very important in there worth pursuing.

Oooh... you just had to go down that road didn't you O_o
You're really going to work my typing skills.

I'll try and explanation the notion of "change" as best I can in english, since half the time I think about this stuff in Japanese (it's easier for some reason).

Where to start...

Read this first ->
http://homepage3.nifty.com/aunkai/eng/bujyutu/index.html

Those that can read Japanese refer here for the original text->
(And feel free to poke holes in the translation ;) )
http://homepage3.nifty.com/aunkai/bujyutu/index.html


This is a translated version of Ark's methedology.
It's kind of long winded and seems abstract, but at it's heart it's still a physical skill that he refers to.

To outline what's written there simply.

A)
Train the body within a framework that works both internal and external properties.
These properties are physical, and the framework allow these physical skills to grow stronger and manifest themselves as tangible physical feelings, as well as skill.


B)
Use those increasing physical skills to temper a different kind of "stength". Chinese refer to it as Jing or Kei

C) Going through A->B builds up your core "foundation".
Then you go back A then back to B, which builds up C... in a neverending process.

Basically the resulting physical feelings, 6 directional contradictory power, compression expansion of the body, standing with the spine, keeping the arch inside the legs (dangjing) along with the million other physical requirements, plus the "flip in thinking" that occurs are always on the move inside you as one "whole", even though they're comprised of different parts. In essence you're always physically moving, you're always changing, always adapting to the situation.
Movement within Stillness, Stillness within Movement and all that stuff.

One way to look at this is:

You build up that "moving" whole inside you which comprises your foundation, and this is where "proper" but spontaneous technique arises.
By conforming your body to the "proper" harmonies, (both mental and physical), your body automatically does the proper movement.

The deeper aspect is:
This constant tempering of the body means that your body, and even your thinking are constantly changing. Or in other words you're constantly evolving.
The hardest part to understand I think, is that even this deeper aspect is a physical feel, not some abstract notion.
(This is why I said that the Zen stuff can be explained physically. The abstract way they view the world is a result, nothing more)

As you temper your body in A goto B, build up C, your body changes, is able to accept the harmonies in more detail, and your body is constantly discovering how to keep itself more in line with those internal/external principals/properties.

So you could say that Bujutsu is about building that "foundation" (of which the Ki/Kokyuu is a corner stone of to train the body), which is in essence a constant "change" of the state of the body and mind.

I could give you clear examples if we were face a face, this is hard to convey via the internet, but if you have any questions, feel free to fire away. :)


****
Added later:

I should mention that this process is almost in direct opposition to the "technique" based training that you see in a lot of Koryu arts, or even sport-based modern Martial arts.
Simple "tanren" becomes the focus, since you're intent on literally changing how your body works, and thinks, from the inside out.
It's an extremely mentally & physically taxing process.

It's this process that the chinese often used to refer to by having Qi permeate the body, change it alchemically etc etc.
You can take that paradigm and apply it to everyday life to, but only because "you" are the center of it, and "you're" adapting to it. It's still mainly a human construct, you're simply applying that physical feel to help yourself "mold" to the world around you.
That's where this stuff gets all metaphysical.

The reason I was being a stickler for the Kuzushi was because, unless someone understands this process as a physical feel (and pretty much everyone that "can do" will click with me if I talk about this from my experience), you can't really talk about the abstract concepts, since they're a result of posessing that Physical feel.

Examples most are familiar with would be
Ueshiba referring to the 8 Gods etc
Allusions to being one with universal energy etc.

It's simply a result of your body physically being in a constant change of flux that you're physically aware of.

mikesigman@eart
29th January 2006, 03:52
Hi Rob:

Just to shine a broader beam of light on "change", that's also the way it is described in the Chinese martial arts. In fact, the Yi Jin Jing exercises, which most of the Chinese and Japanese martial arts developments of ki/qi and jin/kokyu are derived from, is about the "muscle-tendon changes". "Muscle-tendon" could also be read quite correctly as "myo-fascial", BTW. So the Yi Jin Jing is the way of changing the myo-fascial components of the body, the sinews, the tendons, etc. It all hangs together.

FWIW

Mike

Asura
29th January 2006, 06:25
Hi Rob:

Just to shine a broader beam of light on "change", that's also the way it is described in the Chinese martial arts. In fact, the Yi Jin Jing exercises, which most of the Chinese and Japanese martial arts developments of ki/qi and jin/kokyu are derived from, is about the "muscle-tendon changes". "Muscle-tendon" could also be read quite correctly as "myo-fascial", BTW. So the Yi Jin Jing is the way of changing the myo-fascial components of the body, the sinews, the tendons, etc. It all hangs together.

FWIW

Mike

Yea, I totally agree with you there.
And the whole neurological stimulation would fall in nicely with what Trevor posted before I think?
Akuzawa's got these hands that're like...scary (they're soft, but still it's thick/dense), for his frame.
He claims that he didn't condition them by hitting stuff, which would fall in with the brain automatically making the bones denser etc by all this practice.

Joshua Lerner
29th January 2006, 07:05
Hi Rob,

Thanks for taking the time to post all of that. A few observations/questions -

How do Ark's excercises to develop the six directional power compare in *feel* to the Yiquan excercises? Based on my mostly self taught experiments with Yiquan, they are very taxing, but not quite physically. More of an exhaustion of the nervous system, if that makes sense. Or maybe taxing in ways that are as close to being physically exhausting as you can without actually being exhausting in that way.

It sounds like Ark's excercises employ more musculature to achieve the same result, which is probably a little more reliable in the early stages, if I am understanding you correctly. For instance, there are excercises in Yiquan where you are feeling as if someone is pushing against you in one direction, which produces a certain subtle reaction in your spine and legs, and you are also imagining resisting a push in the opposite direction, with the appropriate internal response. The way I was initially taught, it involves completely relaxing the muscles while still invoking all of the sensations in all of the directions. But since it depends entirely on your ability to visualize several things at once, and doing it strongly enough to create the reactions in your body that you are trying to get, it starts to feel like one of those guys who spins plates on rods - he gets one going, then the next one, then the next one, until he gets ten going, but then he has to go back to the first one and spin that some more, then back to the second one, etc. Always having to go back through the various "tensions" and making sure you are still doing them.

Ark's method of standing, if I understand correctly according to how you once described it to me, seems to involve putting your body in positions where you have to use your muscles to more physically do contradictory actions at the same time, for instance in order to avoid falling over. Which seems in one sense coarser but at the same time more reliable - it is very easy to fool yourself into believing you are accomplishing something when your only real feedback is your imagination (or over-compliant uke, which I remember fondly from my Aikido years).

Am I understanding that aspect of Ark's teachings correctly? How do *you* understand the differences between the two approaches? Or are they more similar than I've made them out to be?

I was also interested in the emphasis Ark places on change, and his description of the physical feeling of change, because it is something that is described in Daoist texts but isn't really talked about much, at least in the Western IMA circles I'm aware of.

"Well, that says more about your exposure to Western IMA circles than anything else ;)

One of my Taijiquan teachers years ago was talking about that saying that you should stand like a mountain and move like a river. I thought the phrase should be switched around. Shouldn't we stand like a river and move like a mountain? I think I said so at the time, but the teacher probably just thought I was being a smartass.

Asura
29th January 2006, 09:16
Hi Rob,
Or maybe taxing in ways that are as close to being physically exhausting as you can without actually being exhausting in that way.

It sounds like Ark's excercises employ more musculature to achieve the same result, which is probably a little more reliable in the early stages, if I am understanding you correctly.
Ark's method of standing, if I understand correctly according to how you once described it to me, seems to involve putting your body in positions where you have to use your muscles to more physically do contradictory actions at the same time, for instance in order to avoid falling over. Which seems in one sense coarser but at the same time more reliable

I'd say that's a fairly accurate description. The only thing I'd note that is while you engage the muscles more, they aren't engaged in a "clenching" action that you would normally associate with activating the muscles.
Since the focus is to increase the tension by relaxing (in order to emphasize your awareness of the groundpath as one continuous circuit), I've found that I'm quickly getting past the "using" muscle stage. The more I relax to increase the tension, the less actual tension I find I actually have to use when I move spontaneously, or apply the technique. I learn to physically increase the pressure "inside" me to apply something on someone --> Concept of Imashime :) You don't "intend" to put the power in them, but it happens as a result.
Kind of like an "oops sorry, I dropped you on the floor??...damn I didn't even feel anything" kind of thing.

And yea the exercises are the kind that tax you physically at first as well as mentally, but as you dig deeper, and focus more and more on keeping all the properties together, the mental taxation far far outweighs the physical :-p




I was also interested in the emphasis Ark places on change, and his description of the physical feeling of change, because it is something that is described in Daoist texts but isn't really talked about much, at least in the Western IMA circles I'm aware of.
My previous teacher in NYC Sam Chin of Iliqchuan, used to talk about this constantly, and while I "thought" I understood it conceptually, I really didn't. ^^; Looking back now I can say for certain that maybe only 2 of his students that I knew of even "understood" that process physically.



One of my Taijiquan teachers years ago was talking about that saying that you should stand like a mountain and move like a river. I thought the phrase should be switched around. Shouldn't we stand like a river and move like a mountain? I think I said so at the time, but the teacher probably just thought I was being a smartass.
Actually I agree with your Tai Chi teacher. At least the phase that I'm going through. It feels like you become "dense" but "flowy" at the same time, lol.
Dammit...why couldn't english have Giongo 擬音語like japanese...

As a comment, the Yi-Chuan stuff is great, and conceptually I like it, though I think the exercises should be modified so that the students develop the feel through a wider and more complete range of motion. That's my personal opinoin though.

Final note though, is that while Ark's modified some of this stuff from chinese exercises, the bulk of it comes from Koryu Kihon exercises(which ones I'm not going to say here, but if someone's interested and PM's me, I'll be more than happy to talk one on one)...contradictory stuff included :)
That was a shocker for me as well, to be quite honest :)

mikesigman@eart
30th January 2006, 12:53
Ark's method of standing, if I understand correctly according to how you once described it to me, seems to involve putting your body in positions where you have to use your muscles to more physically do contradictory actions at the same time, for instance in order to avoid falling over. Which seems in one sense coarser but at the same time more reliable - it is very easy to fool yourself into believing you are accomplishing something when your only real feedback is your imagination (or over-compliant uke, which I remember fondly from my Aikido years). This question of muscle-tension versus qi-tension is very interesting to me. I'm hoping to meet up with Rob within a few months and thrash a few of these things out, so it'll probably have to wait until then.


"Well, that says more about your exposure to Western IMA circles than anything else ;)

One of my Taijiquan teachers years ago was talking about that saying that you should stand like a mountain and move like a river. I thought the phrase should be switched around. Shouldn't we stand like a river and move like a mountain? I think I said so at the time, but the teacher probably just thought I was being a smartass. Well, the easiest way to explain it is that "stand like a mountain" refers to the incredible difficulty you can have in moving someone who knows how to root, using jin/kokyu skills. "Moving like a great river" referst to the heavy, unstoppable feeling of someone who has learned to move with jin/kokyu as part of their normal movements.

Regards,

Mike

Trevor Johnson
30th January 2006, 16:05
Yea, I totally agree with you there.
And the whole neurological stimulation would fall in nicely with what Trevor posted before I think?
Akuzawa's got these hands that're like...scary (they're soft, but still it's thick/dense), for his frame.
He claims that he didn't condition them by hitting stuff, which would fall in with the brain automatically making the bones denser etc by all this practice.

Hitting stuff's not necessarily required. Compression works, as does vibration. You know that astronauts lose bone density in space. This can be replicated in mice and rescued by putting them on a vibrating table for 10min/day. So lifting works, as does torquing, pulling, etc. Anything that stimulates the bone. This works partly at the level of the osteoblast, which are mechanosensors, as well as neuronally, via leptin-regulated centers of the brain, possibly in the hypothalamus, though there are several areas that are leptin-controlled.

mikesigman@eart
30th January 2006, 17:06
The breathing exercises and some of the tensions work for the bones and other structures that react to being "worked" with compression and expansion. But particularly the breathing exercises. What a lot of people miss is that breathing is done (in some styles) while the primary musculature is "relaxed", but that misses the subtle tensions, pressures, etc., that are being done regularly and deliberately in order to develop the ki/qi. In other styles, there is an admixture of primary-musculature tensions and these other tensions (I think, from what Rob says, this is what Akuzawa teaches). As long as the breathing contributes to the rhythmic expansion and contractions, there will be an overall stressing of the collagenous systems, including the bones.

FWIW

Mike

kimiwane
31st January 2006, 01:38
How in the world do you think it is possible to 'use' this energy if it is bound in more or less tight structures?

Energy moves up and down the entire body constantly as nerve impulses. For instance.

thanks,

kimiwane
31st January 2006, 05:11
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
since you insist that ki does not exist and it's all a discredited notion, you DON'T use ki in your martial arts.


I said that the "ki" referred to as "ki" in martial arts is a specific kind of body skill. In that sense it DOES exist. That same "bodyskill" is applied in meditation. To a different degree.

No. You still miss it terribly. Ki, in any sense, is no bodyskill. It IS your BODY. Yes. You still miss it. Ki still underlies all you say. I will show you.


In fact I'm a big proponent of training that body-skill over technique.

So you criticize those who put ki over technique. Your point is that you must emphasize "ki" over technique.

Hmm. That's original. You have something there. Let's go further.


The reason I was being an !!! about that Kuzushi is that if you know the fundamentals of that body-skill, you should be able to describe how that Kuzushi is done, beyond the typical description of technique.

No. I don't want to overemphasize the point, but the reason you were being an "!!!" is because that is your nature. Of course, it is mine, too. But the reason I replied as I did is that your question was rather inane. You wanted me to "tell how Minoru Mochizuki got you off balance by merely gripping your sleeve." To me, that was rather dim. How does any big judo man get kuzushi?

That you demanded a precise lingo to explain what he did complicated the matter. And then you finally said what you meant and I couldn't believe it was all down to "that." I kept thinking about your post over the weekend and gradually connected with what you say below:


Typical description of technique generally follows this line:
I twist his wrist xxx way, then I pull him forward to his toes, step away from the line of attack, then use waist to do xxx throw

That description is disjointed. It is, in fact, pretty much backward. I know that paragraph is what you attribute to others' thinking, but it makes me wonder why you would describe it so disjointedly? Do you, perhaps, not understand what other people have been saying? Are you perhaps deliberately making it look jerky? How have judo people been getting kuzushi all these years if no one knew what they were doing?


Rather than the typical explanation outlined above, I was seeing if you would explain something like the following (not necessarily the same way, just wanted to see how your body works, according to your descritpion)

The "Ki" or bodyskill based description I refer to is
Forget about the wrist, if he grabs you, equalize the pressure on your hand by drawing/compressing into the spine. Maintaining the "up/down" "forwards/backwards" "left/right" contradictory power (which by the way you dismissed as a manga term...its actually a fundamental in both CMA and JMAs...but you wore a circle in asphalt walking the circle, so you should know that, right? ), create a groundpath to his hands, then release while driving the compression into the ground, etc.

What you describe sounds like what's necessary to do either aiki age or aiki sage. I noticed in the clips I saw that basically, all he was doing seemed to be a combination of the two, like kokyu dosa.

And what you say sounds like what BK Frantzis describes in The Power of Internal Martial Arts. Ah, but he goes a little further. He says that ki flows through the structure. Or it might be better to say that ki flows through the body alignment. He is clear that the alignment itself is only a channel to let the ki flow through. But he does describe something very similar to what you say above.


That's just an example, not saying I expected you to explain it exactly the same way.

Well you could use that to describe getting kuzushi for a wrist grab, as in aiki age or aiki sage, but you can't apply that to Mochizuki sensei's getting kuzushi with a grasp of my sleeve.

So what you have come down to is really just lingo if, as I say, it's what you MUST do for aiki age to work. Well, I know how to do aiki age and aiki sage and it feels similar to what you describe, BUT that whole rationalization is just a description of what the human body naturally does.
For example, opening a door. Or picking up an object. That is to say, that's how they do it if they're properly aligned. It's what the body must do to exert force. But what if he does not grab you? What if he punches? Or if he attacks with a sword? How do you apply your six-direction energy? Isn't that out of Roppokai?

Your answer also reminds me of a Zen story. The abbot of the monastery had to choose his successor but he wasn't sure which of three men he could really support. So one day, he had them in a room and he set a little vase of water on the floor.

He said something like, "Who can tell me what is in this vase without talking?"

One fellow said something like "What is in the vase is not there at all."

The abbot balanced his head from side to side, as if weighing the answer.

The second man made some motions with his hands. No result.

The third man walked to the vase and kicked it over. The water went into the tatami.

The master said, "You are the one."

So if you'd try to explain kuzushi in your way to sensei, he would have spilled you onto the floor.


Everyone has their own ways of describing things, but if your body is "built up", then you should be able to describe these things on a universal level, and identify where they univerally apply (within movement, and since these movements happen more or less in a martial context, I mean, you don't go around flooring people with Fajing everyday when you shake their hand, so talking about it in a martial context is only natural.)

And there it is again, a glaring ignorance of what you're even saying:

"you should be able to describe these things on a universal level, and identify where they univerally apply (within movement,"

good enough as a start, but you instantly wreck when your next words fail to make the curve:

"since these movements happen more or less in a martial context, I mean, you don't go around flooring people with Fajing everyday when you shake their hand, so talking about it in a martial context is only natural.)"

That's it. That's the manga boy. You cannot even SEE a movement if it isn't a "martial arts" movement. All the matrix of normal human life is just a boring backdrop for the exciting stuff--the big stuff where you can obviously see that people are fighting. It has to be really big and exciting, or you get bored.

But the truth is in mundane ordinary living, walking, washing clothes, hanging them up, picking things up, putting them up, reaching for things.

All this is full of the energy of life that I call ki.

You say, "you should be able to describe these things on a universal level, and identify where they univerally apply (within movement," but the only way you can connect this to daily life is that you don't do fajing when you shake hands. But you DO apply fajing every time you shake hands. You use the very same body, don't you? It's just a matter of not displacing the other person. You still give them energy. Don't you? You don't shake hands like a dead fish, do you? In Japanese terms, you have kiai when you shake hands. Something is supposed to happen. But it's not so big that it attracts the attention of a young upstart.

If you know where to look and when, you can see aikido in a baby as he goes about his business. I am about to start a thread on that subject in the aikido forum.

What you describe sounds accurate enough, but it sounds like it only applies to wrist grabs. I'm sure your sensei is good at it, but now that you come out with it I can tell you it's a gimmick that is well known where real physical power is used in martial arts.

Maybe you're only seeing people who have never felt real interaction with the uke in aikido. I recently had some experience with one of those styles where the weakest action insires uke to slam his oshiri down with no real interplay. Akuzawa's method ought to work very well on such people. I could see that he was rolling the hands around a little, a bit of give and take, the the kuzushi and a drop. So it looks and sounds, in fact, like yawara, or the principle of ju. The give and take, the yeilding. So it sounds like aikijujutsu.

Interesting, but hardly world shaking. I guess if one had never felt strength or resistance in aikido technique (as many, many aikido people apparently NEVER have), yeah, they would fall right over for that kind of thing. But have you been to Shizuoka yet? Have you tried out Tezuka's grip?

And it seems you mentioned going to Paris. I don't know how I let that slip. Mochizuki Sensei's son, Hiroo, is in France. I've never met sensei's grandson, Michi, but I believe that's who you need to grab. I think he's about 20 years old. And though I've never even seen him, I believe he will show you what a younger man can do.

I learned that many times in Japan, but most of those guys showed humility even when they won. I'm just not used to in-your-face budo. It's something I'd expect to find in a trailer park more than in Tokyo. But such is the folly of youth.

So now you have two choices: find the truth in Shizuoka or find it in France. Meanwhile, I am going to open a thread on kuzushi in the aikido forum and then I will deal with you in detail on the matter of many, many kinds of kuzushi.

Until then, how do you think Mochizuki sensei got kuzushi so easily? I can tell you it was not the way you described at all. It was so much simpler.


I simply asked you if you could describe the bodyskill that drives the kuzushi, and is universal to ALL technique.

But the way you described above is just mechanics. Kuzushi is far more than mechanics. And does it really apply to ALL techniques--as you described? I have some examples in a moment.


Since you refused to, and decided to play the "I have xxxx years experience" game, I simply made the observation, that years mean nothing if your training was nothing.

And there goes that "!!!" nature again, consistent as a cuckoo. Again, son, you're talking about Mochizuki Minoru. You call yourself an aiki man and you've never been to the old yoseikan in Shizuoka. You've never learned what the meijin was teaching. You have never grabbed Akira Tezuka or Hiroo Mochizuki or even the grandson, Michi Mochizuki. Tezuka is just west of you. And you're going to France, so the Mochizukis will be available there. You're too old not yet to know that there is nothing new under the sun. Go ahead and go to them and they will gladly teach you what Mochizuki's "nothing" can do.


Doesn'T matter how many times Mochizuki slammed you into the mat, massaged you, and made you appreciate his "human"ness. You either got the bodyskill, or you don't.
If you do, then you should be able to describe it physically.

Well, the current lingo is one thing, but the old way of teaching in silence is another. I learned what I learned by careful and detailed observation, modelling and direct explanations from a rational man. I was able to get kuzushi on some people and not on others. And sometimes I got it on people it shouldn't have worked on.

But no one beats everyone. Even you can be beaten by your sensei, can't you? Why doesn't your bodyskill save you then? It's because no matter what you are doing, if the other guy is similarly skilled and just a little faster, just a little stronger, your bodyskill loses. So what you describe is really just a wordy way of saying what severe aikido and judo men know very well without wording it up. They simply feel it and know how to use it.

If they can beat you, then what does it matter what words you use? They're just a loser's words when you've lost. But if you win a few times and think you can never be beaten, they're a LOSER's words. Please let me know if you decide to face the truth in Shizuoka or in France.

It is so much simpler than you think.

Now let's carry on with discussions of ki in this thread. I will deal with kuzushi in deep detail on the aikido forum.

Best wishes.

Cufaol
31st January 2006, 14:21
Energy moves up and down the entire body constantly as nerve impulses. For instance.

thanks,

I know the theories about chakra, Ida and Pingala and Kundalini. I'm more than familiar with this entire idea/system. Problem is, that they are no more than a mental scheme/idea.
c.

Asura
31st January 2006, 20:45
What you describe sounds like what's necessary to do either aiki age or aiki sage. I noticed in the clips I saw that basically, all he was doing seemed to be a combination of the two, like kokyu dosa.


It looks like it, but in reality he's just showing the most stripped down version of moving with "Jin" which you don't seem to understand. The result is also... cleaner ;) But like I said before <yawn> you have to feel it to understand it.



And what you say sounds like what BK Frantzis describes in The Power of Internal Martial Arts. Ah, but he goes a little further. He says that ki flows through the structure. Or it might be better to say that ki flows through the body alignment. He is clear that the alignment itself is only a channel to let the ki flow through. But he does describe something very similar to what you say above.


You're quoting a guy that claims he was "sprayed" with Chi by his teacher.
:rolleyes:



Well you could use that to describe getting kuzushi for a wrist grab, as in aiki age or aiki sage, but you can't apply that to Mochizuki sensei's getting kuzushi with a grasp of my sleeve.


Sagawa could. ;)
In fact Kimura's big deal about Sagawa's stuff was that it was a universally applicable skill.



So what you have come down to is really just lingo if, as I say, it's what you MUST do for aiki age to work. Well, I know how to do aiki age and aiki sage and it feels similar to what you describe, BUT that whole rationalization is just a description of what the human body naturally does.
For example, opening a door. Or picking up an object. That is to say, that's how they do it if they're properly aligned. It's what the body must do to exert force. But what if he does not grab you? What if he punches? Or if he attacks with a sword? How do you apply your six-direction energy? Isn't that out of Roppokai?

Dude... go back and hunt and peck your Chinese Boxing books lol.
Six Directional, Eight Extremes Fist (Baji Chuan) etc, all refer to the same thing. In fact they used to cover this over and over again in "Wushu" magazine, as part of the "ougi" or hidden transmission in Chinese Martial Arts.

If you have that six-directional tension inherent in your body, then whatever move you do will inherently have kuzushi on contact.
What would I do with a punch depends on the situation. If it's coming straight at me from a close in position, safest posture to take is the one you'll see in Baji-fist (btw, yagyu shingan will use this position as well), where the elbows are folded. Person gets kuzushi'd slightly on contact as the person moves forward.
But, like I said earlier, bujustu at its base is about henka, change. But at the heart of that "change" lies a universally applicable skill.



That's it. That's the manga boy. You cannot even SEE a movement if it isn't a "martial arts" movement. All the matrix of normal human life is just a boring backdrop for the exciting stuff--the big stuff where you can obviously see that people are fighting. It has to be really big and exciting, or you get bored.


Btw, I'd stop with the "manga" hints.
It's making you sound like a tool :rolleyes:
何か漫画フェチでもあるの?wwww



Maybe you're only seeing people who have never felt real interaction with the uke in aikido. I recently had some experience with one of those styles where the weakest action insires uke to slam his oshiri down with no real interplay. Akuzawa's method ought to work very well on such people. I could see that he was rolling the hands around a little, a bit of give and take, the the kuzushi and a drop. So it looks and sounds, in fact, like yawara, or the principle of ju. The give and take, the yeilding. So it sounds like aikijujutsu.

Yup, but yielding means jack if there's nothing to backup the body.
If you don't have that bodyskill to back it up, then yielding will only get you crushed ;)



Interesting, but hardly world shaking. I guess if one had never felt strength or resistance in aikido technique (as many, many aikido people apparently NEVER have), yeah, they would fall right over for that kind of thing. But have you been to Shizuoka yet? Have you tried out Tezuka's grip?

Actually I have, and the "kind" of resistance, even if heavy, that's produced by the majority of aikido guys is laugable. It's either "datsuryoku" or sheer strength. (Btw a large portion of CMA people are guilty of the same thing, so I'm not singling out the Aiki peeps ;) )



And it seems you mentioned going to Paris. I don't know how I let that slip. Mochizuki Sensei's son, Hiroo, is in France. I've never met sensei's grandson, Michi, but I believe that's who you need to grab. I think he's about 20 years old. And though I've never even seen him, I believe he will show you what a younger man can do.

I learned that many times in Japan, but most of those guys showed humility even when they won. I'm just not used to in-your-face budo. It's something I'd expect to find in a trailer park more than in Tokyo. But such is the folly of youth.

So now you have two choices: find the truth in Shizuoka or find it in France. Meanwhile, I am going to open a thread on kuzushi in the aikido forum and then I will deal with you in detail on the matter of many, many kinds of kuzushi.

You go do that ;)
I'll drop a hint for you every now and then.



Until then, how do you think Mochizuki sensei got kuzushi so easily? I can tell you it was not the way you described at all. It was so much simpler.

Really? Then I look forward to hearing it.





And there goes that "!!!" nature again, consistent as a cuckoo. Again, son, you're talking about Mochizuki Minoru. You call yourself an aiki man and you've never been to the old yoseikan in Shizuoka. You've never learned what the meijin was teaching. You have never grabbed Akira Tezuka or Hiroo Mochizuki or even the grandson, Michi Mochizuki. Tezuka is just west of you. And you're going to France, so the Mochizukis will be available there. You're too old not yet to know that there is nothing new under the sun. Go ahead and go to them and they will gladly teach you what Mochizuki's "nothing" can do.

Uh...I never said I was aiki.
And I'll get up to Shizuoka at some point, alright? ;)
Stop having such a raging #$$#on for these guys lol.
I think its pretty clear to the rest of the forum members that you've lost it and have nothing of substance to offer.
Especially since you haven't been able to offer up anything for the discussion Mike and I were having, which I'm sorry, but you should be at least familiar with if you're going to talk about the metaphysical aspects of "ki".



But no one beats everyone. Even you can be beaten by your sensei, can't you? Why doesn't your bodyskill save you then?

Cuz like any good skill, his "Kou" or foundation is better developed than mine.
And you are correct, if it comes down to both having the same level of foundation, then the person who is faster, and who is slightly stronger, will win. That's where "jutsu" also comes in.
But I'm saying with confidence that most people out there are NOT training like we do.
We know how the typical person trains, and generates power, but they don't understand us ;) And that's where we get the leg up, and why I've been able to apply it so successfully to a venue like BJJ where Aiki peeps regularly get their asses handed to them :rolleyes:

Trevor Johnson
31st January 2006, 21:40
Energy moves up and down the entire body constantly as nerve impulses. For instance.

thanks,

That energy is very tightly controlled and regulated, to do only the work that it's supposed to do. Especially nervous impulses. They don't leak to other tissues.

mikesigman@eart
31st January 2006, 21:43
Well when *I* leak, I use tissues, by jingo!

Trevor Johnson
31st January 2006, 21:47
Well when *I* leak, I use tissues, by jingo!

Ummm, ew! TMI!

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 17:06
"Quote: (By Trevor Johnson)
And I would be interested in what those doctors would think of ki. Are you afraid that they'd make fun of you for professing it? Go ahead, challenge them. You might be surprised!"

Well, here's the real thing: at work, over the next two months, I have to produce a manual of operations for an international study involving 70 surgeons.

At home, I am also scheduled to spend the next two months revising a novel, which needs to be shortened by about 30%.

I have one fiction book that I'm trying to get the illustrator to finish up so that we can get it into the book producer.

Simultaneously, I'm finishing the final edits for another short fiction book that I hope to produce in the same way.

And after these three projects (scheduled to be completed by March 30, 06), I'm supposed to begin work on translating a Jujutsu book into English from a different European language. Well, not "translating", really, but helping the author assure that the English (not his native language) is correct and strong. This is someone I know from Japan. A great budo man.

Meanwhile, I'm trying to do aikido in the odd hours while still providing my wife and child the attention that they need and which it invigorates and enriches my life and my aikido to give them.

So I don't have time to push a lot of effort on a scientific experimental approach to ki.

Besides, I just realized that you seem to be coming from an experimental science. My experience is in observational science. We can't do experiments on people to see if they get lung cancer, for instance. We review the data on hundreds of thousands of man-hours of occupational experience and compare that to the outcomes of those people as determined by death records and cancer registries. So I'm applying "observational" rules and attitudes to my experiences--not experimental thinking. Both are valid. I'm only very experienced in one, however. So my "scientific" thinking is along the lines of observation rather than experimentation.

If any scientist should come to me with an interest in conducting some kind of ki experiments, I'd be glad to "SCHEDULE" some time later in this year or maybe not until next year. And I have plenty of other things waiting to get on that same schedule, so it's very unlikely that I will pursue a scientific investigation of ki other than applying my observant mind to the moving and changing life all around me.

Best wishes.

mikesigman@eart
1st February 2006, 17:22
If any scientist should come to me with an interest in conducting some kind of ki experiments, I'd be glad to "SCHEDULE" some time later in this year or maybe not until next year. And I have plenty of other things waiting to get on that same schedule, so it's very unlikely that I will pursue a scientific investigation of ki other than applying my observant mind to the moving and changing life all around me. Ummmmmm.... I'm actually quite content that people maintain their own perspectives, reflecting to the public exactly what they *know*. It's pretty obvious what you know, David.

My wife is an orthopedic surgeon, I have an engineering background, and I've done "in-service" presentations at the Colorado University medical school.... for the teaching faculty. I have demonstrated a number of the physical skills called "ki" and "kokyu" and even led people through progressions until they could replicate some of the simpler ones to an understandable degree. No one noticed any tears in the fabric of the universe nor was anyone knocked out of their socks (although some costernation was caused by some of the "emitted qi" stuff). Once the physical demonstrations and manipulation of "jin" were taught, there was more of an "aha" rather than a "Holy !!!!!" response.

The fact that you don't show any understanding of the physics behind these things isn't necessarily surprising, because it's fairly normal. The only abnormal part is that you appear to be saying you understand these things while at the same time giving every indication that you don't. It puts the discussion into a constant feedback loop, alleviated only by digression to personal remarks and far too many vague and ambiguous claims.

Regards,

Mike

Joshua Lerner
1st February 2006, 17:31
No one noticed any tears in the fabric of the universe nor was anyone knocked out of their socks (although some costernation was caused by some of the "emitted qi" stuff).

Hi Mike,

What kind of "emitted qi" stuff were you showing them? And what is your understanding of the mechanics or physics of it? Bioelectrical? Perceptual? Psychological?

And it's a good thing that no one noticed you leaking through the tears in the fabric of your tissues.

Thanks,

Josh

mikesigman@eart
1st February 2006, 17:52
What kind of "emitted qi" stuff were you showing them? And what is your understanding of the mechanics or physics of it? Bioelectrical? Perceptual? Psychological? Well, I'm no expert in this part of it, but I can see why this became the focus of the "woo-woo" crowd. Generally it's considered a marginal side-effect by many martial artists, but there's more to it, in my opinion.

When I first encountered this "magnetic feeling" phenomenon, it was interesting, but nothing spectacular. Generally, people notice it as part of themselves and almost always as a portion of the heavily innervated, heavily vascularized areas of the body. So it's a fair guess to say "trick of the central nervous system". Over time, I've come to the conclusion that there's a little bit more to it than that, but NOT enough for me to ever stop what I study and spend a lot of time investigating it.

Currently available studies indicate that the fascial membranes are capable of emitting a small electromagnetic field (see James L. Oschman's book "Energy Medicine" for an overview of various source materials). There is, in my opinion, a marked relationship between this "feeling" and the human psychology. In fact, practical Chinese "qigong masters" often discuss whether such-and-such is "really qi" or whether it is "psychological qi". The fairly sceptical book by David Eisenberg, "Encounters with Qi" contained the comment by Eisenberg that he "felt something" from an expert doing something behind him while he was seated in a chair.

Some people (far too many people, IMO) react to this "feeling" that some people can generate and a lot of people simply are in the category of "easy to enter the world of suggestion" because of that feeling. So you get a lot of the woo-woo stuff, healing with reiki (which is a corruption of "wei qi"), etc.

As someone's fascial structures become stronger and more conditioned with "qigongs", usually that are able to generate a stronger "magnetic feeling", so exhibiting this magnetic-feeling stuff is sometimes used as an indicator (in addition to physical displays) for the fact that someone has "strong qi".

Anyway, that's the thumbnail of my perspective. I'd have to show you the exact qigong I led them through (it's a goody), but it's called "Shaolin Nei Jin Gong" or sometimes "Buddha Hand".


Mike

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 18:15
I wouldn't say its flawed so much as Yang simply regurgitates the standard explanation given in the classics.

No, he TRANSLATES the classics. He tells you what THEY said, the old masters who CREATED these arts. He doesn't cloud up their statements with what "he" thinks. He just tells you what they say. That's called "being honest." Kudos to Yang Jwing-Ming! Few people are humble enough nowadays to present the masters' ideas without putting the spotlight on themselves.


What I'm saying is that maybe the answer is much much simpler than many would think.

Why do I get so much flak when I say "it's so much simpler"?

Do I have to use the exact same words you use, or what?

Ki is as simple as a laughing child. Martial arts are as simple as a baby slumping to the floor when he doesn't want to be picked up. If you start there, you can cover everything in martial arts. I will soon start a new thread on this matter in the aikido forum. I just had a moment this morning to make a few comments on this board and catch up a bit to what's been added since I spent any time here.


The chinese loved to be obtuse when talking about stuff, and being vague and talking in allegories was there way of "teasing" people.

Yeah, that's the modern view of things. After all, why hide your martial secrets when someone could just shoot you if they don't like you?

But in the old days, where no one had guns, these martial skills and understandings could absolutely make the difference between living another day or being murdered by the young man you taught. Long-term teacher/student relationships can sometimes breed disrespect. Why would a teacher show you how to kill him--especially if you rolled your eyes at everything he said and talked rudely to him?

Don't you realize that people not unlike yourself are why masters hid things in plain sight? Why give a fine piece of artwork to someone who's going to carve graffitti into it?

Earlier, you asked "how" Mochizuki sensei was able to get kuzushi. I was very tempted to give you the following asinine explanation of 'what he did with his body':

"He took my gi at the shoulder and started pulling slightly. I felt a shift in my weight and began to settle back when suddenly, sensei's stomach gurgled and then next thing I heard was a loud release of flatulence and I found myself flying through the air......"

Now THAT is silly and teasing. But consider the dismissive attitude of the person to whom I was speaking. People throw off stupid explanations to someone with an asinine attitude. And you should realize that that's probably EXACTLY where some of the strangest "myths" of martial arts really originated--a stupid answer to a stupid person who then goes off and tells and retells the story.


If you already had the bodyskill, then you'd read the text and go "oh yea...".
If you didn't then you were screwed until a teacher could physically correct you and show you the literal meaning of those texts (through your body)

IF you were so blessed by the generosity of Heaven as to even GET a teacher at all. And IF you behaved yourself well enough to convince him that you were both ready and WORTHY of receiving such knowledge.

And in the millieu described above, it should be easy to see why many teachers really were very reluctant to show anything to anyone. And why they showed even their closest students only a vague suggestion until they were certain the student could be trusted to the end of time.


About your comment on the three external harmonies, I used to think that this was also something that you simply manifested by "relaxing".
What I've found from my own personal practice is that while natural, it's far from "relaxing", there's a certain amount of internal physical tension/ and psychological involved in keeping them aligned, while at the same time stacking your bone structure so that you use the least amount of muscular force possible.

Ah, yes. Memories, memories. I thought that kind of thing when I was about your age. In fact, I thought it until I was about 38 years old and had been aikido/judo/jujutsu/kenjutsu uchi deshi to a master in Japan.

But you know what? I did not learn the difference there.

I learned the difference when I got Feldenkrais treatment for the injuries I had accumulated in budo training.

What Feldenkrais showed me was that the nervous system will "reset" the body to its absolutely MOST efficient way of standing and moving if given the chance. (and that way is a manifestation of the three external harmonies)

In a bit, I will describe a method that will prove this to you.

It's sort of like having a computer. You get your Windows95 all set up, but then your brother comes in and downloads a media player. Your girlfriend installs some buggy software to let her see how she will look with a different haircut. You open some crazy e-mail and get a virus. Your sister clicks on a website and you get spyware...

Your computer gets so clogged up with garbage that it hardly works anymore. This is like the martial "artist" who has learned so much that he is constantly "managing" his stance and keeping the proper tensions to do what really amounts to "looking like" what he "thinks" a martial artist should look like.

Now, many computers now have a "reset" or "restore" disk that will, theoretically return the computer to the set-up you had before all the buggy software found it--just the basic, clean operating system that you had to begin with--and suddenly you can do all kinds of things you had lost the ability to do because the system was so fouled up.

Feldenkrais is all about teaching people how to access the "restore" control for their human nervous system and body. When they do this technique, the body truly relaxes and reorients itself to gravity. When you do this technique and then stand up, you stand taller, straigher and with less muscular tension. When you walk, you use less energy and move more smoothly and comfortably, with a pleasant feeling that should always inhabit our human movement.

The three external harmonies are easily produced by awareness of ONE thing: that is the impulse to straighten the body vertically against gravity when one senses pressure on the soles of the feet. There is no need to "adjust" the tension in your stomach or shoulders if you simply notice what your body tells you to do in gravity. And it doesn't really tell you "what to do," but what the body WANTS to do if you will stop interfering by trying to maintain a specific form. If you try to "look like a martial artist," that thought alone will prevent the body from properly responding to the nerve impulses that cause it to stand straight in the column of gravitation.

A baby will manifest this impulse before he learns to walk if you move him so that his weight comes onto his feet. In fact, the baby will "spring" up or "pop" up, pushing his legs strongly downward and lengthening his spine powerfully upward, so that he stands entirely aligned with the vertical column of gravitational force.

So there is NO need to "maintain" various tensions or psychological strictures to manifest the three external harmonies. That is called "being screwed up without knowing it."

ALL one need do is notice the nerve impulse to stand straight and COOPERATE actively with that impulse. If you do that, all the muscles that should be tensed will naturally tense just exactly as they should. And all muscles that should be relaxed will naturally relax. The problem is that few people are "able to feel" this impulse because their "self-image" is directing their bodies to "stand like a martial artist" or "walk like a karate man" or "don't look like a sissy."

These deep impulses do not come from the body or the nervous system, but from "ideas" and images that are accepted into the mind. We try to look like someone else and move like them.

Well, you can learn a lot from modelling someone else's physiology, but you MUST know what your own natural baseline is. If you don't know what your own body should really be doing NATURALLY, the misguided mind leads the qi to form the body in an unnatural way. And the one who wants to look like a martial artist actually reduces the effectiveness of his martial art. The martial art needs a naturally-aligned body--not a body that has tight shoulders to look strong, a tight stomach to look skinny, bent knees to remain "always ready for an attack". All that leads to is sickness.

And the psychological effort of maintaining a "certain" kind of alignment that is, according to your own statements, "only" good for martial arts (which a normal person MIGHT use once in two or three years) degrades the effectiveness of the body as well as the psyche.


I myself take a "harder" approach relying on more tension that "feels" like it comes to the tendons. The reason I say this is because it's not the muscles themselves that get sore, but rather the joint areas where the bone and muscle meet. This kind of body development is heavily alluded to in the Yi-jin-jing. Any thoughts on what's actually going on?

Maybe you're actually feeling the firing of the motor plate that signals the muscle to contract.


Btw, maintaining this kind of tension, whether in the Santi, or other postures, causes all sorts of tingling, compression/expansion sensations that I can feel physically, and which you often see described as "Qi" in chinese texts.

That's because you misunderstand what they're talking about.


Keeping these sensations while doing movement tends to greatly increase the power and penetration when striking, throwing, and pushing as a result. (Although that's not the intent)

Yeah. That might work while you're young, but Mochizuki sensei did not rely on it. NO ONE very old can rely on that. Proper alignment with gravity is enough.

mikesigman@eart
1st February 2006, 18:32
(About Yang Jwing Ming aka "Jimmy Yang" commentaries appended in books he has published) No, he TRANSLATES the classics. He tells you what THEY said, the old masters who CREATED these arts. He doesn't cloud up their statements with what "he" thinks. I have to admit that this was a pretty humourous statement. The "classics" are quite unclear: Yang's commentaries are very questionable. :)
The three external harmonies are easily produced by awareness of ONE thing: that is the impulse to straighten the body vertically against gravity when one senses pressure on the soles of the feet. There is no need to "adjust" the tension in your stomach or shoulders if you simply notice what your body tells you to do in gravity. You're completely misinformed, wrong, etc., about this. The three external harmonies are: ankle:wrist, knee:elbow, and hip:shoulder. That's all the classics say. What it means is that the winding connection of the "qi" (and they mean literally the physical connection of the qi within the body) is complete so the body vertically winds in such a way that the afore-named components always move together. Picture a person with both arms straight up in the air. Forget the head and picture that there are two vertical tubes coming down which encompass on each (both) sides the (in this order) wrist, elbow, shoulder, hip, knee, ankle. When a "tube" twists, everything in it twists together. When the body is in more natural positions and moving, the relationships of the 2 "tubes" still exists in someone moving with jin (the 3 internal harmonies) within a qi-connected structure. To the ankle:wrist, knee:elbow, hip:shoulder relationship maintains.

You should stick to what you know and what you can exhibit, IMHO.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 18:32
Lighten up :) from post #152

Aren't you the one who replied so derisively when I quoted Douglas Adams because he's a humorist?

Here's your dichotomy. Gravity and levity are two of your six forces. And there you are trying to suppress someone's full use of those forces.


I meant that in the sense that I'm that confident of my bodyskill, and that from what I've read, I'm guessing that there's a substantial difference in how we operate. I never said I'd bet money that I'd beat you. Don't take it so literally.

Why? Are you being obtuse? You're not saying what you mean? Braggadocio is just that. Call it confidence but I have confidence borne of some heavy trials, but I'm not compelled to say "I can beat (fill in the blank)". MOST martial artists don't feel the need to brag. For instance, I will frequently tell about things (encounters, fights, whatever) that my teachers had, or I will tell about incidents that my students had. But I've never had the overriding desire to beat people or to tell about how I might have done it. The stories I like best, in fact, are those where I lost the encounter and learned from the lesson.


When I say it has to be felt, I mean it.

But it only applies to YOU, right? You've never FELT my technique, but you know that it's "nothing".


That doesn't mean I'm going to put the beatdown on you.

Now this is where I wish I knew how to put those rolly eyeballs in. What a statement. What a middle school attitude.


I really won't know what you have until I touch you as well.

But you've already published your judgments! Many times and rudely.


My comments as to who I held down, or who I threw around were not comments on "I can beat you so hah!", but rather to give you a sound idea of what I've been capable of doing so far.

I really do want to hear more. Nothing better than listening to someone crow about what he can do, huh? Well, listening to that from someone who also dismisses everyone else's training and knowledge is better, I guess. So really. I need to hear more and more of that.


My own personal experience is that xxx years of training has been rendered meaningless in the past. That's just a fact.

But you don't seem to realize that there are limits to what your training has prepared you for. Your own "x" years of training can be rendered meaningless by someone with a little more speed, youth, strength and physical skill. Just a little more. So you really need to get that perspective.

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 19:00
Hello Mr Orange,

I think that, generally, in a forum such as this, appeals to age (particularly young or particularly old) in relation to supposed experience are undesirable, since they run the risk of being misconstrued. It really does not matter to me how old you are; what matters is that you were once a deshi of Mochizuki Sensei and that as such what you have experienced is especially worth hearing about. Similarly with Mr John. I do not mind very much how old he is or how old his sensei is; what matters much more is the content of the training both are doing and how it is described.

Of course, far be it from me to deride the young. It's just brashness that sparks my ire.

As for younger people and time in training, of course, I saw a lot of that in Japan. My first 14 years (seventeen if you want to count the karate) were all spent in the US. When I first went to Japan, 20 years ago, the shock to my system was not how much harder it was over there, but how much easier and more natural. And also, they weren't coy about rank and seeking advancement. Kano sensei made the judan system to inspire people's natural desire to climb up. But my teachers in the US made that a highly distasteful thing. You weren't supposed to even want to get a higher rank. This made some odd things possible that weren't really good for the art we were trying to promote and supposedly spread.

Another thing was the "family" feeling of the dojo. The sensei was to be respected, of course, but not like some holy deity up on a shelf. Mochizuki sensei sat with us, traveled with us (not in his own, separate vehicle, paid for by the students, who all had to pay for their own transportation as well) and ate with us. There was active interaction all around. The shihans were very friendly, once they'd accepted that you were really there to learn and not just diverting your holiday mind with a little goofing off in a real dojo.

But when it comes to age and the ability to learn, there's no question that a young, fit man who starts his training IN Japan and gets his instruction from truly qualified people in a very natural system, can learn at a tremendous rate. And he can quickly advance in ranks. I saw all kinds of young people, who were getting very pure and potent instruction from early adulthood, advance very quickly.

Meanwhile, I'd had pretty good instruction, myself. My students were able to save their lives with what I had taught them. I was able to work out with the shihans the day I arrived in Japan and I was able to take the grueling pace. In fact, I took it much longer and harder than necessary because it was a long time before I realized that no one was ever going to say, "David, you're training yourself to death. You don't have to do EVERY aikido, judo and karate class EVERY week!"

But, no. No one ever told me that. I finally had to realize that I and I alone was responsible for recognizing and working with my own limits. It was possible to expand those limits greatly, but NOT infinitely.

And in that atmosphere, I saw many younger people who got the pure instruction from the first and gradually gained on my skill until I could not throw them. One was Wakabayashi, who turned into a phenomenon while I knew him over about 4 years. He really became spectacular. But he was about 14 years younger than I. He was on the rise and I had already passed my peak. I had the same thing with other younger people, notably the son of the judo sensei, Akahori.

When I met the young Akahori, he was a weak little fellow of about 12 years, just beginning to learn. Three years later, he was as tall as I, 15 years old, my own weight, and the caerfully trained SON of a true judo master.

Young Akahori never beat me, though. He just let me try to move him and at 15, he had become unmoveable to my judo attacks. It might have been different if I had used karate (or if his father had let me put a sack over his head and tie his hands up--but Akahori sensei said no to that).

But you know what? ALL those guys remained nice and friendly and I never saw ANYONE brag about whom they could beat. They had a pride about it, you could tell, but it was pride of accomplishment and they expressed it with "understated elegance" and a well-developed humility that never forgot that, though they had caught up with old Harry Dean Stanton, there were still plenty of people right there in the dojo who could still tie them up in knots. And more: they knew that "out there" they would face unknown people with unknown backgrounds. And they knew not to treat that lightly.


so much is assumed in discussing these experiences in language. It is so easy to make gratuitous value judgments about quality or authenticity here.

And lingo of a particular group makes it even more difficult. I don't know how they talk about it or what certain words mean in their context, so it's almost impossible to get agreement even if you say almost exactly the same thing, but without the same lingo.


Anyway, like Mr Sigman, I think the issues being discussed here are very important and I prefer any moderation to be minimal. Nevertheless, given the difficulty of the subject, I think that extra care needs to be taken not to resort to personal attacks.

Do you suppose I will ever grind that unfortunate flaw out of my character? I appreciate your measured responses and feel that I have understood some things on a haragei level that you didn't really specifically say. I think I have felt your ki across the ocean and the ether and the electronic frontier. And I really appreciate your help, Sensei.


I will make any further interventions as moderator via PM. Of course, I will close the thread if I think that the rules of this forum are being broken, but this is really a last resort and we are nowhere near that stage yet.

It's not as bad as some of the arguments I got in with some Yoseikan folks, is it? And I think I've even gotten on better terms with Phil Farmer as time has gone by. It is a lot better that way, ne? Thanks again.

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 19:03
If you feel, that it is not proper to discuss it in physical/technical terms in this thread, why not open a new thread in a different section of the board in order to specifically address the issue? In fact, you had suggested that you would be willing to post to such a thread a few posts back. I think that would clear up this point of contention for the benefit of everyone.

Otherwise, all I have seen, is a lot of dancing around the issue (and posturing) without actually answering Rob's core question.

Is it better now?

Thanks for the input.

Joshua Lerner
1st February 2006, 19:19
Generally, people notice it as part of themselves and almost always as a portion of the heavily innervated, heavily vascularized areas of the body. So it's a fair guess to say "trick of the central nervous system".
[snip]
Currently available studies indicate that the fascial membranes are capable of emitting a small electromagnetic field (see James L. Oschman's book "Energy Medicine" for an overview of various source materials).
[snip]
As someone's fascial structures become stronger and more conditioned with "qigongs", usually that are able to generate a stronger "magnetic feeling", so exhibiting this magnetic-feeling stuff is sometimes used as an indicator (in addition to physical displays) for the fact that someone has "strong qi".

I would rather say "trick of the peripheral nervous system", since most of what you are talking about seems to involve peripheral nerves, or just "trick of the nervous system", since if it is controlled by the central nervous system (i.e. it can be produced by intending it), I'm not sure how helpful it would be to distinguish between the two.

As for fascia, the jury is still out for me about its importance in either "external qi" or martial abilities. As I discussed with Rob, I'm a fan of fascia for a number of reasons, but I'm not seeing the connection, based on the admittedly little I know about fascial physiology. I *do* see the importance of the fascia for things internally, such as acupuncture treatment which may (or may not, who knows?) rely on fascia as a conduit. And it may explain a number of ideas in classical Chineses physiology that don't make sense in any other western terminology. But how the fascia (or tendons, for that matter) is "developed" separatelyfrom other connective tissue, as you seem to be claiming, is something I don't yet understand. And short of doing autopsies on people who had these abilities to see whether or not there is anything different about their fascia, I'm not sure how the connection can be drawn.

What would be interesting is if the fascial electromagnetic field was also controlled by, or at least affected by, the peripheral nerves, because as far as I know the fascia emits an electromagnetic field when physical pressure is applied to it. That would provide a link between the central and peripheral nervous system and the fascia.

Although I do know that he is controversial at best, Rupert Sheldrake's ideas about what he calls "morphogenetic fields" may be connected to these phenomena also. He is a bit of a wacko, but if his research is reliable, I think he may be on to something very interesting, and he's not afraid to debate with scientists who disagree with him. www.sheldrake.org


There is, in my opinion, a marked relationship between this "feeling" and the human psychology. In fact, practical Chinese "qigong masters" often discuss whether such-and-such is "really qi" or whether it is "psychological qi".

I often have the same problem treating patients, trying to figure out if their subjective experience of the treatment is really correlating to what I'm trying to do. Part of me thinks that the difference between the "real" stuff and the "psychological" stuff is important, but there is a nagging suspicion in the back of my head that the difference is a social construct.

I read a fascinating book, the name of which escapes me at the moment, which was an account of a social anthropologist who spent time in China learning about Chinese medicine from three types of teachers - a charismatic qigong healer, a standard state-sponsored TCM school, and a private acupuncturist who lead a study group that read and discussed the Huangdi Neijing. The qigong healer was teaching one student to be his protege, and one of the important parts of the process was the teacher interpreting the student's experiences for him.

But regardless of which is true, I think that there is something very important there. The fact that so many people, at least in my experience, have sensations of "qi", even if they don't correlate to classical Chinese models, suggests to me that the experience of qi is in some sense embedded in our physiology. Kind of a perceptual archetype, if that phrase makes any sense. I've been working on a very long, ponderous essay on the history and implications of the concept of qi for a while, and these ideas are all part of it.



Some people (far too many people, IMO) react to this "feeling" that some people can generate and a lot of people simply are in the category of "easy to enter the world of suggestion" because of that feeling. So you get a lot of the woo-woo stuff, healing with reiki (which is a corruption of "wei qi"), etc.


It may turn out that "suggestion", which is kind of a vague term, is a neurological predisposition that would also make it easier to have the experience of qi. Kind of like two genetic traits that occur together because the ride together on the same chromosome, though maybe a bit more causally connected than that.

And the word "reiki" would be "ling qi" ("spirit qi", or "numinous qi") when pronounced in Chinese, unless you are saying that the energy used in reiki is a corrupted form of what the Chinese call weiqi. I wouldn't agree with that based on how the term is used in Chinese medicine, but you may be using the word differently than how I'm used to hearing it.

Thanks for all the information, by the way.

Josh

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 19:21
I know about enthropy, (or the basics at least) but my point actually was that I've some hard time believing ki might be another term for enthropy.

I thought entropy was the inevitable breakdown of things. That does not describe ki in any wayl.


@ Kimiwane: really, are you actualy suggesting that we all run on Ki?

Absolutely. But not "run on" ki. We ARE ki. It's not like something you "fuel up" with. It comes from within our bodies from the same place all the visible world originates.


A movement, is really just biomechanics, electricity etc. So unless Youle=Ki, your argument really doesn't make much sense.

Well, if everything is made of ki, everything = ki. Ki=mc2.

[quote]After all, we don't use warmth energy, we produce warmth by moving, resulting in or explained through the theory of enthropy. And don't give us the "Maybe the old masters meant enthropy when they were talking about ki...", that would be really dull.[QUOTE]

Well, I certainly did not promote that idea. If anything, I think entropy is what happens to ki. We can dissipate it, waste it, over-use it, etc. But it does NOT "come from" entropy.

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 19:59
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
So atoms really are solid objects? Come now. Physics tells us that the entire universe is energy that sometimes is and sometimes isn't little particles. Why will yu accept it if a physicist says it, but refuse to accept virtually the same statement describing that universal energy matrix as ki? What difference does that make?

From Post #159:

Seriously, you're talking to the wrong person if you want to hypothesize in this manner. My training is in engineering and I keep abreast of mathematical and scientific matters too much to be drawn into these wastes of time about ki and energy.

Sounds like you're contradicting yourself. You say there is no underlying energy field if it is ki. Do you also reject that atoms are very fleeting "condensations" of the invisible energy field as many physicists have described? You simply dismissed my statement. Or should I say, "You DODGED the question"?


If there was a ki it would be known by now and all the Chinese books wouldn't have dropped it like a hotcake. Let's move on.

If that's how you think (and don't want to waste your time), why are you on this board about "What is ki?"? You say "if there was a ki it would be known by now" but it is "known" around the world. You have never shown anything to discredit it other than just saying "It is not." By all means, give me some scientific and engineering explanations to work on. Simply stating "it is not" is hardly scientific, is it? And "all the Chinese books" dropped it?

What books are those? It's in ALL the Chinese books I've studied.


Similarly, I don't think you should drop terms like "pre-heaven qi", "reeling silk" and the like just for the nice sound they make in a conversation.

I don't just "drop" them. I dealt with them rationally in my posts and gave you my sources. My comments are based on classical texts and the descriptions made by Chinese masters--not out of my own reasoning.


However, for stark practical purposes let me quickly encapsulate a few things: "Pre-heaven" qi is sometimes called "pre-birth" qi and refers to the "natural" order of things... in line with the ancient Chinese cosmology. It refers to the body's "qi" and natural movements as exemplified by the foetus in the womb.

Uhhhhhhhhh...........???????????

Didn't you clip that from MY post? How is that different from what I said?


The idea is that we lose this naturalness after birth, yada, yada, but the point to remember is that it's talking about the same general subject that Rob and I are referring to, in actuality. "Reeling Silk" is a type of movement and is simply a variation of "Six Harmonies movement". But again, that is simply a manipulation of the general subject that Rob and I are talking about.

No. You and Rob are talking about a linguistic manipulation of what the Classics say. But you lose vast content with your pre-imposed limitations of thought. Thanks.


Six-harmonies movement has the 3 external harmonies and the 3 internal harmonies. You referred to the 3 internal harmonies and your description was simply flummery, to put it diplomatically. The 3 internal harmonies are:
heart leads mind (meaning your emotional mind, your "desires" trigger your mind to start doing something.... you had it backwards and confused).

Well, in the undisciplined person, the emotional mind does lead the wisdom mind. Yang's explanation describes how to actually discipline the self and "DIRECT" the flow of qi for one's own purposes. And having the wisdom mind DOMINATE the emotional mind is the First Internal Harmony.

My explanation comes from Yang Jwing-Ming. I cited the book. I have heard of him. I have read some of his books and many of his articles. I correctly stated it as HE stated it based on translated classic texts.

Now YOU, I have never heard of. Have you written any books that I can read? How many national kung fu champions have you trained? Yang has a big and well-known school, RESPECTED by serious people. If you're not one of those, I tend to think it is you who have missed the point. Thanks.


In other words, the 3 internal harmonies have to do with using the strength and movements of jin/kokyu/intent rather than normal movement. That's essentially all it means.

In YOUR opinion.
But who are you? You have never said what you learned, where you learned it, who taught you or how long you studied. I never stated such things about myself as any "proof" of "skill", but simply as an idea of "who" I am. If you ask a doctor who he is, directly after his name, he will usually say, "I trained at Harvard, in the school of medicine...." as many of my colleagues have done.

So before you tell me how much more you know about these things than Yang Jwing-Ming and other well-known teachers, would you please tell me HOW you got to know so much? And please, since it seems terribly important to YOU, tell what degrees you have and in what subjects--not genralities, but specifics. What degrees? What schools?


So this topic was also being discussed by Rob, but you don't hear him.... you're hearing stuff you've "read", etc., and he's talking the stuff that he "does".

Again, Mike, I "did" all that stuff from the time young Rob was a baby. I don't "know it all" as you and he seem to feel you do, but I'm not stupid, I am not inexperienced and I am not without ability. I have read deeply in ADDITION to my extreme physical training. You seem to have either torn out the pages from any book you've ever had or you just rejected any parts you didn't understand and tried to rephrase it in terms you're used to. If I am wrong, then please explain it better.


I think this sort of conversation, bickering, defense of pecking-order, etc., is going to be the norm as people who can actually do wind up in conversations with people who have "years of experience" and "dan rankings" but who can't really "do" and who will defensively deny that there is any body of essential knowledge that they don't have. THAT is what the real discussion needs to look at, IMO, but then it's just an opinion.

Well, Mikey (and that's just the equivalent of your and Rob's constant references to "people who can 'do' and those with experience but no ability"), the only natural reply that a man could give to you is "I WILL KICK YOUR !!! IF WE EVER MEET."

But that is an idiot thing to say, isn't it? Still, such childish and IGNORANT assertions leave room only for that answer. I don't think you can "do" anything other than hurl insults.

I call on Dr. Goldsbury again to caution the disrespectful participants here to lay off the constant direct assertions that I or anyone else "can't do" while you and Rob "can". Again, we have never met. You know nothing of what I can do. And I have made no claims as to what I can do. I've ONLY told where I went and what I studied. Jeez! It's like claiming "those with a high IQ will always say "x" and those like you, with a low IQ will so and so."

It's extremely childish, rude, insulting and demands that I come and literally whup you. But my manner of "whupping" would preferably involve a bokken and would leave no room for touching hands, grabbing wrists or pushing.

That is exactly the kind of response your statements demand. It is not in my character to answer such impudence with the naturally corresponding reply. You make your posts unworthy of reading by a monkey with that attitude. So lay out your credentials and state your opinions, but grow up and lay off the snide assertions.

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 20:01
I am not playing doctor with you. I could get in a lot of trouble for that... ;)

errrrrrgggggghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!

(smilie).

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 20:04
Actually, from what I know of physics, the universe IS grinding to a halt. It's just slowly. One example can be found in this year. It's one second longer than last year, because the earth is slowing down! Entropy, it gets us all.

You fail to account for the fact that days get shorter after Wednesday.

Thursday is shorter and Friday is shorter. Saturday and Sunday are super fast and then Monday proves Einstein's concept of time stretching to infinity.

mikesigman@eart
1st February 2006, 20:12
I would rather say "trick of the peripheral nervous system", OK. As long as you realize that the peripheral nervous is connected to the CNS and doesn't just float out there by itself. ;)
As for fascia, the jury is still out for me about its importance in either "external qi" or martial abilities. As I discussed with Rob, I'm a fan of fascia for a number of reasons, but I'm not seeing the connection, based on the admittedly little I know about fascial physiology. I *do* see the importance of the fascia for things internally, such as acupuncture treatment which may (or may not, who knows?) rely on fascia as a conduit. And it may explain a number of ideas in classical Chineses physiology that don't make sense in any other western terminology. But how the fascia (or tendons, for that matter) is "developed" separatelyfrom other connective tissue, as you seem to be claiming, is something I don't yet understand. And short of doing autopsies on people who had these abilities to see whether or not there is anything different about their fascia, I'm not sure how the connection can be drawn. Maybe I can expand more on this is you clarify the details of your questions a bit more. In regard to being developed *separately*, I've never said that. They're all together developed: skin components, myofascial, tendons, bones (that's why the claim of 'the bones get denser). It's a part of the deliberate expansion and contraction (look up some of the old adages about qi and you'll see 'expansion and contraction' as mainstays) of the fascia/connective-tissue done with breath, pressures, tensions, stretching, etc.
What would be interesting is if the fascial electromagnetic field was also controlled by, or at least affected by, the peripheral nerves, because as far as I know the fascia emits an electromagnetic field when physical pressure is applied to it. That would provide a link between the central and peripheral nervous system and the fascia. I don't know. Oschman's book looks into these aspects; I'm more interested in the functional training and conditioning aspects.

All the Best.

Mike

mikesigman@eart
1st February 2006, 20:21
Well, Mikey I looked for something, anything with actual facts to debate in your post, but all I see is assertions. Fine. But tell me, why you think it necessary to start playing games with my name?

Mike Sigman

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 20:45
The problem with that statement is that it defines ki as ATP. ATP and myosin, how your muscles work. ATP and nerves, just about everything a nerve does requires it. ATP depletion is what causes rigor mortis.

So, that makes ki the energy specifically stored in chemical bonds, which I know you don't mean.

No. And I don't see how it implies that ki is stored in chemical bonds. The chemicals, too, are made of ki. The body is made of chemicals made of ki. The nerve signals from the brain are electric, but when the nerve plate fires to activate the muscle, it is a chemical release that actually happens. The muscle, itself never fatigues, but generating the chemical agent takes finite time and is also influenced by waste products that build up and hamper the activity of the activator chemicals, causing the muscle to "seem" to fatique.

But this nerve activity is not all there is to it. But anyway, that is still, just as you describe it, an accurate depiction of "energy moving within a tightly bound structure", to which comment I responded. So whether you call it ki or ATP, it IS "energy moving within a tightly bound structure of energy".

But, in fact, ki underlies ALL of that.

Best wishes.

Asura
1st February 2006, 22:23
Don't you realize that people not unlike yourself are why masters hid things in plain sight? Why give a fine piece of artwork to someone who's going to carve graffitti into it?


Um... actually being obtuse, hiding things in plain site etc, were pretty common across all facets of asian culture.
It wasn't limited to martial arts :rolleyes:

And graffiti is art  :p
(ノ*゜▽゜*)ニパパパ



If you try to "look like a martial artist," that thought alone will prevent the body from properly responding to the nerve impulses that cause it to stand straight in the column of gravitation.


I think Frediwhatever his name is and I would have interesting ideas to share.
In fact everything I do is against "exhibiting" a stance, or "looking" ike a MAist.
You can't see on the surface of my body, what I'm doing internally (unless I let you).
In fact maintaing the proper tensions relieves stress in my body, and walking/running/lifting etc all movement becomes 10x more effecient.

But the fact of the matter remains that being able to get to the point where its natural takes training.




And the psychological effort of maintaining a "certain" kind of alignment that is, according to your own statements, "only" good for martial arts (which a normal person MIGHT use once in two or three years) degrades the effectiveness of the body as well as the psyche.

I never said it was effective only for MAists.
In fact I've got a good notion that the early messengers in Japan had to use this kind of alignment when they were running. Guys just over 5 feet running 170km in three days, they weren't supermen, so they had to have something extra ;)




That's because you misunderstand what they're talking about.

Actually I was told I was dead on, early on, by Sam Chin ;)
(For those of you in the NY area, Sam is DEFINITELY worth checking out. The guy doesn't keep secrets and will flat out show you how to train the bodyskills Mike and I have been talking about :) )




Yeah. That might work while you're young, but Mochizuki sensei did not rely on it. NO ONE very old can rely on that. Proper alignment with gravity is enough.

Actually Sagawa said you can continue to "shape" the musculature until your 70. And Sagawa lived until he was 90 ;)

Joshua Lerner
1st February 2006, 23:00
OK. As long as you realize that the peripheral nervous is connected to the CNS and doesn't just float out there by itself. ;)

Of course. But when you say that it is a phenomena associated with "a portion of the heavily innervated, heavily vascularized areas of the body", you actually *are* talking specifically about the peripheral nervous system.


Maybe I can expand more on this is you clarify the details of your questions a bit more. In regard to being developed *separately*, I've never said that. They're all together developed: skin components, myofascial, tendons, bones (that's why the claim of 'the bones get denser).

All of those changes take place with any physical activity, so I'm assuming you are saying there are specific types of changes unique to internal training that explain the unique and definable qualities of someone who is an accomplished internal martial artist. Otherwise, it wouldn't make much sense to bring it up in this context, right? I'll try to be more clear without being pedantic.

1) When people develop jin/kokyu skills, what changes take place in their fascia, tendons, and other connective tissues, that would not take place in more common forms of training?

2) How do we know these physical changes take place? This is not a rhetorical question - I mean, literally, what are the signs that these changes take place?

3) How are these changes in the tissues different from the changes that would take place from other types of training, such as olympic weightlifting or regular 'ol strip-mall McDojo American karate? (not that there's anything wrong with that)

I'll leave it at that for now.

Thanks,

Josh

kimiwane
1st February 2006, 23:48
From Post # 164


(Trevor)
So in other words, the way that you can tell whether or not a baby exhibits genki is by the physical signs that he manifests, in the way he moves and in how he smiles, (and in whether or not he spits up all over you or your wife?) etc. Hrm.

Yes. But having read a bit more of your post already, I know that you're about to take this in a different direction and it goes off the mark.


that kind of motion is...hardwired, to some extent, plus a gradual learned component. Babies don't have the neural connections that are gradually built up during development.[quote]

Well, in a child that young, you don't use movement as a gauge since it is involuntary. Except if the baby is NOT moving at all, he can probably be called byouki. Naturally, you wouldn't try to draw a lot from involuntary movement. Even so, you would gauge genki in an infant by the sounds he makes, what his eyes do and so on.

Still, you can judge a "toddler's" condition in large part by his movements.

[quote]A lot of baby behavior is in fact hardwired, because they haven't done any learning yet. Their smiling is not a concious thing, it's automatically triggered when they see Mom. Dad not so much, he's not so important.

Sure. But again, it's not so much a point with infants as toddlers. But you can listen to an infant cry and tell if he feels good or bad. Also, in an infant, puke is a prime indicator of daily condition.


Do these qualities manifest in babies of other species? Does a puppy have genki? What about premature babies? They're not healthy, but they have the same qualities of movement.

Young animals of almost every species get up and run very soon (minutes) after birth. And yes, baby animals can be genki or byouki. And you can pretty well tell by looking at them how they're feeling. Premature babies would have ki, but I would guess that for most of them it is pretty weak because they are not ready to be in the environment they're in. Their lungs often have not developed yet. They can become genki if treated with great care.


So, when I want to understand ki, I should be able to look at the infant cerebellum, to see what CAUSES those qualities of movement.

Maybe, but again, the point is not the movement but the feeling (kibun or kimochi), how he feels. Kimochi ii pretty well means genki. If he is listless and nothing will interest him, he's probably kimochi warui and byouki.

But with a toddler, yes, you will see active and vigorous voluntary movement that is clearly a direct expression of their feelings. A toddler that feels good jumps and dances around, bounces up and down by flexing and extending his knees and so forth. A toddler that just lies around without moving may well be sick. And his mother will say, "Byouki desuka?" "Are you sick?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane...the ki comes first. The qualities are qualities of the ki. The entire mind and body are ki.


Hm. Interesting. Because this fits a conception of ki within the brain. Funny thing, did you know that your health is partly controlled by the brain?

And of course, the brain can be affected by the movements of the body. Without having to get chemical, just think if you walk around with your head looking straight down at your shoes all day. All day, every day. You will probably soon die if you do that. You're bound to get sick.

So there's an experiment that anyone can do. We should sign up mikesigman or asura to volunteer to do that experiment for one year. Head down at all times. At the end of one year, you would be sick, sick, sick. Your body could not function properly. Any volunteers to test the hypothesis?

We would, of course, have to do preliminary things, test the health at beginning, outline just what physiological effects could be expected, somehow monitor and record the daily life of the subjects....


Nerves release signals to the immune system to control it, to the bones to change density, to the organs to modulate their function, etc.

And you can stimulate the actions with certain physical movements without the influence of the natural triggers for these responses.


Called neuropeptides, and they also may regulate how much pain we feel when, as well as directing inflammation to the sites of injury....Given that pain would be a symptom of unhealthy ki, this is a connection, no?

Well, yes, chronic pain would be a sign of some unhealthy condition, which is always concomitant with unhealthy ki. But pain in itself is not unhealthy. Failure to feel pain is more unhealthy than the ability to feel pain upon injury or trauma.

All valid statements that don't conflict with the concept of ki as I have laid it out.


What I'm having some trouble with is the comment about the brain controlling energy. Besides the whole electrical impulse thing, it SOUNDS like you're talking about energy control at a quantum level. Which sounds like psychic powers, but perhaps it is not.

I don't think I said the brain controls energy. I said "the mind". But in the ki view, the mind is not merely in the brain.

Quote by David:
"the tao is seen as far larger than any individual and also eternal. So I'd have to say, they are [[the ten-thousand things exist]] whether anyone observes them or not."


However, it does matter whether they are observed in their influence on the human mind and will, yes?

I don't know about that. In a way, nothing can affect you if you don't perceive it. But "perceive" in that case would include everything from literally "seeing" something to "experiencing" (whether you realize it or not) the passage of a waste product through a cell wall. It influences you if it touches you, basically, whether you realize it or not. I'm not sure what this question ultimately means in this discussion (I have not read further at this point).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
there are limits to where science can and should go. It should NEVER get fouled up into romance, for instance. You cannot scientifically make love. A robot can, but a human should not.


Go take a look at E-Harmony, or the various dating services. That's exactly what they do. They look at people and see what qualities make them fit. Other research is being done on how to make a marriage work. There are specific qualities, that can be trained, that will keep people together in a loving partnership, even with the husband slowly transitioning into a grumpy and rather irritating old man with disgusting personal habits. (I'm male, so I'm not allowed to slang at the wife on hers.) Love may not be able to be quantified, but attraction can be, as well as lasting affection.

Lust certainly can be, and the equation is complex. It's based on molar EtOH, pico- and nanomolar concentrations of pheremones, a certain percentage of visible epidermis/total size of body, and a complex psychological calculation based on net worth and facial features. I'm only being partially facetious here.

A certain amount of feng shui is based on psychology of the environment. That may not be what they CALL it, but arranging someone's home in a certain way so that it pleases them and they are happy in it is in fact a science. It can be learned as feng shui, but I don't care what you call it. Well, more into a field of engineering, I'd guess. There's definitely an art to it, but there's an art to science as well, one most people, who see us only as bland number-crunchers and cell-pokers, don't understand. (And you really won't understand us until you see the Princeton math dept. rituals under Fine Tower at night...)

And yes, I do use scientific thinking in my relationships. It has certain benefits that you are perhaps overlooking, mostly involving anatomy and physiology, but also involving psychology. In my case, I've used elements of immunology, a lot of psychology, and several other things, including elements of neurobiology. Some things are best analyzed.

Well...here's what I do. When my wife is nearby and quiet, I will say, "Hmm...it's hard to believe."

That hangs a second and she says, "What's hard to believe?"

I say, "Well, you know that Meg Ryan?"

She says, "Yes."

I say, "Well, she's pretty, yeah?"

My wife says, "Yeah."

I say, "I mean, that's one of the things people always say about her, right up front, don't they? I mean, she's loved by people all over the world and everyone knows she's beautiful. Right?"

"Yeah," my wife says.

And I say, "It's hard to believe..." and let that hang.

She says, "What's hard to believe?"

"That I'm married to a prettier girl than Meg Ryan."

"Oh, stop that!" she says. But it works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
"I just look at the baby and say "Kawai-chai-cho". (baby talk Japanese for "poor little baby".) "


My paradigm demands I say gootchy gootchy goo, actually.

Which would you prefer, changing babies by equation or by hand?

Generally, I try to be somewhere else. Actually, I do change him quite a lot, I think, compared to most husbands. I like caring for my children. Not to say you don't. But I just enjoy interacting with them and seeing what they will do when they're very small and we mostly consider everything they do to be meaningless.


More seriously, though, I think you're missing something of what I'm saying. I'm not advocating destroying it {{the ki system, I take it DO}}, I'm advocating understanding it. What were all those Taoist alchemists DOING, if not exploring the universe and trying to better humanity, or at least themselves?

Well, that's it. They lived on very little food in high mountains with no machines to carry them or to carry things for them. And I think they were much more observers than experimenters, though they did do both. Under the conditions just described, they could eat a tiny bit of an herb or a root and they could determine how it would affect the body in terms of the schematic of Chinese medicine. Speaking of which, my Chinese MD colleague tells me that accupuncture is regularly used as anesthetic for surgeries. Accupuncturists don't do it. The regular doctor just puts the needles where the standard points have been "established" to work. They do not attempt to explain it scientifically. I believe they've been disappointed in those efforts. But when they put the needles where the "ki" doctors say to put them it works.


It seems to me that I'm carrying on in the same tradition. I don't see it as a bad thing to explore the concept of ki by the same methods that it was originally explored, by logic, by creativity, and by rigorous experimentation, the same way those crazy old Taoist alchemists did. I just use different, more modern, approaches. Ones that involve fewer mercury fumes and risk less madness.

No question that some of the taoists got way out there and I'm sure more than a few failed to achieve impressive longevity, much less "immortality" because of something they ate or inhaled. Still, use of 'ki' as a fundamental in their thinking is not something we should try to erradicate. You can use the taoist way if you are dropped from an airplane into a primitive environment. Ordinary science would be somewhat hampered by lack of equipment. Think of those temples that cling to the sheer sides of mountains. Built by hand. No monitors or beepers or buzzers or microscopes...


The reason that the creationists are going so nuts is that they're scared of us. They're afraid that somehow we'll change the world into a Godless one, that we'll reveal that they've been wrong about God and that all their existance is a myth. Further, nobody really likes thinking about the inevitable heat death of the universe, now do they? If it's such a cold hard place, with entropy killing us eternally, then what does it mean to be human? What is it even WORTH?

I doubt many creation scientists worry much about entropy, frankly. Heat death of the universe does not concern them. It is the plain, old rotting death of the self that they fear.


when Darwin postulated the theory of evolution, no theologians of the time saw any problem believing in God and evolution at the same time. Neither do I.

Nor I.


Where theologians read the Bible and study God's word, I study God's works. The physicists who reach back before the Big Bang for answers study them as well. Was there a creation? How did it work? The big one, WHY?
I study how we work, and I would say that, if there is a creator, that creator was a danged clever being. Whether a Christian god or Izanami and Izanagi, danged clever all the same. You look at the complexity, and it's amazing how we work, and how we came to be.

Look at them lilies out yonder in the field...


Here, you're postulating something that by rights SHOULD have a physical extension, since it's involved in our existance and manifests in our movements, no?

Richard Wilhelm's "I Ching" translation (translated to English by Cary Baynes) describes the first hexagram, "Heaven" as being the creative, tireless energy of movement and time. It is associated with Light.

The second hexagram, "Earth", is seen as heavy, dark and still. It is space.

These first two hexagrams also support the first line of the Bible: "In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth."

The nature of the universe is revealed in the fact that Heaven is immaterial. It CANNOT express itself unless it has Earth to receive its energy. Does that make sense? A painter must have a canvas. The male cannot reproduce without the female to receive his energy.

Pure ki might as well NOT exist if there is no "body" for it to form. (It forms the body). But without the whole system of the planet, grasses, atmosphere, etc., the body cannot even be formed. Only the whole system interacting can produce viable life forms. So not only SHOULD it have a physical manifestation, it MUST have a physical form or we will never be able to see it.


So, it's fair game for investigation.

Well, yes, but not for a supplanting traditional ways of learning about it and using it, by simple substitution of scientific thinking.


We may be able to quantify it for our own use, and we'll need to if we want to understand it, BUT there's no reason to not use it yourself, in the form to which you're accustomed. Just don't get all ticked off if we manage to explain it and use it to better humanity.

Well, sure. IF you do. What I object to is those who claim already to have it all figured out and dismissed. That's just crazy talk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
"Ki is not some disembodied force that floats around that we can suck up and use to generate ki balls to throw at one another. It is so much simpler and plainer than that that there's nothing for science to look at."


It's exactly the opposite. It may look simple and plain, but how many years of your life have you been trying to train it? Simple and plain is how it feels once you actually learn it, but while you're trying?

Until you understand it, everything looks complicated. The crime is to realize you can't understand it and then just trying to substitute opinions for hard work and admitting that there are some things you DON'T already understand. And that's not aimed at you but at sigman and asura.


There's everything to look at. And if you look at neurosci wonks, you'll see we're currently doing it.

With no objection from me unless they just claim to have disproven it (and they offer no explanation).


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
Ki balls, sure. Go ahead and do all the science you want. But how to prove the energetic matrix? How to prove that we can "lead" our own ki to make ourselves healthy or sick?

Well, if you want to do those experiments, or hook up your girlfriend to meters, to see how she feels, I won't stop you. But for me, it's a personal relationship with life and i don't see the need to interject it into the academic world where I work or to interject science into my personal and subtle and very happy relationship with life.



But yield who will to their separation,
My object in living is to unite.
My avocation and my vocation
As my two eyes make one in sight.

Robert Frost, Two Tramps in Mudtime.

That is me to a tee. My opponents seem to want to favor one eye and cut out the other because it has been "discredited" and only sees things it doesn't understand.


It's the way I see the world. Everything has a cause. I may not always understand it, but it's the trying that's important.

Well, yes, as long as you know it's a mental construct in itself. Science is only a set of rules for observation and testing. It produces a map, but as they say in Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), "the map is NOT the territory." Many people get some scientific ideas and think those ideas are the world. As long as you know the difference and also know it's no better to try to replace an intuitive system with science than to invade science with religion.


It's what I live for, because the more I understand, the happier I am. The more we understand, the more we can do, the more we can save.
Same mindset of the early philosophers, early doctors, East and West. That's what I've kinda been trying to get across, is that just because people have different ways of saying things and different ways of looking at them, doesn't mean that they don't MEAN the same thing at the root.

As long as you don't think you can replace one thing with the other. As in, Arts and Sciences. There's a reason why we say that instead of "Sciences and Sciences".


There's no East or West, border nor breed nor birth, when two such men come face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth! (With apologies to Kipling)

That describes my relationship with Mochizuki sensei.


And as I said above, we're learning how it works right now. I'm working on it right now, my little piece, my little question. And we'll have it soon. In my lifetime. Betcha! Scare you? Scares me, a little. But it's so much fun, if it weren't scary we'd have to ban it as illegal!

When you say "We'll have it soon," do you mean a total understanding of "ki"?
That's not what you're really working on now, is it?

You may understand a lot of things scientifically in your lifetime, but I don't expect ki to be one of them. It doesn't scare me. As I've said many times, I live and work by scientific standards. But I create and make love and do martial arts by feeling, experience and intuition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
Maybe I've confused you with someone else. Didn't you say you have to get a new paradigm to supersede the old? Weren't you talking about renovating all ki concepts to get rid of all those that aren't proven by science?

I don't think ki needs to be renovated and I don't think its existence indicates the need to change science, either.



Well, this is why you need to read kuhn. You need to understand what a paradigm is or you won't understand what I'm saying about the above. It's a bit of a tricky concept. Much like what we're discussing now

Of course I know what a paradigm is. But again I insist that Einstein did not replace Newton. Both sciences still function within the ranges they are intended. You can't build a Piper Cub with Einsteinian physics. And you can't build a nuclear bomb with Newtonian.

And NEITHER of those theories will ever make a baby.

Until.

Joshua Lerner
1st February 2006, 23:51
The other question, which I forgot to put into the last post, is how are fascia, tendons, etc. *employed* differently in jin/kokyu training than they are in other types of training?

mikesigman@eart
2nd February 2006, 00:00
The other question, which I forgot to put into the last post, is how are fascia, tendons, etc. *employed* differently in jin/kokyu training than they are in other types of training? Well almost anything I say will be too simplistic (because these things involve coordinations, tensions, etc.), but generally the idea is that the fascia structures get thicker, stronger, and they "store" energy like a bowstring... just like it says in the classics.

Regards,

Mike

Trevor Johnson
2nd February 2006, 00:03
Of course I know what a paradigm is. But again I insist that Einstein did not replace Newton. Both sciences still function within the ranges they are intended. You can't build a Piper Cub with Einsteinian physics. And you can't build a nuclear bomb with Newtonian.


I will repeat. If you think this, you absolutely, positively, do not comprehend what a paradigm is in science. I am absolutely deadly serious on this. Read Kuhn. You will see. Newton's dead, so's his physics. We don't realize it, because we grew up with Einsteinian physics, and it's the WAY we're taught which hides the difference. The difference, however, is VAST.

mikesigman@eart
2nd February 2006, 00:09
1) When people develop jin/kokyu skills, what changes take place in their fascia, tendons, and other connective tissues, that would not take place in more common forms of training?

2) How do we know these physical changes take place? This is not a rhetorical question - I mean, literally, what are the signs that these changes take place?

3) How are these changes in the tissues different from the changes that would take place from other types of training, such as olympic weightlifting or regular 'ol strip-mall McDojo American karate? (not that there's anything wrong with that)1. Qi and Strength are inseparable. SOME qi always increases as your normal strength increases. It's also an old saying.

2. Well I guess you could say "tests". All the non-puncture tests like laying on a spearpoint, hard to cut, chopstick smashed straight into the throat, bed of nails (yes, that old saw), hooks through the skin (another old saw), etc., etc., were "tests" of the increase in "qi". Naturally a lot of the "tests" could be bogused and that's what a lot of westerners tend to focus on. Among the Chinese I've heard "this guy's qi is mostly fake" or "this guy's qi is real". And so on.

3. These are focused developments in such a manner that a lot of the aspects stand out. For instance anyone can learn to "root" a little... a great root is considered "qi". Anyone can lie on a bed of nails (given enough nails to reduce the psi), but "qi" allows someone to walk in sharp metal, etc., take heavy direct blows, and so on.

FWIW

Mike

Asura
2nd February 2006, 01:04
Thought I'd drop this in for those reading this thread.

It's an interview with Jumin Chen.
He's pretty candid about a lot of stuff, and directly refers to my Yugi-oh Six directional power term :rolleyes:

Link:
http://www.taiji-qigong.de/info/articles/jumin_pj_en.html

"The so called Hunyuan-strength is important. This is the so called "six-directions"-strength. In the martial arts you cannot predict what will happen. For example if we push and pull one by one - this doesn't work. We have to push and pull at the same time - plus opening and closing. These are four directions. And then rising and sinking with the arm - in total six directions. (...) Within Taiji, Xingyi and Bagua it is important to use the whole body. It is only one part to train the technique: How can one method work against another? You can demonstrate a technique. But it doesn't always work. Why? Because it's a technique. It's not the whole Hunyuan-strength. If you use a technique, most of the time it doesn't work - sometimes it does. But that's not the meaning. It's the whole body! This is very very important"

:p

Trevor Johnson
2nd February 2006, 01:42
Thought I'd drop this in for those reading this thread.

It's an interview with Jumin Chen.
He's pretty candid about a lot of stuff, and directly refers to my Yugi-oh Six directional power term :rolleyes:

Link:
http://www.taiji-qigong.de/info/articles/jumin_pj_en.html

"The so called Hunyuan-strength is important. This is the so called "six-directions"-strength. In the martial arts you cannot predict what will happen. For example if we push and pull one by one - this doesn't work. We have to push and pull at the same time - plus opening and closing. These are four directions. And then rising and sinking with the arm - in total six directions. (...) Within Taiji, Xingyi and Bagua it is important to use the whole body. It is only one part to train the technique: How can one method work against another? You can demonstrate a technique. But it doesn't always work. Why? Because it's a technique. It's not the whole Hunyuan-strength. If you use a technique, most of the time it doesn't work - sometimes it does. But that's not the meaning. It's the whole body! This is very very important"

:p


That was...clear...as mud. At least to me.

Asura
2nd February 2006, 01:54
That was...clear...as mud. At least to me.

The article or the quote? ;)

Trevor Johnson
2nd February 2006, 02:26
The article or the quote? ;)


The quote. The first part was clear. After the ... it got a little fuzzy. Part of it might be the translation from german to english.

Joshua Lerner
2nd February 2006, 02:27
We have to push and pull at the same time - plus opening and closing. These are four directions. And then rising and sinking with the arm - in total six directions.

This is interesting - I can see left/right as opening/closing in one sense. I've been playing recently with the idea of eight directions instead of six - holding the arms as if hugging a tree, for example, you can either try to crush the tree (closing) or break out of a tree that surrounds you (opening), or you can try to twist the tree you are holding right or left. It all comes down to whether the arms are "pushing" in the same or opposite directions. But that does make it very difficult to do all at once. At least for me. It seems that most of the time, just doing the six basic directions is enough.

Mike - thanks for taking the time to respond to my questions.

mikesigman@eart
2nd February 2006, 02:52
This is interesting - I can see left/right as opening/closing in one sense. I've been playing recently with the idea of eight directions instead of six - holding the arms as if hugging a tree, for example, you can either try to crush the tree (closing) or break out of a tree that surrounds you (opening), or you can try to twist the tree you are holding right or left. It all comes down to whether the arms are "pushing" in the same or opposite directions. But that does make it very difficult to do all at once. At least for me. It seems that most of the time, just doing the six basic directions is enough.

Mike - thanks for taking the time to respond to my questions. Well, HOW you do the six directions is destined to be a hot topic on another list (not forum). PM me mikesigman at earthlink.net and I'll talk to you about it, if you're interested.

Regards,

Mike

Asura
2nd February 2006, 03:07
The quote. The first part was clear. After the ... it got a little fuzzy. Part of it might be the translation from german to english.

I think I can clear that up.
What he's referring to is people practicing "only" technique, devoid of the six-directions, and concentrating mainly on redirection of vectors, normal strength, etc. The techniques by themselves will work, but not all the time. Especially if you come across someone that's stronger/faster etc than you.
So he's saying if you want to take those techniques to the next level, in essence so they work no matter what, you have to at least get this basic notion of six-directions, which I referred to as six-directional contradictory strength/jin.

The article itself is basically a much nicer rehash of what I've been saying on this thread. I suggest reading all three parts, it'll give a basic outline of what the IMA training schema is really like.
Of course, you'd have to actually go out and try some of the various exercises to understand what's going on :)

Trevor Johnson
2nd February 2006, 03:53
I think I can clear that up.
What he's referring to is people practicing "only" technique, devoid of the six-directions, and concentrating mainly on redirection of vectors, normal strength, etc. The techniques by themselves will work, but not all the time. Especially if you come across someone that's stronger/faster etc than you.
So he's saying if you want to take those techniques to the next level, in essence so they work no matter what, you have to at least get this basic notion of six-directions, which I referred to as six-directional contradictory strength/jin.

The article itself is basically a much nicer rehash of what I've been saying on this thread. I suggest reading all three parts, it'll give a basic outline of what the IMA training schema is really like.
Of course, you'd have to actually go out and try some of the various exercises to understand what's going on :)

Of course, that goes without saying. Thanks for the clarification! It makes much more sense now.

P Goldsbury
2nd February 2006, 08:06
I will repeat. If you think this, you absolutely, positively, do not comprehend what a paradigm is in science. I am absolutely deadly serious on this. Read Kuhn. You will see. Newton's dead, so's his physics. We don't realize it, because we grew up with Einsteinian physics, and it's the WAY we're taught which hides the difference. The difference, however, is VAST.

A paradigm is an example or pattern of the inflexion of a noun or verb, or other inflected parts of speech. The transferred or figurative meaning is simply an example or pattern.

The OED does indeed quote Kuhn, who contends that each period of normal science in the development of scientific discipline corresponds to one and only one methodological framework or paradigm. In a nut-shell paradigms are 'universally recognized scientific achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners'. There are other examples given by the OED, including one from Wittgenstein: a logical or conceptual structure serving us as a form of thought within a given area of experience.

It is not clear to me that David is misusing the term here and I think you are far too 'absolute' in stating what he does or does not know or comprehend on the basis of such little evidence. This is the main problem with the entire thread.

Trevor Johnson
2nd February 2006, 18:20
A paradigm is an example or pattern of the inflexion of a noun or verb, or other inflected parts of speech. The transferred or figurative meaning is simply an example or pattern.

The OED does indeed quote Kuhn, who contends that each period of normal science in the development of scientific discipline corresponds to one and only one methodological framework or paradigm. In a nut-shell paradigms are 'universally recognized scientific achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners'. There are other examples given by the OED, including one from Wittgenstein: a logical or conceptual structure serving us as a form of thought within a given area of experience.

It is not clear to me that David is misusing the term here and I think you are far too 'absolute' in stating what he does or does not know or comprehend on the basis of such little evidence. This is the main problem with the entire thread.

I'm being absolute on the einstein vs newton thing, because I have READ kuhn and know what he's talking about. He discusses exactly this. Newton's dead. So is his paradigm. We do not use newtonian physics for anything, we use einsteinian for everything.
Kuhn uses a very specific definition of paradigm, drawn not from philosophy of science but from history. I am using it this way. And yes, I am right.

Look, I don't want to be a jerk about this, but if you want to tell me I'm wrong, go read Structure of Scientific Revolutions and find the sections where he talks specifically about Newton and Einstein and THEN tell me I'm wrong. Dictionary definition doesn't have enough depth.

Ron Tisdale
2nd February 2006, 18:30
Hmm. So, you presuppose that the author you are citing is correct, neh? What if he is not, and then, by extension, you are not? I think Peter's statement about absolutism is actually spot on.

Best,
Ron (hey, I'm a lightwieght in this, so feel free to ignore me)

R_Garrelts
2nd February 2006, 19:05
I'm being absolute on the einstein vs newton thing, because I have READ kuhn and know what he's talking about. He discusses exactly this. Newton's dead. So is his paradigm. We do not use newtonian physics for anything, we use einsteinian for everything.
Kuhn uses a very specific definition of paradigm, drawn not from philosophy of science but from history. I am using it this way. And yes, I am right.

Look, I don't want to be a jerk about this, but if you want to tell me I'm wrong, go read Structure of Scientific Revolutions and find the sections where he talks specifically about Newton and Einstein and THEN tell me I'm wrong. Dictionary definition doesn't have enough depth.

I've also read Kuhn, and, although he is often considered the flag-bearer for a lot of anti-science nonsense, I quite liked many of his ideas. However, if you think we "do not use Newtonian physics for anything" you are sorely mistaken. "Newtonian" (or, perhaps more correctly, classical or non-relativistic) mechanics is utilized for everything from the building of bridges to automobile engineering to plumbing and heating. Kuhn's point was that Einstein's paradigm superseded Newton's because it solved problems Newton could not (namely the incompatibility of classical mechanics and electromagnetism) and simultaneously offered up new problems solvable within Einstein's paradigm. An important point is that Einstein's concept of motion, in the classical (i.e. non-relativistic) limit, reduces to that of Newton (with a precision that makes the differences between the two negligible for many purposes). In this realm Newton is still perfectly viable, which is probably why one can still find structural engineers who have never taken a class on relativity.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, while Kuhn was trained as a physicist, many prominent physicists (notably Steven Weinberg) have staunchly criticized Kuhn and his ideas. In all fairness, though, it seems a lot of the criticism stems from popular characterizations of Kuhn (characterizations which Kuhn himself staunchly opposed).

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled thread on... well, whatever you guys were talking about.

P Goldsbury
3rd February 2006, 00:24
Look, I don't want to be a jerk about this, but if you want to tell me I'm wrong, go read Structure of Scientific Revolutions and find the sections where he talks specifically about Newton and Einstein and THEN tell me I'm wrong. Dictionary definition doesn't have enough depth.

Well, I do not want to be a jerk, either. I am attempting to be a neutral moderator in this discussion and make sure that the rules of E-Budo, especially the rule about treating fellow members with respect, are kept.

Incidentally, I teach Kuhn to my students at Hiroshima University. My point here is that Kuhn's use & definition of paradigm is just one example among many others. It makes no difference to the meaning of the word whether a paradigm has a limited lifespan or not.

Sincerely,

Trevor Johnson
3rd February 2006, 03:12
"Newtonian" (or, perhaps more correctly, classical or non-relativistic) mechanics is utilized for everything from the building of bridges to automobile engineering to plumbing and heating. Kuhn's point was that Einstein's paradigm superseded Newton's because it solved problems Newton could not (namely the incompatibility of classical mechanics and electromagnetism) and simultaneously offered up new problems solvable within Einstein's paradigm.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, while Kuhn was trained as a physicist, many prominent physicists (notably Steven Weinberg) have staunchly criticized Kuhn and his ideas. In all fairness, though, it seems a lot of the criticism stems from popular characterizations of Kuhn (characterizations which Kuhn himself staunchly opposed).

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled thread on... well, whatever you guys were talking about.

Not just the problems, but also the whole way newtonian people vs einsteinian people see the universe. It's an interesting thing. The thing is, the differences are very small in the equations, so they're not visible and get thrown out, here on earth. However, the worldview, the ways of thinking about things, the whole perception of the universe, is different.

And yes, philosophy of science did rather make a mess of kuhn. He was a historian, not a philosopher.

Trevor Johnson
3rd February 2006, 03:20
Well, I do not want to be a jerk, either. I am attempting to be a neutral moderator in this discussion and make sure that the rules of E-Budo, especially the rule about treating fellow members with respect, are kept.

Incidentally, I teach Kuhn to my students at Hiroshima University. My point here is that Kuhn's use & definition of paradigm is just one example among many others. It makes no difference to the meaning of the word whether a paradigm has a limited lifespan or not.

Sincerely,

Cool, then, perfect. One of the things I like about kuhn is that he talks about what being a scientist means, and how we view the world, in a way that I really agree with. I've been in research science for, hmm, well over a decade, despite my relative youth. I've been raised on science bedtime reading by a scientist, etc. So, I find his view of what we do, why, and how, to be correct. And frankly, one of the things that I'm seeing here is the possibility of a broken paradigm. If kimiwane is correct, that is. I'm a little fuzzy on some of what he says, because it seems to contradict itself at times, but we'll even that out with time. So, then there's the tension, the fury, and finally the resolution.

The other possibility, which I'm leaning towards because of the self-contradictions, is that ki results from the brain's perception functions(Of the body and of the "self".) and our ability to manipulate them. In which case, it fits so elegantly into current paradigms I don't need to worry about it, and I'm fine, though the experiments would probably win a Lasker at least! Given that I'm working on brain and behavior, it's a problem that interests me to some extent.

Besides which, if you're talking about paradigms with a scientist, I think Kuhn's is one of the better definitions because of the way it addresses what we do and are. Certainly the one I use.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 15:32
The kuzushi thread I promised is up.

Please have at it.

Soon to come: a Thread on Aikido's roots in Toddler Movement.

Hope I can soon get a chance to catch up with all the posts on this thread since last I could delve in. I guess Trevor's post (about 164, I think, about page 12) was the last I read.

I will see what I can do.

Best wishes.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 16:07
Read this first ->
http://homepage3.nifty.com/aunkai/eng/bujyutu/index.html

from your site:

"Eventually this definite "frame"/frame through which the body is trained, disappears, or rather gives way to a "formless" shape. In its place arises a posture that does not appear on the surface of the physical body. (Again, this is not an abstract concept, but a physical skill). In order to step in this direction, it is first necessary to train the body's physical sense of balance to a degree not done by the average person."

This sounds like what I call "zero stance", both internally and externally. Interesting, but I was laying this out 12 years ago.


A)
Train the body within a framework that works both internal and external properties.
These properties are physical, and the framework allow these physical skills to grow stronger and manifest themselves as tangible physical feelings, as well as skill.

B)
Use those increasing physical skills to temper a different kind of "stength". Chinese refer to it as Jing or Kei

C) Going through A->B builds up your core "foundation".
Then you go back A then back to B, which builds up C... in a neverending process.

And all this sounds like what we always called "keiko".


Basically the resulting physical feelings, 6 directional contradictory power, compression expansion of the body, standing with the spine, keeping the arch inside the legs (dangjing) along with the million other physical requirements, plus the "flip in thinking" that occurs are always on the move inside you as one "whole", even though they're comprised of different parts. In essence you're always physically moving, you're always changing, always adapting to the situation.
Movement within Stillness, Stillness within Movement and all that stuff.

None of this should appear new to anyone with a little taiji background and a little aikido.


You build up that "moving" whole inside you which comprises your foundation, and this is where "proper" but spontaneous technique arises.
By conforming your body to the "proper" harmonies, (both mental and physical), your body automatically does the proper movement.

Standard regurgitation, isn't that?


The deeper aspect is:
This constant tempering of the body means that your body, and even your thinking are constantly changing. Or in other words you're constantly evolving.

How is that different from "the budo method"? What's "new" about this?


(This is why I said that the Zen stuff can be explained physically. The abstract way they view the world is a result, nothing more)

Well, see, there you have just flown right off the handle. There is nothing "abstract" about the way Zen or Zen people view the world. The vision of Zen is what's right in front of your eyes. What's abstract about it? The abstraction (and misrepresentation) are both in your mind.


I should mention that this process is almost in direct opposition to the "technique" based training that you see in a lot of Koryu arts, or even sport-based modern Martial arts.

Now you're getting to something else I've been saying since returning to the US from Japan. What you are taught in this world is "ura".

The arts you are shown are the "ura" of the actual arts.

First, you have to know that to get to the truth of them. Then you have to know how to find the true "omote" of those arts by looking for the "ura" of how those arts are transmitted.

Everything is given backward--from the leaf (technique), back to the root (the self). People are kept busy for decades with techniques that they are (unknowingly) trying to assemble back into a "self". But the learning is indeed very fast when you first develop the self and an intimate relationship with one's own feeling.

Just the other day, an aikido guy was telling someone that "aikido reprograms the nervous system" and this is exactly the kind of backwardness I mean.

Aikido does not "reprogram" anything. It is the result of cultivating powerful innate human abilities found in all children. Zero degree training is a way to "pass through the mirror" and suddenly see the ura. It reverses the idea of what aikido and all other martial arts are.


Simple "tanren" becomes the focus, since you're intent on literally changing how your body works, and thinks, from the inside out. It's an extremely mentally & physically taxing process.

That depends on how badly out of true you've gotten before you begin training. If you bring a child up properly, he will develop all those things naturally, with some guidance. But if you let the child develop weird ways and become confused with social images and distorted self-image, then you have to work to straighten that out.

Even then, however, the work doesn't have to be so terrible. You still seem to be going by brute force, compared to the Feldenkrais Method.

Moshe Feldenkrais could (and many of his followers can) help people to release decades of bad "programming" of their systems and allow the nervous system's natural "reset" function to return them to the vigorous (genki) state of youth, both physically and psychologically, in a matter of minutes. Feldenkrais was a judo master, BTW.


It's this process that the chinese often used to refer to by having Qi permeate the body, change it alchemically etc etc.
You can take that paradigm and apply it to everyday life to, but only because "you" are the center of it, and "you're" adapting to it. It's still mainly a human construct, you're simply applying that physical feel to help yourself "mold" to the world around you.
That's where this stuff gets all metaphysical.

Only because you clearly do not understand it. You have pasted your own meaning over it. You don't see what "it" really "says" because you supply your own words. It is not metaphysical but "natural".


The reason I was being a stickler for the Kuzushi was because, unless someone understands this process as a physical feel (and pretty much everyone that "can do" will click with me if I talk about this from my experience), you can't really talk about the abstract concepts, since they're a result of posessing that Physical feel.

Well, the Kuzushi thread is up, just for you, in the Aikido forum.


Examples most are familiar with would be
Ueshiba referring to the 8 Gods etc
Allusions to being one with universal energy etc.

It's simply a result of your body physically being in a constant change of flux that you're physically aware of.

Yah...speaking of Vonnegutt, he once said,

"Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly,
Man got to ask himself, why, why, why?
"Tiger go to rest, bird got to land,
Man got to tell himself he understand."

So you tell yourself you uderstand Ueshiba's oneness with God and universal energy. If that makes you happy, go ahead. Just remember, it's only YOUR abstraction and not at all related to the truth.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 16:35
Since the focus is to increase the tension by relaxing (in order to emphasize your awareness of the groundpath as one continuous circuit), I've found that I'm quickly getting past the "using" muscle stage. The more I relax to increase the tension, the less actual tension I find I actually have to use when I move spontaneously, or apply the technique. I learn to physically increase the pressure "inside" me to apply something on someone --> Concept of Imashime :) You don't "intend" to put the power in them, but it happens as a result.
Kind of like an "oops sorry, I dropped you on the floor??...damn I didn't even feel anything" kind of thing.

Strange. I described all this earlier as "zero force", didn't I?
You're not supposed to "feel" something when you do fa jing. I think this is where you guys really miss the boat. It seems you expect issuing fa jing to be like an orgasm or something.

No lights flash, not feeling of electricity or joy juice shooting through your body. It is, as Zen has always said, "Nothing special."


Actually I agree with your Tai Chi teacher. At least the phase that I'm going through. It feels like you become "dense" but "flowy" at the same time, lol.

One of our early (yoseikan aikido) teachers described something he called "ponderous" movement, like that of a glacier. It isn't particularly fast, but you cannot stand against it. It is heavy but it moves right through where it's going.


Dammit...why couldn't english have Giongo 擬音語like japanese...

Make it up. Just do it. Put it out there. Maybe they'll use it in a song next week, and then the whole country will be saying your words. How do you think things like "bling-bling" get into the language? Just do it.


Final note though, is that while Ark's modified some of this stuff from chinese exercises, the bulk of it comes from Koryu Kihon exercises(which ones I'm not going to say here, but if someone's interested and PM's me, I'll be more than happy to talk one on one)...contradictory stuff included :)
That was a shocker for me as well, to be quite honest :)

I thought it was a little odd that "the koryu teacher" could not be named on your website. Why is that?

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 16:45
I know the theories about chakra, Ida and Pingala and Kundalini. I'm more than familiar with this entire idea/system. Problem is, that they are no more than a mental scheme/idea.
c.

I'm talking about the spinal cord, the nerves that go down the legs to the feet. I'm talking about the nerve signals that go from the feet to the brain and those that the brain sends back to the muscles in the feet.

Are you saying those are all a mental construct?

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 17:52
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
And what you say sounds like what BK Frantzis describes in The Power of Internal Martial Arts. Ah, but he goes a little further. He says that ki flows through the structure. Or it might be better to say that ki flows through the body alignment. He is clear that the alignment itself is only a channel to let the ki flow through. But he does describe something very similar to what you say above.





You're quoting a guy that claims he was "sprayed" with Chi by his teacher.

Well, you claim you can beat "anyone". Who sounds dumber?


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
Well you could use that to describe getting kuzushi for a wrist grab, as in aiki age or aiki sage, but you can't apply that to Mochizuki sensei's getting kuzushi with a grasp of my sleeve.


Sagawa could.

But YOU can't. So you're just talking about something you CAN'T DO.


In fact Kimura's big deal about Sagawa's stuff was that it was a universally applicable skill.

They all are. They come from babies, after all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
So what you have come down to is really just lingo if, as I say, it's what you MUST do for aiki age to work. Well, I know how to do aiki age and aiki sage and it feels similar to what you describe, BUT that whole rationalization is just a description of what the human body naturally does.
For example, opening a door. Or picking up an object. That is to say, that's how they do it if they're properly aligned. It's what the body must do to exert force. But what if he does not grab you? What if he punches? Or if he attacks with a sword? How do you apply your six-direction energy? Isn't that out of Roppokai?


If you have that six-directional tension inherent in your body, then whatever move you do will inherently have kuzushi on contact.

The natural man DOES have that six-directional tension inherent in his body. It MUST be there for ANY exertion of strength, opening ANY door, picking up ANY object. This inner tension is necessary to do ANYTHING. That is why "the skills" are "universal". The only reason it's even necessary to teach them is that people are trained into unnatural ways of moving and in that education, their sense of self and body is mutilated.


What would I do with a punch depends on the situation. If it's coming straight at me from a close in position, safest posture to take is the one you'll see in Baji-fist (btw, yagyu shingan will use this position as well), where the elbows are folded. Person gets kuzushi'd slightly on contact as the person moves forward.
But, like I said earlier, bujustu at its base is about henka, change. But at the heart of that "change" lies a universally applicable skill.

LAME answer. Try again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
That's it. That's the manga boy. You cannot even SEE a movement if it isn't a "martial arts" movement. All the matrix of normal human life is just a boring backdrop for the exciting stuff--the big stuff where you can obviously see that people are fighting. It has to be really big and exciting, or you get bored.


Btw, I'd stop with the "manga" hints.
It's making you sound like a tool
何か漫画フェチでもあるの?wwww

Oh. But "rolling your eyes" doesn't make you look like a tool?
It does. Just feels different when it lands on you, doesn't it? But seriously, that is the air you emanate, like a character off Dragon Ball. Didn't realize it? You do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
Maybe you're only seeing people who have never felt real interaction with the uke in aikido. I recently had some experience with one of those styles where the weakest action insires uke to slam his oshiri down with no real interplay. Akuzawa's method ought to work very well on such people. I could see that he was rolling the hands around a little, a bit of give and take, the the kuzushi and a drop. So it looks and sounds, in fact, like yawara, or the principle of ju. The give and take, the yeilding. So it sounds like aikijujutsu.


Yup, but yielding means jack if there's nothing to backup the body.

Well, if you didn't have that, you couldn't have issued the resistance that gives you a firm force to yeild to. And if you're so dumb that you yeild in a straight line before him...yeah. You'll get crushed. I notice, however, that Akuzawa always rolled the opponent to one side or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
Interesting, but hardly world shaking. I guess if one had never felt strength or resistance in aikido technique (as many, many aikido people apparently NEVER have), yeah, they would fall right over for that kind of thing. But have you been to Shizuoka yet? Have you tried out Tezuka's grip?


Actually I have,

You've been to Shizuoka and met Tezuka Akiria sensei?


the "kind" of resistance, even if heavy, that's produced by the majority of aikido guys is laugable. It's either "datsuryoku" or sheer strength. (Btw a large portion of CMA people are guilty of the same thing, so I'm not singling out the Aiki peeps )

Yeah, well, clearly you haven't been to Shizuoka, then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
And there goes that "!!!" nature again, consistent as a cuckoo. Again, son, you're talking about Mochizuki Minoru. You call yourself an aiki man and you've never been to the old yoseikan in Shizuoka. You've never learned what the meijin was teaching. You have never grabbed Akira Tezuka or Hiroo Mochizuki or even the grandson, Michi Mochizuki. Tezuka is just west of you. And you're going to France, so the Mochizukis will be available there. You're too old not yet to know that there is nothing new under the sun. Go ahead and go to them and they will gladly teach you what Mochizuki's "nothing" can do.


And I'll get up to Shizuoka at some point, alright?

I seriously doubt it.


you haven't been able to offer up anything for the discussion Mike and I were having, which I'm sorry, but you should be at least familiar with if you're going to talk about the metaphysical aspects of "ki".

I wasn't talking about the "metaphysical aspects of ki." The question is "What is ki?" and you and Mike have been talking about something unrelated since you insist that there is no ki. Take it to the kuzushi thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimiwane
But no one beats everyone. Even you can be beaten by your sensei, can't you? Why doesn't your bodyskill save you then?

[qutoe]And you are correct, if it comes down to both having the same level of foundation, then the person who is faster, and who is slightly stronger, will win. That's where "jutsu" also comes in. But I'm saying with confidence that most people out there are NOT training like we do.[/quote]

Your sad mistake is the obvious belief that no one else has ever trained your way and that no one else ever learned or retained that material. That's called overconfidence and hubris.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 18:09
That energy is very tightly controlled and regulated, to do only the work that it's supposed to do. Especially nervous impulses. They don't leak to other tissues.

And what work would that be?

Whatever the mind conceives and directs it to do.

As for nerve impulse leakage, yes, it does happen. That's why your eyes water when you get hit in the nose. It's called "peripheral nerve excitation".

For martial artists, or any advanced physical actor, one of the most important things is to learn to limit peripheral nerve excitation, so that we use only the absoultely necessary muscles to do what we want to do.

And anyway, the idea of ki and issuing power is not related to "leaking" nerve impulses. That power is produced by coherency and congruency of the mind's directions to the body.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 18:14
No one noticed any tears in the fabric of the universe nor was anyone knocked out of their socks.

Yeah. Who postulated such bs? Other than yourself? Who mentioned "tears in the universe?"

And just what, exactly is your "engineering background"? Do you actually have a degree in any kind of science? You are the one I hear doing the double talking and answering statements that were never made.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 18:56
And graffiti is art  :p
(ノ*゜▽゜*)ニパパパ

Yeah. To Cretins.

Say your teacher gave you a samurai sword. He said, "I give you this ancient sword to honor your diligent efforts in training."

You're so proud. You get home and take the sword out of the saya and you find that someone has inscribed his name on it with a Dremel tool: "Shorty wuz here" and "DragonBall Rulez!!!" That kind of garbage inscribed all over a beautiful old sword.

What do you think of graffiti now?

Unfortunately, that's how I see your whole budo. You're like a nice sword with idiot graffiti engraved all over it.


I think Frediwhatever his name is and I would have interesting ideas to share.
In fact everything I do is against "exhibiting" a stance, or "looking" ike a MAist.

Really? So you've been doing for six years what I discovered twelve years ago? It's worth deeper study. I encourage you to go much deeper. Maybe someday you will be able to understand what I do.


You can't see on the surface of my body, what I'm doing internally (unless I let you).

Or unless I "CAN" see what you're doing. It's unfortunate for you, but fortunate for me that you only "THINK" you can define what I am capable of doing.


But the fact of the matter remains that being able to get to the point where its natural takes training.

Not if you never leave the natural state to begin with.

[qi\uote]Actually I was told I was dead on, early on, by Sam Chin ;)
(For those of you in the NY area, Sam is DEFINITELY worth checking out. The guy doesn't keep secrets and will flat out show you how to train the bodyskills Mike and I have been talking about :) )[/quote]

Ah, but Mike says what he does is "ki and kokyu" and you claim there IS NO KI. So how can you be talking about the same thing?

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 18:59
Those are excellent questions, Josh. That's the kind of focus this thread needs.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:10
Well almost anything I say will be too simplistic (because these things involve coordinations, tensions, etc.), but generally the idea is that the fascia structures get thicker, stronger, and they "store" energy like a bowstring... just like it says in the classics.


What a vague and meaningless answer, Mike. You've tap-danced around the question.

If I laid out that answer, you would demand scientific explanations. Can't you give them here? When you say, "The idea is..." it just means that you don't really know, doesn't it?

Tell us scientifically.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:16
I will repeat. If you think this, you absolutely, positively, do not comprehend what a paradigm is in science. I am absolutely deadly serious on this. Read Kuhn. You will see. Newton's dead, so's his physics. We don't realize it, because we grew up with Einsteinian physics, and it's the WAY we're taught which hides the difference. The difference, however, is VAST.

Yes, Trevor. I understand what a paradigm is. It's just the prevailing way of looking at things.

But if, as you say, "Newton's dead," you would have to prove to me that his laws no longer apply. You would have to show me a mathematical formula that he developed but which no longer works.

Can you build a Piper Cub airplane with Einsteinian physics? Please tell me how.

The fact that one scientific paradigm gains currency and an older theory fades from popular use does not mean that the old way "is dead".

Again, it's like saying that, because we now use the metric system to measure things, the English system no longer works. But it works fine AS LONG AS YOU REMAIN WITHIN THE CONSISTENCY OF THE SYTEM. In other words, you can't use two cups of flour and two liters of water to get a good result. You have to restrain yourself to the self-consistent system you are using.

That's really the difference between "science" and the "ki theories". They are both rigidly consistent within themselves. As long as you work from within those consistent sets of parameters, your answers are valid in that context.

But when you try to "mix" the parameters of the two systems, the results will be baloney.

So if you want to discredit the ki system, you have to show where it is inconsistent with itself--not where it conflicts with science.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:21
It's an interview with Jumin Chen.
He's pretty candid about a lot of stuff, and directly refers to my Yugi-oh Six directional power term :rolleyes:

http://www.taiji-qigong.de/info/articles/jumin_pj_en.html

See? HE didn't sound like Yugi-oh. Maybe because he didn't "roll his eyes". But again, he also did not describe anything not seen in ordinary actions such as opening a door. You can make it sound "fancy and mysterious and hard to get," etc., but it's still just a microscopic dissection of what happens when any properly-aligned person exerts strength for any purpose.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:24
It is not clear to me that David is misusing the term here and I think you are far too 'absolute' in stating what he does or does not know or comprehend on the basis of such little evidence. This is the main problem with the entire thread.

Sublimity.

Thanks.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:28
I'm being absolute on the einstein vs newton thing, because I have READ kuhn and know what he's talking about. He discusses exactly this. Newton's dead. So is his paradigm. We do not use newtonian physics for anything, we use einsteinian for everything.

Well, Trevor, I think Newtonian physics is, in fact, STILL used for MOST things in this human-scale world. We design buildings and build them using Newtonian concepts and formulae. We build little kit-planes with Newtonian rules. No one attempts to design a little ultralight airplane with Einsteinian principles. Or can you give an example of someone's doing just that?

And back to the point of this claim: just as Einstein did NOT replace Newton, the "scientific" method has not and will not replace or override or supersede the ancient taoist masters' sytem of ki (including healing, fighting, eating/breating and all the rest).

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:31
"Newtonian" (or, perhaps more correctly, classical or non-relativistic) mechanics is utilized for everything from the building of bridges to automobile engineering to plumbing and heating. Kuhn's point was that Einstein's paradigm superseded Newton's because it solved problems Newton could not (namely the incompatibility of classical mechanics and electromagnetism) and simultaneously offered up new problems solvable within Einstein's paradigm.

So Einstein ADDED to our knowledge, but it was NOT necessary to discard the old system.

Thanks for that summary.

cxt
7th February 2006, 19:33
Kimiwane


You should give up any idea of you getting a stright answer from Mike & Crew.

They hijacked a thread on the Ryukyuan Martial Arts forum (thread on the differnces between Naha/Shuri/Tomari) a week or so ago, same statements of facts--SANS facts, same self-defeating statments, same smug "I know the secret handshake and you don't" attitiude.

(basically said that there were few real differences since none of them did "ki" and "kokyu" right---not a quote, just my take on their post)

Even recycling some of the same lines of sloppy reasoning here that they did there.

Example, first they claim that the stuff is unique, few people know about it, fewer still do it correctly (of course THEY are some of the few that are doing it right) THEN thy claim that its "prevalent."

Oh, also Mike demanded that "I" define the very terms HE introduced in the first place.

(also asked me to define "moving from center" for some odd reason as well.)

Anyway---might be fun hosing Mike & Crew (who am I kidding --it IS fun!), but you'll make little real progress.

I caught Mike & Crew in the same web of distortions, half truths, and outhouse dreck--and when pinned to the plate they started to bitch, moan and whine, just like they do here.

They are utterly impervious to logic and reason.

Oh, they also tend to work in a group--which I am sure that you know.


Chris Thomas

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:43
the number of years someone has been doing martial arts tells us nothing but how many years they've been doing it. Whether they've been doing it right is another question entirely. I've got about 45 years of martial arts and most of it was spent doing things the wrong way. Now I'm just about ready to start learning.

I felt that way in 1990. Then I was uchi deshi to an uchi deshi of Morihei Ueshiba. After that, I DID start learning. If you weren't so full of your ego, you would have already realized that I've been saying ALL ALONG some of the most important points you've tried to make here.

But you have hashed it all up with pseudo-science. Please tell me again what's your science background? What's your degree? Whom have you trained with and where?

In other words, are you a PhD from the American College of Martial Sciences or do you have some degree from Harvard? Which of the two would say "It makes no difference?"

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 19:53
Kimiwane


You should give up any idea of you getting a stright answer from Mike & Crew.

They hijacked a thread on the Ryukyuan Martial Arts forum (thread on the differnces between Naha/Shuri/Tomari) a week or so ago, same statements of facts--SANS facts, same self-defeating statments, same smug "I know the secret handshake and you don't" attitiude.

Nah, nah, nah. That's just my imagination!

You see it, too?

Feels like the tide is turning here! Thanks for the input! (And sorry for my irritability)


(basically said that there were few real differences since none of them did "ki" and "kokyu" right---not a quote, just my take on their post)

My feeling exactly.


Example, first they claim that the stuff is unique, few people know about it, fewer still do it correctly (of course THEY are some of the few that are doing it right) THEN thy claim that its "prevalent."

So it's NOT my imagination???


Oh, also Mike demanded that "I" define the very terms HE introduced in the first place.

That does sound familiar...


Anyway---might be fun hosing Mike & Crew (who am I kidding --it IS fun!), but you'll make little real progress.

But dang if I won't "spray them with my ki"!!!


I caught Mike & Crew in the same web of distortions, half truths, and outhouse dreck--and when pinned to the plate they started to bitch, moan and whine, just like they do here.

Ha!!! Isn't it a shame that Akuzawa-san has to be represented by such??


They are utterly impervious to logic and reason.

Oh, they also tend to work in a group--which I am sure that you know.

Yeah. It's ijimeru. Typical schoolyard bully stuff. Make a group, then use the group to expel someone from it and then to group-humiliate the outkickee.

I mean, Mike says stuff that's diametrically opposed to Asura's statements, yet, because they're "on the same side" they support each other (even to contradicting themselves).

Very funny, no?

Thanks again.

cxt
7th February 2006, 20:15
Kimiwane

Very funny--but kinda sad in that folks are so limited that they can't come up with new material.

Like Asura, comes on all "resonable" and "lets just chat."

Then he makes bald-faced claims--such as when claimed that "champion" Thai and Kyuoshinkai fighters were defeated by folks that trained in "other" methods, or when he claims to have used "other" methods to defeat BJJ experts.

When asked to provide the actual NAMES of the defeated "champions" etc--he gets all snide and insulting.

Hell, Mike & Crew "contradict" THEMSELVES--they can't even get their OWN individual stories stright--let alone each other.

Mike & Crew have no grasp of science, they have no grasp of physics, they have no grasp of kinesology/biomech---yet they consider THEMSELEVS to be some of the few "experts" in "ki."

They are fully commited, nasty, short-tempered, mean spirited--and seriously ignorant.

A very dangerous combination.

Thankfully one that you have been quite neatly pinning to a plate!! :)



Chris Thomas

Trevor Johnson
7th February 2006, 22:31
And what work would that be?

Whatever the mind conceives and directs it to do.

As for nerve impulse leakage, yes, it does happen. That's why your eyes water when you get hit in the nose. It's called "peripheral nerve excitation".

For martial artists, or any advanced physical actor, one of the most important things is to learn to limit peripheral nerve excitation, so that we use only the absoultely necessary muscles to do what we want to do.

And anyway, the idea of ki and issuing power is not related to "leaking" nerve impulses. That power is produced by coherency and congruency of the mind's directions to the body.

Whatever the mind directs the brain to direct the body to do? Whatever the mind directly directs the body to do? Or whatever the mind, being an emergent property of the brain, directs the body to do? Fuzzy wuzzy?

I'm currently looking at papers on peripheral nerve excitation, so far they're saying something to me that I'm not sure they say to you. See if that trend continues...

cxt
7th February 2006, 22:48
Perhaps a quick run down of what everybody means when they say "ki" would be in order??

Some people look on it a metaphysical, even spritual force. Others take a strictly scentific view.

I'm sure its already been discussed prior, but reading thu the posts it seems to me that people are using different definations--and thus some posts are kinda "missing" each other.

Of course my opinion and 35 cents will not even buy a stamp these days. :)


Chris Thomas

P Goldsbury
7th February 2006, 23:13
Perhaps a quick run down of what everybody means when they say "ki" would be in order??

Some people look on it a metaphysical, even spritual force. Others take a strictly scentific view.

I'm sure its already been discussed prior, but reading thu the posts it seems to me that people are using different definations--and thus some posts are kinda "missing" each other.

Of course my opinion and 35 cents will not even buy a stamp these days. :)


Chris Thomas

Excellent suggestion, Mr Thomas.

It is a pity that people did not take it up on Page 1.

Best wishes,

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 23:31
Thankfully one that you have been quite neatly pinning to a plate!! :)

To quote Channukah Harry, "Stop! You're embarrassing me!"

Sometimes it's bad to turn a discussion into osae komi, but sometimes it just has to be done. At least with my personality.

Thanks.

kimiwane
7th February 2006, 23:38
Whatever the mind directs the brain to direct the body to do? Whatever the mind directly directs the body to do? Or whatever the mind, being an emergent property of the brain, directs the body to do? Fuzzy wuzzy?

Well, whoever directs whatever, it emerges from Picasso's brush as a masterpiece.

So, "what he does". You know? Whatever the individual wants to do. If that's science, you get Einstein. If it's art, you get weird paintings, the Watts Towers, cans of soup. If it's Minoru Mochizuki, you get thrown with sutemi and land in a strangle hold. The point is, the human decides what he wants to do and he does it, however you name the "parts" that work together. It's human action directed by human will.


I'm currently looking at papers on peripheral nerve excitation, so far they're saying something to me that I'm not sure they say to you. See if that trend continues...

Peripheral excitation occurs when the nerve impulse for a given nerve is unusually strong and the energy affects other, nearby nerves. There's an interesting thing about how loud noises can affect the nerve centers in the abdomen to induce a sense of falling because of peripheral excitation of a nerve that runs near the main aural nerve (again, could look up the names of these nerves, but don't have the book handy. If it becomes a serious problem, I can find the books.)

So, yes, some leakage of nerve signals does occur within the body.

Trevor Johnson
8th February 2006, 00:28
Well, whoever directs whatever, it emerges from Picasso's brush as a masterpiece.

So, "what he does". You know? Whatever the individual wants to do. If that's science, you get Einstein. If it's art, you get weird paintings, the Watts Towers, cans of soup. If it's Minoru Mochizuki, you get thrown with sutemi and land in a strangle hold. The point is, the human decides what he wants to do and he does it, however you name the "parts" that work together. It's human action directed by human will.



I'll give you the leakage of nerve signals, jumping from neuron to neuron, though not to other cells that I know of, if you'll answer the questions about mind and what directing what that I asked...

kimiwane
8th February 2006, 21:52
I'll give you the leakage of nerve signals, jumping from neuron to neuron, though not to other cells that I know of, if you'll answer the questions about mind and what directing what that I asked...

As I understand it, a very powerful nerve signal will actually "spill over" to an adjacent nerve. So nerve-to-nerve, I guess, means cell-to-cell.

The example I gave was of a loud noise stimulating a sense of falling because the nerve that controls that sense runs adjacent to the aural nerve. The aural impulse is so strong that it transmits to and stimulates the nerve that goes down into the nerve plexus in the upper abdomen.

That only happens with very loud noises, though.

And I think the eye-watering when we're hit in the nose is similar.

As to "the questions about mind and what directing what that I asked..." those are mostly brief sentence fragments scattered broadly across these pages. Tracing back, I was able to surmise that the general question is this:

"If the body represents a closed system of energy bound in tight patterns, but the energy is able to move through channels in the body, what use can be made of the energy?"

My answer was that you can make any use of the energy that the mind directs the brain to do. Or whatever "the heart" directs the brain to do. If you are a painter, you paint, usually from inspiration (heart). If you are a philosopher, you think in the most precise terms of which you are capable (mind). If you're defending yourself, you make powerful (maybe involuntary) use of the arms and legs (mind and heart). Mike Sigman earlier said of the six harmonies that the first involves the emotions leading the "mind", then the mind leading the chi.

I said that is the natural way, but the "art" of using the six harmonies first requires the discipline of the "wisdom mind's" dominating the "emotion mind."

Either way will work. And you can do with the energy what you will.

The important thing is that you make the most efficient possible use of your energy and that requires mental awareness as well as emotional content. The trick is to make both elements congruent.

Most people are living in permanently conflicted states. Their hearts want to do one thing but their minds tell them to do something else. One side may win out, but usually at the cost of the other. Most people may fall into that group. But many people are so evenly balanced that neither impulse wins out and the person literally does "nothing". Since that's not really possible, they do little meaningless things, unable to quit their jobs and go to the Himilayas, too devoted to safety to take any risk, too comfortable in pain to risk everything for a chance at freedom.

If even a small part of the individual intent is incongruent or divided, it can drain the power of one's deepest passions.

I'll bet that doesn't satisfy your question, but if not, please re-ask it or reference the post you're replying to.

Thanks.

cxt
8th February 2006, 22:59
While I don't doubt there is MUCH to more to heaven and earth than is dreamt of in "my" philosophy.

And although I use and find valuable a number or breathing and meditative methods myself--rather fond of various yoga methods.

I think "ki" and "kokyu" are real things that can be tapped thu dedicated, disciplined practice.

But I don't really consider/see such things in any metaphysical/spiritual manner.

I simply question the extent, the effectiveness and ultimate use of such training.
People being people--I would guess that like everything else--actual abilty to apply such skills might just vary.

I think Pan Qin Fu (the "iron fist"-hope I spelled his name correctly) said it best when he asked: (my paraphrase)

"If those "old masters" could really jump 30 feet then why did they have stairs in their houses?"


Chris Thomas

Cufaol
9th February 2006, 10:54
As I understand it, a very powerful nerve signal will actually "spill over" to an adjacent nerve. So nerve-to-nerve, I guess, means cell-to-cell.

"If the body represents a closed system of energy bound in tight patterns, but the energy is able to move through channels in the body, what use can be made of the energy?"

My answer was that you can make any use of the energy that the mind directs the brain to do. Or whatever "the heart" directs the brain to do. If you are a painter, you paint, usually from inspiration (heart). If you are a philosopher, you think in the most precise terms of which you are capable (mind). If you're defending yourself, you make powerful (maybe involuntary) use of the arms and legs (mind and heart). Mike Sigman earlier said of the six harmonies that the first involves the emotions leading the "mind", then the mind leading the chi.

I said that is the natural way, but the "art" of using the six harmonies first requires the discipline of the "wisdom mind's" dominating the "emotion mind."

Either way will work. And you can do with the energy what you will.

The important thing is that you make the most efficient possible use of your energy and that requires mental awareness as well as emotional content. The trick is to make both elements congruent.

Thanks.

Now we are getting somewhere. (Though I'm not really sure about where that really is.... :p ) It's not exactly science, but at least I understand the overall picture. It's one I can do without, not withstanding it has appealing symbolic power.

Nice post.

Cheers, Christophe

Trevor Johnson
9th February 2006, 17:56
Whatever the mind directs the brain to direct the body to do? Whatever the mind directly directs the body to do? Or whatever the mind, being an emergent property of the brain, directs the body to do? Fuzzy wuzzy?


Questions. As in, what do you believe the mind that is capable of directing this energy to be?

Furthermore, you are talking about, in one area, the energy of the universe all knotted up into atoms and stuff. In other words, energy at a quantum level. Then you talk about stuff that is several orders of magnitude larger that is "energy" firing in the brain and nervous system. Which is it? Is one form of energy controlling the other? How are you reconciling the different orders of magnitude, types of energy, &c?

kimiwane
9th February 2006, 22:02
I think "ki" and "kokyu" are real things that can be tapped thu dedicated, disciplined practice.

But I don't really consider/see such things in any metaphysical/spiritual manner.

I think they're just natural parts of human life, vital elements that cannot be omitted for healthy living. But just that. No visions, no levitation, no telekinesis in my presentations.

Just life.


I simply question the extent, the effectiveness and ultimate use of such training.
People being people--I would guess that like everything else--actual abilty to apply such skills might just vary.

Definitely. I think you can develop a high level of skill in these things, but nothing that prevents your having to wash and hang your socks. Or wash the dishes, or get up and have breakfast in the mornings.


I think Pan Qin Fu (the "iron fist"-hope I spelled his name correctly) said it best when he asked: (my paraphrase)

"If those "old masters" could really jump 30 feet then why did they have stairs in their houses?"

Yeah. When you get really old, you need all the ki you can get just to climb those stairs.

kimiwane
9th February 2006, 22:14
Questions. As in, what do you believe the mind that is capable of directing this energy to be?

You can apply it to living. Whatever your life is about. If you're a fireman, it can help you climb those stairs with a load on your back. It can help you rise to the occasion of an emergency and survive it or save someone from it. Or do evil in the world, if that's your thing. It's rather neutral in a moral sense, though any human can tell you going evil is bad.


Furthermore, you are talking about, in one area, the energy of the universe all knotted up into atoms and stuff. In other words, energy at a quantum level.

So we both agree that a quantum level of energy exists? Good. But I don't say it' "all knotted up into atoms and stuff." As I understand modern theories, about half of the time, it's not knotted into anything, but pulses into and out of knotted condensations, so that particles sometimes appear to be there and sometimes do not. But, yes. There is a quantum level of energy and I think we just agreed on it. Didn't we?


Then you talk about stuff that is several orders of magnitude larger that is "energy" firing in the brain and nervous system. Which is it? Is one form of energy controlling the other? How are you reconciling the different orders of magnitude, types of energy, &c?

Well, do you agree that nerve impulses occur in the brain? Do you agree that nerve impulses travel through the human body?

If so, then you also agree with me here. There is a quantum level of energy in the universe and one of its forms is nerve impulses in the human body and brain. Are we agreed? I think we are.

You say "Which is it?" But don't you agree that both forms exist? Why even form a question that forces a choice between two things that both exist? why can't we just say "It's both?"

Does one form of energy have to control the other? What does Science say about it? Do they hypothesize a unity? Or do they insist on a duality? If so, I have never heard a theory on either. Why should I create one? I'd be glad to hear your theory, though, since you agree that both levels of energy exist.


How are you reconciling the different orders of magnitude, types of energy, &c?

I think it all comes from the quantum level of zero point energy or, to me, ki.

I don't see any real need to reconcile the orders or magnitudes because they bot exist in nature. Has someone else reconciled them in scientific terms?

kimiwane
9th February 2006, 23:11
Don't waste what you have.

Think of small circles, small circuits. Keep your life small and quiet, walk as much as possible, keep a calm mind, experience the weather, accustom yourself to looking at objects both near at hand and far away. Try to see the detail at all ranges. Feel the breeze. Notice the scents in the air. Pay attention to your weight as you walk.

But mostly, live a quiet, regular life. Don't overeat, don't overdrink. Don't overdo anything. Conserve your energy but use it as you need it. Express yourself fully. Don't be inhibited. But don't be ostentatious or wasteful of anything.

Be grateful for what you have and know that enough is enough. Quiet extreme desires. Cultivate simple tastes. Live on little and always have enough. Read Tao te Ching and follow it.

Be positive and observe all things with care.

It's a relationship with life. Get the most of it.